Much that is fanciful and unreal has been written about the tournament,
and it is only in recent times that the knowledge of the subject
has been placed on a more scientific basis, through the labours and
researches of Querin von Leitner, Cornelius Curlitt, Boeheim, Dillon,
Haenel and others, who have built on the valuable foundations laid by
earlier writers on the subject. In France the subject has received but
scant attention in recent times.
The contemporary literature in France and England concerning the
tournament of the sixteenth century is much less voluminous than that
written in the fifteenth, and the narrations of chroniclers greatly
lack that technical knowledge which characterizes the work of their
predecessors, who belonged to a higher class of society. The contrast,
indeed, in their treatment of these meetings is very marked, in that
comparatively little attention is devoted by the later writers to the
martial sports themselves, while the pageantry and dresses closely
connected with them absorb most of the matter of their narrations.
This is perhaps an indication of a diminished public interest in
the tournament in these countries; and but for the fuller and more
circumstantial German records it would be difficult to present any
comprehensive account of its ramifications during the sixteenth
century and to the time when it fell into disuse. There are many
records relating to the tournament in the College of Arms, London,
and among the Ashmolean, Harleian and Cottonian MSS.[171]; whilst the
_Chronicles_ of Hall and Holinshed also afford much information. De
Pluvinal, in _Maneige Royal_, published in 1625, gives some interesting
particulars of jousting in its later stages, and Ménestrier, in _Traité
des Tournois, Jousts, Carrousels, &c._, when it had almost ceased being
practised.
The institution had attained its highest development in most of the
countries of chivalry in the first half of the fifteenth century, and
the sixteenth saw its rapid decline. It had become more and more a
mere sport and pastime, and had lost much of its former dignity in
being so closely associated with mummeries and the pageant. All the
safeguards instituted in the fifteenth century had become accentuated
in the sixteenth to a degree making serious accidents very rare; and
the introduction of barriers in combats on foot, and the employment
of lances in these contests, apart from the preliminary casting, so
often described in the narrations of such encounters of the fifteenth
century, had greatly changed their character, and made them much less
dangerous.
In admitting cavaliers to the tournament kings of arms were particular
to exclude all who were not of noble birth, with the requisite number
of descents. The bâton of illegitimacy, however, was no bar to the
admission of the bastards of princely houses, who were generally
accepted in society on an apparently equal footing with nobles of the
highest rank.
The prizes awarded were often a wreath, a ring, a sword, helmet, jewel
or a charger; at a joust held at Weimar in 1534 they consisted of a
spur, a sword and a lady’s slipper, all of gold.
Many new forms of jousting were introduced in Germany late in the
fifteenth and during the sixteenth centuries, though most of them
were derived from three main courses with but trivial differences
from them. Some of the variants were conceived with a view to the
introduction of some striking or humorous novelty; and, in fact, the
passion for theatrical effect then prevailing in Germany, brought about
some extraordinary mechanical absurdities as applied to jousting. The
intricacies of the various courses would seem to have been somewhat
perplexing even to the generations by whom they were practised, and
they are, of course, much more difficult to disentangle now.
It was in Germany that the bulk of the jousting harnesses of the
sixteenth century were made, and in that country the contemporary
literature over the period in question concerning the tournament is
most considerable.
The tournament records of the emperor Maximilian I and those of the
ruling princes of the German Empire are of the first importance in
the history of the tournament of the period, for it was at the courts
of these sovereigns that such sports were most practised in their
various phases, and when they reached their greatest development.
The tournament, with its attendant pageants and mummeries, played a
leading part in the weekly routine of the relaxation and amusements
of these princes and their chivalry, a part perhaps second only to
the chase; and these records bring the actual details of the various
courses vividly before us in the many carefully executed drawings
representing them which have been preserved. Most of them deal with the
tournament of the sixteenth century, though some of the combats of the
last quarter of the fifteenth are recorded and illustrated; and while,
perhaps, none of the drawings are strictly speaking contemporaneous
with the events they depict many of them were copied from older
pictures, so that taken as a whole the details given are more reliable
than most of the other sources of information.
The most precious among these tourney-books is the _Freydal_ of
Maximilian I, a work of the year 1515, in which the emperor’s combats
in the lists, with the accompanying mummeries, are pictured.
The allegorical name “Freydal” is one of those assumed by the emperor
in his knightly character. Maximilian was born in 1459, elected emperor
in 1494, and died in 1520. He began his jousting career when quite
a youth, and took a leading and personal part in the compilation
of _Freydal_, dictating some of the text to his secretary Max
Trytssaurwein in 1511; and, indeed, he corrected some of the proofs
with his own hand. He selected for the book the examples of the various
courses in which he was engaged, in almost all of which he appears as
the victor. These instructions as to the choice of the subjects of the
plates are of great value to the student, and are given in Appendix
D. The personal character of the work adds much to its interest and
importance in the history of the tournament.
The admirable reproduction of _Freydal_ by Querin von Leitner, issued
under the directions of Franz, Grafen Folliot De Grenneville,[172]
leaves little to be desired. There are 255 plates arranged in series of
_Rennen_, _Stechen_, foot combats and a _mêlée_, all depicting courses
in which Maximilian had “_gerennt_, _gestochen_ und _gekämpft_.”[173]
The work is valuable from many points of view, for it includes a
register of the prominent personages of the time, and full particulars
of the colours, trappers, arms and crests of the cavaliers taking part,
together with the costumes of the mummers and others, besides some
genealogical notes.
_Freydal_ is one of a series of chronicles somewhat similar in
character, comprising _Theuerdank_, _Weisskünig_, _Triumph of
Maximilian_ and _Ehrenpforte_; all were written with a view to the
glorification of the emperor and his reign. _Freydal_ is the emperor’s
testament to posterity of his career in the tiltyard, and, with the
accompanying mummeries he initiated, forms a knightly tribute to the
memory of his much lamented consort Mary of Burgundy. A poem in the
work follows, which illustrates the spirit of vanity and the somewhat
frivolous character of the monarch:—
RITTER FREYDALB[174]
Nun ver von kurtzweil lesen wil
Vnd lustbarlichen dingen,
der nem fur sich die ritterspil,
da ainr nach eer thut ringen,
als ritter Freydalb hat gethon
Aus ritterlichem gmute
Auf mengen adelichen plon.
Sein tugent vnd auch gute
ist allermenigelich offenbar,
wie er konndt tryumphiern
mit rennen, stechen kempfen zwar
Auch tantzen vnd thurniern
damit er in sein jungen tagen,
Als ir hie horen werden
grose freyd ynd ruem do hat erjagen,
(Seins gleich lebt nit auf erden).
_Theuerdank_ is a narration of Maximilian’s journey to Ghent to wed the
heiress of Charles the Bold, with an account of his adventures by the
way, and the story of his courtship. It was written by the emperor for
the instruction of Charles V when a youth. There are 117 wood-cuts by
Hans Schaufflein.
_Weisskünig_ is the story of his life and government.
_The Triumph_ describes the progress and achievements of his reign, as
typified by the picture of the triumphal car running through it. It
was written in 1512, greatly at the emperor’s own dictation; and the
illustrations depict jousters fully equipped for some of the various
courses of the tournament.
