CHAPTER VIII

TRIAL BY COMBAT, ITS SCOPE AND HISTORY

Curiously interlinked with the procedure of the law courts, forming, indeed, an integral part of the law of the land, was the judicial duel; an institution applying to both civil and criminal jurisdiction.

It was allowed in certain cases, such as on a civil writ of right for the recovery of land, and in criminal charges of treason or felony on an appellant making a sworn declaration before a judge. This law, though falling greatly into disuse after the reign of Queen Elizabeth, remained on the statute book until early in the nineteenth century.

Among the Ashmolean, Harleian and Cottonian MSS. are many tracts, treatises and other documents relating to the laws and manner of conducting judicial duels, with other matter concerning these combats; and abstracts from the MSS. are given in Appendices E, F, and G, respectively.

The custom of trial by combat or legal duel, the ordeal of battle, was introduced into England by the Normans.[244] As far as can be ascertained it was unknown to the Anglo-Saxons, though the ordeal of hot water appears in one of Ine’s laws;[245] and, indeed, trial by ordeal appears repeatedly among the laws of the Anglo-Saxon kings. The principle involved was the same in both cases, viz. that the Almighty would not remain indifferent when solemnly invoked, but would intervene miraculously so that the ends of justice might be furthered. The simple faith of the times would act as a deterrent to appeals to the judgment of God and would thus tend to limit the number of cases. The consciousness of innocence or guilt would also contribute towards the vindication of the cause of justice in actual combat.

The proofs by fire and water (_vulgaris purgatio_), holding, carrying or walking over hot iron or heated plough-shares (_ferri candentis judicium_), being thrown into deep water, bound hand and foot, may be said roughly to have preceded that by judicial combat; but they form quite another and earlier branch of the subject. The number of cases given in history of these earlier forms of ordeal which defendants are stated to have passed through triumphantly is considerable, but most of them must surely be either apocryphal, or the intensity of the ordeals themselves was much exaggerated.

Ordeal by combat is found among the laws of nearly all the German tribes; and it flourished greatly in France until cases of more than suspected miscarriage of justice brought it into disrepute. An edict passed at Lyons in the year 501 established the institution as a regular form of trial. It appears among the ancient laws of the Swedes and Lombards.

In civil cases a claimant would declare that some ancestor of his had been in seisin of certain property but had been unlawfully deprived of it by another, and he would offer battle to the “tenant,” as the owner was then called, for its restitution, by the body of a champion. The tenant, or defendant, could then choose between an appeal to the Grand Assize, an inquest where the question of right is determined by the verdict of neighbours,[246] in which institution may be traced the germ of the more modern jury; or to the ordeal of battle, in his own body or by champion. No one was compelled to defend his seisin of a free tenement by battle, though a claimant could offer combat in the lists, which, however, might be refused by a defendant. When a civil court ordered a combat it was fought on foot in a small circular or oblong enclosure, similar to that used in the foot-fighting, with shields and staves (bastons) at a _pas d’armes_ of the fifteenth century. The course of procedure in criminal cases for the most part differed widely from that followed in civil cases and was under quite another jurisdiction; and it largely consisted of accusations made against the honour of certain persons, or of alleged treason. It was customary for an accuser to justify his charge by an offer of single combat in the lists, “God showing the right”; and such a mode of settlement was greatly in unison with the chivalric spirit of the age. To bring such a matter to an issue an accuser offered battle by throwing down his glove, which when lifted by a defendant signified that the challenge was accepted. The king was appealed to, and, in the event of the case being remitted to the ordeal of battle, he assigned the place and day for the combat. He further, in consultation with the constable and marshal, decided on the preliminaries, the conditions of battle to be observed being regulated in accordance with fixed ordinances, which in England were drawn up by the constable for the time being. The combat would be on horseback, fighting _à outrance_, with lance and sword, in lists similar to those erected for the tourney. Charges of homicide or murder might in this country be remitted to the ordeal of battle, with shields and bastons and in civil garments. Should an accused or claimant fail to appear in the lists on the day appointed he could be outlawed.

The judicial duel may be regarded as the prototype or parent of the chivalrous duel on foot at a _pas d’armes_.

The custom never took deep root in England, though during the reign of King Henry II, when the monarchy had become more settled, and in the times of his immediate successors Richard and John, disputes relating to the possession of land were very rife, greatly owing to the fact that so many manors and smaller holdings had been forcibly and illegally riven from their rightful owners in the preceding reigns since the Conquest, by the barons and their adherents. The ordinary law courts experienced great difficulty in dealing with them on the principles set forth in the written statutes, which then as always inclined to favour the man in possession; and the rough and ready settlement by combat was ordered, more especially in cases where there was a hopeless conflict of testimony between litigants and no means of getting at the truth by the evidence of any living witnesses.

The actual number of judicial duels would seem to have been small in England, for in the great majority of cases before the courts the judges managed to declare that there should be no combat.

Certain persons were excused from battle. They comprised the citizens of London, who were exempted by charter; the clergy; “_sexagenarii_”; and “those blind by accident after issue joined.”[247] Women were not exempted by law and, indeed, sometimes fought.

The early ordinances, forms and manner of carrying out this singular institution in practice in England are given in _Origines Juridiciales_.[248]

A short and imperfect summary follows on these pages:

TRIAL BY COMBAT IN CIVIL CASES

In cases where this mode of trial for the possession of certain lands or other property was allowed by the court, and a combat followed, the further tenure of a holding in question would depend solely on the principle of battle, without any later appeal to the Grand Assize being permissible.

Before a trial by combat could be sanctioned the claimant in the suit was summoned before the court with his champion, who, once fixed upon, could not be changed, unless in the case of his “natural death” taking place in the interval before battle; but should he die “by his own fault, the lord shall lose his Sute.”

The defendant might either defend his cause in person or fight by deputy; but should he elect to be represented by champion and the one chosen should die in the interim it would become a question to be argued before the court as to whether or not the defendant should be allowed to appoint another in his place. The challenger or demandant was not allowed to fight in person.

Should the defendant, the “tenant,” be vanquished in the fight, then “the lord shall lose the land and the claimant shall have it”; but it often happened that a champion had been hired for some fee or reward, and if this should be proved the principal would lose his suit. Some particulars are given of a case of this kind[249] “betwixt Thomas fitz Hugh de Staunton and the prior of Lenton for the advousen of the church of Harlaston, in Northamptonshire.” Both parties to the suit were represented by champion, the appellant being a churchman, and they fought on foot in the lists, armed with bastons (i.e. polygonally-shaped maces or cudgels of heavy wood, tipped with horn: “basculi cornuti, bastons cornuz”).[250]

TRIAL BY COMBAT IN CASES CRIMINAL

This was conducted much on the lines of knightly usage in combats on horseback _à outrance_, except, as already stated, in charges of homicide or murder.

The cartel setting forth the charge, subscribed to on oath, was laid before the judges of chivalry by the appellant, the accuser, stating that “he was ready to maintain the same with his body.” This document was then considered by the judges, and should combat be allowed it was served on the accused, the defendant; and if within an interval of six weeks he had not responded, judgment was registered against him by default, his coat-armour being reversed or ignominiously fastened under his horse’s tail, in disgrace.

Should the accused stand on his defence both parties were cited to appear in the field outside the lists, which were quadrangular in form with a gate at each end. Judgment seats were provided for the constable and marshal, and at their feet were stationed a competent number of experienced knights and “a doctor or two of civil laws,” all for the advice and assistance of the court.

The appellant first came to the gate at the right end of the lists, clad in complete armour, attended by his esquires, and the constable and marshal demanded of him through their herald his name and purpose. On his answering, he was conducted into the lists by a knight and herald and placed before the judgment seat on the right hand. A similar course of procedure was adopted towards the defendant, who was placed facing the accuser on the left hand.

The choice of the weapons stipulated in the cartel lay with the defendant, and the advisory knights inspected and measured them for both sides, so that there might be no inequality in that respect between the parties; and the knights must answer for it that there be no enchantment or magic practised on either side.

It was then demanded of the principals if their purpose held, and they affirmed the same, laying their hands on the Evangelists. The appellant then briefly rehearsed the terms of the cartel of defiance, making oath as to its truth, after which the defendant affirmed also on oath his denial of the charge.

These preliminaries over the parties prepared for battle, which was to continue from sunrise to sunset; the herald crys, “Let them goe together,” and the onset is sounded by trumpet call.

