THE TOURNAMENT

UNIFORM WITH THIS VOLUME
THE ARMOURER AND HIS CRAFT. By Charles Ffoulkes
DECORATIVE IRONWORK. By Charles Ffoulkes
OLD PASTE. By A. Beresford Ryley

A COURSE OF GERMAN GESTECH.

THE TOURNAMENT

ITS PERIODS AND PHASES

BY

R. COLTMAN CLEPHAN, F.S.A.

WITH A PREFACE BY

CHARLES J. FFOULKES

Curator of the Armouries at the Tower

WITH A FRONTISPIECE IN COLOUR
AND 23 OTHER ILLUSTRATIONS

METHUEN & CO. LTD.
36 ESSEX STREET W.C.
LONDON

First Published in 1919

PREFACE

Those students of arms and armour who have Mr. Clephan’s work on Defensive Armour, Weapons and Engines of War in their libraries will expect to find valuable material for study when they find his name as author of a work on the Tournament. And in this they will surely not be disappointed. It is perhaps a novel experience for one who has for some years seriously meditated such a work himself to be asked to introduce the work of another; but in the study of arms and armour all men are brothers, and I take leave to say that we of this brotherhood know little of the jealousies and divisions of opinion which beset the student in other historical details. The perusal of Mr. Clephan’s work has shown me that it would have been impossible to undertake such a project without unattainable leisure, tireless energy, deep research and very real devotion to the subject. Mr. Clephan has dealt with the subject from a wide European point of view, and has amassed a vast amount of information from German sources which has, up till now, been denied to those unskilled in that language; and, with his copious notes and references, has made this material available for study, for which alone we must ever be deeply indebted to him.

The Tournament, as practised in Germany and towards the close of the sixteenth century in England, France and Italy, must have been a rather dull performance, as the minute regulations and the cumbersome equipment precluded that dash and intrepid onslaught which make the descriptions by Froissart and other writers of his time such excellent reading. Even the gorgeous displays of Henry VIII leave us rather cold when we find that the king invariably won, and that the queen could stop the tilting at her pleasure, which was presumably when her lord had had sufficient entertainment. We have only to note that the suit in the Tower made for Henry VIII to fight on foot in the lists weighs 93 lbs., to realize that no man could be strenuous or energetic in this equipment; and when we find that the horse in the sixteenth century joust had to carry a dead weight of 340 lbs., it will be manifest that he could only amble gently along the tilt, and could not dash headlong down the lists, as the artist would have us believe. The whole subject of arms and armour teems with such disillusioning; but to the earnest student these are taken with grace, because they are born of facts quarried out of masses of written and printed records with years of incessant perseverance and devotion.

After the pioneer work of Meyrick and Hewitt, the interest in arms and armour died down for over half a century, but in the last ten or fifteen years it has revived, and its resurrection may be traced to writers who, like Lord Dillon and Mr. Clephan, have striven to give us a real insight into the military life of nations, rather than highly-coloured fantasies which have no foundation in fact. If Mr. Clephan’s researches cause us to modify our views on certain aspects of the Tournament, I feel quite certain that all who have previously written on these lines will admit the new light he has brought to bear. The audience he directly appeals to is small, but they will yield to students in no other branch of history or art in their keen devotion to their subject; and I trust I may conclude, in their name, by wishing Mr. Clephan every success in the work before us, and, if I may enter into the spirit of his subject, “Good jousting.”

CHARLES FFOULKES

Office of the Armouries
H. M. Tower of London
29 August, 1917

INTRODUCTION

Most of us owe our early impressions of the tournament to the delightful account of the “Gentle and Joyous Passage of Arms” of Ashby de la Zouche, in the county of Leicester, given by Sir Walter Scott in his fine romance Ivanhoe. But that eminent novelist, in presenting to his readers the picture of a pas d’armes of the times of the lion-hearted Richard, took a poet’s licence by describing a jousting and mêlée such as belonged, in many details, to a time later than Richard’s by some two and a half centuries. The knightly armour of the reign of King Richard was of chain-mail, while that of the times of Henry VI was, of course, a complete harness of plate. The first-named equipment is thus described by Sainte-Palaye: “Une lance forte et dificile à rompre, un haubert ou haubergeon, c’est à dire, une double cotte de mailles, tissues de fer, à l’epreuve de l’épée, étoient les armes assignées aux Chevaliers.”[1]

Sir Walter’s account is thus hopelessly misleading in regard to its period, though admirably worked out in many other respects. There are ancient romances of great historic value, in that they give nearly contemporaneous details of the tournament of the fourteenth and fifteenth centuries, and represent many features which may be regarded as correct in the light of a close comparison with other records. That of Petit Jehan de Saintré, written by Anthoine de la Sale, in 1459, is one of these, and we owe much enlightenment to it.

There is great confusion among the works of chroniclers in regard to the dates of many tournaments, and often it is impossible to reconcile their statements. The differences are, however, usually but slight.

Mr. ffoulkes, in his Preface to this work, draws attention to the large amount of fable and exaggeration so often interwoven in many accounts given of the tournament, and to the necessity for presenting the subject historically in its true light. In order to do this one must discard much that has been written concerning it throughout the ages and go back to original information, carefully sifted and compared, in order to arrive at some degree of truth.

As a rule, illuminations in MSS. must not be estimated at their face value, for, besides being often fantastic, they are rarely contemporaneous with the events they portray; and the narrations of chroniclers were mostly written some time after the events in question, and often introduce details which really belong to a later age. Thus the illustrated Froissart in the British Museum,[2] which dates from about the end of the fifteenth century, pictures a joust at the tilt at the pas d’armes held at St. Inglevert in the year 1389, a tournament described in our [chapter IV]; but a tilt or barrier placed between the combatants, along which they rode in opposite directions, was first employed about the end of the first quarter of the century following. Such anachronisms are very common in records of the tournament, so that care and discrimination are required in their interpretation.

The works of Meyrick and Hewitt are of great historical value, and they afford much information carefully gathered from original documents. This information has been copiously made use of by more recent authors with but a scant or even no acknowledgment. It should be remembered, however, that these eminent and devoted historians were pioneers, so to speak, and much has been learnt of the tournament since their day; yet their labours form excellent foundations for the building up of a scientific superstructure.

The admirable version of Freydal, by Querin von Leitner, pictures the jousts of the Emperor Maximilian I, especially those of the last quarter of the fifteenth century. It presents a veritable mine of information concerning the tournament of that period, placing the technique of the subject on a sound basis. Even this account, however, is hardly contemporaneous.

The interest in the subject flagged for a season, and until some quarter of a century ago but little more was heard of it. It was Wendelin Boeheim, in his Waffenkunde, who set the ball rolling again; and since his book was written a number of learned papers have appeared in England and Germany dealing with the tournament, though in French literature the subject has received but little attention. Among such papers those by Viscount Dillon, published in Archæologia and the Archæological Journal, are very important. This writer has corrected many mistakes made by the earlier authors and persistently handed down from one generation to another. Most of the writers would appear to have regarded as gospel truths all statements made by Meyrick. These mistakes are most difficult to eradicate from our literature, for their correction has been made in publications such as those mentioned above, which are unfortunately only read by a select few.

All these learned books and scattered papers treat the subject more or less sectionally, and, so far as I know, there has been no work of any importance published which attempts to deal with the subject as a whole from start to finish. This manifest want I have endeavoured to supply in the present volume.

My position for many years, up to the date of the war, as an official of the Verein für Historische Waffenkunde, gave me access to a mass of original information concerning what may be fitly termed the German period. Such information is not readily got at, and much of it has been embodied in the present volume. It is to such sources that we must turn for many details, more particularly for those of a technical nature. These records, however, mainly relate to tournaments of the last quarter of the fifteenth century (after the Burgundian Chronicles cease), to the whole of the sixteenth, and so up to the time when the institution fell into desuetude.

My thanks are due to Mr. Basil Anderton, m.a., the Public Librarian of Newcastle-upon-Tyne, for reading over parts of my MS. and for drawing attention to many books bearing on the subject of the tournament; to Mr. Charles J. ffoulkes, B.Litt., f.s.a., Curator of the Armouries of the Tower of London; to Mr. Frederick Walter Dendy, d.c.l., and Mr. Samuel T. Meynell, for some valuable suggestions; and to the University of Cambridge for the loan of books.

R. COLTMAN CLEPHAN

Tynemouth,
Northumberland

CONTENTS

LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS

	A Course of German Gestech	[Frontispiece]
PLATE		FACING PAGE
I.	Combat on Foot between Sir Richard Beauchamp and Sir Pandolf Malatesta (1)		[52]
	The Tapestry at Valenciennes (2)
II.	The Beauchamp Effigy		[66]
III.	Maximilian I engaged in Hohenzeuggestech		[90]
IV.	Two Harnesses for the German Joust or Gestech. At Paris		[94]
V.	Harness for Scharfrennen. At Dresden		[98]
VI.	Maximilian II armed for Scharfrennen. At Paris		[102]
VII.	Geschifttartscherennen		[106]
VIII.	A Scharfrennen at Minden in 1545 (1)		[110]
	A Joust at the Tilt at Augsburg in 1510 (2)
IX.	A Harness for the German Joust. Wallace Collection (1)		[116]
	Suit in the Wallace Collection for Jousting at the Tilt (2)
X.	German Armour for Jousting at the Tilt. At Dresden (1)		[120]
	An Armour for Freiturnier. At Dresden (2)
XI.	Harnesses for Jousting at the Tilt. At Paris (1)		[128]
	Field Harness of Anne de Montmorency (2)
XII.	The Comte de Charolais, as represented at Brussels in 1905 (1		[144]
	Jean de Clѐves, as represented at Brussels in 1905 (2)
			PAGE
	Scoring “Cheques.” In text		[127]
	MS. Ashmole, No. 845, fol. 167		[128]
	””” 166		[132]

BIBLIOGRAPHY

THE TOURNAMENT

[CHAPTER I]

It is impossible to trace the beginnings of these martial exercises, mention of which first appears in history in chronicles of the eleventh century; but they doubtless grew out of earlier forms of the rough games and sports engaged in by the noble youth of the period as practice for actual warfare.

Du Cange in his Glossarium, under the heading “Torneamentum,” cites Roger de Hoveden, who defines tournaments as being military exercises carried out in a spirit of comradeship, being practice for war and a display of personal prowess.[3] Their chief distinction from other exercises of a kindred nature lies in the fact that they were actual contests on horseback, carried out within certain limitations, of many cavaliers who divided themselves into contending troops or parties, which fought against each other like opposing armies.

Mention of rules for observance in the conducting of these martial games is made by more than one chronicler of the period as having been framed in the year 1066, by a French Seigneur, Geoffroi de Preuilli of Anjou, and it is stated that he had invented them and even been killed in one of them;[4] and the very names “tourneamentum” and “tournoi” would imply a French origin. These designations would seem to have been derived from “tournier,” to wheel round; though Claude Fauchet, writing in the last quarter of the sixteenth century,[5] expresses the opinion that the word “tournoi” came about from the cavaliers running par tour, that is by turns at the quintain: “fut premièrement appellé Tournoy pource que les Cheualiers ŷ coururent par tour; rompans premièrement leur bois et lances contre vne Quintaine....”

Military games of a similar nature are often stated to have been practised in Germany earlier than this, and Favine in Theatre of Honour and Knighthood[6] prints a list of rules and ordinances for observance at a “tournament” to be held at Magdeburg, as having been issued by the Emperor of Germany Henry I, surnamed the Fowler, 876-936, a century and a half earlier than the date of the promulgation of the rules of Pruilli. The German text, however, bears the impress of a later period than early in the tenth century, and this view is expressed by Claude Fauchet, who gives the rules, which are curious enough for insertion here; and he mentions the authority from which Favine drew his statement.[7]

“Sebastien Munster au troisiesme liure de sa Geografie, certifie que Henry premier de ce nom viuant enuiron l’an VCCCCXXXVI fit publier vn Tournoy, pour tenir en la ville de Magdebourg qui est en Saxe, lequel fut le premier, ＆ tenu l’an VCCCCXXXVIII. Le mesme Munster recite douze articles de loix de Tournoy:—

1. Qui fera quelque chose contre la Foy.

2. Qui aura fait quelque chose contre le sacré Empire, et la Cesarce Majesté.

3. Qui aura trahy son Seigneur, ou sans cause iceluy delaisse fuyant en vne bataille: tué, ou meurdry ces compagnons.

4. Qui aura outragé fille, ou femme, de fait ou de parolles.

5. Qui aura falcifié vn seel, ou fait vn faux serment. Qui aura esté declaré infame, ＆ tenu pour tel.

6. Qui en repost (c’est secrettement ＆ en cachette) aura meurdry sa femme. Qui d’aide ou de conseil, aura cósenty la mort de son Seigneur.

7. Qui aura pillé les Eglises, femmes vefues, ou orphelins: ou retenu ce qui leur appartenoit.

8. Qui avant esté offensé par aucun, ne le poursuit par guerre, ou en Iustice; ains secrettement ＆ par feu ou rapines. Qui gaste les bledz ＆ vignes dont le public est substanté.

9. Qui mettra nouuelles impositions sans le sceu de l’Empereur: ou ie croy qu’il entéd parler d’vn Seigneur qui surchargera sa terre.

10. Qui aura cómis adultere, ou rauy vierges ＆ pucelles.

11. Qui fait marchandise pour reuendre.

12. Qui ne pourra prouuer sa race de quatre grands peres, soit battu ＆ chassé du Tournoy.”

Jousts and Tournaments were classed under the heading of Hastiludia or spear-play: as also was the behourd or buhurt, Bohordicum in Mediæval Latin,[8] a military exercise of a similar nature; though in what respect it differed from the joust or tournament is nowhere stated. That it was an exercise with lance and shield is clearly shown in a passage in Concilium Albiense.[9]

That the behourd was practised continuously for long after the introduction of the joust and tournament is known by the fact of the issue of royal edicts for the prohibition of these exercises, as late as the reign of King Edward I.[10]

The origin of the joust does not appear to be less ancient than that of the tourney itself,[11] which it gradually almost supplanted; and it may have been suggested by the quintain. William of Malmesbury thus defines it:—Justa, jouste. Monomachia ludicra, hastiludium singulare.[12] The Bayeux tapestry shows a kind of combat with spears.