_The Ehrenpforte_ is a monument to the glory of the Emperor’s name and
house.
In the tourney-book of Maximilian belonging to the Prince of
Hohenzollern-Sigmaringen the spirited illustrations are by the hand
of Hans Burgmaier, of Augsburg, an able coadjutor of the great
armour-smith Koloman Colman of the same city, surnamed Helmschmidt.
Of great interest and importance are the three original tourney books
of the Saxon Electors—Johanns _des Beständigen_, Johann Friedrichs _des
Grozmüthigen_, and August, scoffingly called by Carlyle, if we remember
rightly, the _physically_ strong. They are in three volumes, which are
preserved in the public library at the Japanese Palace, Dresden. The
illustrations, which number over 300, are water-colour drawings on
parchment, and they depict the courses of _Rennen_, _Stechen_,[175] and
a _mêlée_, as run by those princes during their reigns; they afford
characteristic records of these knightly sports from the year 1487 to
1566. The earlier jousts of the _Kurfürst_ Johann begin towards the end
of the fifteenth century, the others following in the sixteenth; while
the third volume, executed in 1584, includes fifty-five drawings of the
courses of _Scharfrennen_ and _Gestech_ run by the _Kurfürst_ August,
the last taking place in February, 1566, at Dresden. The drawings are
by Heinrich Göding, of Brunswick, the court painter, and many of them
would seem to have been copied from an earlier work.
There is also an old copy of one of the books in the royal library at
Veste Coburg. Professor Haenel, the Curator of the Johanneum Collection
of Arms and Armour at Dresden, has reproduced a selection of the plates
in the three volumes of the joustings of the Saxon _Kurfürsts_, two of
them coloured as in the originals, the others plain (published under
the auspices of _Die Verein für historische Waffenkunde_, Dresden,
1910). The book supplies a long-felt want, for the original volumes are
not easy of access.
In the _Gewehrgalerie_ at the Johanneum, Dresden,[176] are twenty-nine
paintings in oils by the same artist as those in the tourney-books,
and they depict courses run in _Scharfrennen_ by the _Kurfürsts_.
These pictures are of even greater value than the drawings in the
tourney-books in being painted on a larger scale, and giving more
details both of the courses themselves and the general surroundings of
the lists. One of them, like the last picture in the tournament-book,
Vol. III, depicts the last joust of the _Kurfürst_ August, run against
his ennobled master-armourer Hans Dehn, in the year 1566; and it bears
the title, “_Ein Rennen mit Hannss Dehnen gethan, der ist alleine
gefallen. Ao 66 im Februar zu Dressten an der Festnacht_.” This
oil-painting is hung in a bad light, and is darkened by age, but a
close examination reveals the fact that the riders and horses are only
models, stuffed with straw, their hoofs attached to low four-wheeled
bogies. The figures are impelled to charge by a mechanical apparatus;
ropes, running along the bogies and beyond, are visible, but the
machinery itself for setting the models in motion is hidden from view.
These models, as stated on the picture, formed part of a Carnival
mummery, held at court. The painting exhibits the moment when Hans
Dehn is in the act of being hurled from his horse by the _Kurfürst_,
his lance falling to the ground; while the prince is holding up his
left hand in the manner customary after impact. The _Kurfürst_ wears a
jousting-salade, with a crest of plumes; the usual shield; bases and
jousting-cuisses. The legs and feet are unarmoured. The lance is stout,
rounded, adorned with puffs, and headed with a small conically formed
sharp tip; the vamplate is very large. The horse bears an enriched
collar and a spiked chamfron, while plumes adorn the head and tail. The
saddle is without cantle, the object of the course being unhorsing; the
trapper, reaching down to the horse’s houges, is painted with stars,
foliations and the arms (viz. a lion _rampant_).
[Illustration: _PLATE III_
MAXIMILIAN I ENGAGED IN _HOHENZEUGGESTECH_]
About the end of the seventeenth century the models of horses used for
the display of armour in the Tower of London were mounted on casters,
and guide books of the period and later state that they had been
employed in practising tilting and running at the ring. This could
hardly have been the case as regards these particular models, their
purpose having been doubtless merely for convenience in moving and
cleaning. These statements were, however, founded on the fact that
there had been horses fitted with mechanical contrivances for impelling
them forward towards one another for the purpose of practising the
joust and its kindred military sports. In the years 1672 and 1673
patents were taken out in England for models of horses fitted with
mechanical appliances for the purpose in question,[177] and the joust
at Dresden on Twelfth-night, 1566, shows that they were not confined to
this country.
The subjects of the paintings and embroideries on trappers in the
sixteenth century were often humorous, religious, and sometimes even
political in character. An example shows a barrel of gunpowder in the
act of explosion and a pair of sweethearts standing before it kissing.
Another exhibits a man standing in the street, clad only in his shirt,
being well soused with water thrown from an open window. A religious
example deals with the struggle in progress between the propaganda of
reform as against the Church of Rome, wherein a monk and a Lutheran
divine are seen fighting for the globe amid lightning and hail; the
waves of the sea, peopled by monsters of the deep, advancing menacingly
towards them.
The mottoes are often curious and suggestive, for instance:—
“_Was achte ich des Monden Schein,
wenn mir die Sonne gnedig sein._”[178]
Another:—
“_Niemand weisz mein Sinn
Ob ich ein Fuchs od Hase bin._”[179]
The humorous devices painted were sometimes groups of owls, hares, mice
or foxes. Trappers were usually armoried.
The contract price for a complete harness for the tiltyard in the
second half of the sixteenth century was usually from 100 to 200
_thalers_ (£20 to £40), rather a wide margin; though anything extra
special in the way of enrichment would often cost much more. August
_Kurfürst_ of Saxony ordered from Peffenhaüser of Augsburg in 1582 a
“_Stechkürass fur die Pallier[180] mit allen Doppelstücken, und alle
Stücke zum Freirennen und Fussturnier 200 Thalers_,” i.e. a harness for
jousting at the tilt with the reinforcing pieces thereto appertaining,
together with the additional pieces for _Freirennen_ and _Fussturnier_.
A more ordinary suit “_ein anderer, schlichter, gemeiner Kürass_” is
offered at 100 _thalers_. Four _thalers_ “_Tringeld_” for each suit
was usually added. A _Feldkürass_ (a hoasting harness) was cheaper,
say 60 to 80 _thalers_ according to quality. Prices had advanced
since the beginning of the century. In 1511, September 16, “Conrad
Seusenhofer receives for two suits of armour for his Imperial Majesty
and one for the English Embassy 211 _florins_.”[181]
1512. Sept 13. “Payments made by Thomas Wuley on the King’s behalf to a
certain merchant of Florence for 2000 complete harnesses called Almayne
rivets according to pattern in the hands of John Douncy, accounting
alway a salet, a gorget, a breastplate, a back-plate and a pair of
splints for every complete harness at 16s a set.”[182] Such last-named
suits were for the soldiery and without armour for the arms and legs.
