It also works for anyone who would be in combat or similar, add your protection and padding, and the belts would, likely, end up a lot "shorter" there. Especially the belt that would have your stuff on it there.

Knights also might need the longer end as an additional contact point to keep a longsword from flapping around. Tod Cutler has a video on that topic

You made me belt out in laughter, then buckle over.

Leatherworker supply stores (like Tandy's) will have tons of belt and strap hardware, including an array of the belt tips.

They also often do the wide middle/narrow ends trick.

@@DH-xw6jp Also _Dixie Gun Works, Crazy Crow Trading Post_ (also good source for knifemaking supplies),....

For as practical a bunch of people as ranchers are, some of us will still cram some scrolled silver just about anywhere we can find to put it.

Thanks for this info! How very cool.😊

Pregnancy etcetera or just pregnancy?

​@@pyotrilyichtchaikovsky3733women's weight and size can fluctuate throughout the month due to hormonal changes during her cycle or bloating during menstruation in addition to weight/size changes associated with pregnancy.

​@@pyotrilyichtchaikovsky3733 ect because our weight can also fluctuate during our monthly cycle due to bloating. Some women bloat quite a bit and have a whole other set of pants just for that time of the month

​@@pyotrilyichtchaikovsky3733 I'll have to assume that you're a man and don't know this, but women can also fluctuate due to things like bloating and water retention due to hormone changes and menstruation. I assume these kinds of things are under the 'etc'

​@@RJE95I know that this might sound argumentative, but i am truly curious, would that be bloating to the extent of being pregnant like and requiring inches more of belt? Because as a man, i am also sometimes bloated and perhaps need half an inch to an inch max on bad days. That isnt near close to pregnancy levels. And pregnancy is a rare enough event where i wouldnt base my whole wardrobe around its potential.

Still, having a short rope can be quite useful, be it for improvising things, or using bits of it as tinder...

​@@edi9892 People rarely needed tender since they worked with pre-established fires (camping is largely a recent thing) outside of a night or two while traveling, in which case, you are way better off carrying dedicated tender material than destroying your belt (and rope was not exactly cheap, either). Rope also stays in place less compared to a flat belt, which creates additional drag (and thus energy expenditure) and chafing.

Agreed!

If they are using ring belts then they are pretty relaxed about historical accuracy to begin with. Ring belts are anachronistic for a historical intention.

Then you're lucky because you can just use what you like instead of thinking about whether it suits the character.

Creating a character can give you focus of where you are going if you don’t know what step to take next. But if you just like me to have a clothing then buy what looks good and wear it.

Then you ARE the character!

You still kinda need to think of a time period and region. It would be like looking for "American fashion", do you want 18th century or 21st? Do you want SoCal or Wyoming?

Then this video is mostly useless. As anyone say medieval is at best gesturing at a huge span of time.

It is less that it is difficult so much as that most of the available black dyes had high lead or iron content and tended to itself corrode the material over time. It caused the object to have a much shorter 'lifespan', so it was often something used by the more affluent (indicating that they could afford to replace clothing more frequently).

No, they did (according to his video) not have acces to the ingrediences to make it proper black (it turned some type of grey).

@@lynxlynx6685 Then he is irresponsibly spreading misinformation (not the first time). The Hospitaliers and some monk orders wore black in the High Middle Ages (we even know which dyes they used) and we have explicit mentions of black textiles in Viking sagas. While dying leather is different to dying textiles, coloring leather is usually _easier._

@@nevisysbryd7450 yet REAL black fabric was considred very high status even in late medieval times. because, like today, even if the black is really black at first, it starts to fade quickly by washing. and dont forget that "black" isnt the same as "black". Depending on the source that might refer to a dark grey or other dark shade.