The terms “tourney” and “joust” are often confounded with each other, but they are sharply different, the former being a battle in miniature, an armed contest of courtesy on horseback, troop against troop; while the other is a single combat of mounted cavaliers, run with lances in the lists; though jousting was by no means confined to these enclosures; indeed, such contests were sometimes run in the open street or square of a town. Jousts were often included with the tourney, though frequently held independently; and as the lance was the weapon of the former so was the sword greatly that of the latter. The lance was to be directed at the body only, otherwise it was considered foul play. The joust more especially was run in honour of ladies. These martial games were much practised in all the countries of chivalry.

The chroniclers are vague in their definitions of the Round Table game, the Tabula Rotunda, or as Matthew Paris calls it “Mensa Rotunda.”[13] He expressly distinguishes it from the tournament, though in what respect it differs from it he does not enlighten us. He describes a tabula rotunda, held at the Abbey of Wallenden in the year 1252, which was attended by a great number of cavaliers, both English and foreign, and states that on the fourth day of the meeting a knight named Arnold de Montigney was pierced in the throat by a lance “which had not been blunted as it ought to have been.” The lance-head remained in the wound and death soon followed. We see from this incident that already in the middle of the thirteenth century it was customary to joust with blunted or rebated lances! In 1279 (8 Ed. I) a Round Table was held by Roger Earl of Mortimer, at his castle of Kenilworth, which is thus described in Historia Prioratus de Wigmore[14]:—“He (Mortimer) invited a hundred knights and as many ladies to an hastilude at Kenilworth, which he celebrated for three days at a vast expense. Then he began the round table; and the golden lion, the prize for the triumphant knight, was awarded to him.” Dugdale states that the reason for the institution itself was to assert the principle of equality and to avoid questions of precedence among the knights.

In some “Observations on the Institution of the Most Noble Order of the Garter,” printed in Archæologia of the year 1846,[15] it is stated that in 1343, King Edward III in imitation of King Arthur, the traditional founder of British Chivalry, bent on reviving the fabled glories of a by-gone age, determined to hold a Round Table at Windsor on the 19th of January, 1344. The intended meeting was proclaimed by heralds of the king, in France, Scotland, Burgundy, Hainault, Flanders, Brabant, and in the German Empire, offering safe-conducts to all foreign knights and esquires wishful to take part in it.[16] King Edward fixed the number of the tenans at forty, enrolling the bravest in the land; and he appointed that a “Feast” should be kept from year to year at Windsor on every following St. George’s Day. Walsingham, writing about half a century after Froissart, states that in 1344 the King began to build a house in Windsor Park, which should be called the “Round Table”; that it was circular in form, and 200 feet in diameter. It is also stated that a circular table, made of wood, was constructed at Windsor sometime before 1356; and that the Prior of Merton was paid L26-13-4 for 52 oaks, taken from his woods near Reading, for the material.[17] Walsingham relates that Philip of France, jealous of the fame of our king, had a table made on the Windsor model.

Matthew of Westminster chronicles that a round table was held in 1352, which had a fatal ending.

There is an actual round table of ancient provenance hanging on the eastern wall of the hall of the royal palace at Winchester, the reputed “painted table of Arthur,” and there are some remarks concerning it in the Winchester volume of the Archæological Institute, 1846, telling all that is known concerning it. The hall itself may have been standing in the reign of Henry III; and in the sixteenth century, and probably long before, a round table was an appendage to it; but as to the approximate date of its make there is no reliable evidence. The earliest historic reference to the table is by Hardyng, late in the reign of Henry VI or early in that of Edward IV, who alludes to it as “hanging yet” at Winchester; and Paulus Jovius tells us that the table was shown to the emperor Charles V in 1520, when it had been newly painted for the “last” time, but that the marginal names had been restored unskilfully. In the reign of Henry VIII a sum of L66-16-11 was expended in repairing the “aula regis infra castrum de Wynchestre, et le Round tabyll ibidem.” John Lesley, bishop of Ross, said that he saw the table not long before 1578, and that the names of the knights were inscribed on its circumference; and a Spanish writer, who was present at the marriage of Philip and Mary, thus describes the painting on the table:—

“Lors du mariage de Philip II. avec la reine Marie, on montrait encore à Hunscrit la table ronde fabriquée par Merlin: elle se composait de 25 compartemens teintés en blank et en vert, lesquels se terminaient en pointe au milieu, et allaient s’elargissant jusqu’à la circonférence, et dans chaque division étaient écrits le nom du cavalier et celui du roi. L’un de ces compartemens appelé place de Judas, ou siége périlleux, restait toujours vide.”

The forms of the lettering and general decoration of the table point to a date in the reign of Henry VII or early in that of Henry VIII, but this, of course, only applies to the painted enrichment. Whatever may be the date of this table and its painting, they are both undoubtedly of considerable antiquity, probably from five to six centuries old.

The fête d’armes held by Boucicaut at St. Ingelbert in 1389 (which is described in [Chapter III]), is called in the account of the meeting a “table-ronde”; and the text would imply that the holding of a round table meant a hastilude at which the challengers or tenans kept open house to all comers, as well as meeting them in combat in the lists; and the institution is thus coupled with the banquet. The passage runs:—

“Ainsi feit là son appareil moult grandement et très-honnorablement messire Boucicaut, et feit faire provisions de très-bon vins, et de tous vivres largement, et à plain, et de tout ce qu’il convient si plantureusement comme ‘pour tenir table rond à tout venans’ tout le dict temps durant, et tout aux propres despens de Boucicaut.”[18]

The same lavish hospitality was extended here as at Kenilworth in 1279, Windsor in 1344.

It is clear from various records that the tenans at a round table of the thirteenth and fourteenth centuries sometimes fought under the names of King Arthur’s knights, indeed, “Sir Galehos” appears among the names of the knights inscribed on the actual round table at Winchester; and they also sometimes adopted the names of other legendary heroes, for at a round table held at Valenciennes in 1344, at which the prize was a peacock, victory was achieved by a band of cavaliers which fought under the names of King Alexander’s knights.[19] The accounts given of King Edward’s tournament at Windsor, and that of the later Boucicaut’s pas d’armes, both of which are called round tables, may be said to define sufficiently what a “Round Table” of the fourteenth century really was; and we fail to find any material difference from other meetings of the kind and period.

Favine in Theatre of Honour and Knighthood[20] refers to “Hastiludia Rotunda” as being practice for cavaliers “to sit well their horses, to keepe themselues fast in their saddles and stirups. For, if any man fell, and his Horse upon him, at these encounterings with their lances, lightly worse did befall him before he could any way get forth of the Preasse. But others came to heauior fortune, their liues expyring in the place, being trod and trampled on by others”—but all this would apply to the ordinary mêlée. This form of tourney was much in favour during the thirteenth and fourteenth centuries, but we hear no more of round tables after that.

The Quintain (quintana) and Running at the Ring (Ringelrennen, Corso all’ Annello) were closely allied with the joust, and were practised in preparation for it; the chief objects for attainment in the former being a correct aim, to remain steady in the saddle after impact with the figure, and deftly to get rid of the stump of the broken lance. The quintain was a more ancient game than the joust, and indeed, not improbably, it gave rise to it; and being free from the risk of personal danger, was a sport and pastime of the people. The game assumed many forms, though it was chiefly a means of practice with the lance, sword, baston and battle-axe, indulged in by the young aspirants for knighthood as well as by the citizens and yeomanry. The original quintain was merely a post set up, against which the strokes were directed or against a shield hanging from it, with the same object in view. Later, the post developed into a human figure, usually fashioned as a Turk or Saracen, who held a wooden sword in his hand. The objective of the lance was the space between the eyes; and the figure was placed on a pivot, and so constructed that a misdirected stroke, that is a hit too much on one side or the other, would cause it to spin round with great velocity, dealing the tyro a smart blow with the sword. Another form was a bag of sand, from which the clumsy operator was apt to receive a buffet as it swung round or to have the contents expended over his horse and person; and there were other similar varieties of the game. The water quintain was practised from a boat, rapidly propelled by rowers; while the player stood at the bow, his lance couched and directed towards a shield, hung from a post standing in the water. The quintain continued to be a popular game right through the seventeenth century, and could be played on foot as well as on horseback. A picture of a quintain is given on a miniature in the Chroniques de Charlemagne, in the Burgundian Library at Brussels, and is reproduced by Lacroix in Military and Religious Life in the Middle Ages and Renaissance.

Running or Tilting at the Ring was merely a later form of the quintain. An upright shaft or post was holed at intervals for the reception of a rounded bar, socketed into it at right-angles, from which hung the ring placed on a level with the player’s eye; and the horseman, couching his lance, rode towards it at full gallop with the object of transfixing it. When fairly hit the ring became detached by the action of side springs and remained on the head of the lance. Pluvinal gives particulars of the game as practised at the beginning of the seventeenth century; it was much in vogue at the court of Louis XIV. For running at the ring the lance was much shorter than that employed in jousting, its length was 10 ft. 7 in. and weight 7 lbs. There is a specimen at Dresden, tipped with a cone to hold the ring when hit, and there is naturally no vamplate. It will be realised what excellent practice these sports afforded for the joust and tourney. Both games are described in Strutt’s Sports and Pastimes. MS., Ashmole 837, fol. 185, furnishes an instance of the game:—

“These persons here vnderwrytten / beinge one the kinges parte the playntyff / And the other wt therle of Rutland defendant / dyd Run at ye Rynge iiij course every man / at wch tyme none toke the Ryng but only Mr hayward / and Mr Constable beinge wt the defendant / whome are apoynted when yt shall please his grace / for them to Rune agayne / he wch shall take the Ring furst shall have the prysse /

This beinge done came VI one ether partye to the tourney whose names are hereafter named

Probably written by Sir Gilbert Dethick, Garter King of Arms.

Judicial Combats are also properly classed under the general heading of the Tournament, and these duels, on foot and on horseback, were fought greatly subject to its rules and regulations. An account of this singular institution follows after the tournament proper.

[CHAPTER II]

Jousts of Peace, Hastiludia pacifica, were those of sport, military exercises and courtesy; while Jousts of War, Joûtes à Outrance, or as Froissart calls them “Justes Mortelles et à Champ,” were combats to the death, though subjected to the intervention of the umpire at any stage, by the casting of his bâton, by which a serious wounding or death was often prevented. The term “à outrance,” however, was used not infrequently in Chapitres d’Armes or articles of combat where no fatal ending was in contemplation; they were encounters of courtesy in fact, though contests in which battle-axes, sharp swords and pointed lances were employed.

The chroniclers of the joust and tournament of the earlier centuries exhibit a lack of technical knowledge, and the terms they employ are often mixed and conflicting; and, indeed, this confusion continues throughout later centuries also, to an extent making any exact definition of terms extremely difficult.

Whatever information we possess regarding tournaments of the twelfth and thirteenth centuries is greatly derived from the Mediæval Latin chronicles of the Anglo-Norman monks; but the material they furnish requires to be used with discretion, owing to the frequent unhappy blending of fact and legend, a lack of professional knowledge, and a way of reporting things of half a century or more ago in harmony with the environment of the time of writing. Among the chroniclers of the tournament of the period we are immediately dealing with, are William of Malmesbury, whose History of the Kings of England finishes at the year 1142; Wace, who wrote the Roman de Rou, on Rollo and the succeeding Dukes of Normandy, in 1160; William of Newbury, 1197; Roger of Hoveden, 1201.[21] William Fitzstephen was an eye-witness of the events he relates; the prolific and illuminating Matthew Paris, 1259; Robert of Gloucester, who died in 1290; and Matthew of Westminster, 1307.

Much information concerning the body-armour of the twelfth and thirteenth centuries has been derived from seals, and particularly from those of the kings of England; also from illuminations in chronicles, representations on tapestry and carvings in ivory. Military effigies and brasses have also proved of immense value, for they enable us to fill in many of the gaps left in the recitals of chroniclers, and afford precise information as to the knightly equipment for battle, as far as least as the presence of the surcoat will permit. We have, indeed, been favoured among the nations in the preservation of so many of these monuments. There are but few brasses of the thirteenth century existing, though effigies are very numerous. Sad it is that so many of these priceless memorials have been lost or thoughtlessly mutilated; but their very important bearing upon history was but faintly recognised much before the nineteenth century began. Many of them had been thrown on the rubbish heap to make way for some trivial and often mischievous alteration, or lost when some of our finest churches were spoilt by what is so often miscalled restoration; and many even of the effigies left to us have been exposed to a process of tinkering by thoughtless hands. Not a detail is missing on many of those monuments that remain, and even colours are indicated.

William of Newbury states that tournaments first appear in England in the troubled reign of King Stephen, 1135-1154; and that they were introduced from France by the Norman nobles is clear from the expressions employed by Matthew Paris concerning them, viz.: “Conflictus Gallicus” and “batailles francaises.” Lombarde[22] states that “the kings of this realm before King Stephen, would not suffer it to be frequented within their land; so that, such as for exercise in that feate in armes, were driven to passe over the seas, and to performe in some different place in a foreigne countrie: but afterwards King Stephen in his time allowed it.”[23] It was the Norman knights who introduced the employment and couching of the lance in England. Of that age we have the remarkable description of the martial sports of London by William Fitzstephen. He tells us ‘that every Sunday in Lent, immediately after dinner it was customary for great crowds of Londoners, mounted on war-horses, well trained to perform the necessary turnings and evolutions, to ride into the fields in distinct bands, armed “hastilibus ferro dempto,” with shields and headless lances; where they exhibited representations of battle, and went through a variety of warlike exercises: at the same time many of the young noblemen who had not received the honour of knighthood, came from the King’s court, and from the houses of the great barons, to make a trial of their skill in arms; the hope of victory animating their minds. The youth being divided into opposite companies, encountered one another; in one place they fled, and others pursued, without being able to overtake them; in another place one of the bands overtook and over-turned the other.’