Hans Schwenkh’s _Wappenmeisterbuch_, the tourney-book of Duke William
IV of Bavaria, in the Royal Library at Munich, commences in 1510. It
was compiled by Frederich von Schlichtegroll in 1807, it exhibits
eight separate forms of the tourney, and covers the jousting of the
duke in the first quarter of the sixteenth century together with later
examples. The illustrations are faithfully reproduced on stone by the
brothers Theobald and Clemens Senefeder, with an explanatory text by
Schlichtegroll.
The tourney-book of Duke Henry of Braunschweig-Lüneburg is at Berlin;
that of the Pole Zuganoviez Stanislaus of the year 1574 in the Dresden
Historical Museum.
Several forms of jousting, combats on foot and the tourney prevailing
in the fifteenth century have been lightly touched upon, and a more
detailed statement of the leading courses now follows, together with an
account of their more important variants.
The main courses of the jousts are:—
1. Courses run in the lists with lances rebated or
tipped with coronals, without a tilt or barrier
between the jousters; the chief object in view
being the splintering of lances and unhorsing.
2. Courses of courtesy run in the lists with sharp
lances, also without a tilt; the main desideratum
being unhorsing.
3. Courses run with lances tipped with coronals, in
which the jousters charged along a tilt which was
between them. In this course the chief object in
view was the splintering of lances.
There are many variants in the first two groups.
These three classes were practised more or less in all the countries of
chivalry in the sixteenth century, though outside Germany it was the
joust at the tilt which was commonly run. In the Fatherland and Austria
these courses were known respectively as the _Gestech_ or _Stechen_,
_Scharfrennen_ or _Rennen_, and the _Welsch Gestech_ or Italian joust.
The type of joust run in the lists without a barrier or tilt, the
lances tipped with coronals, is a very old one, though it had been
subjected to a gradual modification and the application of safeguards
as the centuries had advanced. The horses were blindfolded, so that
they should not flinch or jib at the moment of impact, and so deflect
the aim of the rider; and the animals were also sometimes rendered deaf
by the stopping of their ears with wool, and they were often muzzled.
Except in the case of one German variant of this class, the legs of the
riders were without armour, these limbs being sufficiently protected by
the saddle-steels. A chamfron, sometimes spiked, covered the face of
the horse, and a crinet its neck. A cushion or mattress (_Stechkissen_
or _Bourrelet_), filled with straw, hung from the saddle-bow, covering
the chest of the animal, to act as a buffer when there were collisions,
which frequently happened in the absence of a tilt; and, indeed, in
such cases one or both chargers, with their riders, often fell. An
illustration of this cushion is given in the _Tourney Book of René
d’Anjou_, and another by Boeheim in his _Waffenkunde_, drawn after an
actual example, which is believed to have belonged to Maximilian I, and
now forms part of the superb collection of arms and armour at Vienna.
The horse was usually barded in leather, which did not extend to the
front, and a trapper, painted with various devices, covered its body.
The saddle employed in Class 1, which weighs about 10·2 _kilos._, has a
high squared plate in front reaching to the jouster’s breast, and there
are short steels, though no cantle; so that unhorsing was of frequent
occurrence. The head-piece of this class was the great jousting-helm.
This course involved much more skill and initiative in the jouster and
a more careful training of the horse than did the joust at the tilt.
This class of joust was much practised in Germany under the general
name “_Gestech_” or its abbreviation “_Stechen_,” and was in three
forms:
(a) _Das Gestech im hohen Zeug_ or _Hohenzeuggestech_,
known in France as _Joûte à la haute barde_.
(b) _Das gemeine deutsche Gestech._ _La Joûte Allemand._
(c) _Das Gestech im Beinharnisch._ _Joûte au harnois de
jambe._
The joust in Germany was a ruder sport than that practised in other
countries, and unhorsing very frequently took place.
_Hohenzeuggestech_ is an older form of the group, its main object
being the splintering of lances. In this course the jouster sat high
up on his horse in a saddle formed like a well, and his body being
well supported on all sides unhorsing was impossible as long as the
animal kept its legs and the girths held. This form of saddle had
been employed in the _Kolbenturnier_ or baston course (i.e. a duel on
horseback with heavy bastons or maces), which prevailed during the
fifteenth century and which has been described. The protection on the
saddle front in _Hohenzeuggestech_ rises over the rider’s breast, a
broad band of iron encircles his body, and the steels are long and
broad. The saddle weighs about 12 _kilos._ The horse ran blindfolded
in a leather bard and trapper of cloth; the rider’s legs and feet were
encased in hose and well-padded shoes, no armour being necessary, as
the saddle-steels afforded ample protection. The mobility of both man
and horse must have been much restricted by the heavy armament and
by the blindfolding and the thick cushion over the breast. The heavy
Flemish horses “did not vanish from their posts like lightning and
close in the centre of the lists like a thunderbolt,” but charged at an
amble.
Plate III pictures Maximilian armed for _Hohenzeuggestech_, as shown in
_Freydal_, Plate 98.
_Das gemeinedeutsche Gestech._ In this course the object was unhorsing,
or at least the splintering of a lance on an opponent’s shield. In
_Freydal_ there are eighteen illustrations of this form of joust. The
armour for the course underwent a complete change about the beginning
of the fifteenth century, a special form of harness having been
designed for it. The legs and feet were without armour.
Plate IV illustrates two harnesses for the German joust (_Gestech_ or
_Stechen_). Both date in the last quarter of the fifteenth century,
that with tassets being the later of the two. They are now at Paris.
[Illustration: _PLATE IV_
TWO HARNESSES FOR THE GERMAN JOUST OR _GESTECH_. AT PARIS.]
Plate IX (1) pictures a suit in the Wallace Collection, London,[183]
for the _Gestech_ (_Stechen_). It is very heavy, weighing about a
hundredweight, leaving the wearer with little other mobility than was
needed to couch and aim his lance; it had evidently seen some service,
and bears the dents of many jousts. It is the only complete armour of
this kind that we know of in this country. The great jousting-helm
weighs about twenty pounds: it is bucket-formed, and extends down in
one piece over the top of the cuirass, to which it is fastened by
three strong screws, two in front and one behind—the latter, placed
vertically, is adjustable for getting the correct line of vision. The
crown-piece curves gently over the wearer’s head, and has a comb along
the top pierced with twin holes for attaching the crest and torse or
wreath which encircles its base. The eyelets for fastening the lining
are bordered with laton, and the rivets are capped with the same
metal, a golden looking blend, something between bronze and brass.
The _oculārium_ affords but a very limited range of vision, and the
front of the head-piece juts out in a sort of beak. The helm is very
roomy, so that the wearer could move his head about freely under the
cap of felt and leather lining, and small cushions stuffed with hair
or feathers were over the temples. The breastplate is globose, and, as
usual with armour for _Stechen_ and also for _Rennen_, is flattened
on the right side for better couching and aiming the lance. It is
reinforced with a heavy plate over the abdomen, to which the taces, of
five heavy lames, are riveted. The back-plate is in three overlapping
plates. A garde-rein (_Schwänzel_) of five lames protects the loins,
and the tuilles, garnished with a figure like a horn, are tile-formed.