Should the appellant not overcome the defendant during the day the latter was deemed guiltless, and the procurator of the constable and marshal publicly proclaimed the fact: but to secure what was termed “a perfect victory,” a confession of guilt by one of the parties was necessary. The cartel was then sealed with the common seal in testimony that the combat had duly taken place, and all the legal formalities been observed.

A picture of a legal duel on a murder charge, of the reign of Henry III, has been preserved, and the names of the combatants are written upon it. It has been reproduced by Hewitt in _Ancient Armour and Weapons of War_,[251] and the parties are represented fighting. A gallows is depicted in the group with the vanquished combatant hanging from it. This was no knightly battle—the champions fought on foot in their civil dresses of leather or cloth, bare-headed, with quadrangular bowed shields, and bastons garnished at their heads with spurs, like those of a pick.

Rules and ordinances for the regulation of judicial combats in France were promulgated by Phillip IV, surnamed le Bel. An abridged account of them follows:—[252]

Four things to be established before the Gage of Battle may be adjudged.

1. The institution applies to grave suspicion in cases of murder, manslaughter, treason or the like offences. 2. Every true man if he knows himself to be accused to present himself before the court without waiting to be cited or summoned. 3. That no gage be granted for accusations of theft or robbery. 4. On a gage of battle being granted the appellant to furnish particulars as to where the alleged wicked deed was done, the name of the party dead; or full details of the treason alleged to have been committed.

Should the judge allow the combat the advocate of the appellant is to lay the case before the court in sober terms; but should the defendant deny the charge the appellant must say that, although he cannot prove it by witnesses or other evidence, yet he can avouch it in his own body or by another for him, in an enclosed field in presence of the king.

The appellant is to throw down his glove and retain counsel for arms, horse, etc., necessary for the gage of battle. The defendant may reply to the accusation that the appellant has falsely and maliciously lied; and that in his defence, by the help of God and our Lady, he will avouch his innocence with his body or by some other for him; and that he will be ready on the day and at the place fixed upon for the combat. Then he is to take up the gage thrown down by the appellant, and a decision will be given by the count as to whether trial by battle will be allowed or not.

If recourse to a duel be permitted the parties will swear to be on the ground on the day appointed; the combat to be overlooked by wise and honest men, clerks, knights, and esquires, without favour to either party; but should either appellant or defendant fail to keep his tryst he shall be proclaimed recreant, and afterwards arrested.

Regulations as to the procedure for the combat follows:—the parties to bring sustenance for themselves and their horses for the day; the lists to be 40 paces in width by 80 in length, and within them two pavilions are to be pitched for the use and comfort of the combatants. The herald is to come on horseback to the gate and to cry three times; firstly, before the arrival of the appellant; secondly, when the combatants have entered the lists; and thirdly, when they have taken their oaths. The appellant should be first in the field on the day of battle, before the hour of noon; the defendant not later than four in the afternoon. The parties make their affirmations and the sign of the cross, and appear before the stand on which the judge is seated, and he commands them to raise the visors of their helmets, after which they return to their pavilions. The herald, after having called them for the third time, motions them to kneel before a table on which a crucifix and missal are placed, when a priest admonishes them; and the marshal takes off their right-hand gauntlets and hangs them on the arms of the cross. The combatants then mount their horses, the pavilions are removed from the lists, and the marshal cries, “Gentlemen doe your Deuoire,” throwing down his glove, and the combat begins.

The body of the vanquished, dead or alive, shall be delivered by the judge to the marshal, his points cut and armour cast piecemeal in the lists, and his horse and armour shall appertain to the constable and marshal of the field. The victor shall depart honourably from the lists, on horseback.

Ashmole MS., No. 764, p. 7, furnishes the following:—“_De la droite ordonnance du Gaige de Bataille par tout le royaume de France Philipe par la grace de Dieu Roy de France a touz ceulx qui ces presentes lettres verront salut._” This letter of King Philip IV, written in 1306, limits the practice of wager of battle, and is prefixed to regulations for the whole course of the combat (44-54 b).

In Favine’s _Theatre of Honour and Knighthood_,[253] rendered into English in 1622, judicial duels are thus defined:—“It was the custome of our auncient French to vndertake the hazard of armes and combat, to justifie themselues in an Accusation, fordged against their honour and good fame; and to sustaine the truth of some iust cause, whereof the proofes were doubtfull, yea, wholly hid and concealed.” In France the oaths were administered over the bones and relics of saints and martyrs.

In _La Vie de Bertrand Du Guesclin_[254] is an account of a singular legal duel between Jews, named Daniot and Turquant, which took place in Spain; and the narration aptly illustrates the superstitious character of the times and country. These Jews were accused of assassinating Blanche de Bourbon at night in her bed; and on being charged with the crime Daniot averred that he had not entered the bed-chamber of the princess at all, and had done his best to prevent Turquant from committing the murder. This Turquant denied on oath, stating that his accomplice had taken an equal part with himself in causing the death of the princess. On hearing of this direct conflict of testimony Bertrand Du Guesclin is stated to have suggested a judicial duel in the lists (_champ-clos_) between the parties, and this having been assented to the fight duly took place. The combatants, who were well mounted and in complete armour, fought with swords, and after some severe passages Turquant wounded Daniot in the arm so severely that he was incapacitated from further combat, owing mainly to the loss of so much blood. The _coup de mort_ was about to be given to the vanquished champion and a confession of his guilt demanded when just at that moment a thick cloud appeared above the heads of the combatants, and issuing from it a flash of lightning struck them both dead.

Among the Monstrelet illustrations is a picture of a highly improbable judicial duel between a man and a dog, the man being accused of murdering the dog’s master. The picture was copied from an ancient painting which hung in the great hall of the Castle of Montargis, and is supposed to picture an event recorded by Colombière in _Theatre d’Honneur et de Chevalerie_. The fight is stated to have taken place in the reign of Charles V of France (1364-1380).[255] The scene represents the duel in progress within a large circular enclosure or lists, around which are galleries and promenades like a theatre, the numerous spectators being richly dressed nobles and ladies. Companies of soldiers are on guard and there is a large band of trumpeters. The defendant is clad in a leather jerkin, torn in places, and slashed drawers; he is armed with a baston or club and a large circular shield. The dog, a large staghound, is seen gripping the murderer by the throat, and justice is vindicated.

“On the seuenth of June 1380 a combat was fought afore the kings palace at Westminster, on the pauement there, betwixt one sir John Anneslie knight, and one Thomas Katrington esquire; the occasion of which strange and notable triall rose hereof. The knight accused the esquire of treason, for that which the fortresse of saint Sauior within the Ile of Constantine in Normandie, belonging sometime to sir John Chandois, had béene committed to the said Katrington, as capteine thereof, to keepe it against the enemies, he had for monie sold and deliuered it ouer to the Frenchmen, when he was suffientlie prouided with men, munition and vittels, to have defended it against them: and sith the inheritance of that fortresse and landes belonging thereto, had apperteined to the said Annerslie in right of his wife, as néerest cousine by affiniti vnto sir John Chandois, if by the false conueiance of the said Katrington, it had not beene made awaie, and alienated into the enemies hands: he offered therefore to trie the quarrell by combat, against the said Katrington, wherevpon was the same Katrington apprehended, and put in prison, but shortlie after set at libertie againe.” It was decided to try the case by combat, and the constable and marshal were duly notified. Lists were erected and crowds assembled on the day appointed to witness the fight. On being called three times by the herald-at-arms the parties entered the lists for fighting, and the articles of combat were publicly read, and after each had been duly sworn the fight commenced “first with speares, after with swords, and lastlie with daggers. They fought long till finallie the knight had bereft the esquire of all his weapons, and at length the esquire was manfull overthrowned by the knight,” who was declared the conqueror. The esquire died soon after from his hurts. The king was present at the fight.[256]

Mr. Hewitt[257] describes a legal duel of the reign of King Richard II, between a chevalier of Navarre and an English esquire, which is figured in Cotton MS., Nero, D VI. The engraving has been reproduced in Strutt’s _Regal Antiquities_.[258] Holinshed gives an account of the duel, as taking place in 1384, between John Walsh or Wallis and an esquire of Navarre named Martilet; the charge being that the former had forced the wife of the latter. Martilet was slain, his body drawn, hanged and beheaded.