Robert of Gloucester, in his Chronicle in verse, which ends shortly before the accession of King Edward I, writes concerning William Rufus:—

“Stalwarde he was ＆ hardy ＆ god knyght, thorn al thyng In batayle ＆ in ‘tornemnes’ er than he were Kyng.”[24]

but this of course has not the value of contemporary history.

The knight-errant of the twelfth century and even later often spent the evening of his days as an anchorite, undergoing many self-imposed penances, fastings and flagellations in expiation of many acts of violence and even oppression of his active career.

The tournaments of the twelfth and thirteenth centuries were characterized by all the romantic fire of knight-errantry, though they were often rough and disorderly, and not infrequently degenerated into real battles or free fights, in which many of the combatants were seriously injured or killed. At the meeting held at Neuss, near Cologne, in 1240, sixty of the combatants are stated to have been killed. In England an Earl of Salisbury died from his hurts; his grandson, Sir William Montague, was killed when jousting with his own father; and many prominent knights and nobles were so injured in the tourney that they never regained their health. Tournaments generally tended to become milder as rules, regulations and limitations were enacted for their government; but it was not before the reign of King Edward I that they were brought under any regular disciplined system of control.

After the reign of King Stephen these martial exercises often came under the ban of both church and state, the former even going to the length of excommunication and the refusal of Christian burial to the fallen. Pope Gregory issued a bull against them in 1228, and there were other bulls.[25] King Henry II discouraged them and issued edicts against them; and we are told by William of Newbury that many young cavaliers travelled from England to enjoy their favourite pastime in other lands, especially France. Tournaments were revived in England, says Jocelin of Brakelond,[26] after the return of the heroic Richard from the Holy Land, who granted licences for holding them; and from this time forward unlicensed tourneying was treated as an offence against the crown. Roger de Hoveden writes in Annals, under the year 1194 (in translation):—“King Richard ordered tournaments to be held in England, which he confirmed by charter; but that all wishing to tourney should pay for the privilege according to rank—viz., an earl, 20 marks of silver; a baron, 10 marks; a knight, holding land, 4 marks; and any who were landless, 2 marks; and no knight was permitted to enter any lists without first having paid his fee.” The charter of this grant was delivered into the custody of William, Earl of Salisbury; and Hubert Fitz-Walter, the king’s chief-justice, appointed his brother, Theobald Fitz-Walter, to be collector.

Hoc ett Breve, Dni Regis Ricardi I. missum Dno Cantuariensi, de concessione Torneamentorum in Anglia.

Heac est forma Pacis fervandae a Torneatoribus (Harl. MS. 237).[27]

Tournaments became controlled by royal ordinances, and any infraction of the rules laid down was punishable with the forfeiture of horse and armour, imprisonment and other penalties; though at times the regulations would seem to have been very loosely interpreted or entirely disregarded. This assumption of control by the state had been brought about by various causes quite apart from the frequently disorderly nature of the meetings, and the large number of casualties involved; though these were the ostensible reasons often given for the interdiction of all unauthorized gatherings of the kind. Much, however, depended on the character and temperament of the reigning monarch, and the condition of order or otherwise prevailing in the country at the time. At tournaments, whether held by royal licence or not, the combatants were divided into two camps or parties; and they gathered together large concourses of spectators, who were too apt to become strong and eager partisans, as we see at the football games of to-day; the unpopular side being sometimes assailed with volleys of stones, some discharged from slings. These meetings were thus frequently looked upon with disfavour by the powers that be, and were either entirely prohibited, or licences were refused in troublous times; for the assemblage of so many influential knights and powerful barons with their feudatories, coming from all parts of the kingdom, constituted a danger to the state in affording opportunities for cabals, sedition and other disorders, and, indeed, tumults frequently occurred. Tournaments were very popular in France during the reign of Philip Augustus; and Père Daniel relates an incident of that reign affording a striking example of the large gatherings that assembled. An unexpected attack having been made on the town of Alençon, the king was enabled to enrol a sufficient force at a tournament being held in the neighbourhood at the time to repel it. Jousting was not much practised in France at that time or during the thirteenth century, the cavaliers of that country preferring the mêlée.

In the year 1196 King Philip Augustus “sent vnto King Richard, requiring him to appoint fiue champions, and he would appoint other fiue for his part, which might fight in listes, for triall of all matters in controusee betwixt them, so to avoid the shedding of more guiltlesse bloud. King Richard accepted the offer, with the proviso that either King might be of the number, that is the French King one of the fiue vpon the French part; and King Richard one of the fiue vpon the English part. But this condition would not be granted.”[28]

In the year 1250 “was a great tornie and iusts holden at Brackley, when the earle of Gloucester (contrarie to his accustomed manner) fauoured the part of the strangers, whereby they prevailed. In so much that William de Valance handled one Sir William de Odingesselles verie roughlie, the same Sir William being a right worthy knight.”[29]

In 1251 King Henry III forbad the holding of a round table[30] and many examples of such prohibitions are given in Foedera. Yet, meetings of the kind were often held in England in spite of them, for the young cavaliers, imbued with the chivalrous spirit of the age, declined being balked of their favourite pastime and were willing to run some risks for its gratification. In the reign of Henry III the king admonishes his subjects “to offend not by tourneying,” and, “by the advice of parliament enacted, that all who (without leave) should keep a tournament, should forfeit their estates, and their children to be disinherited.”[31] As late as the reign of King Edward II an edict was issued against the practice, the ordinance running “Turneare, burdeare, justas facere, aventuras quaerere.”[32] Prohibitions against tournaments were issued in the years 1220, 1234, 1255 and 1299. In normal times, however, they were often encouraged by the crown, and were presided over, and even taken part in, by kings and princes. Matthew of Westminster states that it was customary for newly made knights to pass over to the Continent to show their mettle by feats of arms; and that King Henry III knighted eighty gentlemen on one occasion, who all went abroad, accompanied by Prince Edward, to take part in tournaments.

In the early days of tournaments there were only five authorized lists (champs clos) in England, and they were all south of the Trent. At a later period these enclosures were usually placed in the neighbourhood of a large town where there was a hall spacious enough for the banquet and the dance; the size of the lists being regulated by the number of cavaliers expected to take part. Those of the twelfth century were open at the sides, a barrier standing at each end; later they were made quadrangular in shape, longer than broad by one-fourth. They were enclosed by a double row of palisading, high enough to make it impossible for a horse to leap over; the space between the rows affording a place of refuge for the varlets (ephebi) and attendants. The rôle of the varlets was to rush in and steady their masters in the saddle, when swaying after their careers; and, when unhorsed, to extricate and drag them, as opportunity offered, out of the press or from among the horse’s hoofs in the mêlée; for they were unable to help themselves in their heavy armour. This duty was both difficult and dangerous, but they had to manage as best they could. Openings were left at either end of the lists for entrance and exit, and movable barriers were provided for closing them when required. A thick covering of sand was strewn on the ground, or it was well mulched with tanning refuse so as to provide a soft bed for breaking the force of the fall of a cavalier when unseated. The lists were gaily decorated with tapestry, bunting and heraldic devices; a tribune for the umpire or judge, and benches for the spectators, were provided; as well as special galleries for the ladies, which were often adorned with gold and silver embroideries. Two pavilions were pitched for the use of the leaders, which were removed before the commencement of the tourney. The scene presented by a tournament must have been brilliant in the extreme; and the element of danger involved would add greatly to the interest and excitement of the spectators. Permanent lists were often surrounded by a ditch or moat. The marshals of the lists, kings of arms, heralds and pursuivants-at-arms were stationed within the enclosure to note the various incidents taking place among the combatants; and it was the duty of the first-named to see that the rules of chivalry and general regulations were strictly observed. Trumpets announced the entry of each competitor, who was followed into the lists by his esquires; and flourishes of music were heard at intervals to animate the combatants, and to mark special feats of gallantry. Each knight usually bore on his person some token of his lady-love, which was disposed on his helmet, lance or shield. The armour and horses of the vanquished fell as spoil to the victors, unless ransomed by payment in money; this, however, was the case only in contests of courtesy. The jousting at a tournament usually ended with “le coup ou la lance des Dames,” a homage to the fair sex joyfully rendered.

We have seen that blunted lances were in use in 1252, but we have not found any record of the coronal, a lance-head formed like a flattened crown (whence the name), before very early in the fourteenth century, when it appears on a picture in a MS. in the British Museum.[33] Cavaliers frequently successful in the tourney enriched themselves by the forfeiture of the horses and armour of the vanquished.

The routine of an early tournament is described in Codex 69 of the Harleian MS.[34] It is first proclaimed over a wide area; and on assemblage the cavaliers, mounted on horseback, are divided into two parties or squadrons, the challengers and the challenged. Each troop usually varied in number from twelve to twenty, and was headed by its own leader; the weapons were pointless swords with rebated edges. The two bodies then take up positions at opposite ends of the lists; the onset is sounded, “Lasseir les aler,” and they engage in combat until the signal is given to cease fighting. Various perquisites fall to the superintending Norroy King at Arms, and he and the heralds are paid their expenses and six crowns of “nail money” for affixing the cote-armour of the two leaders in front of their pavilions. An illustration on a MS. of the thirteenth century in the royal library[35] is reproduced in Sports and Pastimes. It pictures the entry on horseback of the two baron-leaders into the lists, wearing chain-mail and pointed bascinets, and with their horses trapped; they bear no weapons. The King of Arms, in civil dress, is standing between them holding their banners, one in each hand. Trumpeters are seen in the background.

The presence of ladies graced the tournament, and they were treated with great deference; the names and deeds of the successful champions were submitted to them, and it was they who awarded and presented the prizes. The days of combat usually closed with the banquet and the dance. The tourney from the first was confined to men of noble birth, though this rule was not so strictly enforced in England as in Germany and France, where all not of the privileged class were strictly excluded.

The first mention we have found of prizes at tournaments is in 1279, when, at the Round Table held at Kenilworth in that year, the prize (a golden lion) was awarded to Sir Roger Mortimer; but they do not seem to have become general until much later.

Henry III, on his marriage with Eleanor of Provence, in 1236, held a tournament for eight successive days; and according to Matthew Paris, there was one at Northampton in 1247, another at Nebridge in 1248.

The tournaments held during the reign of Richard I were frequently interdicted by the Church owing to the brutal character of many of them; and Jocelin of Brackelond tells the story of a number of knights who held one between Thetford and Bury St. Edmunds, in spite of the fiat of the abbot. Another took place soon after, which had also been prohibited; and all who had taken part in it were excommunicated. Matthew Paris describes a tournament held at Rochester in 1251, at which foreigners contended with English knights. There was great bitterness at the time between some of the nationalities owing to very rough treatment that had been experienced by some English knights abroad; and all rules and regulations were thrown to the winds at Rochester, the proceedings degenerating there into a free fight. The English set upon the foreigners with staves, beating them severely, and chased them into the town, to which they fled for refuge. Another instance of this kind may be cited in an account given by Matthew of Westminster of a case in 1253, when the Earl of Gloucester and a companion took part in a tournament abroad, at which they were so roughly handled as to require fomentations and baths before they were in a condition to return to England. Trivet relates a further striking example in a case, lawless and brutal in its character, which received the name in history “La petite Bataille de Chalòns.” Edward I, King of England, was travelling through France in the year 1274 on his way home from the Holy Land to take possession of the crown, when he was invited by the Count de Chalôns to take part in a tournament to be held in the open, near the town of Chalôns, with a certain number of his followers. At an early stage of the contest the Count, a knight of unusual strength, forcing his way through the mêlée attacked the King with great vigour and impetuosity; and casting away his weapons threw his arms around King Edward’s neck, hoping to unhorse him. The King, however, being a tall and powerful man kept his saddle, and at the moment of the greatest pressure cut fiercely at his adversary, dragged him from his horse and threw him heavily to the ground. The exasperation of the French cavaliers on seeing their leader fall was very great, and for a time a real battle ensued, in which the outside followers of both sides took an active part, the English using their terrible bows: but some degree of order having been at length restored the count surrendered to the King and acknowledged him to be the victor. After this tournament laying hands on an opponent was strictly forbidden. Thomas of Walsingham also gives a spirited account of this meeting, which runs on similar lines.[36]

At Whitsuntide in the year 1256 great jousting was held at Blei, when the Lord Edward, afterwards King Edward I, “first began to shew proofs of his chiualrie.” In one of these encounters “William de Longspee was so brused that he could never after recover his former strength.”[37]

“In the ninth year of King Edward’s reign, the feast of the round table was kept at Warwike with great and sumptuous triumph.”[38]

The Round Table assembled at Kenilworth by Sir Roger Mortimer has been already referred to in the section devoted to the Tabula Rotunda, and Hardyng in his Chronicle[39] thus pictures it:

“And in the yere a thousand was full then Two hundred also sixty and nynetene,[40] When Sir Roger Mortimer so began At Kelyngworth, the round table as was sene, Of a thousand Knygts for dicipline, Of young menne, after he could devise Of Turnementes, and justes to exercise.

“A Thousand Ladies, excellyng in beautee He had also there, in tentes high above The justes, that thei might well and clerely see Who justed beste, there for their Lady Love For whole beautie, it should the Knightes move In armes so eche other to revie To get a fame in play of Chivalry.”

Hardyng died about the year 1465, nearly two centuries after the events he narrates.

The lance, or glaive as it is often called, of the eleventh and twelfth centuries[41] was quite straight and smooth; a vamplate was added in the fourteenth, small at first but larger later, for the protection of the right arm. The lance for jousting was made of soft wood, so as to splinter easily.