The motons over the armpits, fastened in their places by straps of
leather, are plain and very large—9½ inches across; that on the right
side is pierced with a _bouche_, to leave space for the lance-shaft.
On the right side is a lance-rest (_Rüsthaken_), and, as is usual
in armour for both _Gestech_ and _Scharfrennen_, there is a heavy
queue, termed in German a _Rasthaken_, which acted as a counterpoise
for holding the heavy lance used in the course in position, and for
avoiding much strain on the lance-arm. The lance-shaft lies in the
bed of the lance-rest, and is held under the queue behind it on the
flattened part of the cuirass, the direction towards impact being
guided by the hand. The cuirass is held together by hinged straps or
strips of iron, which are pierced for fitting over staples and are
secured by nuts. The pauldrons are each in five plates, with wings
behind, and the coudes are pointed. On the top of each shoulder is
a thin iron peg, which stands up diagonally, fixed to the armour by
laton-headed rivets. These projections are roughly about two inches
long, and are squared and topped like a nail. They were perhaps
intended as winding pegs for the tassels or jagged ends of the mantling
which usually streamed out from the jousting-helm. Such pegs are
present on two similar harnesses at Paris. The right hand is without a
gauntlet; the arm bears the poldermiton or _épaule de mouton_, stamped
with the Augsburg guild badge; and on the bridle forearm and hand is
the stiff and heavy mainfere, the jousting gauntlet. The jousting
shield is of hard wood, covered with leather and gesso, about 15½
inches broad by 14 inches high: it is formed rectangularly at the top,
somewhat rounded at the bottom, and is slightly concave and emblazoned.
Pieces of horn are let into it to lend it elasticity and stability. It
is fastened by cords to a pierced wooden block fixed on the breastplate
and is held in position by a strap which buckles on to the helm. The
harness itself bears the Augsburg guild stamp, a fir-cone and the
letter “S” with an indistinct bar or bâton running through it. It is
dated in the last quarter of the fifteenth century. No leg-armour was
worn, so as to give the rider a better grip of his horse; hose covered
the shanks, and well-wadded shoes, of cloth or leather, the feet.
There is almost an exact counterpart of this suit in a harness in the
fine collection at Nuremberg, also forged at Augsburg, with the year
of make, 1498, inscribed on the armour, the only difference between
the two suits being that there are here tassets of laminated plates
instead of the solid tuilles present on the Wallace suit, the tuilles
being an indication of a somewhat earlier date. There are three similar
harnesses at Vienna. The weight of the armour with shield is usually
about 45·6 _kilos._ When arming, the different pieces are screwed on
one after the other, the jousting-shield being adjusted last.
The lance is of fir or pine and is stouter than that used in _Rennen_;
its greatest diameter is 9 _centimetres_, length 373 _cm._, and weight,
with vamplate and coronal, about 14·3 _kilos._ An example may be seen
in the writer’s collection of arms and armour at Tynemouth.
Plate 9 in the tourney-book appertaining to the _Kurfürst_ Johann (_des
Beständigen_) pictures a _Gestech_ at Leipsig in 1489, between Duke
Hans of Saxony and Von Wunsdorf, in which the latter was unhorsed. The
duke wears the jousting-helm, a spiked moton is over the armpit, and
his lance is heavy and furnished with the circular form of vamplate,
viz. that used in _Gestech_. The horse wears a collar of bells
(_grelots_ or _Schellenkette_), and a cushion over the breast; the body
is covered with a trapper, painted with the royal arms. The equipment
corresponds with the date of the armour shown on Plate IX (1).
The frontispiece of this work is taken from the tourney-book of the
_Kurfürst_ Johann Friedrich (_des Groszüthigen_), Plate 81. It depicts
the _Kurfürst_ running in _Gestech_ at the moment when his adversary
is being hurled from his saddle. The victor’s body-armour, vamplate,
the chamfron of his horse and the coronal of his mighty lance are
all painted the colour of steel. His crest, enriched by a crown at
its base, is the Saxon emblem or badge (_Kleinod_), it is painted in
a tawny colour with black stripes. The hose are striped in colours,
green, pink, white and black; the shoes are of black felt. The trapper,
reaching down to the horse’s houges, is banded in white, blue and two
shades of red, and is sprinkled with the ciphers “XS” in gold and
silver. It bears, twice repeated, the arms of Meiszen, Thuringen,
Pfalz-Sachsen and Landsberg with the crested helm and shield of Saxony.
The horses wear necklets of bells (_Shellenkette_). The trapper of the
opposing champion is banded in shades of yellow and red sprinkled with
foliations; his crest a pair of silver horns with a coronet encircling
the base and silver laterals of linden twigs and leaves. The details of
the armour are very clear and the picture a good representative of its
class.
_Das Gestech im Beinharnisch_ is a course run with leg-armour, as its
name implies. The object is unhorsing and the splintering of lances.
The _Kuriss_ saddle was employed. The presence of leg-armour rendered
unhorsing much easier of accomplishment than without it, for the belly
of the horse could not be so well gripped.
The joust of courtesy with pointed lances, as differentiated from
Froissart’s _justes mortelles_, was, as we have seen, much practised
throughout the fifteenth century; and it continued being run in
Germany until soon after the middle of the sixteenth, when it became
practically displaced by the joust at the tilt. This course was known
in Germany as _Scharfrennen_ or _Schweifrennen_, in France as _La
Course à la queue_; it is illustrated six times in _Freydal_ and many
times in the Saxon tourney-books.
The main desideratum of the course was unhorsing, and the form of the
saddle had been designed with that object specially in view, though
the splintering of lances also counted in the score, in fact, the
jouster who sat his horse the longest against the greatest number of
splintered lances, or without being unhelmed, was declared the victor.
The objective of the lance in this course was either the beaver of an
opponent or his jousting-shield on the left side. The first-named mark
was more difficult to hit than the other and the lance more liable to
glance off, but when fairly struck it proved irresistible. As a rule
the effect of impact was that the rider reeled in his saddle as he
tried to maintain his seat, though usually one or other of the jousters
was unhorsed, and, indeed, sometimes both fell, unless supported
at the critical moment by the varlets. The lance was held with the
point inclining slightly upwards, and, as in the other courses, the
jouster promptly withdrew his hand and arm from the shaft immediately
after impact, holding his arm upright, and the broken lance fell to
the ground. It was the omission to do this which caused the accident
resulting in the death of Henri II of France. The lance was a long,
thin, rounded straight pole of soft wood, lighter than was used in
_Stechen_, and was about 373 _centimetres_ long with a largest diameter
of about 7 _cm._, as against 9 _cm._ in the one for _Gestech_. The
vamplate is in the form of a truncated cone. _Rennen_ (_Scharfrennen_)
was an even hardier course than _Stechen_, and demanded a still more
careful training in man and horse and a surer seat.