Froissart describes a judicial duel which took place at Paris in the year 1386, in the reign of Charles VI of France, between the Chevaliers Jean de Carouge and Jacques le Gris, both knights of the household of the Comte d’Alençon. Owing to the singular nature of the charge the event caused a great stir at the time and drew a multitude of spectators from far and near. De Carouge leaving France to take part in the crusade in Palestine, his young and handsome wife, a modest and virtuous dame, awaited his return in their strong castle of Argenteil. Jacques le Gris having conceived an unlawful passion for the lady determined to gratify it during the absence of her lord. He paid a visit to the castle one morning and was received by the lady with all honour as being a companion at arms of her husband; and was being shown over it when he asked to see the dungeon. She suspecting no evil, took him down to it alone, when he suddenly locked the door, took advantage of her and forced her. On the return of de Carouge from the Holy Land his wife complained to him of the outrage, which was solemnly denied by the defendant; and the husband called together his friends and kindred to advise with them as to his proper course of action. Parliament was applied to, and a combat to the death between the parties was arranged to take place, de Carouge to act as champion for his wife, le Gris to defend his honour in his own person. Lists were erected at Paris behind the Temple, together with accommodation for the vast number of spectators expected to be present. King Charles was at Sluys at the time superintending the arrangements for a contemplated invasion of England, but he hurried back to Paris to sit as umpire on the occasion. On the day of battle the two knights entered the lists, with their sponsors, armed at all points; and the onset was sounded for a joust _à outrance_, which was run without hurt to either party. They then dismounted and attacked each other with swords. De Carouge was first wounded in the thigh, but continued fighting and at length passed his sword through the body of his adversary, killing him instantly. The body of le Gris was delivered over to the common hangman by the marshal and dragged to Montfauçon, where it was gibbeted.

Juvenal des Ursins, in _Histoire de Charles VI_,[259] also gives an account of this duel, which differs materially from that of Froissart, and is more likely to be correct. It states that when the vanquished knight lay wounded on the ground and when de Carouge was about to administer the _coup de grâce_ he demanded a confession of guilt, but le Gris with his last breath solemnly asseverated his denial of the crime; and innocent he was later proved to be, for some time afterwards another person on his death-bed confessed to having committed the outrage. The motive of the lady in charging the wrong person is not apparent. The duel is also described in _Les Annales de France_.

In 1398 the Dukes of Hereford and Norfolk accused each other of treason, and a duel took place between them, though King Richard had in vain tried to reconcile them. Holinshed gives the following account of this combat:—“The duke of Aumarle was that daie high constable and the duke of Surrie marshal, and they entered vnto the lists with a great companie of men apparelled in silke sendall, imbrodered with siluer both richlie and curouslie, euerie man hauing a tipped staffe to keepe the feeld in order. About the houre of prime came to the barriers of the listes, the duke of Hereford, mounted on a white courser, barded with gréene and blew veluet imbrodered sumptuouslie with swans and antelops of goldsmiths worke, armed at all points. The constable and marshall came to the barrier, demanding of him what he was, he answered ‘I am Henrie of Lancaster, duke of Hereford which am come hither to doo endeuer against Thomas Mowbraie duke of Norfolke, as a traitor vnto God, the king, his realme, and me.’ Then he entered the listes, and descended from his horse, and set him down in a chaire of greene veluet, at the one end of the lists, and there reposed himself, abiding the comming of his aduesarie.” King Richard then entered the lists with great pomp “accompanied with all the péeres of the realm,” and took his seat upon the tribune. “After him entered the Duke of Norfolk, his horse barded in crimcon velvet, embroidered with lions in silver and mulberry trees,” and he took his seat in a chair, “which was of crimosen veluet, courtined about with white and red damaske.” The herald then gave the signal for the combat to begin, but the course proved abortive, and the king cast his bâton, the heralds crying “Ho, Ho.” A council was then held by the king resulting in both dukes being banished the realm.[260]

TRIAL BY COMBAT IN GERMANY[261]

Application had to be made by an appellant to the civic authority of a town before a judicial duel could take place, and this having been done the following answer would be given:—

“We have received your letter and are very sorry to see that your hearts are so moved with rancour and hatred as you seem to bear to one another. In which regard we pray you that you would desist from combat if it may be; and that you would end your quarrels by the way of mildness and gentleness without the adventuring of handy strokes and without shedding human blood. Consent to our request, and so much the rather because we entreat you most instantly.”

Should the demand for a trial by combat be still persisted in the following answer was returned:—

“Seeing that you still persist in your hatred and challenge, and that the way of gentleness can take no course of kindness between you, we do order and appoint that you shall appear on such a day before us to hear the ground and subject of your quarrel, wherein we mean to do you justice.”

A day may then be assigned for the combat if it be allowed.

The preliminaries and regulations are similar to those which prevailed in France and England, with, however, the difference that in each of the pavilions pitched in the lists for the accommodation of the combatants, a bier, a coffin, four candles and a shroud for the dead were placed; and both the appellant and defendant were confessed by a priest. If not slain the party vanquished remained infamous for the rest of his life; he was never allowed participation in aught knightly, and his beard was to be kept close-shaven.[262]

Trials by combat in Germany were more complex and far-reaching than was the case in France and England, and the weapons employed in conducting them more varied and specialized in character.

A paper was read on February 20th, 1840, before the Society of Antiquaries, London, by Mr. R. L. Pearsall,[263] entitled, “Some Observations on Judicial Duels, as practised in Germany”; a short résumé of which follows here. The paper is largely based upon a curious manuscript of the year 1400, in the Royal Library at Munich, containing some text and a number of wood-cuts on vellum, representing various forms of duel in Germany. The work is by Paulus Kall “Master of Defence”[264] to the then Duke of Bavaria; and the illustrations refer to judicial and perhaps other duels as practised in the Fatherland about the end of the fourteenth century, as well as to some others of a still earlier period. This MS., together with others at Munich and Gotha, references to which Mr. Pearsall has omitted to give, form the ground-work of his paper.

Strange though it may seem, the legal duel was resorted to as a court of appeal in extreme cases of quarrels and accusations between man and wife; and Fig. 2 in Paulus Kall’s book affords an illustration of the manner in which such combats were conducted. It depicts a man, bare-headed, buried in a pit up to his loins, holding a short staff in his right hand, the left arm bound to his side. The woman is clad in her chemise only, which is bound together below the middle by a lace passing between the legs; the right sleeve of the garment extends beyond the hand “_ein dunne Elle_” in a bag which contains a stone, and this constitutes her weapon of attack. At first sight the combat would appear to be an unequal one. It might be thought for a moment that the wood-cut had been conceived in a humorous sense, but there is no doubt whatever that such duels did really take place in Germany, though cases of the kind were probably comparatively rare after the twelfth century; and, indeed, Mr. Pearsall had not been able to find any record of an actual combat of the kind later than the year 1200, when a man and his wife are stated to have fought under the sanction of the civic authorities at Bâle. We may take it, however, from other evidence that the practice continued up to the close of the fourteenth century and perhaps even later. Reference is made in the paper to a book of drawings, also at Munich, executed as late as the end of the fifteenth century, among which is a representation of such a duel, though possibly traditional in character. The man here is depicted as buried up to the waist in a tub; he wears a skull-cap, and is armed in the same manner as shown in the other drawing, with a short staff, the left arm tied to his side. The woman is fully dressed and in the act of swinging a weapon which looks like a sling, in which is a stone. Mr. Pearsall further refers to “an ancient codex of defence” in the library at Gotha, one of the drawings depicting a duel between a man and his wife, the former fighting from a tub; and the man is shown to have vanquished the woman and drawn her into the tub headforemost, in which she appears with her legs kicking in the air. This incident explains why the chemise, as shown on Fig. 2 of Kall’s work, was tied with a lace between the legs; and that wood-cut also illustrates the mode of action on the part of the duelists in attack and defence. The woman’s weapon is thus seen not to be a sling at all, but one similar in principle to the extended sleeve with a bag at the end in which is a stone; the object being to inflict a swinging blow on her opponent, who parries with his staff. Another cut, the source of which Mr. Pearsall does not mention, represents a more deadly form of duel between a man and a woman, who fight bare-headed and naked to the girdle, with small falchions, like knives; and wounds are shown on both their persons.

A singular form of duel, pictured in Paulus Kall’s book, is that with “_shilts_,” used as weapons both of attack and defence, sometimes alone, and at others in conjunction with daggers held in the disengaged hand. To judge from the wood-cuts this great oblong shield is about 4½ feet long by about 18 inches broad; and though the examples depicted differ somewhat, they are all garnished at the head, foot, and sides with a greater or less number of projecting spears or spurs, for the purposes of attack. The combatants are wearing greyish-brown tight-fitting dresses and hoods; the faces, hands and legs are left bare. The preliminaries completed, the duelists are conducted into the lists by an official; each combatant brings a bier and is accompanied by his relations and a confessor. The principals are then sworn, their weapons handed to them, and the onset sounded. It would appear from the surrounding details and the character of the officials concerned, that this form of duel appertained to members of the privileged class.