@@Glimmlampe1982 'Real' black fabric today is still not scientifically black. True black would absorb all light and have no color bias or reflection. Color runs on a spectrum and in-period they were able to achieve textile colors that they considered sufficiently black and RBG-neutral enough to categorize as it as black. Black was not categorically particularly expensive; the better, darker blacks were, much as carmine (read: kermes and later cochineal) red was vastly more expensive than madder red (selected for the signature British 'redcoats' specifically because it was the cheapest dye). There were equivalent processes for blacks, although, yes, they tended to be shorter-lived or less 'true' of a black (in the same way that madder has a lower color saturation and is more orange than kermes/cochineal). And, no, it was not exorbitantly expensive by the Late Middle Ages. By the 15th, 16th, and 17th centuries, it was increasingly popular with the middle class. While the best forms of blacks were expensive, they rarely compared in price to scarlet or tyrian purple.

And it being impractical can also be a status symbol. For a clearer example, look at late 16th century women's sleeves for upper class wear. "This outfit makes me useless" shows how many servants you can afford... rather the opposite of the adventuring lifestyle.

Make sure to do some extra research, the article and time period I focus most on is earlier than the Elisabethan period, so fashion would definitely be different then!

@@LivingAnachronism The period is early 15th century actually (Henry V), so it's very much medieval! It's on a low budget to begin with, so I'm really optimizing wherever I can to make up for any shortcomings (like getting good belts to make up for the lack of accurate armor pieces, etc.) Definitely researching the period a lot though, and your videos have already given me a lot to work with!

If you're into casting, you could try not only pewter, but also brass and aluminum! The source is aournd us everywhere, in cans...

I know of one creator that does this. They also offer custom cast designs, although they claim it takes ~$30 USD minimum in time and materials to make the cast alone.

@@nevisysbryd7450 Oof, yeah - I forgot to factor in making the mold. Guess it'd only be worth the setup if you were going to make them a lot (or lots of them). Ah well, cool in theory, lol 😄

@@morgansmith1930 I think the crafters' shop name is Billy and Charlie, btw. Might find something to your fancy there. Pewter was really popular in Britain. Idk about anywhere else, though.

@@nevisysbryd7450 Wow, thanks! A lot of their stuff looks really good - I'll have to keep them in mind. I especially like the pilgrims' badges. Thanks for the recommendation!

Yes, I will go! Actually not that far of a drive for me, thanks Greg!

Medieval belt studs were actually a thing, and not just relegated to the upper classes. Most of them were tiny round domes in patterns but I've also seen spaced out triangular pyramids cast from pewter. These were just finds from the Netherlands roughly 12c-15c, not sure how widespread they were.

@@hellaradusername They never went out of fashion ;-)

This is highly relative to the individual's lifestyle. People in most situations rarely went that far from their house and so would go back for anything they needed. Blades were subject to varying legal restrictions. While messers were popular throughout much of the Holy Roman Empire, I hey were not everywhere. We actually have no evidence to suggest that the prickers were used to eat with. Their practical purpose is entirely speculation. Most people did not carry a dagger most of the time. Carrying one was something for lifestyles, locations, or activities with a higher risk of violence. People rarely carried around water containers outside of travel, in which case, most evidence points to canteens of either metal, wood, ceramic, or in Britain's case, leather, or calabash gourds. People mostly seem to have gotten water from a local source (eg a fountain or vendor) or gone back home for it. Spoons were rarely an EDC thing. Again, we mostly see them kept at home unless someone is specifically off to an eating event. Same thing for mugs. People usually carried around a single bag or purse at a time, not a separate coin purse, although plenty of purses had multiple separate containers. Gloves varied entirely by social activities and time of year. The most consistent EDC items were a purse or bag, a knife (and possibly a pricker), a belt, possibly a few coins (possibly not), possibly a religious object like a paternoster, and clothes (insofar as EDC is separate from clothes). Scribes would carry a penner set (up to a penknife, pen(s), inkwell, ink(s), paper/parchment) hunters and woodsmen often some kind of short sword, gamblers dice, many might carry a dagger/sword/buckler, some might carry a lantern, travelers might carry a firestarter kit, anyone traveling or working far from storages might carry a canteen, moneychangers had specialized purses, and chatelaines with keys and hygiene kits and so on were especially popular with women. Anyone might carry a scent pouch/pomander, pilgrim badge, or other insignia to imply or display something.