The salient features of this form of joust are as follows:—The saddle
employed in all its varieties was smaller and lighter than that used in
the other courses, the weight being only a little over four _kilos._;
it had a low pommel and no cantle, and was shaped, in fact, much like
the British saddle of to-day. Jousting-cuisses (_Dülgen_ or _Dilgen_,
weighing 12 _kilos._) hung from it and protected the lower limbs of
the jouster, which were unarmoured. The armour was lighter than that
used in _Stechen_, though somewhat similar in form, and the back-plate
was shorter. The helmet was a jousting-salade (_Rennhut_) forged in
one piece, without any movable visor, but with a separate beaver
reaching well over the top of the cuirass, to which it was screwed,
back and front. It was well lined, and a cap of leather or silk was
worn. The parts of the salade extending over the temples of the wearer
were strengthened by extra plates (_Stirnplätter_); and there was a
thick reinforcing plate (_Magenblech_) over the abdomen, and to it
the heavy taces and tassets were riveted. The horse was barded as in
_Stechen_, a cushion or mattress protected the breast, and the animal
was covered with the trapper. As in _Stechen_ the cuirass was flattened
on the right side, and to it the lance-rest (_Rüsthaken_) and queue
(_Rasthaken_) were screwed. The queue was smaller than that on the
harness for _Stechen_, the lance used in _Rennen_ being lighter. There
were no motons over the armpits, these weak places being well protected
by the vamplate, which was larger and differently formed from that
employed in _Stechen_. The shape was that of a truncated cone. The
large concave shield of wood, covered with leather and plated with
iron, was 6 to 8 _cm._ in breadth, it was screwed on to the beaver, and
an armlet encircled the right lower arm.
[Illustration: _PLATE V_
HARNESS FOR _SCHARFRENNEN_. AT DRESDEN.]
Suits for both _Rennen_ and _Stechen_ were made so that they could
be worn by a man of anything like a medium size; they were costly,
and were frequently lent out by princes and the great nobles to their
poorer brethren who lacked this equipment. A beautiful harness for
_Scharfrennen_, made for the _Kurfürst_ August of Saxony (1553-1586),
by Sigmund Rockenburger, of Wittenberg, in 1554, is in the Dresden
Museum. The form of the harness is graceful, and it is richly
and tastefully etched with human figures, a double-headed eagle
and foliations; in the centre of the breastplate is a spear-like
projection—a fashion which did not last very long. The back-plate is
unusually short and so is the garde-rein (_Schwänzel_). This harness is
illustrated on Plate V. The weight is about forty _kilos._ The spurs
have long shanks and are of both the rowel and prick kinds.
The store of armours for the tournament kept by the Saxon _Kurfürsts_
at Dresden greatly accounts for the number of historic suits preserved
there.
In the _Turnierwaffensaal_ at the Johanneum, Dresden, is a fine
realistic representation of a _Scharfrennen_, the jousters mounted and
in complete armour down to the smallest detail. They are facing each
other, with lances in rest. The armour is etched and gilt, and every
detail is original except the under-garment, the hose and well-wadded
shoes. The period is about the middle of the sixteenth century.
Plate VI illustrates Maximilian II, mounted and armed for
_Scharfrennen_ in 1564. The armour is in the Collection at the Musée
d’Artillerie, Paris.
Plate VIII (1) pictures a _Rennen_, held at Minden, between the
_Kurfürst_ August of Saxony and Johann von Ratzenberg. This particular
joust was termed a “_Gedritts_,” signifying that the victor in the
first encounter had still to dispose of a second antagonist in
order to gain the prize; three were thus engaged, and hence the
name. The _Kurfürst’s_ second adversary was Hans von Sehönfeld. The
jousting-salade, large vamplate, jousting-cuisses and other details are
clearly shown. Numerous illustrations of _Scharfrennen_ are present
in _Freydal_ and in the Saxon tourney-books. There are many variants
from the main course, the most important being _Geschiftrennen, la
course à la targe futée_. It is of two kinds, _Geschifttartscherennen_
(_tartsche_, a shield) and _Geschiftscheibenrennen_ (_scheibe_, a plate
or disk); the wearing of a shield or a large plate or disk of iron
over the breastplate being the main distinction between them. In both
cases, when the centres of the shields were fairly struck by a lance
a mechanism was set in motion by the freeing of a spring, which in
_Geschifttartscherennen_ dissolved the shield itself into fragments,
the pieces flying over the jouster’s head in wedged-formed particles.
In _Geschiftscheibenrennen_, on the right impact having been attained
the iron plate remained in its place and only the wedge in the centre
flew out. The mechanism of the first-named was much more complicated
than that of the latter.
Unhorsing was another of the objects in view in both cases. Both
courses would seem to have had their origin in the game of Running at
the Ring. There is an illustration of the mechanism at the back of
the shield given in a picture-codex in the Armeria at Madrid, dating
about 1544.[184] The general equipment in both cases was the same as in
_Scharfrennen_.
Illustrations of _Geschifttartscherennen_ are given in _Freydal_, both
with leg-armour and without. In plates of that work. Nos. 29 and 45,
the shields are seen flying in pieces in the air and both riders are
unhorsed; while in Plate 5, here reproduced in our Plate VII, both
riders keep their seats, but the shields are seen dissolving into
fragments over the heads of the jousters. There is but one illustration
of _Geschiftscheibenrennen_ in _Freydal_, viz. in Plate 41. There are
also illustrations in the _Triumph of Maximilian_.
In _Bundrennen_, often called _Pundtrennen, Course appelée Bund_, the
jouster here also endeavoured to strike the centre of his opponent’s
shield, but the main object was unhorsing. This was the most dangerous
of all the courses, in the fact that a disrupting shield was employed,
like that used in _Geschifttartscherennen_, but without any protecting
beaver beneath it, so that the sharp lance was apt to glance off
into the jouster’s face or a fragment of the disrupted shield fly
into it, sometimes injuring the nose or eyes. This course, says the
_Weisskünig_, “was certainly amusing to look upon, though with often
sorrowful results to one or other of the combatants.”[185] In one of
the plates of _Freydal_ (No. 25), illustrating this course, the emperor
and his opponent are both seen as being unhorsed; while in other
plates (Nos. 21, 62, 73, 93 and 204) the shields spring disrupted into
the air, but the jousters retain their seats.
_Anzogenrennen, Course au pavois_,[186] is a kind in which a very
long shield was employed, which was firmly fixed to the beaver by a
large screw with a considerably projecting head. The immediate object
was unhorsing, or at least the splintering of lances. A picture in
the tourney-book of Duke William IV of Bavaria furnishes a good
illustration of the course as run in the year 1512, and there are
later examples in the tourney-books of the Saxon _Kurfürsts_. The arms
and lower limbs are unarmoured, the harness the same as that employed
in _Scharfrennen_. The shield is very long, extending from the slit
for vision in the salade down to below the abdomen. The part over the
breastplate conforms to the contour of that piece, while below it the
shield becomes concave in form. There is usually a spike in the centre.
There are twenty-five illustrations in _Freydal_ (Plates Nos. 9, 17,
50, 58, 89, 97, 141, 180 and 240), all of which exhibit the opponents
of Maximilian as being unhorsed; while in Plate 169 both riders retain
their seats. In other plates both jousters are unseated.
_Krönlrennen_ was a freak, probably of Maximilian’s, first run in 1492.