A fourth kind of duel was fought with spiked clubs (or more usually with swords) and “_der Hutt_,” a shield formed like a hat; and Kall’s wood-cut pictures the duelists as being clad in garments of cloth. The shields vary in size from very small to very large, the latter kind being employed in conjunction with spiked clubs, the former with swords. Another form of duel is with the “_streit-axt_” (_bec de faucon_), the variety of battle-axe with a hammer on one side of the head and a spike, like that of a pick, on the other. Here the champions fight in complete armour; and besides axes they carry swords and daggers. In the Gotha codex is a drawing entitled, “_Dass ist wie sich ainer versorgen sol der zu gewapenter Hand fechten sol_,” meaning that this is the equipment for a duel with gauntlets. The duelist is shown as being anointed with oil by his armourer preparatory to combat; and the items of his body-armour stand ready to be put on in their turn. Some of the wood-cuts in Paulus Kall’s work afford representations of such duels; and the text furnishes directions as to how they were to be conducted. It was from this kind of legal duel, more especially, that combats on foot in the lists at a _pas d’armes_ had their origin.

The last form of duel referred to in Mr. Pearsall’s paper is one with two-handed swords; and a wood-cut of Paulus Kall’s illustrates a combat of the kind, in which the duelists are clad in jerkins and long hose. The swords appear to measure about five feet in length. These clumsy and unwieldy weapons were for striking and parrying, but could not be employed effectively at close quarters.

An original manuscript in the possession of Mr. Richard Bull, F.S.A., at the commencement of the nineteenth century, contains the orders, rules and regulations issued by Thomas Duke of Gloucester, the Constable of England, in the reign of King Richard II, 1377-99, for observance in cases of trial by combat.[265] They differ little from those of an earlier period, but the particulars given of the lists may be noted with advantage. They run:—

“The Kinge shall finde the feeld to fight in and the listes shalbe made and deuised by the Constable and it is to be considered that the listes must be 60 pace longe and equally made without greate stones the grounde flat and 40 paces brode in good order and that the grounde be harde stable and firme and that the lists be strongly barred abowt with one dore in the este an other in the weste with good and stronge barres seven foote highe or more than a horse can leape over them.”

The weapons were to be “glayues,”[266] long sword, short sword and dagger.

There are other copies of these rules extant besides the one given in the _Antiquarian Repertory_, viz., Ashmole MS. 856, 83-89, and that among a MS. Collection of Ordinances of Chivalry of the fifteenth century, belonging to Lord Hastings. The last-named document is copied in Lord Dillon’s paper on these Hastings MS.,[267] published in _Archæologia_, Vol. LVII, and is reproduced in our Appendix H, but with the long preamble left out. These three copies of the rules for conducting judicial duels in the reign of Richard II vary somewhat; for instance, glaives[268] are mentioned in the two first copies as being among the weapons employed in these combats, but not in the last.

RULES FOR JUDICIAL COMBATS IN THE REIGN OF RICHARD III[269]

A case lodged by an appellant should be pleaded in the court before the constable and marshal, and if the accusation cannot be substantiated by witnesses, a recourse to trial by combat may be granted by the Crown. Should a judicial duel be decided on, the time and place of combat are fixed by the constable; the weapons to be “glayves,” long-swords, short swords and daggers. Sureties to be found by both parties to keep their day, and no attempt shall be made to injure the plaintiff or defendant before the day of battle.

The general rules and arrangements do not differ materially from those of earlier reigns, though here it is mentioned that spears of equal length were issued to the combatants, thus explaining the term “glayves.”

If the charge be one of treason the vanquished shall be stripped of his armour, and a piece of the railings of the lists broken down, and he shall be drawn through the lists by horses to the place of execution.

A judicial combat took place at Quesnoy in 1405, Duke William, Count of Hainult, sitting as judge. The parties were two gentlemen, Bournecte the appellant and Bounaige the defendant. The accusation was that of murder. Lists were erected at the expense of the Duke, and the fight commenced by each combatant hurling his lance at the other, but without effect; they then drew their swords, and Bournecte soon overcame his adversary, who confessed his crime, and was ordered by the judge to be beheaded. This was a duel between members of the privileged class.

A challenge for a duel between Henry Inglose, Esq., and Sir John Tiptoft, Knt., to be fought before the Duke of Bedford, high constable, in 1415. (Cotton MS. Titus. C. 28.)

A trial by combat took place at Arras in the year 1431, the Duke of Burgundy sitting as judge. The charge was one of treason, and about the time of the duel many allegiances were being transferred from Burgundy to France. The appellant, Maillotin de Bours, had charged the defendant, Hector de Flavy, with having expressed the intention of deserting the Burgundian interest in favour of that of France and with other contemplated acts of treason. On this information the Duke had de Flavy arrested and lodged in prison. The defendant, however, had many influential friends at Court, and through their good offices and representations he was at length received in audience by his sovereign, when he solemnly denied the charge, alleging that it was de Bours himself who had suggested the treason. The Duke then sent for the appellant, and the discussion between the parties waxed very violent until at length de Bours flung down his glove and demanded a trial by combat, God showing the right. The defendant, with the Duke’s permission, took up the glove and a day was fixed for the combat to take place, both parties giving security to keep their tryst. Lists were prepared and erected. Within them was the model of a sepulchre, for de Flavy had been dubbed a knight before the Holy Sepulchre at Jerusalem. On the day of combat the Duke took his seat on the tribune prepared for him. De Maillotin first entered the lists armed at all points, attended by the Seigneur de Charny and other sponsors. He held a lance in one hand and one of his two swords in the other, and after making his obeisance to the Duke he retired to his pavilion. Sir Hector de Flavy entered the lists in like manner; he was influentially attended, and his charger was led in by the two sons of the Comte de St. Pol. After saluting the Duke he also retired to his pavilion. Both knights on re-entering the lists were led before the judge and swore on the Evangelists that their cause was just and true. They then took up their positions for combat and the onset was sounded, the fight beginning by each hurling his lance at the other, but without hurt to either. They then attacked with swords, each champion displaying the utmost courage and dexterity. The Duke at this juncture quite unexpectedly cast his bâton, thus putting an end to the fight. He commanded the attendance of the combatants to dine at his table on the morrow, when he reconciled them to each other.[270]

“In the foure and twentith yeare” of the reign of King Henry VI (1446) “the prior of Kilmaine appeached the earle of Ormond of treason. For triall whereof the place of combat was assigned in Smithfelde, and the barriers for the same there readie pitcht. Howbeit, in the meane time a doctor of diuinitie, named maister Gilbert Worthington, parson of saint Andrews in Holborne, and other honest men, made such sute with diligent labor and paines taking to the kings councell, that when the daie of combat approched, the quarell was taken into the kings hands and there ended”.[271]

“In the same year also, a certeine armourer was appeached of treason by a seruant of his owne. For proofe whereof a day was giun them to fight in Smithfield, insomuch that in conflict the said armourer was ouercome and slaine; but yet by misgouerning of himselfe. For in the morning, when he should come to the field fresh and fasting, his neighbours came to him, and gaue him wine and strong drinke in such excessiue sort, that he was therewith distempered, and reeled as he went, and so was slaine without guilt. As for the false seruant, he liued not long vnpunished; for being conuict of felonie in court of assise, he was judged to be hanged, and so he was, at Tilburne.”[272]