A manuscript in the Record Office, transferred from the Tower about 1855, entitled Emptiones facte per manum Adinetti Cissoris et visu Albini ＆ Roberti de Dorset contra Torniamentum de Parco de Windsore, nono die Julii anno Sexto (a Roll of Purchases made for the tournament held at Windsor Park in the year 1278), is copied in Archæologia of the year 1814.[42] This document is of rare value in giving particulars of the equipment of the cavaliers engaged in tournaments of the last quarter of the thirteenth century, besides mentioning other matters of interest. Thirty-eight cavaliers took part in the tournament at Windsor Park, twelve of the highest rank being styled digniores. Among these were the Earls of Cornwall, Gloucester, Warren, Lincoln, Pembroke and Richmond;[43] and there were several foreign knights present. Many of the cavaliers whose names appear on the roll had been with King Edward in the Holy Land. Both arms and armour[44] were provided for the occasion for all the cavaliers taking part. Thirty-seven of the outfits ranged in cost from 7s. to 25s. each; that for the Earl of Lincoln, however, was much higher than any of the others, being 33s. 4d. The equipments must thus have differed widely in quality and embellishment. The armours were of leather gilt, each suit consisting of a coat-of-fence (being a “quiretta”[45] of leather), brassards of buckram, a surcoat (the material for the majority of these garments being carda,[46] but those for the four earls were of cindon silk), a pair of ailettes, of leather and carda,[47] two crests (one for the man, the other for the horse), a shield of wood heraldically ensigned, a helm of leather, and a sword of whalebone and parchment, silvered over. The shields of wood cost 5d. each, without emblazonment; the swords 7d. each, and 25s. was paid for silvering the blades, and 3s. 6d. for gilding the hilts. The helmets for the “digniores” were gilded at an expense of 12s., the others silvered. Each helmet cost 2s., and the ailettes 8d. the pair. Eight hundred little bells (grelots) were provided, to be used in necklets for the horses; sixteen skins for making bridles; twelve dozen silken cords for tying on the ailettes;[48] and seventy-six calf-skins for making crests. The cuirasses and helmets were made by Milo, the currier; and the cost of carriage for the whole of the sets from London was 3s. The sum total for all these outfits provided in England was £80 11s. 8d.; but some other purchases were made in France, and in the list are items for saddles and horse furniture. There is no mention of lances, and many of the items scheduled are only open to conjecture. Sir Roger de Trumpington, whose effigy lies in Trumpington Church, Cambridgeshire, was among those taking part in the tournament. If one can imagine this passage of arms, its participants armed with swords of whalebone and parchment, with their arm-defences of buckram, it does not seem a very dangerous affair, though a rough enough sport.

There is another document of about the same period of the highest importance, viz. the Statuta de Armis, or Statutum Armorum in Torniamentis. This was drawn out at the request of the earls and barons of England and by the king’s command, and affords much information as to the equipment for the tourney late in the thirteenth century, the usages to be observed, and the regulations as to the heralds, esquires, and varlets. There are several copies extant, one of which, and that perhaps the most reliable, may be seen in the Bodleian Library. Part of the text is reproduced by Hewitt in his invaluable work on ancient armour,[49] and the document is referred to in Archæologia of the year 1814.[50] These statutes provide that:—

No “conte,” baron or other chevalier shall henceforth be attended by more than three armed esquires, who shall all bear the cognizance of their master.

No knight or esquire taking part in any tournament shall bear a pointed sword or dagger, a staff or baston, but only a broadsword for tourneying. All should be armed with “mustilers;”[51] “quisers;”[52] “espaulers;”[53] and “bacyn,”[54] and no more.

If any “conte,” baron or other chevalier break any of the rules of the tourney, he shall, with the assent and command of the Seigneurs, Sire Edward, fiz le Rey; Sire Eumond, frère le Rey; Sire William de Valence; Sire Gilbt de Clare; and Cunto Nichole,[55] lose horse and armour and be imprisoned at the discretion of the said court of honour, and all disputes shall be referred to it for settlement.

Any esquire to a knight breaking the regulations in any way should lose horse and armour and be imprisoned for three years; and none was allowed to raise up a fallen knight but his own appointed esquire, bearing his device. Spectators were prohibited the wearing of armour or the carrying of arms. Etc.

May we see in the comparative mildness of these rules, and the control exercised by the court of honour, some results of King Edward’s own dangerous experiences at the Chalôns tournament.

It is an interesting fact that the effigies of two of the members of this distinguished committee have been preserved, viz.: those of Edmund Crouchback, whose sword-belt is enriched with heraldic bearings; and William de Valance. Both are in Westminster Abbey. The figure of the former wears the coif or hood of mail; the body is covered by a surcoat with long sleeves and reaching nearly to the ankles; but poleynes or knee-kops can be discerned. In the case of the other effigy the surcoat is sleeveless and shorter than the other, reaching down to just over the knees. Poleynes are present, but there are no coudes. A concave triangular shield hangs by the belt. Chain-mail; quilted stuffs, often reinforced with rings or studs of iron, bone or horn; ordinarily dressed leather and cuir-bouilli, which is leather boiled or beaten—were all quite capable of resisting an ordinary sword-stroke or lance-thrust.

An effigy of the twelfth century in the Temple Church, London, that of Geoffrey de Mandeville, Earl of Essex, dating in the year 1144, in the reign of Stephen, exhibits the knight completely encased in mail, wearing a coif of mail of the same fabric, and over it is the tall cylindrical, flat-topped helm. It was found, however, that certain vital and more exposed parts of the body required further protection, for the mail, far from presenting a glancing surface towards the strokes and thrusts from weapons of attack rather afforded them a lodgment. The mail therefore became gradually reinforced over the most vulnerable places with pieces of leather or plates of iron until a full panoply of metal plating had been attained, a process which had not been quite completed before the first decade of the fifteenth century. The course of transition can best be followed by a study of brasses and effigies. The Crouchback and de Valence effigies show us that but little progress in the direction of plate-armour had been made up to the end of the thirteenth century, though after that time the transition became rapid.

The usual knightly panoply was a coif of mail and beneath it a cap of cloth, worn in battle with or sometimes without a surmounting helm; the tunic; the gambeson or pourpoint, of quilted cloth; the hauberk, of chain-mail; the chaussons, which covered the upper part of the leg; the chausses, the lower; and the surcoat.

Chain-mail is probably a fabric of Eastern origin, consisting of forged iron rings, each ring interlinked with four others. This web must have been somewhat of a rarity even as late as the eleventh century, and, indeed, until the process of wire-drawing had been invented, owing to the laborious and costly nature of its manufacture. Each ring required to be cut from a long strip of wire, hammered-out from the solid, then interlinked, riveted, forged or butted together. The Romans employed chain-mail, as shown by the compressed masses which have been found, but whether it was interlinked in the manner just described is doubtful. Hauberks of quilted stuffs, reinforced with rings or studs of iron, bone or horn, were much in use; and so were those of ordinarily dressed leather; or of cuir-bouilli, which is leather prepared by boiling and beating. All these defences were quite capable of resisting an ordinary sword-stroke or lance-thrust.

The arming of the horse with a bard of chain-mail or its substitutes did not take place before the third quarter of the thirteenth century; the trapper came into use somewhat earlier, though probably not painted or embroidered with heraldic bearings before the reign of Edward I.

[CHAPTER III]

The fourteenth century was eminently a period of transition and development in arms, armour, jousts, tournaments, and, indeed, in everything that related to warfare. During its course chain-mail harness had been gradually replaced by iron plate, bit by bit; a process hardly completed at the end. It was a century of almost incessant fighting among the nations, in the East as well as in the West; and the knightly armour of the period in its advancing stages lies open as a book before us, in a study of our effigies and brasses.

An epoch-making detonating force had come into operation, which inaugurated a new era in the art of war. In its early days ordnance was greatly inferior in destructive power to most of the mechanical engines of the period, but by the end of the century it had developed to an extent which produced a revolution in the relative resources at command for attack and defence; and the old chivalry became at length second in importance to the infantry arm.

Contemporary information regarding the jousts and tournaments of the earlier part of the fourteenth century is sparse; they are described in the Romances of Richard Cœur de Lion, Sir Ferumbras, and others, which teem with improbabilities though still of the greatest value; and there is a pictorial representation in Roman du roy Meliadus of “Une Mêlée de Tornois”.[56] This romance, probably written about the middle of the century, contains several pictorial examples of jousts and tournaments, and a wealth of coloured and gilded drawings on military subjects generally; while others are figured in the Froissart plates[57], Hefner’s Tratchten and Carter’s Painting and Sculpture. It is to Froissart that we are immeasurably most indebted for information regarding these martial games, more especially those of the second half of the fourteenth century, and his recitals contain much invaluable detail, which had been industriously collected from heralds, pursuivants, kings-of-arms and other officials at the tourney. Froissart was born about the year 1337, and he began to gather the material for his history when about twenty years of age, viz. eleven years after the battle of Crecy. The Chronicles commence with the coronation of Edward III, in 1337, and with the accession of Philip of Valois to the crown of France, and they close about the end of the century with the death of Richard II of England. At the beginning of his career Froissart was closely associated with the English court as a poet and historian, acting, indeed, as clerk to the closet to Queen Philippa, after which he entered the Church, becoming later canon of Chimay. His fine personal gifts soon placed him in excellent and confidential relations with many prominent and influential personages, both of France and England, able to give him reliable information for his history. His industry was remarkable, his style of writing both original and luminous, and his facts and narrations, though often marshalled with some confusion, are most reliable, so far at least as we can judge now. He was no extreme partisan, but tried, as he often says, whenever possible to hear both sides to a question. The weak place in his history is his dates and the lack of them. Sainte-Palaye says of him: “Froissart, qui a mieux réussi qu’acun de nos historiens à peindre les mœurs de son siècle, ...”

Royal jousts were often held in celebration of the coronations and weddings of princes; and such were usually proclaimed in advance in other countries of chivalry, so as to afford opportunities for the attendance of foreign cavaliers anxious to distinguish themselves; and these were provided with safe-conducts by the crown.

In 1302 “Tournies, iustes, barriers, and other warlike exercises, which yovng lords and gentlemen had appointed to exercise for their pastime in diuerse parts of the realme, were forbidden by the kings proclamations sent downe to be published by the shirifs in euerie countie abroad in the realme: the teste of the writ was from Westminster the sixteenth of Julie.”[58]

A tournament was proclaimed by the King of Bohemia and the Earl of Hainault, to be held at Condé in 1327, just after the coronation of Edward III; and Sir John de Hainault, who had been present at the ceremony, left England to attend this tourney, accompanied by fifteen English knights, who intended taking part.[59]

Holinshed states that in September, 1330, the King (Ed. III) held jousts in Cheapside, when he with twelve challengers answered all comers. The meeting continued over three days, and no serious accidents took place.

A joust of the same year is figured in Codex Balduini Trevirencis. The cavaliers are seen jousting with lances tipped with coronals and with flat triangular shields, heraldically ensigned: they wear ample surcoats and the horses are trapped in cloth. The heaumes bear fan crests, the saddles are without supports; and the object in contemplation is the splintering of lances and unhorsing.

“Great iustes was kept by King Edward at the toune of Dunstable in 1341, with other counterfeited feats of warre, at the request of diuerse yovng lords and gentlemen, whereat both the king and queene were present, with the more part of the lords and ladies of the land.”[60]

King Edward held a tournament in London in the middle of August, 1342; and had sent heralds into Flanders, Brabant and France to proclaim it. Froissart states that the eldest son of Viscount Beaumont[61] was killed at this tournament. Other chroniclers date this passage of arms in 1343.

To cry a tourney—“Cy sensuyt la façon des criz de Tournois et des Joustes. Cy peut on à prendre à crier et à publier pour ceulx qui en seront dignes,” etc. Ashmolean MS., No. 764, 31, 43.[62] On the reverse of the last leaf is a picture of a Joust, wherein two combatants on horseback, bearing their crests, are fighting with lances within the lists.

The Round Table held at Windsor on St. George’s Day in 1344 has been referred to in the section devoted to the Tabula Rotunda. These hastiludes and jousts are mentioned by Froissart, who tells us that they were characterized by great splendour. The Queen was attended on the occasion by three hundred ladies, richly attired; while the King had a great array of earls and barons in his train. The “feast” was noble, with all good cheer and jousting, and lasted over fifteen days. Holinshed’s account, under the year 1344, is as follows:—“Moreouer, about the beginning of the eighteenth yeare (?) of his reigne, King Edward held a solemne feast at his castell of Windsore, where betwixt Candlemasse and Lent, was atchiued manie martiall feasts, and iusts, and tornaments, and diuerse other the like warlike pastimes, at which were present manie strangers of other lands, and in the end thereof, he deuised the order of the garter, and after established it, as it is to this daie. There are six and twentie companions or confrers of this felowship of that order, being called knights of the blew garter, and as one dieth or is depriued, an other is admitted into his place. The K. of England is euer chiefe of this order. They weare a blew robe or mantell, and a garter about their left leg, richlie wrought with gold and pretious stones, hauing this inscription in French vpon it, Honi soit qui mal y pense, Shame come to him who euill thinketh. This order is dedicated to S. George, as chéefe patrone of men of warre, and therefor euerie yeare doo the knights of the order kéepe solmne his feast, with manie noble ceremonies at the castell of Windsore, where King Edward founded a colledge of canons.”[63]

Shortly after this round table the King issued letters patent for hastiludes and jousts to be held annually at Lincoln, over which the Earl of Derby was nominated as Captain by the King, the office to be retained by the earl during life-time, but after his death to become elective.

The “Feast of the Round Table” was again held at Windsor in 1345, and within a few years of it jousts took place at Northampton, Dunstable, Canterbury, Bury, Reading and Eltham, the exact years of which do not appear in the wardrobe accounts which have been preserved. In July, 1346, King Edward invaded France, and did not return to London until October, 1347, his home-coming being celebrated by jousts, tournaments, masques and other festivities.

A manuscript covering the expenses of the great wardrobe of Edward III from December, 1345, to January, 1349, now in the Public Record Office, is printed in Archæologia for the year 1846.[64] Some of the items scheduled cover robes for the person, which were delivered to certain of the knights taking part in a “round-table” held by the King at Lichfield in 1348 or 1349, more probably the former year; viz. for the King’s person and eleven knights of his chamber, these being Sir Walter Manny, John de L’Isle, Hugo Courtenay, John Gray, Robert de Ferrers, Richard de la Vache, Philip de Spencer, Roger de Beauchamp, Miles de Stapleton, Ralph de Ferrers and Robert de Mauley. To each of these knights two yards of blue cloth for coats and “three quarters and half a yard” of white cloth for hoods[65] was delivered. Similar cloth was also issued to some of the other knights. The challengers, or tenans, of the round table consisted of the king and seventeen of his knights; their opponents, the venans, comprised fourteen knights, with the Earl of Lancaster at their head. An entry in the wardrobe accounts shows that King Edward wore a harness bearing the arms of Sir Thomas Bradeston on the occasion. Any further particulars of this round table, beyond the details of the robes for the banquet, are lacking. This tournament was celebrated with great pomp and magnificence.