It is called “_Halbierung_” in the tourney-book of _Kurfürst_ August
of Saxony, and is a blending together of the courses _Scharfrennen_
and _Gestech_, in that one jouster wore the armour usually employed in
_Scharfrennen_, but used the lance headed with a coronal appertaining
to the _Gestech_; the other, the harness for the _Gestech_ with
the sharp lance. The objects of the course were unhorsing and the
splintering of lances. Plate 6 in _Freydal_ illustrates _Krönlrennen_,
and there is an excellent example given in the tourney-book of August
of Saxony, Plate I.
In _Pfannenrennen_ the combatants ran without body-armour, except for a
square metal shield on the breast, and the horses wore hoods.
_Feldrennen_ closes the list under _Scharfrennen_. “Hoasting” armour
was employed; the saddle was that used in jousting at the tilt. The
horses were not always blindfolded, and the immediate object in view
was the splintering of lances.
In the _tourney proper_, or _mêlée_, field-harness with _Kuriss_
saddles were usually employed. Lances are splintered, and the combat
continued with swords.
One of the fifteenth century forms was the _Feldturnier_, or field
course, a combat of groups on horseback. Ordinary field-harness, with
or without reinforcing pieces, was usually worn. This form of contest
is illustrated in the tourney-book of Duke William IV of Bavaria,
showing that each cavalier was always provided with two swords. In what
respects it differed from the ordinary _mêlée_ is not apparent. Both
swords and lances were employed.
The joust at the tilt has been already referred to more than once,
and some account given of its leading features. There is reason to
believe that it was practised as early as the first quarter of the
fifteenth century, and we have mentioned cases of a _toile_ having been
employed at Arras in Burgundy in the year 1430, with some rather later
instances. Viscount Dillon, in his paper “Tilting in Tudor Times,”
published in the _Archæological Journal_ of the year 1898,[187] gives
an extract from the _Chronicles of St. Remy_ to the effect that the
_toile_ or tilt probably originated in Portugal. As already stated, the
salient feature of this form is that it was run with a barrier between
the jousters, along which they rode in opposite directions, their left
sides towards it, until impact was effected. The first barrier was
a _toile_, a rope hung with cloth extending along the length of the
lists; but as this did not prevent the horses from bumping against one
another a tilt of planks, usually about six feet high, was devised,
which effectually kept them apart, and collisions were avoided, thus
rendering the sport much less dangerous. The use of the tilt made
impact more uncertain than when running “at the large,” and there was
usually a considerable proportion of non-attaints. The main object of
this course was the splintering of lances, though unhorsing was also in
contemplation and not unfrequently took place. Unseating was, however,
rendered difficult by the form of the saddle employed, the so-called
_Kuriss_ saddle, which had a cantle behind and a high pommel in front,
thus making it much easier for a rider to keep his seat. The usual
weight of this form of saddle was a little over 9 _kilos._ Jousting at
the tilt soon greatly supplanted the earlier form in France, Italy and
England; but it took no root in Germany before the sixteenth century,
at the commencement of which it is stated to have been introduced
into that country and Austria from Italy. The name “_Welsch Gestech_”
(Italian Joust), given it in the Fatherland, tends greatly to confirm
this; and, indeed, it was just at this time that Maximilian was
introducing a new style of armour from Italy into his dominions. Though
frequently practised in Germany during the first half of the sixteenth
century, the joust at the tilt by no means displaced running “at the
large” there. Several plates in _Freydal_ furnish illustrations.
[Illustration: _PLATE VI_
MAXIMILIAN II ARMED FOR _SCHARFRENNEN_. AT PARIS.]
Plate VIII (2) depicts a joust at the tilt, run at Augsburg in 1510,
between Duke William IV of Bavaria and the Pfalzgraf Friedrich of
the Rhine. The illustration is reproduced from a picture in Hans
Schwenkh’s _Wappenmeisterbuch_, the tourney-book of the duke, who is
seen jousting; it is a work which has already been referred to in
these pages. The tilt itself, of three broad planks, is of massive
construction. The harness worn in the earlier form was the _Stechzeug_,
the kind that was used in the German _Gestech_, with no leg-armour,
a style which has been already described and illustrated on Plate IX
(1). The cuirass employed is flattened on the lance side, and there is
a _Rasthaken_ or queue as well as a lance-rest. Bases are worn by the
riders, and a crest of plumes. The trapper of the duke’s horse, dark in
colour, is shot with painted rays over the body, and a picture of the
Sun in Splendour encircles the horse’s tail, which is further decorated
with plumes. A collar of _grelots_ is around the neck of the animal;
the head is adorned with plumes, and the chamfron embellished with a
picture of the sun. The lances with coronals are well shown; the former
are long poles narrowing gently towards the heads, and the latter are
in three short prongs.
Plate XI (1) pictures two fine suits at Paris for jousting at the
tilt, one of them with the manifer or mainfere, the passe-guard and
poldermiton in their places.
Plate X (1) illustrates a German harness, at Dresden, for this form
of joust. It dates about 1580. There are three armours for jousting
at the tilt in the Wallace Collection of Arms and Armour at London,
Catalogue Numbers 484, 495 and 505. The first of these is a harness
for _Realgestech_, as shown by the cross-ribbed shield, a device for
affording a grip for the coronal of the lance on impact in order to
prevent it from glancing off—another departure in the direction of
greater safety for the jouster. This course was a late variety of the
joust at the tilt.
No. 505, illustrated on Plate IX (2) is perhaps somewhat earlier
in date than the other two suits, for in the right side of the
“volante-piece” is a little square door or window, for enabling the
wearer to converse freely when open. This aperture is about three
inches square in size and freely perforated so as to admit air to the
wearer when closed. It is shut, of course, when the jouster is ready
for his career. In other respects the three suits are very much alike;
and the “peaescod-bellied” breastplates of all of them tend to fix
their date within narrow limits. The shields of Nos. 495 and 505 are
practically the same in form and size. They fit round the front of the
left side of the neck and cover the left shoulder and breast, running
nearly straight down to the middle of the breastplate. The grand-guards
are screwed to the upper parts of the breastplate and the shields are
attached to them in like manner. The other reinforcing pieces are
either present with the suits, or the armour is holed for them.
The sad accident which resulted in the death of Henri II, of France, at
a _fête d’armes_ held at Paris in 1559, was in a joust at the tilt with
the Comte de Montgomeri. It was caused by the Comte failing to drop his
splintered lance in good time.
The drawings of Hans Burgmaier in the _Triumph of Maximilian_ afford
illustrations of some of the varieties of the German jousting of the
period.
Plate 45 illustrates the _Welsch Gestech_ (Italian Joust) or Joust
at the Tilt. The head-piece is the jousting-helm and the reinforcing
pieces are in their places. The lance, tipped with a coronal,
is lighter than that employed in the German _Gestech_ and in
_Scharfrennen_ and the vamplate is circular in form. Feather plumes are
worn.
Plate 46 pictures the Gestech or German joust (_Das gemeine deutsche
Gestech_). The head-piece is the same as that on Plate 45. A cushion
is worn over the horse’s chest, and a _Rasthaken_, or queue, and a
_Rüsthaken_, or lance-rest, are on the flattened right side of the
cuirass. The lance is heavy and tipped with a coronal. The crests shown
are very fanciful.