A good example of a judicial duel, fought in the year 1455, is given in _Histoire des Ducs De Bourgogne_.[273] It took place at Valenciennes, a town then belonging to the county of Hainault, which, with so many other rich manufacturing territories had fallen under the dominion of the dukes of Burgundy, by marriage or conquest. The privilege of sanctuary had been conferred on the town by its ancient counts, and the old rights and charters had been confirmed by the dukes their successors. A person named Mahiot Coquel, a tailor of Tournay, had murdered a man in that town, and he took refuge from justice in Valenciennes, claiming the right of sanctuary. Soon after his arrival a near relative of the murdered man named Jacotin Plouvier, met him in a street of the town and threatened vengeance against him for the murder of his kinsman; upon which Coquel applied to the magistracy, demanding their aid and counsel. The syndic then sent for Plouvier and reproached him with having the intention of violating the franchise of his town; but he denied this and claimed the right of lawful combat as against Coquel, at the same time throwing down a gage of battle. This, after some hesitation, Coquel lifted up; and a combat was allowed as being the law of the land, without being any infringement of the principle of sanctuary, which only applied to protection from the officers of justice. The parties were lodged in prison in separate cells, and seconds were appointed to arrange the preliminaries for the fight; when the Comte de Charolais, afterwards Charles the Bold, on being informed of the case, acting in the capacity of lieutenant-general for his father Duke Philippe le Bon, of Burgundy, ordered the matter to be referred to his council for judgment. The town authorities then applied to the Duke their sovereign lord for the maintenance of their ancient rights, when all opposition to the combat was withdrawn; the Duke announcing his intention of being present, with his son the Comte de Charolais, to view the fight. Lists were erected, not in the form usual for the tourney, but round and with only a single entrance. The judges of the fight were the provosts of the town of Valenciennes and of the county of Hainault, the Duke and his son being merely spectators. Two seats draped with black cloth were placed facing each other in the middle of the lists, and the combatants were conducted to them and sworn on the Evangelists. The two champions were clad in leathern garments, close-fitting and laced down the middles, the arms and legs bare. These corselets were well greased so that neither of the parties could easily grip the other. Their hands were rubbed with ashes for the better grasping of their weapons, and each held a piece of sugar in his mouth as a preventive against their throats becoming parched with the heat. Their weapons were knotted clubs, equal in weight and length and obtusely pointed at the narrower ends, and triangular shields, painted red. When the signal for combat had been given Mahiot Coquel, who was the shorter and weaker man of the two, grasped a handful of sand with which the lists were strewn, and threw it into the eyes of his opponent. This nearly blinded Jacotin for the moment, and he received a heavy blow in the face from the club of his adversary, but on recovering somewhat he set upon Mahiot and seizing him by the arm threw him violently to the ground, then placing his knees on his stomach, to the horror of the spectators, he kept steadily prodding Mahiot between the eyes with the pointed end of his club until he was dead. The body was then dragged by the hangman from the lists to the gallows.

Lacroix in _Military an Religious Life in the Middle Ages, ＆c._, gives a picture of a judicial duel of the knightly kind, fought on foot. It is copied from a miniature in the _Conquêtes de Charlemagne_, a MS., in the National Library at Paris. The combatants are armed at all points; their weapons are swords; and the lists, of open railings, are octagonal in form.

The general course of procedure in these matters continued much the same up to and including the reign of Henry VIII. A manuscript of that reign, sometime belonging to Sir Edward Wyndham, Kt., Marshal to the Camp, gives particulars,[274] The form and size of the lists and counter-lists are as before; also the kind of weapons to be employed. The defendant, if he appear not, is called by proclamation, made by the marshal of the king of “Heraults of that province wherein the Battail is to be deraigned.” The bill of challenge of the appellant and the answer of the defendant is read to them and they take their oaths:—

1. That their appeal and defence is true. 2. That neither hath advantage of the other in weapons. 3. That each will do his best to vanquish his enemy.

The combatants being ready, the constable and marshal, sitting at the king’s feet, order the onset to be sounded, pronouncing the words in high voice, “Lesses les aller et fair leur devoir.”

“In the fight if either of the parties do give sign of yielding or if the king, being present, do cry ‘Hoe,’ the constable and marshall do part them and observe precisely who hathe advantage or disadvantage either of the other at that instant, for if they should be awarded to fight again, they are to be put in the same position as they were before.”

“If the king take up the matter they are brought honourably out of the lists, neither having precedency over the other.”

If the “Battail” be performed and one party be vanquished then “in case of Treason the rayles of the lists are broken down, and the party vanquished is drawn at a Horse-tayl and carried presently to execution.”

The last instance of a duly authorised legal duel in France was that between François de Vivonne de la Chataignerie and Guy Chabot de Jarnac, which took place at St. Germain-en-Laye in 1547, in the presence of the king (Henry II.) It is doubly remarkable in that it contributed a new and subtil stroke of the sword, the “coup de Jarnac,” and that it led to an edict being issued against duelling. This ordeal by combat resulted in the death of de la Chataignerie.

Judicial Duel in 1548, 2nd Edward VI, between one Newton, a Scot, and a gentleman named Hamilton; the former being charged with uttering opprobrious epithets against His Majesty of England. Lists were erected in the market-place of Haddington, and at the time appointed the parties entered them for combat, clad in their doublets and hose, and armed with sword, buckler and dagger. The fight began with great spirit, Hamilton following his adversary up to the very railing of the lists, whereupon Newton struck him on the leg with his sword inflicting a great gash, upon which he fell to the ground and was slain. This ending of the fight was looked upon as a miscarriage of justice.[275]

The Abbé de Brantôme reports a trial by combat which took place about the middle of the sixteenth century, without the sanction of either king or parliament. The appellant was a Seigneur de Fandilles who charged the defendant, the Baron de Guerres of Lorraine, with an odious crime; and it was mutually agreed that the matter be referred to the judgment of God, in battle in the lists. The fight took place on foot with “bastardes” (hand and a half swords) in the lists at Sedan, a M. de Bouillon acting as judge. De Fandilles severely wounded his adversary in the thigh with a stroke of his powerful weapon, and the loss of blood was so great that the defendant could hardly keep his feet, at length falling to the ground. The lists were as usual freely strewn with sand, and the baron clutched handfuls of it which he threw into the eyes of his opponent, who was blinded for the time being and incapacitated from continuing the combat. This ending of the duel by means of an action strictly forbidden by the laws of the duello caused great disputes between the seconds and friends of both parties; and the matter was further complicated by a fall of the stand which afforded accommodation to the judge and spectators. This was certainly an irregular judicial duel, without any sanction at law, though the legal forms were observed.

Brantôme narrates several other duels.

In Harleian M.S., Vol. III, 505, 7021-22, is a catalogue of judicial combats anciently granted by the kings of England.

In the reign of Queen Elizabeth judicial duels had become rare, and the crown employed all its influence in their restraint. Fierce polemics had arisen in regard to the lawfulness or otherwise of the practice, and the conscience of the nation had been thoroughly aroused against them by reason of cases of more than suspected miscarriage of justice coming to light. Strong influence was brought to bear on the law courts to place all possible obstacles in the way of granting licences for such combats, and judges, at that time more especially, usually managed that disputes concerning the possession of land should be settled in the law courts without any resort to the ordeal of battle. Many treatises were written against the practice, examples of which follow: Ashmole MSS., No. 856, p. 10. “Duello foild. The whole proceedings in the orderly dissolveing of a designe for single fight betweene two valient gentlemen; by occasion whereof the unlawfulnesse of a duello is preparatorily disputed, according to the rules of honour and right reason; written by the Lord Henry Howard Earle of Northampton.” 126-145, p. 11. “A Discourse touching the unlawfulnesse of private combates, written by Sir Edward Cooke Lord Chiefe Justice of England, at the request of the Lord Henry Howard Earle of Northampton.” (3 Oct., 1609.) 146-148. “Ex MS. in Bibl’ Hatton.”

Cotton MS. Titus. Fol. 33. A treatise on duels, in two books. (239.) Fol. 38. Two papers on measures taken against duels. (402.) Fol. 44. A paper concerning laws against duels. (416.)

On the 18th June, 1571, a judicial duel was ordered to take place, the principals being Simon Low and John Kime, who were to fight by proxy in the persons of George Thome and Henry Nailer, respectively. The dispute between the parties related to the possession of some land; and the weapons for the intended fight were to be bastons and leathern shields. A plot of ground, 21 yards square, in Tothill Fields, was doubly railed in for the fight, and a stand connected with it was erected for the chief justice, as representing the court of common pleas. Behind it two tents were pitched for the use of the combatants. The Queen was much against the fighting, and the combat did not come off after all, for the champion of the appellant failed at the last moment to put in an appearance, so the plaintiff was non-suited.

Duels of the privileged order naturally survived those of the proletariat. Ashmole MS., No. 856, p. 7, gives “The manner of the challendge made by the Earle of Northumberland against Sir Francis Veare,” both by letter dated 24 Apr. 1602, and by inter-messages, until forbidden by the Queen’s commandment. (107-111.) Ex. MS. in Bibl’ Hatton, and, under the same number, P. 16. “The manner of Donald Ld Rey, and David Ramsey esq. their comeing and carriage at their tryall, upon monday, the 28 of November, 1631, before the Ld of Lynsey, Lord High Constable of England, and others.” This is a very full report of the trial. (175-227.) Under No. 856, p. 15. “His MAᵗˢ: declaration against duells, published at his chappell at Bruxells upon sonday the 24th of November 1658.” (172.)