A spirited verse from Chaucer’s “Knight’s Tale” follows:—[66]

“The heraudes lefte hir prikyng up and doun; Now ryngen trompès loude and clarioun; Ther is namoore to seyn, but west and est In goon the speres ful sadly in arrest; In gooth the sharpè spore into the syde. Ther seen men who kan juste and who kan ryde; Ther shyveren shaftès upon sheeldès thikke; He feeleth thurgh the hertè-spoon the prikke. Up spryngen sperès twenty foot on highte; Out gooth the swerdes as the silver brighte; The helmès they to-hewen and to-shrede, Out brest the blood with stiernè stremès rede; With myghty maces the bonès they to-breste. He, thurgh the thikkeste of the throng gan threste, Ther, stomblen steedès stronge, and doun gooth al; He, rolleth under foot as dooth a bal.”

We see in the Romance of Perceforest how the ladies at a tournament tore off pieces of their apparel to be used as tokens or favours by their devoted knights, to an extent leaving them in a condition of dishabille. A knight often wore “a kerchief of pleasance” on his helmet, a token from his lady-love.

In 1358 “Roiall iustes were holden in Smithfield, at which were present the Kings of England, France and Scotland ... of which the more part of the strangers were as their prisoners.”[67]

“Moreouer, this year (1359) in the Rogation wéeke was solemne iusts enterprised at London, for the maior and his foure and twentie brethern as challengers did appoint to ansuer all commers, in whose name and stéed the King with his foure sonnes, Edward, Lionell, John and Edmund, and ninetéene other great lords; in secret manner came and held the field with honor, to the great pleasure of the citizens that beheld the same.”[68]

“Moreouer this yeare (1362) the fiue first daies of Maie, were kept roiall iusts in Smithfield by London, the king and queene being present, with a great multitude of ladies and gentlemen of both the realms of England and France.”[69]

Much detailed information concerning the jousting of the fourteenth century has fortunately been preserved in the records of the wars in France, some examples of which follow.

At the time when the siege of Tournay was raised by means of a truce, a tournament was held at Mons, at which Sir Gerard de Verchin, Seneschal of Hainault, was mortally wounded.[70]

Froissart states[71] that a combat took place before the walls of the town of Rennes in 1357, then being besieged by the English forces, between a young knight-bachelor,[72] Bertrand du Guesclin, and an English cavalier, Sir Nicholas Dagworth. The articles of combat provided for three courses with the lance, three strokes with the battle-axe and three thrusts with the dagger. These were all duly delivered, the knights bearing themselves right gallantly, without hurt to either of them. The fight was viewed with extreme interest by both armies.

So far Froissart. But there is some doubt whether it was Sir Nicholas Dagworth who was one of the principals in this duel; for in the Histoire de Bretagne it is stated that it was William de Blanchbourg, brother of the Governor of Fougerai, who was Sir Bertrand’s opponent on the occasion, and that he was wounded and unhorsed. It is more probable, however, that both duels were fought, though the last-named combat was not likely to have taken place under the walls of Rennes, for both cavaliers were Frenchmen.

There is a singularly beautiful brass in the pavement of the south chapel of Blickling Church, Norfolk, in memory of Sir Nicholas Dagworth, who was a man of importance in the reigns of kings Edward III and Richard II. He lived until the year 1401,[73] and his will appears in Testamenta Vetusta. The brass is given in the Boutell Collection. It affords an excellent example of the armour prevailing at the end of the fourteenth century, when the evolution from chain-mail to full plate-armour had been almost completed. The helmet is the pointed bascinet, with the camail, the latter with an ornamental bordering coming over the top of the jupon. The cyclas, which has an enriched fringing, hides the body-armour from view, and the knightly belt is elaborately decorated; the pouldrons are articulated. The gauntlets, with short cuffs, have gads over the fingers for use in the mêlée, and they show an imitation of finger-nails, and the solerets are freely articulated. The knight’s head rests on his great helm, which has a mantling; and a wreath, surmounted by the crest, a griffin. The armour is enriched with chasing. The Arms—Erm, on a fesse, gu., three bezants: impaling Rosale, Cu., a fesse between six martlet’s or.

The armour of the Black Prince in the Chapel of the Holy Trinity, at Canterbury Cathedral, affords an excellent illustration of the degree of progress reached in the last quarter of the fourteenth century. The process of evolution from chain-mail to plate is here almost completed, there being only small pieces of the former at the skirt, arms and insteps of the solerets. The Prince died in 1376, and the date of his effigy is somewhat later.

During a skirmish at Toury, in France, shortly before the death of King Charles V, in 1380, an esquire of Beauce, named Gauvain Micaille, enquired through an herald if any English gentleman would be willing to try a feat of arms with him—a joust of three courses, and the exchange of three blows with the battle-axe and of three thrusts with the dagger. The challenge was accepted by an English esquire, named Joachim Cator. The Frenchman received a severe wound in the thigh in the jousting, which was in contravention of the rules of the tourney; but the Englishman pleaded that it was an accident solely due to the restiveness of his horse; and this explanation was accepted by the umpire.[74]

An interesting tournament took place at Cambray in 1385 on the marriage of the Count d’Ostrevant to the daughter of Duke Philip of Burgundy. The ceremony was followed by a banquet at which the King of France was present as well as the Duke. The tournament was held in the market-place of the town, and forty knights took part, the King tilting with a knight of Hainault. The prize was a clasp of precious stones, taken from off the bosom of the Duchess of Burgundy; it was won by a knight of Hainault, Sir John Destrenne, and was formally presented by the Admiral of France and Sir Guy de la Trimouille.[75]

The number of courses run in jousting and the blows and strokes exchanged with battle-axes, swords and daggers at a meeting like that just described was usually three each; but they tended to increase as the century advanced, and five got to be a common number, and later as many as ten or even twelve. In the duel between Sir Thomas Harpenden and Messire Jean des Barres, at Montereau sur Yonne in 1387, they numbered “cinq lances à cheval, cinq coups d’épée, cinq coups de dague et cinq coups de hache.” The first four courses of the jousts were run with equal fortune, but in the fifth Sir Thomas was unhorsed and lay senseless on the ground; he revived, however, after a time, and all the strokes and blows were duly exchanged without further hurt to either knight. The King of France was present on the occasion.[76]

About this time, when the war between France and England was in full progress, there was much jousting with pointed lances between the knights and esquires of the two nations; safe-conducts being issued by the commanders on either side.

A meeting was arranged to take place near Nantes, under the auspices of the Constable of France and the Earl of Buckingham. The first encounter was a combat on foot, with sharp spears, in which one of the cavaliers was slightly wounded; the pair then ran three courses with the lance without further mishap. Next Sir John Ambreticourt of Hainault and Sir Tristram de la Jaille of Poitou advanced from the ranks and jousted three courses, without hurt. A duel followed between Edward Beauchamp, son of Sir Robert Beauchamp, and the bastard Clarius de Savoye. Clarius was much the stronger man of the two, and Beauchamp was unhorsed. The bastard then offered to fight another English champion, and an esquire named Jannequin Finchly came forward in answer to the call; the combat with swords and lances was very violent, but neither of the parties was hurt. Another encounter took place between John de Châtelmorant and Jannequin Clinton, in which the Englishman was unhorsed. Finally Châtelmorant fought with Sir William Farrington, the former receiving a dangerous wound in the thigh, for which the Englishman was greatly blamed, as being an infraction of the rules of the tourney; but an accident was pleaded as in the case of the duel between Gauvain Micaille and Joachim Cator. At this meeting the honours lay with the Frenchmen.[77]

Somewhat later a combat à outrance[78] took place at Chateau Josselin, near Vannes, between John Boucmel, a Frenchman, and Nicholas Clifford, in which Boucmel was struck on the upper part of the breastplate by his opponent’s lance, which, glancing off, entered his neck through the camail and severed the jugular vein, killing him instantly.[79] A plate of Froissart’s represents this duel as a combat on foot with long lances, taking place in a small quadrangular enclosure.

Juvenal des Ursins states[80] that at the marriage of Charles VI, of France, with Isabel (Isabeau) of Bavaria, 1385, jousts and grand fêtes took place in its honour. Sir Peter Courtenay came to France at the time with the object of accomplishing a feat of arms with the Seigneur de la Tremouille. The King’s consent to the duel had been obtained, and the day and place were fixed for its accomplishment. The knights appeared in the lists on the day appointed in order to fulfil their engagement in presence of the King, who, however, at the last moment, owing to some remonstrances, forbade the combat: but a duel did take place at the time between an English knight and the Seigneur de Clery, in which the Englishman was wounded and unhorsed. This joust had been brought to the notice of the Duke of Burgundy, who said that the offence committed by a Frenchman in jousting with an enemy without the consent of his sovereign was worthy of death; his Majesty, however, at length pardoned the offender.

Froissart describes a realistic tournament, held at Paris during the wedding festivities, as between the Saracens under Saladin, and the Crusaders, led by Richard Cœur de Lion.

The feat of arms between Sir John Holland and Sir Reginald de Roye, a French chevalier of distinction, held at the town of Entença, before the King and Queen of Portugal and the Duke and Duchess of Lancaster, presents features of its own. The French knight sent an invitation to the Englishman entreating him to joust with him three courses with the lance, and to exchange the same number of strokes with the battle-axe, sword and dagger, for the love of his lady. The challenge was promptly accepted, and an answer returned by the herald, together with a safe-conduct for the Frenchman and his company. Sir Reginald arrived in due time at Entença, handsomely accompanied by six score knights and esquires. The meeting was held in a spacious close in the town, the ground well strewn with sand; and galleries had been erected for the accommodation of the royal and ducal parties, with other spectators. The jousting was to be with sharp lances, to be followed by a contest with sharp and well-tempered battle-axes, swords and daggers. The champions were well mounted and rode into the lists in full armour, taking up positions for their careers at either end of the lists, with the distance of a bow-shot between them. The signal for the onset having been sounded, the knights charged each other at the gallop, and Sir Reginald struck the bars of his opponent’s visor so stoutly that his lance splintered on impact. Sir John Holland also struck the visor of his adversary well and fairly, but the helmet of the Frenchman, instead of having been securely laced to his body-armour as was usual, was only held by a single thong, and of course slipped off, leaving the knight bare-headed and Sir John’s lance unbroken. The jousters then returned to their stations, and charged each other as before, and again the same thing happened, owing to the same cause. The English who were present regarded the unusual loose fastening of the helmet as a trick, but the umpire, the Duke of Lancaster, ruled that it was admissible for Sir John Holland to have employed the same artifice had he chosen to do so, and that therefore he could not decide against the French knight.[81] After the stipulated three courses with the lance had been run, the knights fought three rounds each with battle-axes swords and daggers, without either receiving a scratch. The French chevalier was adjudged to have had the advantage, though both had done well.[82]

In 1389 a deed of arms was performed at Bordeaux before the Duke of Lancaster, between five Englishmen and five Frenchmen: three courses with the lance, three courses with swords, and the same number with battle-axes. None was wounded, but one of the English knights killed the horse of a Frenchman with his lance, which greatly angered the Duke, who replaced the loss with one of his own chargers.[83]

The most prominent and accomplished jouster of his day was the Chevalier Jean Le Maingre, called De Boucicaut, Mareschal of France 1368-1421, and his Mémoires,[84] by an unknown author, contain descriptions of some of his exploits in the tiltyard. One of these recitals[85] follows:—During the three years’ truce between France and England, when King Charles VI was at Montpellier,[86] the French Seigneurs De Boucicaut, de Sampi and de Roye challenged all comers, being foreign knights and esquires, to joust five courses with lances, pointed or blunted, at their pleasure, at St. Ingelbert,[87] a place near Calais; the pas d’armes (or the “table-ronde,” as it is called in the Chapitres d’Armes, or articles of combat) to continue for thirty days. A great elm stood before the pavilions of the challengers, and hanging from its branches were two shields of wood, one of them plated with iron, “l’un de paix, l’autre de guerre,” so that each venant on arriving at the rendezvous could signify his pleasure as to whether he elected to fight with pointed or rebated lances by striking with a wand the shield for peace or that for war. The arms and devices of the three tenans were painted above the two shields, so that each venant might be able to select his adversary among them, and a note blown on a horn proclaimed his choice. Each venant was to furnish the king of arms with his name and titles, and to bring another cavalier with him as his sponsor. The lists were richly decorated, the challengers handsomely apparelled; and lavish hospitality was dispensed in a pavilion specially pitched for the purpose. Any arms, armour, or other requisites of which the venans might stand in need, were freely provided, the motto everywhere displayed being “Ce que vouldrez.” The chronicle goes on to state that on the first day of the jousting, Jean de Holland, Earl of Huntingdon, half-brother to King Richard, signified his intention of jousting with Boucicaut. Both lances were fairly splintered in the first encounter, the second and third being fought with equal fortune; but in the fourth the horse of the English knight fell with its rider, who was severely injured, his antagonist only retaining his seat by the prompt support of his varlets. Boucicaut then retired to his pavilion, but was not allowed to remain resting for long, for other English cavaliers desired to joust with him, and he disposed of two other knights the same day. While he was engaged in combat day after day, his fellow tenans were not idle, and the thirty days stipulated in the Chapitres d’Armes ran their course. Among other cavaliers from England taking part were Earl Marschal, the knights de Beaumont, Thomas de Perci, de Clifford and Courtenay, besides Sir John d’Ambreticourt and many Spanish and German cavaliers. Boucicaut is said to have gone through the whole thirty days of jousting without a scratch.

The rôle of the tenans at a pas d’armes was no sinecure, and for three knights to have held the pas for thirty days against all comers, as in this case, must have been an arduous undertaking; and very dangerous also, more especially as much of the jousting was with pointed lances. No. XI of Froissart’s plates professes to depict one of the jousts of this pas d’armes; but it pictures one at the tilt, so that the drawing is obviously of a later date than that of the Inglevert meeting, and was, in fact, executed in the reign of Edward IV, when the tilt was in common use. Froissart[88] gives a long and circumstantial account of this meeting, and states that it was very richly appointed. King Charles of France was present incognito, and had subscribed very handsomely towards the heavy expenses incurred.

