CHAPTER VI

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_).

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.