Though practically in abeyance for a long period the law for an appeal to combat had remained on the statute book; and a trial by battle was demanded as late as the year 1817, in the case of Thornton _v._ Ashford. The judge, Lord Ellenborough, pronounced “that the general law of the land is that there shall be a trial by battle in case of appeal unless the parties bring themselves within the scope of one of the exemptions.” The suit was allowed, but the challenge being refused no combat ensued. The law was repealed in the following year (1818).[276]

FOOTNOTES:

[244] _Origines Juridiciales_, p. 65.

[245] Pollock and Maitland, _History of English Law_, I, 39.

[246] Pollock and Maitland, _History of English Law_, I, 147.

[247] _Origines Juridiciales_, p. 79.

[248] Published in 1671, by William Dugdale Esquire, Norroy King of Arms, later Sir William and Garter King of Arms; the ordinances, etc., being those in operation in the reign of Henry II, set forth by Ranulph de Glanville, Justice of England, page 65.

[249] _Origines_, p. 68.

[250] Bastons were sometimes headed with a double beak, like a pick. Their usual length was three feet, though shorter ones could be used in the event of combatants mutually wishing it.

[251] Vol. I, p. 375.

[252] _Theatre of Honour and Knighthood_, Chap. II, p. 423, written at Paris _anno_ 1619.

[253] Chap. 2, p. 423.

[254] _Anciens Mémoires Du XIV Siècle_, I, 505.

[255] See Montfaucon, Tom III, Pl. 18.

[256] Holinshed’s _Chronicles_, II, 727.

[257] _Ancient Armour and Weapons of War_, II, 342.

[258] Plate 58.

[259] Page 371.

[260] Holinshed, II, 844. Harleian MS., III, 6079, Art. 36, gives an account of this duel.

[261] _Theatre of Honour, etc._, p. 459.

[262] _Theatre of Honour, etc._, p. 459.

[263] _Archæologia_, XXIX, 348.

[264] Probably a fencing master.

[265] _Antiquarian Repertory_, II, 210.

[266] The glaive here mentioned is not the weapon usually known by that name, but the lance: for it will be observed in some later rules given on these pages that “spears of equal length” were to be issued to the combatants. Lances were often termed glaives at this period, and in such combats were shortened to five feet.

[267] Appendix B.

[268] Clayues.

[269] _Antiquarian Repertory_, 1, 152.

[270] _Chronique de Monstrelet_, Liv. II, Chap. CII.

[271] Holinshed, III, 210.

[272] _Ibid._

[273] II, 182.

[274] _Origines Juridiciales_, p. 78.

[275] Holinshed III, 890.

[276] 59 Geo. III, c. 46.

APPENDIX A

TOURNEY

ABSTRACTS of the Ashmolean Manuscripts, regarding the Tourney.[277]

No. 764. p. 6. “Cy sensuyt la façon des criz de Tournois et des Joustes. _Cy peut on à prendre à crier et à publier pour ceulx qui en seront dignes._” 31-43.

On the reverse of the last leaf is a picture of the Joust, whereon two combatants on horseback, bearing their crests, are fighting with lances within the lists.

No. 1105. p. 9. Extracts from various records about Tournaments and Knighthood. 200 _et seq._, 210.

No. 840. p. 73. A Justing-cheque, showing how the spears were broken. 298.

No. 763. II. p. 5. Rules, etc. 148-149.

“The Ordinaunce, statutes and rules made by John Lord Typtofte, Erle of Worcester, Countstable of England by the Kinges commaundment, at Windsour the 29 of May ao sexto Edwardi quarti, to be observed and kepte in all manner of Justes of pees royall with in this realme of England.”

MS. copies of these ordinances are not uncommon, and much differing from each other. They are printed in _Harrington’s Nugae Antiquae_ by Park; and in Dr. Meyrick’s _Critical Essay on antient armor_, II, 179-186, with valuable notes from the MS. M. 6, in the Heralds’ College.

No. 763. p. 5. 6. The same Ordinaunce and statutes. 181. Rules for combatants “At Tornay.” 149b.

No. 857. p. 213. “Rights due att the tournay. _Firste the Kinge of Armes._...” 506.

No. 1115. p. 43. Preamble to articles of tilting, addressed unto the King. 92.

No. 860. The “Round Table” prohibited, 36 Hen. III, 88.[278]

No. 1109. p. 191. Tournament at Windsor, Names of the combatants and judges in a “Course at feild at Windsor the 17th of Nov: 1593, ao regni reginae.” 36. 154b.

No. 856. p. 5. Justing at the marriage of Richard Duke of York (1477). A narrative, by an eye-witness, of the marriage of Richard Duke of York, and Ann daughter of the Duke of Norfolk, and of the grand justing then celebrated in 1477, _and the 17th yeare of King Edward IV_. 94-104. Transcribed “Ex MS. in praefat’ Bibl’ Hatton.”

This article is fully as curious as the narrative of the justing of Anthony Lord Scales, which was published by W. H. B. in the _Excerpta Historica_, in June, 1830.

No. 1116. p. 10. Justs at Westminster. (1511.)

“Justes houlden at Westminster the xijth daie of Februar by the Kinges grace (Henry VIII) called _Cueur Loyal_, the Lord William of Devon _Bon Voloir_, Sʳ Thomas Knivet _Valiant Desire_, and Edward Nevell _Joyous Penser_, with the articles and courses of the said Justes etc.” 109-110b.

The articles begin thus—“The noble lady Renowne considering the good and gracious fortune....” The “courses” are tilting lists for the two days (Wednesday and Thursday, 12-13 Feb., 1511,) marked with strokes, and accounts of the “best joustres.”

p. 56. “The appoynctement of the standinge schaffoldes in the Kinges pallace of Westminster, at his justes. _First next unto the King on his right hande the Earles_,” _etc._ 47 b.

No. 837. p. 17. The Field of the Cloth of Gold at Guisnes (1520).

“Ce sont les noms des princes, prellatz, et grans seigneurs de France, qui estoient en la compaignie de Roy de France quant le Roy (Henry VIII) Dengleterre et led’ sr le Roy (Francois) sentrevyrent et ordonnerent les Joustes et Tournoys qui sensuyvent.” 179ba.

Prefixed to the title is a stanza of 5 lines, inviting to the justs.

No. 1116. p. 7*. The Field of the Cloth of Gold at Guisnes (1520).

“The proclamacōn in Frenche of the articles of the Justes and other feates of armes at the meeting of the aforesaid Kinges (Henry and Francois) at Guisnes, proclaimed through the realme of France by Thomas Benolt al’s Clarencieux King of Armes. _Comme ainsi soit louange_ ...” 105-7b.

p. 8. “The lettres of savegarde given by the said King of England unto Thomas Walle al’s Norrey King of Armes, for the proclamacōn of the same Joustes in the parties of Almayn and the contrye of Germania, wch Norrey proclamed thē as welle in French for the lowe contreys, as in high Dutch as hereafter followeth etc.” 107b-108b. Dated 1520.

p. 5*. Narrative of “The meating of the King of England (and) the Emperor at Canterburie, and the meating of the said King and the French King at Guysnes, Anno D’ni 1520.” 100-3b.

No. 837. p. 21. Running at the Ring (t. Edw. VI?).

“These persones[279] here underwrytten beinge one of the Kinges part the playntyff, and the other wt th erle of Rutland defendant, dyd run at ye rynge iiij course every man, at wch tyme mone toke the ryng but only Mr. Hayward and Mr. Constable beinge wt the defendant,” etc. 185a.

Tourneys t. Eliz.

p. 43. The Challenge of four Knights errant, the Earl of Oxford, Charles Howard, Sir Henry Lee, and Sir Chr. Hatton; against all comers, at the tilt, tourney and barriours; addressed unto the Queen for permission to perform the same. 245.

Note that the said challenge was proclaimed by Clarencieux, on twelfth-night, 1570; and that the exercises were performed on 1, 2, and 6 May. 245b.

Written invertedly by another hand. Other papers relating to the same affair are in No. 845, artt. 37, 39. No. 845. II, 36, 37, 38, 39, 40, 41, and at p. 599.