Monkish chronicles, written in times not contemporaneous with the events they describe, are usually unreliable in being coloured with the circumstances of a later age; and any illuminations or wood-cuts accompanying them are apt to reflect the times in which they were executed, rather than those they are represented to portray, for the artist fills in his picture with the details of the scenes before him. However, with the accumulated knowledge we now possess, we are enabled to correct some of the mistakes, from a chronological point of view.

A royal tournament was held in London by King Richard II, immediately after the Michaelmas of the year 1390, in honour of Queen Isabella; and heralds were sent to proclaim it throughout England, Scotland, Hainault, Germany, Flanders and France. Sixty knights were to joust with rebated lances, as tenans, for two successive days, the Sunday and Monday, against all comers; and the Tuesday following was set apart for the esquires. The jousting was to be followed by banquets, dances and sumptuous fêtes and entertainments of various kinds. The prizes for the Sunday were as follows:—A rich crown of gold for the best lance among the venans; and, for the most successful among the tenans, a very rich golden clasp. Those for the Monday are not stated; but for the Tuesday, the esquires’ day, they were a handsome charger, fully accoutred, and a falcon, for the best lances of the venans and tenans, respectively. The ladies were to act as judges and to present them. The Sunday’s jousting was called the feast of the challengers. At three p.m. the procession started from the Tower of London. Sixty barded chargers, an esquire mounted on each, advanced at a foot’s pace; then sixty ladies of rank richly apparelled and mounted on palfreys, rode in single file, each leading a knight, in full armour, by a silver chain. The procession thus formed proceeded along the streets of London, down Cheapside to Smithfield, attended by minstrels and trumpeters. The King and Queen, with their suites, accompanied by some of the great barons, had gone earlier to Smithfield, and there awaited the arrival of the procession and the knights from abroad. Their Majesties were lodged in the Bishop’s palace, and there the banquets and dances were to be held. Many foreign knights and esquires attended, and among them Sir William of Hainault (Count d’Ostrevant)[89] and the Count de St. Pol.

On the arrival of the procession at Smithfield the knights mounted their horses and prepared for jousting, which began soon after. The prize for the best lance of the venans on the Sunday, the first day of jousting, was awarded by the ladies to the Count de St. Pol; and that for the most skilful knight among the tenans, to the Earl of Huntingdon.[90] The King led the tenans on the Monday; and the prize for the best lance of the venans was awarded to the Count d’Ostrevant; that for the most successful of their opponents to Sir Hugh Spencer. The esquires jousted on the Tuesday, after which there was a banquet, and dancing was continued until daybreak. There was jousting on the Wednesday for knights and esquires indiscriminately; and on Thursday and Friday fêtes, masques and banquets, after which the royal party left for Windsor.[91]

Caxton refers to these royal jousts in the following terms:—

“All of the King’s hous were of one sute, theyr cotys, theyr armys, theyr sheldes and theyr trappours were embrowdred all with whyte hertis, with crownes of gold about their necks, and cheynes of gold hangyng thereon; whiche hertys were the King’s leverey, that he gaf to lordes, ladyes, knyghtes, ＆ squyers, to know his houshold peple from other; then four and twenty ladyes comynge to the justys, ladde[92] four and twenty lordes with chynes of gold, and alle in the same sute of hertes as is afore sayd, from the Tour on horsback thrurgh the cyte of London into Smythfeld.” The narrative of this tournament by Holinshed[93] is far from being so picturesque as that of Froissart, and it differs in some particulars from it. He says there were twenty-four ladies, not sixty, mounted on palfreys; and that the prizes for the first day were awarded to the Comte de St. Pol and the Earl of Huntingdon; and on the Monday to the Earl of Ostravant and Sir Hugh Spencer.

King Richard proclaimed another grand tournament to be held at Windsor in one of the closing years of his reign; the tenans or challengers to be forty knights and forty esquires, clothed in green. The Queen was present, but very few of the barons attended, owing to the great unpopularity and arbitrary actions of the King,[94] whose reign had begun under the happiest auspices, but the manifest defects in his character brought his career to a sorrowful ending.

There was a kind of tourney called the Espinette held at Lille, in honour of a relic preserved there, which, though obscure, would seem to have been but an ordinary joust with which certain annual ceremonies were connected. Hewitt[95] quotes the Chronicle of Flanders concerning a celebration in the year 1339:—“Jehan Bernier went to joust at the Espinette, taking with him four damsels, namely, the wife of Seigneur Jehan Biensemé, the wife of Symon du Gardin, the wife of Monseigneur Amoury de la Vingne, and mademoiselle his own wife. And the said Jehan Bernier was led into the lists by two of the aforesaid damsels by two golden cords, the other two carrying each a lance. And the King of the Espinette this year was Pierre de Courtray, who bore Sable, three golden Eagles with two heads and red beaks and feet.” M. Leber gives some account of the fête de l’épinette in the Collection des traités.

The vamplate, avant-plate, placed on the shaft of the lance, for the protection of the right hand and arm, first appears in the fourteenth century; and so does the lance-rest on the breastplate. An ordinance of the thirteenth century orders the lance to be blunted for the tourney; but in the fourteenth it was ordered to be tipped with a coronal, the short points of which were just sufficient to catch on to the armour without being capable of piercing it. The helmet of the fourteenth century was the pointed bascinet, with the camail or hood of mail worn over the top of the cyclas. The great heaume used early in the fourteenth century differs little from that of the end of the thirteenth; later it assumed the form of a cylinder, surmounted by a truncated cone. It was usually of iron, though sometimes of leather, either ordinary or of cuir-bouilli. The fan crest, doubtless adopted from a classic prototype, came into vogue in the last quarter of the thirteenth century, though it is represented on the seal of King Richard I.

Crests were made of various materials. Those for the cavaliers taking part in the tournament at Windsor Park, in 1278, were of calf-skin, one for the man and another for the horse, as shown in the Roll of Purchases; that of the Black Prince, at Canterbury,[96] was of cloth. They were attached to the helm by means of a thin iron bar. Crests were usually affixed to the great helm, which was worn over the bascinet; though there are instances of their being used alone on the smaller head-piece.

The heraldic crest does not appear before towards the close of the thirteenth century; a notable instance may be cited in the case of the remarkable effigy of Sir John de Botiler, in St. Bride’s Church, Glamorganshire, which dates about the year 1300. The helmet of this monument is the cervellière, which is a visor-less, saucer or shallow basin-shaped head-piece, going over the hood of mail; and the crest is embossed on its front. Crests were not generally worn before about the end of the first quarter of the fourteenth century, after which period they develop from comparative simplicity into fantastic and even ridiculous conceptions.

A strange fancy was the cap-of-maintenance, the placing of a cap of velvet or other material on the helm, surmounted by the family crest; and in the second half of the century or a little later the orle or wreath and mantling or lambrequin are added.

The shield of the century was of the triangular kite or heater-shaped form.

In 1390 “John de Hastings earle of Pembroke, as he was practising to learne to ioust, thrugh mishap was striken about the priuie parts, by a knight called Sir John S. John, that ran against him, so as his inner parts being perished, death presentlie followed.”[97]

In 1398 the Earl of Crawford, of Scotland, jousted à outrance, i.e. with sharp lances, with Lord Wells of England at London Bridge, the 23rd April, being the feast day of St. George. An attaint was made in the first course, and both champions kept their seats. The Earl sat so steadfast in his saddle under the shock that the by-standers cried out that he was locked to his seat, on hearing which he jumped off his horse and then vaulted back into his saddle again with such agility as greatly to astonish the people. In the second course they met again as before without either being hurt; but in the third Lord Wells “was borne out of the saddle and sore hurt with a grieuous fall.”

Not long after a duel on horseback took place in Scotland between Sir Robert Morley, an Englishman, and Sir Archibald Edmounston, and afterwards with another Scot Hugh Wallace, and the first-named was the victor in both cases; but he was at length overcome by one Hugh Traill, at Berwick, and died shortly after from chagrin.[98]

[CHAPTER IV]

The fifteenth century marks a very distinct epoch in the history of the tourney, which became milder and less dangerous to life and limb; and during its course a stricter observance than hitherto of the rules, regulations and limitations prescribed were progressively more strictly enforced, and their infringement subjected the offenders to severe and sometimes degrading penalties. An oath to observe the rules of chivalry was administered to all cavaliers taking part in the tournament.

Body-armour had proved inadequate to resist the then weapons of attack, and at the commencement of the century, or perhaps a couple of decades earlier, the armour-smith was especially directing his attention towards the strengthening of the knightly harness. The chief seat of the industry for the greater part of the century was at Milan, at which city armour was forged of such strength as to be capable of resisting thrusts with the lance and strokes from the terrible battle-axe, sword and mace practically without fracture; and one meets with references in English and other records to orders being sent to Milan for harnesses of proof, a civil garment being forwarded to indicate the stature and build of the person, since ill-fitting suits would be apt to chafe the wearers. But, while the best and most costly harnesses came from Italy, less expensive equipments were imported into England from Germany; for “ostling” (Easterling) armour is sometimes mentioned in English articles of combat, and it was probably obtained through the agency of the Hanseatic Confederation from their London depôt, the Steelyard, then situated in what is now Lower Thames Street, London. The cost of carriage also would be much less from Germany.

The great armour-smiths of Milan at the period immediately under review were members of the Missaglia Negroli family, which, like many others, carried on their craft for several generations. The Germans have always been wont to borrow the inventions and processes of other nations, and then often to cheapen them; and so it was with body-armour. They gradually succeeded, under the personal inspiration and direction of the Emperor Maximilian, in transferring the bulk of that industry, even in the best harnesses, to German soil, until at length cities like Nuremberg and Augsburg became the chief seats of the manufacture; and indeed the bulk of the armours preserved to us of the later “Gothic” and “Maximilian” styles are of German make. That Maximilian engaged armour-smiths from Italy is seen by a contract made in 1494[99] with the Milan armourers Gabrielle and Francesco de Merate, to erect and equip for him a smithy in the town of Arbois, in Burgundy, to forge there a certain number of harnesses at fixed prices. The armour worn by Maximilian I at Worms, in 1495, in a combat on foot with the Burgundian, Claude de Vaudrey, bears the stamp “m,e,r,” surmounted by a crown, the Milan mark of these smiths, who came next in celebrity to the Missaglias.

Many ameliorations were conceived in the fifteenth century with a view to further minimizing the risk of serious accidents, and one of the most far-reaching and important was the application of the tilt in jousting. Many injuries had befallen the riders in the tourney by the collision of their horses, sometimes by accident, at others by design, and the idea of the tilt was conceived greatly with a view towards obviating this danger. The tilt, or toile, was at first a rope hung with cloth, stretched along the middle of the lists, but later it became a barrier of planks, along which the tilters charged in opposite directions, their bridle-arms towards it, their lances held in rest in their right hands on the tilt side of the horse’s neck, striking the polished, glancing surface of their adversary’s armour at an angle. The tilt had the advantage of lending a fixed direction to the jousters in their careers, though they often failed to touch each other. With the danger of these collisions removed, the knight ran his course with but little risk.

Jousting in the open with pointed lances was, however, continued by a hardier type of jousters until long after the introduction of the tilt; and here the saddle was without cantle, so as to offer no impediment to unhorsing; and a cushion or mattress, stuffed with straw, was placed over the chests of the horses, to act as a buffer in case of collision. A rough game it was for a cavalier to be unseated and thrown to the ground in his heavy armour, sometimes carrying a weight of two hundred pounds; though his fall was broken by the ground of the lists being covered with thickly strewn sand or mulched with refuse from the tan-yard. This form was much practised in Germany, though strange to say but little harm would seem to have been experienced by the champions in their falls, greatly owing to the extensive padding of their harnesses. Other important departures in the direction of comparative safety were the designing of special forms of armour for the tiltyard, and the introduction of additional or reinforcing pieces, for doubly protecting those parts of the body on which the brunt of the attack fell, viz. mainly on the left side. They first appear in England in the reign of Edward IV. “William Lord Bergavenny bequeathed to his son the best sword and harness for justs of peace and that which belong to war.”

The vamplate of this century was much enlarged, for the protection of the lance-arm; and the steels of the saddles lent great protection to the bodies of the jousters below the breast. The effect of all this was to encase those taking part in the tourney in an almost impenetrable shell, from which they could barely see or do more than couch and aim their lances.

Armour for the lists became sharply divided from that employed for “hoasting” purposes, as harnesses for the field were called, though in what country the change had its origin, whether in Burgundy, Italy or Germany, is uncertain. It was in use in Burgundy in the year 1443, for we read in the account given in Mémoires D’Olivier De La Marche,[100] that during the time the necessary preparations were being made for the tournament held at L’Arbre de Charlemagne, Dijon, in that year, the young cavaliers practised jousting before the duke “et là furent faictes une jouste à selles plattes et en harnois de joûte.”

Harnesses for the lists assume different forms in Germany from those in Italy. In the first-named country in the case of the armour for jousting in the open, so to speak, the breastplate was flattened on the right side for better couching and aiming the lance, which was supported by a Rasthaken or queue behind, as well as by a lance-rest in front, while in Italy the cuirass continued rounded in form. The lance-rest (Rüsthaken) assumed various forms, though usually that of a curved bracket. Reinforcing pieces were employed in all courses.

There is another variety of armour which was used in Scharfrennen, [101] but it, with the others, will be particularly described and illustrated later on. Jousting at the tilt prevailed greatly in England, though abroad many other varieties were practised as well. Jousting lances were often painted or ornamented with party-coloured puffs of cloth along their length. Lance-heads assumed various forms, examples of which may be seen in several of the German museums and in the Tower of London. Illustrations are given by Boeheim.[102] The shafts varied in form, weight and thickness for the different courses.

The armour for combats on foot was made very strong and heavy, and so padded with under-clothing as to cause faintings and even deaths in hot weather. Foot-fighting was rendered much safer by the introduction of “barriers,” over which the champions fought, but they do not appear much before the sixteenth century.

