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 7_s._ to 25_s._ each; that for the Earl of
Lincoln, however, was much higher than any of the others, being 33_s._
4_d._ 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 5_d._ each, without emblazonment; the
swords 7_d._ each, and 25_s._ was paid for silvering the blades, and
3_s._ 6_d._ for gilding the hilts. The helmets for the “_digniores_”
were gilded at an expense of 12_s._, the others silvered. Each helmet
cost 2_s._, and the ailettes 8_d._ 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 3_s._ The sum total
for all these outfits provided in England was £80 11_s._ 8_d._; 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.
FOOTNOTES:
[21] He began to write the _Annals_ just after the death of Henry II.
in 1189. They begin with the year 732 and end in 1201; and form not
only a chronicle of England, but include also the history of many other
countries.
[22] _Perambulation of Kent_, fol. 448.
[23] Cited in _Horda_.
[24] Cited by Strutt in _Horda Angel-cynnan_, p. 92.
[25] _Rymer Foed._, 301.
[26] _Chronica Jocelini de Brakelonda, de rebus gestis Samsonis Abbatis
Monasterii Sancti Edmundi._
[27] See Appendix B.
[28] Trivet. Cited by Holinshed. II, 263.
[29] Holinshed II, 418.
[30] Ashmolean MS. 860, 88. See Appendix A for catalogue of the
Ashmolean MSS. relating to the tourney.
[31] _Horda Angel-cynnan_ II, 91.
[32] Foedera III, 982.
[33] No. 14, E. III.
[34] See Appendix B.
[35] No. 14, E. III.
[36] _Historia Anglicana_, 1272-1422.
[37] Holinshed, II, 438.
[38] _Ibid._ II, 484.
[39] Chap. 155, fol. 161.
[40] _Anno_ 1279.
[41] The Bayeux tapestry shows one of the eleventh century.
[42] XVII, 297.
[43] John de Britannia.
[44] _Hernesium de Armis._
[45] Cuirass.
[46] A kind of cloth.
[47] Ailettes first appear in the second half of the thirteenth century
and continued in fashion for about sixty years. They assume various
forms, and were worn upright at the outsides of the shoulders, attached
by laces. On brasses they appear at the backs of the shoulders, but
this is probably for the reason that the artists found some practical
difficulty in picturing them so as to appear as they were really worn.
It is not clear whether these singular pieces were intended for defence
or to be used as planes for the ensignment of heraldic devices; it is
certain, however, that they could afford but little protection against
a stroke from a sword or a battle-axe.
[48] Aiguillettes, or laces, later termed arming points, played an
important part in the arming of a man, and were freely employed in
fastening certain parts of his armour together. These points were also
an important item in civil dress, and were usually of cord, silk, or
leather.
[49] I, 366.
[50] XVII, 298.
[51] Probably a coat-of-fence.
[52] Cuisses.
[53] Shoulder-pieces.
[54] Bascinet.
[55] Edward, the King’s son; Edmund, the King’s brother; William de
Valance, Earl of Pembroke; Gilbert de Clare; and the Earl of Lincoln.
These five noblemen constituted a court of honour, a committee in fact
for the control of the tourney. William de Valence died in 1296, so the
document must date before that year.