No. 845. p. 36. Tilting-list and cheque, at a tourney between the Earl of Oxford, Charles Howard, Sir Hen. Lea, and Chr. Hatton, challengers, and seven sets of comers; with their arms tricked. 164. See No. 837, Art. XLIIII.

p. 38. A Tilting-list, showing the antagonists of the Earl of Oxford and others. 167a.

p. 37. “These be the names of the noblemen and gentlemen, that for the honor of the Queenes Maᵗⁱᵉ did their endevor at the Tylt at Westminster on the xvijth day of November, being the first day of the xxiiijth yere of the reigne of queene Elizabeth,” etc. (1581). 165.

p. 39. “Hastiludium apud Westm’ die Solis 6. Decembris 1584, coram Regina, inter nuptos decem et tot coelibes.” 168.

p. 37. “The Tourney holden at Westminster, on monday the 15 of May, 1581, when the prince Delphine of Auvergne and other the Frenshe commissioners were here.” 166a-5b.

p. 40. Proclamation (in French) of the adjudged conduct of combatants, and award of the prize, at a jousting before Queen Elizabeth. 171b.

p. 41. Proclamation (in English) of the adjudgement of prizes to Don Fredericque de Teledo, and other foreign nobles, on an other occasion. 171a.

Draught of another proclamation (in English) concerning the conduct of gentlemen at the tilt and tourney, not named. 170a.

No. 837. p. 5. “The manner of the first cominge into the tiltyard, of the most high and mighty prince Charles Prince of Wales, sonne and heir apparent of our sovereign lo. Kinge James, on friday the xxiiijth of March 1619; which was in the most princely and royall manner that had bene sene many yeares before.” 129-132.

An original paper, with notes and corrections by one of the Heralds. This art. is recorded in the Heralds’ MS., M. 3. f. 1-3b.

No. 1127. p. XIV. 2. Tournament of the Knight of the Royal Amaranthus. In the first quarter of the 17th century. 198-9b.

No. 1116. p. 9*. “The manner how the price[280] shall be given at Joustes of peace royall, and for what considercōns it should be forfeited and lost.

First who so breaketh most speeres,” etc. 108b.

p. 11*. “A demonstracōn by John Writh alias Garter, to King Edward the Fourth, touching three Knyghtes of high Almayn wch came to do arms in England, with the instruccōns by them geven unto the saide Gartr and the articles of their feates and enterprise.” 111-3b. The year must have been 1473.

No. 763. p. 16. “The office of a Kinge at Armes. Fyrst as nyghe as he canne he shall take knowledge and kepe recorde of creastes cognissances and auntient used wordes,” etc. 158ab.

No. 837. p. 8. “The definition of an Esquire, and the severall sortes of them according to the custome and usage of England. _An esquire called in Latine armiger_ ...” 162a.

No. 1116. p. 111. The Names and Arms of the Sovereigns and Knights or the Order of the Golden Fleece (Toison d’or), from its institution in 1429 to the twenty-third festival of the Order, which was holden by King Philip of Spain, 12 Aug. 1559; historical accounts of the celebration of the feasts, in French. ff. 137b-186.

The MS. is beautifully written, with the arms tricked (four on each page), by Robert Glover, Somerset Herald.

p. 88. Lists of the Knights, and notes of the celebration of S. George’s feast, in 1589 and 1593, at Westminster. 67a.

p. 89. Lists of Knights, and notes of the celebration of S. George’s feast, in 1584, at Westminster, and 15 Apr. 1585, at Windsor. 67b.

No. 837. p. XXVI. “The Office of ye Marshall.” 198ab.

No. 1127. p. XIII. “The Statutes of the Order of the Golden Fleece” (27 Nov. 1431); and “The Ordinances for the Officers of the Order.” 139-166-167-175b.

FOOTNOTES:

[277] Catalogue by William Henry Black. Oxford. 1845.

[278] Though indexed this item is not in the catalogue.

[279] The Marquis of Northampton and others, 14 on each side.

[280] Prize.

APPENDIX B

HARLEIAN MS. RELATING TO THE TOURNAMENT

CATALOGUE

Vol. Page Cod. Art. I. 17 69 1-3. Tournament held on the marriage of Richard Duke of York, son of Edward IV. I. 17 69 4-5. On the birth of Princess Mary? Daughter of Henry VIII. I. 17 69 6-7. Creation of Henry VIII. I. 17 69 8. Challenge to hold a Justs-Royall and Tourney at Westminster. I. 18 69 13. At Greenwich, _temp._ Henry VIII. I. 18 69 16. Westminster, _temp._ Henry VIII. I. 18 69 24. On the marriage of Prince Arthur. I. 18 69 11. Challenges to tournaments of Philip de Bouton and others. I. 18 69 12. Uladislaus of Bodna and others. I. 18 69 20. Frederick de Toledo and others. I. 18 69 14. Regulations concerning tournaments by Parliament of England. I. 165 293 123-4. By Richard I. I. 18 69 10. Relation (in French) of Battel of Justs held in the city of Tours. I. 18 69 15. Copy of Chapitres of certain Feats of Arms. I. 18 69 18. Declarations and Conditions of Performing Feats of Arms. I. 18 69 19. Chalenge of 6 Noble Persons to the Justs. I. 18 69 21. Form of Proclamation to be made by the King of Arms. I. 18 69 22. Fees appertyning to the Officers of Armes. I. 18 69 23. The Maner ＆ Order of Combating within Lystes. I. 18 69 17. } II. 12 1354 11. _et seq._ } Regulations Concerning } Tournaments. By John } Tiptoft, Earl of Worcester. II. 226 1776 43. } III. 316 6064 80. } III. 215 4888 20. General Challenge of Earls of Lenox, etc.

EXTRACTS

I. 17 69 1-3. 1. The Proclamation, whereby Six Gentlemen challenged all Comers at the Just-Roiall: To Runne in Ostling-Harneis alonge a Tilt: And to strike 13 strokes with Swords; upon the Marriage of Richard Duke of York (son to K. Edward IV.) with Anne Mowbray Daughter to the Duke of Norfolk. After which Proclamation, follow the Articles, ＆ Draughts of the Shields. 1

2. The Challenge of the LadieMaie’s Servants, to all comers, to be performed at Greenwich. To Runne 8 Courses. To shoot Standart Arrowe, or Flight. To strike 8 Strokes with Swords Rebated. To wrestle all manner of Wayes. To Fight on Foot with Speares Rebated, and afterwards to strike 8 Strokes with Swords, with Gripe, or otherwise. To Call the Barre on Foote, and with the Arme; both Heavie and Light. 2b

Vol. Page Cod. Art. I. 17 69 1-3. 3. Here followe the Articles which fower Gentlemen have Enterprised to doe by the Kings Commaundment ＆ for the Pleasure of the Ladyes, which alsoe the Kings Highnes hath Lycenced them to Aunswear to all other, ＆ all other to aunswear to them, according to the same Articles. 3b viz. to Answer all Comers, at the Kings Mannour of Sheene, to run fower Courses.

4-5. 4. Proclamation And Articles of a Tilting to be held at the Palace of Richmond, upon the birth of a young Princess (Mary?). Tempore Henrici VIII. where the 4 Knights Challengers are to Runne 6 Courses. 4b

5. Petition ＆ Articles of 4 Gentlemen Challenging all Comers (to the Lawnde of Greenwich). To the Feate called the Barriers, with the Casting Speare, ＆ the Targett, ＆ with the Bastard-Sword, Point ＆ Edge Rebated. 5b

6-7. 6. Petition ＆ Articles of the Justs-Royall to be held at Westminster, by 4 Gentlemen Challenging all comers, (upon the Creation of Henry second Sonne to King Henry VII). To Run 6 Courses with Speares. To Tourney 18 Strokes with Swords.