The physical strain on those taking part in a tournament must have been great, and the combatants weary at the end of a long day; nevertheless they joined the ladies in the evening, when the successful competitors received the prizes from their hands; and after the banquet came the dance.

The century saw the mingling of the tourney with the pageant; the mêlée had been much supplanted by the joust, which demanded more individual skill, for in the throng and confusion of the mêlée the element of chance helped certain of the combatants to a distinction beyond their real deserts; while in the joust, which was a contest between two champions only, each had to stand or fall solely on his own merits.

A favourite form of the tourney of the fifteenth century was the Kolbenturnier or baston course, which differed essentially from all the others in that no personal injury was intended in the contest, the object being to batter off the crest which decorated the helm of an adversary; and it was thus purely a game or trial of skill. The weapon employed was a Kolben, a heavy polygonally-cut baston or mace of hard wood, about 80 cm. in length. The Kolben swells out along its shaft to an obtuse point, has a round pommel, short grip, and a rondel-guard of iron. There is an illustration of this weapon in the Tourney-book of René d’Anjou. The helm, a huge, globose form of bascinet, was latticed over the face with strong iron bars, and screwed to the cuirass back and front; it was thickly lined inside and roomy enough to prevent any injury which might be caused by the heavy blows exchanged. It was covered outside with leather and painted with various devices. A fine example of this type of helm is at Dresden, and Boeheim in Waffenkunde,[103] figures one of them in the Collection Mayerfisch at Sigmaringen. The saddle was the high one, known as the Sattel im hohen Zeug; an example, of the second half of the fifteenth century, is in the Germanische National Museum at Nuremburg. The Kolbenturnier ceased being run about the end of the first quarter of the sixteenth century. It was at first practised on foot, and doubtless grew out of the Judicial combats with the baston of the lower classes. Boeheim in Waffenkunde[104] illustrates Duke Georg of Bayern-Zandshut, at Heidelberg, armed for a Kolbenturnier in 1482: from Hans Burgmaior’s Turnierbuch, in possession of the Prince of Hohenzollern-Sigmaringen.

The crests of the fifteenth century are most fanciful and fantastic, such as a crowned unicorn or the tail of a fox; many examples may be seen in the tourney-book of King René, the Beauchamp pageants, the German tourney books, and other works of the kind; and René describes their construction very fully. They are fragile and made greatly of the same materials as those of the century preceding, though oftener of cuir-bouilli, which substance was more substantial and enduring. The tapestry at Valenciennes, which pictures a mêlée of the fifteenth century, shows numerous fragments of crests lying on the ground under the hoofs of the horses. The knights prized their crests greatly; and they were often buried with them. They were fixed in position by an iron bar or brooch; an example of the latter may be seen at the Musée d’Artillerie, Paris. Sometimes the horse was also provided with a crest, as in the tournament at Windsor Park in 1278.

The hours during which fêtes d’armes took place show that the lists were frequently artificially lighted, and, indeed, torches and flambeaux are sometimes mentioned.

Tournaments held at the royal and princely courts of the countries of chivalry were strictly games, the hosts often challenging their guests to trials of skill; and some correspondence preserved of the fifteenth and sixteenth centuries, between German princes, shows what a great part these martial sports played in the routine of their daily lives; second only, if even that, to the chase. Kurfürst Albrecht von Brandenburg, writing to a friend in the last quarter of the century, says:—“Wir sind yor mit gots hilff die fordersten im Turnier gewesen und gedenkens aber zu bleiben.”[105] Maximilian, writing, at the age of nineteen, to Sigmund Pruschenk, remarks:—“Ich hab das pest gethan, wann ich hab VIII stechholz zerstossen.”[106]

Much depended on the docility and training of the chargers, which were often ridden blindfolded, and they were sometimes influenced by a spirit of combat like their riders. The bodies of the horses were padded and covered by the trapper, which fell down almost to the ground, considerably hampering their motions; a mattress of straw, crescent-formed, protected their chests;[107] their ears were sometimes stopped with wool or oakum; the head and tail frequently decorated with feathers; and the animals advanced towards each other at a hand-gallop. The rowel-spurs had long necks. Each variety of joust had its own special type of saddle, devised with the object of making unhorsing either difficult or easy as the case might be. These saddles will be described in their order. Each prince or man of rank and fortune kept a considerable number of horses continually in practice; and the correspondence of the times reveals many requests for their loan.

It was at the courts of Aix and Burgundy where for long the tourney was much fostered; and at both it may be said to have been reduced almost to a science. At the first-named court it was much a matter of amusement, emulation and relaxation; while in the latter, then the most brilliant in Europe, it was greatly the policy of the sovereign to encourage tournaments and fêtes of all kinds. They kept the leaders of the armies and the chevaliers generally in close touch with the head of the state and the country, besides providing gladiatorial spectacles for the duke’s somewhat restless and discontented subjects, who were often smarting under heavy imposts to provide him with the means for constant schemes of aggression and a profuse display, and who were frequently in a state of revolt. After the tragic death of Charles the Bold, the jousting traditions of the court of Burgundy passed over to that of Maximilian of Austria, who would seem to have made successful jousting one of the great objects of his life.

There is perhaps necessarily a certain degree of monotony and repetition in the narrations of the chroniclers of the joust and tourney, but they convey collectively a much clearer idea of these encounters than a mere bald statement of the leading facts could do, and they reflect the chivalrous spirit of the times in the incessant craving of the young cavaliers for notoriety and distinction in the tiltyard. Many examples of jousts and pas d’armes of the fifteenth century are given in the Chronique de Monstrelet, the Mémoires de la Marche, and Chastelain’s Cronique Jacques de Lalain. The Chronicle of Euguerrand de Monstrelet, with its somewhat irregular continuations by de Couci and others, commences where that of Froissart leaves off, viz. in the year 1400; and it has the advantage of being for the most part contemporaneous in regard to the events it narrates. Monstrelet’s style of writing is less sprightly and more monotonous than that of Froissart; but he gives dates to his recitals, which, however, leave much to be desired on the score of accuracy. The names of personages and even towns given in the Chronicles are most perplexing, being frequently so distorted as to make identification an impossibility. Like Froissart, Monstrelet does not confine himself to the events of the period under review in France and Burgundy, but deals also with those of other countries in relation to them. The Chronicles, which really amount to a history, afford a good insight into the subject of the jousts and tourneys of the times; and Monstrelet states that his information was carefully collected from heralds, kings-of-arms and other officials of the lists. Monstrelet was born about 1390 and died in 1453.

The Bibliothèque de Bourgogne in the National Library at Brussels possesses many illuminations of the reign of Philip the Good and Charles the Bold; and there are also several in the Paris Collection and particularly in the Armorial de la Toison d’Or.

An Ashmolean MS., No. 1116, ff. 137b-86, gives the names and arms of the sovereigns and knights of the Order of the Golden Fleece (Toison d’Or) from its institution in 1429 to the twenty-third festival of the Order, which was held by Philip II, King of Spain, 12 Aug. 1559; it gives historical accounts of the celebration of the feasts. The MS., which is in French, is beautifully written, with the arms tricked. Other MSS. in the same Collection, 139-66, 167-75b, of the year 1431, give the statutes and ordinances of the Order.

[Appendix A] furnishes an abstract of all the Ashmolean MSS. relating to the tourney, for reference by our readers.

The Mémoires D’Olivier De La Marche teem with spirited descriptions of numerous fêtes d’'armes held at the Burgundian court during the reign of Duke Philippe le Bon, which are full of detail; and several of them bear the impress of having been written by an actual eye-witness, with ample opportunities for getting information, and with a sufficiency of technical knowledge for placing the scope and minutiæ of the encounters accurately and vividly before us. They also afford invaluable details of the costumes of the period, giving minute particulars of the dresses, and all matters connected with the lists. The Seigneur de la Marche was a Burgundian, born about 1425; he was appointed a page to his master the Duke in 1447, and was dubbed chevalier after the battle of Montlehéry. He distinguished himself before Ghent in 1452, was appointed a commissionary to the forces in 1456, was made a prisoner at Nancy in 1476, and died in 1502. The Mémoires cover a period of about fifty-three years, and form a very valuable contribution to the history of the tourney. They were first published in 1562.[108] Jean de Féore, Seigneur de St. Remy, describes some of the pas d’armes of the century; and the Traité de Tournois, by Louis de Bruges, written in the reign of Charles VIII, of France, deals with others of a later period. The Beauchamp Peageants[109] afford some excellent illustrations of jousts and combats on foot and on horseback. They are reproduced in the History of the Life and Acts of Richard Beauchamp, Earl of Warwick, by John Rouse, the Warwickshire antiquary and historian, who died on the 14th of February, 1491, the seventh year of Henry VII. Earl Richard was born in 1381 and died in 1439. Hefner’s plates, Nos. 109 and 138, also picture jousts and tourneys of this period.

The Romance of Petit Jehan de Saintré,[110] written in 1459, by Antoine de la Sale, contains fifteen large and fine illustrations of jousts, combats on foot, etc., which, as far as we can judge, fairly represent such knightly encounters of the period. Hewitt[111] mentions the equipments and colours, as shown on fol. 39: “Near Knight.—Armour, iron-colour; feet, black; crest, red flower with gold leaves; saddle, bridle, and stirrup-leather, red; trapper, blue, marked with darker blue and lined with white fur. Far Knight.—Armour and feet as before; crest, gold with red feathers; saddle, buff; trapper, dark with black markings; bells, gold. Chanfreins both ridged and spiked, gold; the rest iron. The barrier is red and marked with a deeper red. It will be observed that, except the helm, the whole armour differs in nothing from the usual war suit.” The Mémoires of the Sire de Haynin[112] afford some interesting details in connection with pas d’armes.

The rules of the tourney promulgated by René d’Anjou, King of Naples, Sicily and Jerusalem, and Duke of Lorraine, in Tournois du Roi René, are most important. They contain many restrictions in the use of weapons, and all tend towards restraining the violence and disorder which had hitherto prevailed, and towards rendering these warlike games less dangerous; and they inculcate a spirit of chivalry, thus doing away greatly with much of the brutality of the former age. René thought lances too cumbersome for the tourney, and considered the proper weapons to be rebated swords and maces. The famous duel between the dukes of Brittany and Bourbon is described. But little jousting took place at Aix, the mêlée being preferred. There are several splendid manuscripts of the King’s writings extant, four of them at Paris, illuminated by the King himself, and they go into the minutest details of all which concern the tourney as practised at Aix.

“The Ordinaunce, statutes and rules made by John Lord Typtofte, Erle of Worcester, Counstable of England by the Kinges commaundment, at Windsor the 29 of May ao sixto Edwardi quarti (1466), to be observed and kepte in all manner of Justes of pees royall with in this realme of England.”[113]

There are several copies of the rules extant. The version here given, in an abridged form, is taken from the Antiquarian Repertory. It was copied from a MS. M. 61 in the Herald’s College.[114]

Another copy may be seen in Nugae Antiquae, by Park, which is referred to in Archæologia, or the year 1813.[115] They are also printed in Dr. Meyrick’s Critical Essay on Antient Armor, III, 179-86, with valuable notes from the MS. M. 6, in the Herald’s College.

These rules run:—

“Firste, whoso breaketh most speares, as they ought to be broken, shall have the price.

Item, whoso hitteth thre tymes in the heaulme, shall have the price.

Item, whoso meteth two tymes coronoll to coronoll, shall have the price.

Item, whoso beareth a man downe with stroke of speare, shall have the price.

For the price.

Firste, whoso beareth a man downe owte of the saddell, or putteth him to earthe, horse and man, shall have the price, before him that striketh coronoll to coronoll two times.

Item, he that striketh coronoll to coronoll two tymes, shall have the price before him that strike the sight thre tymes.

Item, he that striketh the sight thre tymes, shall have the price before him that breake the moste speares.

Item, yf there be any man that fortunetly in this wise shalbe deemed he bode longest in the feeld heaulmed, and ranne the fairest course, and gave the greatest strokes, helpinge himself best with his speare.”

How prices shalbe loste.

First. Whosoe striketh a horse, shall not have the price.

Second. Whosoe striketh a mannes backe, turned or disarmed of his speare, shall have no price.

Third. Who hitteth the toyle, or tilte 3 times, shall have no price.

Fourth. Whosoe unhelmes himselfe 2 times, shall have no price, without his horse faile him.

How speares shall be allowed.

First. Whoso breaketh a speare betweene the saddle, and the charnell of the helme, shall be allowed one.

Whoso breaketh a speare from the charnell vpwards, shall be allowed one.

Whoso breaketh and putteth his aduersary downe, and out of the saddle, or disarmeth him in such wise, as he may not runne the next course after, shall be allowed three speares broken.

How Speares broken be disallowed.

First. Who breaketh a speare on the sadle, shall be disallowed for a speare broken.

Second. Who hitts the tilt or toile once, shall be disallowed for 2 speares broken.

Third. Whosoe hitts the tilt twice shal be for the two times abated, for 3 speares broken.

Fourth. Whosoe breaketh a speare within a foot of the crownall (coronal), shall be judged as no speare broken, but a good attaynte.

A few short rules follow for the mêlée and barriers.

There is much confusion in the nomenclature employed by chroniclers in their descriptions of these chivalric war-games, and the terms “tournois,” “tourney,” “joustes” or “joûtes” and “pas d’armes,” are often confounded with each other, all or any being sometimes used in a general sense to cover various forms of jousting and the tourney: and such meetings often received the general appellation of fêtes d’armes. In a contemporary recital of the meeting in 1559, which Henry II of France received his fatal wound, the terms “joûtes,” “tournois,” and pas d’armes are all employed to express the proceedings as a whole. The term “tourney” is very frequently used to denote the mêlée.