As far as perishables, that depends greatly on the activities that you will be doing and the duration. People in a historical context rarely carried food with them besides maybe a single meal to spare them a trip; travellers might carry up to a couple of days, although really, distances between settlements (or at least some sort of inn/tavern) were rarely that far apart. This applies to most camping supplies (ie, most of your #4). Things are also very different based on whether you are traveling alone or with others and whether you have any beasts of burden or vehicles (donkey, mule, horse, cart, wagon, etc) to carry more supplies. Granted, that is not EDC at that point-pretty much none of #4 is, though, besides _maybe_ combs, which are more of an 'at home' thing.

@@nevisysbryd7450 I was thinking of pilgrims, sheppards and anyone else who is likely to be outdoors for a while. There were also travelling craftsmen (especially shoe repair and Gesellen), lesser travelling merchants, and obviously day jobbers (especially during harvests). Depending on the era, mercenaries come to mind as well. I know that not everyone who could carry a sword did carry one, but I thought that daggers were pretty ubiquitous. For one, single edged ones may have been just as much tools as weapons and when it comes to renaissance, you see them in paintings on pretty much everyone and as soon as they get upset, they apparently drew them. I haven't seen a single painting of a brawl without weapons being drawn! (Quite a few of these paintings showed alcohol and playing cards BTW).

@@nevisysbryd7450 The combs part was what I've heard of Viking women and early Medieval people. You can even find them buried with them. Quite often they were made of bone. Later it seems to have been replaced by pocket mirrors as a status symbol.

@@edi9892 That depends entirely on the shepherding system and wealth of the individual in question. Northern France largely kept their sheep in pens and such, letting them out and driving them back in daily. Throughout much of Southern Europe, they practiced transhumance, which could be anywhere from a few miles to vast distances. Shepherds might have a lodge, cabin, or a caravan or other vehicle that they largely stuck close to as a mobile home, or in some cases (such as in Northern England), bush shelters. In pretty much all cases, they still operated out of some kind of residence and did not carry everything around with them constantly. Travelling craftsmen and merchants generally meant vehicles (wagons, carts, etc) to carry their stuff, and, again, there were often inns and such along trade routes, besides that settlements were usually as close to each other as the logistics of production from land allows. Military and mercenaries actually have one of the higher rates of extensive EDC stuff, given that stopping the supply lines greatly slows things down. Canteens and supplies and tools on one's person made a bit more sense for those not mounted or with servants to carry things for them. A lot _was_ carried by the supply lines, though; infantry rarely carried all of their arms, armor, rations, and son on personally but were partially carried en masse in wagons and the like, unlike modern military procedure. Daggers _were_ common, yes. That does not mean that _everyone carried one. Gambling involved higher than usual rates of violence; anyone frequenting such places was more liable to take to carrying a weapon relative to the general population. People who are more likely to get into a fight are more likely to be armed, and recorded depictions of fights are more likely to be exceptional. We are working with many layers of selection bias here. We do not really have any evidence for single-edged swords being used as tools rather than dedicated weapons. Combs might have been bone, horn, or wood (curiously, I do not recall any instances of metal). Whether they were carried around on their person or kept in a container at home is variable, though (between brooches, chatelains, necklaces, bracelets, torques, all sorts of headwear, rings, etc, they were hardly short on types of jewelry). That is also a matter of lifestyle; women largely remained at home, walking short distances and without vigorous activity that would pose a major risk of damaging, dropping, or losing more delicate objects (chatelains, combs), and with the additional weight of carrying them less of an issue. This is much the same as rings being a status symbol by virtue of indicating that the obstruction of your hands is less of a concern; the impracticality of wear for those of lower status itself is part of its intended function. Carrying a comb on your person, rather than retrieving it on the occasion that you use it, suggests a lot about one's lifestyle. Mirrors often went with combs, actually. Not necessarily in the same container or in burials-we often seen combs used with a mirror in visual depictions, though (albeit this is as much or more trope as it is authentic representation).