Plate 47 illustrates _Hohenzeuggestech_. The jousters are seated
on the high saddles (_im hohen Zeug_) peculiar to the course. The
jousting-helm is worn. Lances are tipped with coronals, as is the case
with all varieties of the _Gestech_.
Plate 48. _Das Gestech im Beinharnisch._ This is a variety of _Gestech_
in which leg-armour is worn, as the name implies.
Plates 50 and 55 picture _Bundrennen_, the peculiarity of the course
being that no beaver is worn beneath the disrupting shield. This makes
it the most dangerous of all the courses, and injuries to the face were
frequent. The vamplate is large and formed like a truncated cone.
Plate 51 depicts _Geschifttartscherennen_, in which course the shield,
when struck by the lance on a certain spot, dissolves in fragments over
the jouster’s head.
Plate 52. It pictures _Geschiftscheibenrennen_, a course similar in
principle to the last-named, the difference being that the shield is
a disk which, when properly struck, flies into the air, or the shield
remains in its place but the plug in the centre flies out.
Plate 53. The cavaliers are here accoutred for the pan joust
(_Pfannenrennen_). There are one or two other varieties of the joust
depicted.
Several combats on foot of the fifteenth century, perhaps the most
dangerous items of the articles of a _pas d’armes_ of that period,
have been fully described in Chapters III, IV and V, in the narrations
by contemporary chroniclers of actual encounters. The character of
these contests underwent a great change in the sixteenth century,
through the introduction of barriers over which the combatants fought.
These bars or barriers reached up to the breasts of the fighters,
and prevented their grappling with each other or getting out of
bounds. They made their appearance probably in the last decade of
the fifteenth century. As the tilt had been conceived with a view
towards mitigating the danger of the joust, so barriers were adopted
towards minimizing the risk of serious injuries in fighting on foot,
and, indeed, the new style was hardly more dangerous than the game
of football as played to-day. This latest phase is well described by
Viscount Dillon in “Barriers and Foot Combats,” a paper published in
the _Archæological Journal_ of 1904.[188] The special features of the
armour for combats of this kind are its massive character, the presence
of an apron (_Kampfschurtz_, a sort of continuation of the taces), and
the large, thick, globose bascinet. A fine armour for foot-fighting
in the lists may be seen in the Tower of London. It is a grand piece
of work, weighing about 93 lbs., sent by Maximilian of Austria to our
Henry VIII. The Vienna Collection possesses seven complete armours for
fighting on foot, which vary considerably, both in form and weight.
The weapons employed in these contests in Germany and Austria, as
given in _Freydal_, are the sword in different forms, including the
“bastard” (a hand and a half sword), the dussack, the _Kurisschwert_
or armying-sword, and even the two-handed sword (_Zweihänder_ or
_Schlachtschwert_), the dagger, battle-axe (including the _bec
de faucon_), mace, halbard, _ranseur_, guisarme, _Aalspiesse_ (a
short-shafted spear with rondel-guard), _Langspiess_ (a short lance),
_Würfspiess_ (a javelin), _Stange_ (a quarter-staff), and _Drischel_
(the military flail).
The _Fussturnier_, which originated in the sixteenth century, was a
fighting in groups on foot over a barrier, and in it and some other
courses the challengers were termed “Maintenators” and their opponents
“Aventuriers.” Each combatant had to deliver three thrusts with the
lance and four strokes with the sword. Dr. Cornelius Curlitt gives the
following extract from _Acten des Dresdener Oberhofmarshallamtes_ of
the year 1614:—“The one who shivers the greatest number of lances in
the most adroit manner shall have the lance prize; and he who in five
strokes strikes the bravest and strongest with the sword shall have the
second prize.” The locking gauntlet was forbidden, and the lower limbs
were without armour. A harness for this kind of fighting, by Anton
Peffenhaüser, worn by the _Kurfürst_ Johan George of Saxony in 1613, is
now in the Dresden Museum. The head-piece is a burgonet.
An important later form of joust is the _Freiturnier_, or Free Course,
which grew out of the old German _Gestech_, and, like it, was run “at
the large,” that is without a tilt. There is a harness for this course
at Dresden, reproduced on Plate X (2). The passguard is much larger
than that worn in jousting at the tilt, reaching nearly to the left
shoulder. Leg-armour was worn. The harness illustrated in Boeheim’s
_Waffenkunde_ (Fig. 655) as being for the _Welsch Gestech_, or joust at
the tilt, is really for _Freiturnier_, a form of joust which does not
appear before the second half of the sixteenth century.
As already stated, the suit in the Wallace Collection, numbered
484 in the catalogue of that institution, is for _Realgestech_ or
_Plankengestech_, a variety of joust at the tilt. It first appeared
about 1540, and did not differ materially from the main course; nor did
the armour employed differ except for the cross-ribbing on the shield.
This course, like the others, fell into disuse in the seventeenth
century, though it was the last to survive except the one called
_Scharmützel_, often a sort of general siege or skirmish, with a view
to practice for actual warfare. A _Scharmützel_ was held at Dresden in
1553, when four bands of horsemen attacked a mock fortress, defended
by a garrison armed with _Aalspiesse_ and military forks, and supplied
with four hundred earthenware pots for missiles, to be thrown empty.
Cannon were employed on both sides, presumably fired in blank, though
this is not stated.
[Illustration: _PLATE VII_
_GESCHIFTTARTSCHERENNEN_]
The foregoing comprise the most distinctive forms of the tourney.
There were permanent lists in Germany, as also at Calais; and in
England, at Westminster, Hampton Court, and Greenwich.
The quintain and running at the ring have been described in Chapter
I, and there only remains the _Karoussel_, or _Carrousel_, to be
mentioned. The name is derived from _carosello_, a ball of clay, which
was hollow. The game was a favourite one at the court of Louis XIV,
where it gave rise to handsome dresses and costly display. The players,
arranged in opposing bands or sides, were mounted and threw these
missiles at one another, catching them on their shields. There were
several varieties of the game.
Harness for the tiltyard was usually made thicker than that for field
purposes and was thus somewhat heavier. Much taste and labour were
expended on its ornamentation.
Though the best armour was imported from Italy and Germany, a large
proportion of that in use in England was made at home, and, indeed,
there is plenty of evidence that this is so. Henry VIII, like
Maximilian, took a strong personal interest in all that related to
arms and armour, and was very desirous that the form and quality of
harness made in England should be improved. With this object in view,
he arranged with the emperor for German smiths to be sent to Greenwich,
and some really fine armours were made there during his reign and
later, many of which have been preserved, though the iron billets
used in forging them were imported from Innsbruck, English iron not
having been found to be of a sufficient tensile strength for the best
purposes. Whether this inferiority lay in the process of puddling the
iron or to the presence of any considerable proportion of deleterious
elements, such as sulphur and phosphorous, is another matter. Henry
VIII established his “Almain Armouries” at Greenwich about the year
1514.[189]
The form of “Hoasting” armour underwent several important changes
during the course of the sixteenth century and to the time when
body-armour fell into general disuse. The changes had their origin,
mainly, in new departures in the fashion of the civil dress; indeed,
the shape of the doublet of each period is faithfully reflected in that
of the cuirass of steel. This following of the modes of the day by the
smith sometimes resulted in the production of harness which, however
effective from a spectacular point of view, proved most unsuitable for
service in the field. This was greatly owing to the abandonment of the
principle of a glancing surface on the armour, thus tending to effect
lodgment for strokes from weapons of attack, instead of deflecting them.