A pas d’armes or passage of arms usually covered a variety of martial exercises. It was open to all comers, being knights and esquires qualified to take part, who were invited by proclamation to attend. The field was held by a certain number of challengers, called “les tenans” or holders of the pas; while the attacking cavaliers were known as “les venans,” or comers, who came to try and wrest the pas from them. A pas d’armes was also an imitation of an operation of war, a Scharmützel, in the attack and defence of a supposed position of strength, such as a pasteboard bridge-head, a castle of wood or the assumed gate to a town; the contest being waged with all the ardour of real warfare, though tempered by certain rules, pretences and limitations. The term pas d’armes is comprehensive, for besides jousting and strokes with the sword, etc., such meetings often included combats on foot; and, after the middle of the fifteenth century, contests on horseback with the baston or mace; and they often concluded with the tourney proper or mêlée, troop against troop.

In the Antiquarian Repertory[116] is the following account of a pas d’armes held about the end of the fifteenth century:—

“The king assigns to four maidens of his court the umpireship of the castle called ‘Loyall’; for the attack and defence of which they are to arrange as they may collectively decide upon. The castle is a mock fortress, representing one which had been subjected to a remarkable siege in history. The ladies confide its guard and custody to a captain and fifteen cavaliers to defend the ‘pas’ against all comers. A unicorn is placed within the lists, the four legs of which support as many shields, coloured white, red, yellow and blue respectively. The first shield signifies the opening jousts at the tilt, to be run in ‘hoasting’ armour, with double or reinforcing pieces; the second shield denotes that in the tourney which follows the jousting twelve strokes with the sword are to be exchanged; the third a combat on foot at barriers, the same number of strokes with one-handed swords; the fourth, the defence and assault of the castle, with swords, shields and morris-pikes. The points and edges of all the weapons employed in the four sections to be rebated, only the foyne[117] excepted. Any cavalier, except the leader of either side, if taken prisoner, may be ransomed with three yards of satin, but captains must pay the cost of thirteen yards for their freedom. The pas d’armes to continue from the 27th November to New Year’s Day. The hours, after the first day, from one in the afternoon to seven in the evening.”[118]

Other clauses in the Chapitres d’Armes are:—

“Item. Yt shalbe lawfull for the assaulters to devise all manner of engynes for the wynenge of the said castell; engyn or tole to breake the ground or howse with all only excepted.

Item. None do meddell with fier neyther within or without but to fire their gunnes.

Item. If any man be disarmed, he maye withdrawne himselfe if he will; but once past the barres, he may not com agayne into the torney for that daye. Also there shall no man have his servant within the barres with any peace of harnois, for no man shalbe within the said barres but such as shalbe assigned by the king’s grace.

Item. Who shall beste demeane himselfe at thee same arte of armes, shall have a sword, garnished, to the valew of three hundred crownes or under.

Item. If any man strike a horse with his speare, he shalbe put out of the torny withowt any favour; and if any slaye an horse, he shall paye to the owner of the said horse an hundred crownes in recompence; also yt is not to be thought that any man will slaye an horse willingly; for if he do it, it shall be to his great dishonor.

Item. He that uses a close gauntlet (a locking or forbiden gauntlet) shall win no prize.[119]

Item. He that his sword falleth owt of his hand, shal win no prize.”

The gaining of prizes in jousting was settled as a rule by a counting of points, for and against, and they were usually:—

Breaking a lance fairly on the body of an adversary, below the helmet, 1 point; above the breast, 2 points; unhorsing, 3 points. Points would be lost by striking the saddle or the tilt. A lance should be splintered more than a foot above the head.

The long wars between France and England had engendered much hatred and bitterness between the nations, and frequent combats in the lists, à outrance, continued to take place between the respective cavaliers, many of which fights were characterized by great violence and ruthlessness. Matters at length got to such a pass that in the year 1409 the French King issued an ordinance against all such combats between cavaliers of the two nations.[120] Certain combats, however, continued to take place under royal licence.

In the year 1400 by advice of the Earl of Huntingdon, “solemne iusts were to be enterprised between him and 20 on his part, and the earle of Salisburie and 20 with him, at Oxford.” This was a conspiracy for the assassination of King Henry IV, but the plot miscarried.[121]

In the year 1400 Michel d’Oris, an esquire of Arragon, sent to Calais, by a pursuivant-at-arms, a challenge to a deed of arms, addressed to the Cavaliers of England, in the following terms:—

“Au nom de Dieu, et de la benoite vierge Marie, de saint Michel et de saint George, je, Michel d’Oris, pour mon nom exhausser, sachant certainement la renommée des prouesses de chevalerie d’Angleterre, ai, au jour de la date de ces présentes, pris un tronçon de gréve à porter à ma jambe jusqu’à tant qu’on chevalier du dit royaume d’Angleterre m’aura délivré à faire les armes qui s’ensuivent. Premièrement, d’entrer en place à pied, et d’être armé chacun ainsi que bon lui semblera, et d’avoir chacun sa dague et son épée sur son corps, en quelque lieu qu’il lui plaira, ayant chacun une hache, dont je baillerai la longueur. Et sera le nombre des coups de tous les bâtons et armes ensuivant: c’est à savoir: de la hache, dix coups sans reprendre. Et quand ces dix coups seront parfaits et que le juge dira: Ho! nous férirons dix coups d’épée sans reprendre ni partier l’un de l’autre, et sans changer harnois. Et quand le juge aura dit: Ho! nous viendrons aux dagues et férirons dix coups sur main. Et si aucun de nous perdoit ou laissoit cheoir un de ses bâtons, l’autre pourra faire son plaisir du bâton, qu’il tiendra jusqu’à ce que le juge ai dit: Ho! Et les armes à pied accomplies, nous monterons à cheval; et sera armé du corps chacun ainsi qu’il lui plaira, et aura deux chapeaux de fer paraux, lesquels je liverai; et choisra mon dit compagnon lequel qu’il lui plaira des deux chapeaux: et aura chacun tel gorgerin qu’il lui plaira, et avec ce, je baillerai deux selles, dont mon dit compagnon aura le choix. Et outre plus, aurons deux lances d’une longueur; desquelles lances nous férirons vingt coups sans reprendre, à cheval, sur main; et pourrons férir par devant et par derrière, depuis le faux du corps en amont. Et icelles armes de lances faites et accomplies, ferons les armes qui s’ensuivent: C’est a savoir, s’il advenoit que l’un ou l’autre ne fût blessé, nous serons tenus après, en icelle journée même et au second jour après, férir de coups de lance à course de chevaux à trois rangs, tant que l’un ou l’autre cherra par terre ou soit blessé, si qu’il n’en puisse plus faire. Et que chacun s’arme à sa volonté le corps et la téte. Et les targes soient de nerfs ou de cornes, sans ce qu’elles soient de fer ni d’acier, ni qu’il y ait aucune maîtrise. Et courrons les dites lances atout les selles que les dits chevaux auront, faisant les dites armes à cheval: et chacun liera et mettra ses étriers à sa volonté, sans faire nulle maîtrise. Et pour y ajouter plus grande foi et fermeté, je Michel d’Oris, ai scellé cette lettre du sceau de mes armes: laquelle lettre fut faite et écrite à Paris le vendredi vingtième jour d’Août l’an 1400.”[122]

This letter is given in full, for it affords much first-hand information in a concrete form of the procedure of a combat of the period as well as the manner of such cartels.

The letter states that the Spaniard had attached to his leg “un tronçon de gréve,” being a piece of a greave (armour for the shin), presumably of iron, causing him pain and inconvenience, which he had vowed to continue wearing until delivered from it by a combat with a gentleman of England. To this end he had sent his cartel to Calais, proclaiming his wish for such an encounter, laying down very precise conditions for a fight at which ten strokes with the axe, ten with the sword, and the same number of thrusts with the dagger were to be exchanged; to be followed by twenty courses with lances, on horseback. The pursuivant duly delivered the letter at Calais, where it was seen by Sir John Prendergast, who accepted the challenge in his own person, on behalf of the chivalry of England, subject, of course, to the permission of his sovereign to the duel being obtained. No reply being forthcoming from the Spaniard within a reasonable time. Sir John sent him a letter, stating that the time and place for the combat had been arranged, and an umpire appointed. There being still no reply, another letter followed demanding an answer, and at length one arrived, with excuses for the delay and complaining that Sir John had broken the treaty in an umpire having been chosen without the name having been first submitted to him; though showing no burning desire to have the matter arranged to his own satisfaction. The correspondence continued over four years and came to nothing after all; but for how long the Spaniard continued wearing the piece of greave pricking his leg history does not tell.

In the year 1402 the Sire de Harpedenne, Seneschal de Saintonge, having heard that certain English knights desired to perform a deed of arms for the love of their ladies, suggested to the Duke of Orleans that six gentlemen of his household should challenge a like number of English cavaliers to a combat à outrance. The duke agreeing, the invitation was duly sent and promptly accepted, the fight to take place near Bordeaux on the 19th May, 1402. Much pressure was brought to bear on the duke to induce him to withdraw his sanction, on the ground that such a combat would tend to increase the bitterness between the nations which already prevailed; but he continued to encourage the scheme, and even went to Saint Denis to pray for the success of his countrymen. Arnault Guilhem, Sire de Barbazan, a chevalier of repute, undertook the leadership of the French contingent.

The Sire de Harpedenne and the Earl of Rutland were appointed umpires of the fight; and on the arrival of the French chevaliers at the place of combat they heard Mass, and the Sire de Barbazan addressed them on the justice of their cause, animating them to deeds of valour for their country’s sake; while the Englishmen thought more of a good meal before fighting. According to the French account of the fight, the Englishmen had conceived a stratagem for two of their number, by preconcerted action, suddenly to assail one of the French cavaliers, with the object of reducing their number to five, as against the English six; but the plan failed, and it was one of the Englishmen that was killed, thus turning the tables.[123] This gave a preponderance to the Frenchmen, but the fight continued long, obstinate and bloody, resulting in the victory of the French.[124]

In the same year Louis, Duke of Orleans, sent a challenge to Henry IV, King of England, proposing a combat between them with lances, battle-axes, swords and daggers, the fight to continue until one of them surrendered, which the king declined, on the ground that he could only fight with his equal.

In 1403 a deed of arms, à outrance, was performed at Valentia, four Spanish cavaliers against four Frenchmen, the King of Arragon acting as umpire; and the articles of combat provided for a fight on foot with axes, swords and daggers. The Seneschal of Hainault led the French, and the Seigneur de Sainte Coulombe, a member of the king’s household, the Spaniards. Highly decorated lists had been erected for the occasion, and the king took his seat on the tribune, expressing the hope that the fight might not take place; but the parties urged that great expense had been incurred, and that the French cavaliers had come from a distance at heavy charges in answer to the challenge. The king yielded to these arguments, and gave the signal for the onset. A gallant fight with axes ensued, during which one of the Spaniards seized a Frenchman by the leg and was preparing to stab him with his dagger when the king cast his bâton, putting an end to the conflict, to the great chagrin of both sides.[125]

Plate XI in Horda Angel-Cynnan “shewes how atte coronacion of quene Jane[126] erle Richarde kepte juste for the quene’s part ageynst all commers, when he so notably and so knyghtly behaved himself, as redounded to his noble fame and perpetuall worship.” Sir Richard was then twenty-two years old. The illustration shows a joust at the tilt, run with lances tipped with coronals, the earl’s crest being the bear and ragged staff. The armour and general aspect of the picture point to the period when the Memoir was written rather than to the actual date of the joust. The tilt is of four planks, and appears to be nearly six feet in height. The royal party is seated in a balcony overlooking the lists, and there are raised galleries for the officials and better-class spectators, and seats on the level of the lists for the general public.

Plate XX. Sir Pandolf Malatesta sent a challenge to Earl Richard, first to joust, and “then go togedres with axes; after which armyng swerdes;[127] and last with sharp daggers.” The jousting finished, “they went to gedres with axes, and if the lord Calcot hadde not the sonner cried peas, Sir Pandolf sore wounded on the left shoulder hadde been utterly slayn on the felde.”[128] The illustration pictures the combat on foot with becs de faucon, weapons more picks than axes. The helmets are armets, the earl’s crest his well-known cognizance, and he wears a tabard-shaped surcoat. The equipment is not contemporaneous with the time of the duel, but rather that of the date of the Memoir. The plate in Horda is reproduced on our [Plate I]. The copy from the MS. is not quite correct in the delineation of the weapon wielded by the earl, owing to a blur on the original.

Plate XXVIII pictures a combat on horseback, with rebated swords.

Plate XXXV shows Earl Richard jousting at the tilt incognito. He wears a “volant-piece.”

PLATE I

COMBAT ON FOOT BETWEEN
SIR RICHARD BEAUCHAMP
AND SIR PANDOLF MALATESTA

THE TAPESTRY AT VALENCIENNES

Plate XXXVI. The earl is jousting at the tilt. “The erle smote up the visar (of his adversary) thries, and brake his besauges and other harneys.”

Plate XXXVII pictures the earl jousting with his face exposed.

Plate XL “shewes howe a mighty duke chalenged erle Richard for his lady sake, and he justyng slewe the duke,” the lance going through his body. This joust is with sharp lances in the open. The duke wears a jousting shield, and the earl a “volant-piece.”

In 1415 three Portuguese cavaliers fought the same number of Frenchmen, at St. Ouen, near Paris, in presence of the King of France. The combat was a severe one, resulting at length in the discomfiture of the Portuguese, who succumbed to the Frenchmen. The manner of this surrender so disgusted the authorities and spectators that the defeated party was forcibly expelled the lists.[129]

In 1420 there were several curious subterranean combats, between French and English cavaliers, at Montereau, that town being then besieged by the troops of the Dauphin. The English had laid mines extensively under the walls; and it was in these excavations that the fights took place, by the light of the flambeaux and torches. The first who fought on the French side was Louis Juvenal des Ursins, a valiant esquire, son of the advocate-general, who was dubbed a chevalier on the occasion. The King of England and Duke of Burgundy were present, and wished to break a lance together, from which, however, they were dissuaded. The Sire de Barbazan jousted with the king, at first without knowing who he was, but as soon as he became aware that it was his Majesty, he respectfully retired from the contest. Everything passed with great courtesy between the members of the two nations, and the king gave great praise to the cavaliers engaged.[130]

In the seventh year of Henry V “triumphant iusts and turneis, in the whiche, Erle of Arundell, and the Bastard of Sent Polle by the iudgment of the Ladies, won the price and got the honor.”[131]