The elegant form of “Gothic” armour of the connoisseur had been
modelled, as we have seen, after the shapely Florentine dress of the
fifteenth century: but a radical and far-reaching change took place
at the commencement of the sixteenth, following on a new departure in
civil costume. This style, _armatura spigolata_, is usually known as
“Maximilian,” named after the emperor, and would seem to have been
introduced by him in his extensive dominions from Italy, after his
Italian campaign in 1496. That “Maximilian” armour was of Italian
origin is clear by the very name it bore in Germany at the time, viz.
“_Mailander Harnisch_.” The leading features of this type are:—the
globose form of the breastplate; the abnormally wide-toed solerets,
following the new fashion in shoes, “bear-paw” or “cow-mouthed” as
they were commonly called; the heightening of the shoulder or neck
guards (pieces often, though erroneously, termed pass-guards, a mistake
pointed out by Viscount Dillon in one of his valuable and suggestive
papers on armour); and the substitution of laminated tassets in place
of the solid, tile-formed tuilles. The head-piece is the armet, the
most perfect as well as the most familiar form of helmet—of which,
however, there are several varieties. This armour was usually made
fluted, though sometimes plain. When fluted, the whole surface down to
the jambs, which are always smooth, is covered with narrow, regular
radiating flutings, differing in that respect from “Gothic” armour,
with its broad, sweeping flutings and ridgings.
Tonlet armour (_à tonne_) has a deep skirt of hoops called “jambers,”
standing out all round like a more modern crinoline, and moving up
and down like the laths of a Venetian blind. It also had its origin
in Italy, and was copied from the civil skirts of the doublet of the
period, called “bases”; which when reproduced in steel were clumsy
and unwieldy. We have here an apt illustration of the lengths people
will sometimes go in slavishly following a particular fashion, however
clumsy or unsuitable it might be. This style of armour was greatly
employed in fighting on foot, though a variety was adapted for use on
horseback. A fine and historic armour for fighting on foot, made by
Conrad Seusenhofer of Innsbruck, may be seen in the Tower of London.
Bards probably had their origin in the twelfth century, though there
is little mention of them in English records before the close of the
thirteenth, but in the fourteenth they would appear to have become
fairly common. The chamfron, crinet and peytral are observable in
engravings of the fourteenth century, when they were probably of
_cuir-bouille_. In the _Histoire de Charles VII_ it is stated that
a combat, _à outrance_, took place in the year 1446, between the
Seigneurs de Ternant and Galiot de Balthasin,[190] in which the latter
was mounted “_sur un puissant cheval, liquil selon la costume de
Lombardie estoit tout convert de fer_.” A complete equipment of steel
plate for the horse was attained in the second half of the fifteenth
century, when, according to a picture in the arsenal at Vienna, painted
in 1480, “_Der Ritter sitz auf seinem bis auf die Hufe verdecten
Hengst_.” A fine bard which had belonged to Henry VIII, weighing 92½
lbs., may be seen in the Tower of London. Bards for the tourney were
usually of leather.
The expression “trapped and barded,” so frequently met with in records,
is often misunderstood. The bard is a defence for the horse, while the
trapper is its outside textile covering.
The importance of lightly-armed troops in warfare became steadily
greater, and even as early as the beginning of the sixteenth century
a large proportion of the armour for the field was made lighter, and
demi-harnesses were employed for light cavalry.
The imitation in steel of the civil costume was carried to absurd
lengths, as is glaringly shown in the so-called “_Pfeifenharnis_”
(pipe-harness), forged after the picturesque dress of the period, with
its pipings, puffs or rolls, points and slashes. Illustrations of it
may be seen in the _Triumph of Maximilian_. In a suit in the Wallace
Collection (catalogue No. 555) the details of the dress have been
faithfully and minutely reproduced in metal. The very fabric of the
civil costume has been imitated and the slashes are gilded. Harness was
freely and delicately etched, engraved, damascened, and decorated with
repoussé work; and some of the ornamentation did away altogether with
the glancing surface of the armour, thus greatly militating against its
efficiency for military purposes.
A fine armour in the Zeughaus, at Berlin, affords an excellent example
of the best work of about the middle of the sixteenth century. It is
by Peter von Speyer, of Annaberg, made for the _Kurfürst_ Joachim II,
of Brandenburg, whose arms decorate the breastplate. The helm is
of the type of armet without collar. The peak in the cuirass tends
to be placed lower down as the century advances, until at length
the “peascod” form is reached, as shown on Plate IX (2). Here the
breastplate is of the true Elizabethan “peascod” form, converging
to a retreating point at the bottom. You have this shape exactly in
portraits of the Earl of Leicester, and, indeed, of the queen herself.
The tassets swell out over the hips, another feature observable in the
portraits. This form continued, with some modifications, up to nearly
the end of the century.
[Illustration: _PLATE VIII_
A _SCHARFRENNEN_ AT MINDEN IN 1545]
[Illustration: A JOUST AT THE TILT IN AUGSBERG IN 1540]
FOOTNOTES:
[171] See Appendices A, B and C.
[172] Vienna. 1880-1882.
[173] Courses run with pointed lances, those with coronals, combats on
foot and a _mêlée_, as well as the mummeries in which he was engaged.
[174] In translation:—
THE KNIGHT FREYDAL
Now who would read of pastimes
And joyous deeds of pleasure?
Let him take up the tournament
In all its fullest measure.
This did the gallant Freydal
In knightly deeds of fame,
Thus rendering illustrious
The glories of his name.
His virtues and his goodness
Are manifest to all;
His many glorious triumphs
At tilt, at masks and ball.
Thus were his young days brightened
And the sunniest memories shed,
The cares of old age lightened
By brave records of the dead.
(His like will ne’er be seen again.)
[175] _Scharfrennen_ and the _Gestech_.
[176] The hall where the ancient firearms are on view.
[177] _The Armouries of the Tower of London_, I, 26.
[178] “What care I for the moon if the sun be gracious.”
[179] “No one knows my heart, whether I am a fox or a hare.”
[180] Joust at the tilt.
[181] _The Armouries of the Tower of London_, I, 37.
[182] Ibid., I, 49.
[183] Catalogue No. 21.
[184] _Waffenkunde_, p. 557.
[185] “_Er_ [the Emperor] _hat auch under den pundten vilmal gerennt
da im treffens baid shilt in de höch sprungen, das dann lustig ist zu
sehen, aber sorgklich zu thun_.”
[186] The word _Anzogenrennen_ means merely jousting with the shield
screwed on (_Angeschraubte Tartsche_).
[187] Vol. LV, page 297.
[188] LVI, page 276.
[189] _The Armouries at the Tower of London_, I, 18.
[190] This duel is described in Chapter V.