7. Petition of 4 Gentlemen to K. Henry VII. to be received into his Royal Army purposed for Fraunce; but first that he would Authorize their Challenge of all Comers to the Tilt, To run 6 Courses; for two days together: which being performed, they will be ready (upon 8 days warning) to answer all comers, in any Realme or Place where the King shall be, for one year and a day longer. 7

8. 8. Challenge of 6 Noble Persons to hold a Justs-Royall ＆ Tourney at Westminster, for the Pleasure of the King, the Queene, and the Princess the Kings Eldest Daughter, where the 6 Challengers ＆ Six Answerers shall together Run against each other with Spears on Horseback; and after the Course Passed, to Fight with Swords till the King commaund them to Cease. 7b

10. 10. Relation (in French) of the Battel of Justs held in the city of Tours, between Jelcan (or Jehan?) Chalons, a Native of the Kingdom of England, ＆ Loys de Beul who took the part of King Charles of France. A.D. 1446. wherein Loys de Beul was killed. 9

I. 18 69 11. 11. Le Chalenge Philip de Bouton, Natif de Pais Burgoigne, premier Esquier a Monsser le Conte de Charollois: qui ait Charge ＆ Esleve Emprise de un Fleuer Penser a tacher a son Bras dextre, lequelle il portra ouverte jusque autant que il defendra Royaulme d’Angelterre, en la Campagnie de son Seigneur Monsieur le Bastard le Burgoigne, comme a la Roche. Dat. 1. may. 1467. 11

12. 12. La Declaracon du Pas a l’Arbe D’Or, i.e. How the Lady L’Isle sent her Knight with a Rich Tree of Gold, for him to sett near Brughes, ＆ there to Challenge the Nobles of the Duke of Burgundies Court both to the Justs, ＆ to the Tourney: the Articles whereof do follow. Dated July ... A.D. 68. i.e. 1468.

Vol. Page Cod. Art. I. 18 69 12. *12. The Relation made by Garter King of Arms to K. Edward IV. concerning the Arrival of 3 Knights of the K. of Hungaries Court, named Uladislaus of Bodna, Fredericus of Waredma, ＆ Lancelagus of Trefulwane, who desired to performe some Feats of Armes with the English Gentlemen. With their Instructions given to the said Garter touching his Declaration of their Desires, ＆ the Articles of the Jousts ＆ Tourney. 14

13. 13. Justs at Greenwich, the 20th daie of Maye, the 8th yeare of the Raigne of our Soveraigne Ld. K. Henry VIII. (with the then usual Notes or Marks of each Persons Performance). 16b.

14. 14. Le Statute d’Armes de Turnoys par le Parlement d’Angleterre (f. temp. H. V.). 17

15. 15. Coppye de Chapitres (ou Articles) des certaine Faits d’Armes, tanta Pied, comme a Cheval, qui par deux Gentilhomes d’Almaigne touchant une certaine Emprise. ibid.

16. 16. The Justinge, Tournay, ＆ Fighting at Barriers, holden at the Palace of Westminster, the 32nd yeare of our Soveraigne Lord K. Henry the VIII. there beguune the firste deye of Maye being Saturdaye, ＆c. 18

17. 17. The Ordinances, Statutes, ＆ Rules, made and Enacted by John (Tiptoft) Earle of Worcester Constable of England, by the Kings Commandment (i.e. Ed. IV.) at Windsor, the 29th daye of Maie, in the 6th yeare of his Noble Raigne. To be Observed and Kept in all manner of Justs of Peace Royal within the Realme of England before his Highness or Liefftenant, by his Commandment or Licence had from this Tyme forth. Reserving always to the Queenes Highnes and the Laydes there present, the Attribution and Gifte of the Prize after the Manner and Forme accustomed. (These Ordinances are illustrated by Pictures.) 20

18. 18. Declaration ＆ Conditions of Performing Feats of Arms before ＆ at a Castle called Loyall, at the Gate whereof a White Unicorne sustained four Shields, The First White, signifying to the Justs; whoso toucheth that, to be answered V Courses at the Tilt. The Second Red, signifying to the Tournaye; who toucheth that, to be answered 12 Strokes with the Sword, Edge ＆ Point Rebated. The Third Yellow, signifying to the Barriers, who toucheth that, to be answered at the Barriers 12 Strokes with one-Hand Sword, the Point and Edge Rebated. The Fourth Blue, signifying to th’ assault, ＆ who toucheth that, to Assault the said Castle with Sword ＆ Targett ＆ Morrice Pike, withe the Edge and Point Rebated. 21b

19. 19. Chalenge of 6 Noble Persons to the Justs, the same as before 8. 22b

20. 20. Challenge of Don Fredericke de Toledo, the Lord Straunge, Don Fernando de Toledo, Don Francifco de Mendoza, ＆ Garfilafe de la Vega, to fight on Foot, at the Barriers, with all Comers. 23b

21. 21. Form of the Proclamation to be made by the King of Arms in the Presence-Chamber, upon the Queen’s distribution of the Prizes, to them who had best Exercised the Feates of Armes at the Tilt Tourney ＆ Barriers. 24b

22. 22. Fees apperteyning to the Officers of Armes, at all thos Triumphs aforesaid. 25

23. 23. The Maner ＆ Order of Combating within Lystes, set downe by Thomas Duke of Gloucester Uncle to King Richard the Second (with Pictures). 26

24. 24. The first Booke of the Justs ＆ Banketts ＆ Disguisings, used at the Intertaynemente of Katherine Wife to Prince Arthur Eldest Sone to K. Henry VII. 29b

The Seconde Book, or Parte of this Discourse, is concerning the death of Prince Arthur, and the order taken for his Exequies.

Vol. Page Cod. Art. I. 165 293 123-4. 123. Hoc ett Breve, Dni Regis Ricardi I. missum Dno Cantuariensi, de concessione Torneamentorum in Anglia. 237

124. Haec est forma Pacis fervandae a Torneatoribus. 237

II. 12 1354 11. 11. The Ordinances, Statutes, ＆ Rules made by Johne Lorde Typtofte, Erle of Worcester, Constable of Englande, by the Kinges Commandment, at Wyndsore the 29th daie of Maye, ann. 6. Edw. IV. to be observed and kepte in all manner Justys Royall;—reserving to the Queene ＆ to the Ladyes present the attribution and gyfte of the Prise, after the manner and forme accustomed to be attributed, for their Demerites. 13

II. 226 1776 43. 43. Ordinances, Statutes, ＆ Rules made ＆ enacted by John (Tiptoft) Earl of Woster ＆ Constable of England, by the Kings commandment, at Windsor, the 6th Yeare of Edward the Fourth; for Justes ＆ Triumphs. 45b

III. 215 4888 20. 20. A general Challenge, at Tilt, Tourney, and Barriers, signed Lenox, Southampton, Pembroke, Mountgumbray, dated 1612. In defence of these Propositions. 1. “That in Service of Ladyes, Knights have no free-will. 2. That it is Beautie maintains the World in valour. 3. That noe fare Ladie was ever false. 4. That none can be perfectlye wife but Lovers.” Addressed, “To all honourable Men at Armes, and Knight Adventurers of hereditarie note, ＆ examplarie noblesse, that for most memorable actions doe wield either Sword or Launce in quest of glorie.”

III. 316 6064 80. 80. The Ordinances, Statutes ＆ Rules made by the E. of Worcester ＆ Constable of England, 6th of Edw. 4. to be observed in all manner of Justes. 86

APPENDIX C

COTTONIAN MSS. IN THE BRITISH MUSEUM RELATING TO THE TOURNEY

Claudius, C IV. 10. Breve R. Richard I ad archiep. Cantuar. missum, de concessione torneamentorum in Anglia. 233. 11. Forma pacis servandae à torneatoribus, et in juramentis. 233.

Nero, D II. 15. De la creacion et foundacion des heraulz (d’armes). 249b. 16. Les droiz et largesses appartenant et d’aunciennete accoustumez aux rois d’armes, selon l’usance du Angleterre. 251b. 18. L’ordonnance de faire joustes et tournois. 253. 19. Les droiz appartenans aux rois d’armes, et heraulx, en leur absence, en fait de joustes à plaisaunce. 245b.

Galba. B VI. 77. A list of great personages, who probably appeared at a tilt. 109.

Vesp. C XIV. 229. Notes relating to tournaments. 553.

Titus. B I. 35. Judges deputed for the field in the joustes between Guisnes and Andres. 127.

Caligula. D VI. 54. Twenty-three original letters from Charles D. of Suffolk, to Henry VIII, all probably between Oct., 1514, and March, 1515. 147.

APPENDIX D

The instructions given by the Emperor Maximilian as to the selection of the subjects for the Plates for _Freydal_. They are set down on Folio 38 of that work. “Hernach volgt in was zäl die Rennen vnd stechen in den Freytal gemacht sollen werden.”

Geschift Rennen. Item der geschift Rennen sollen XI sein, Darunnder III fäl, mit ain ander, Vnnd zwen fäl, das Kaiser besiczt vnnd widerparthey felt, Die vberigen VI Rennen sollen Sy baide besiczen.

Swayf Rennen.[281] Item Swayf Rennen sollen VI sein, Dar vnnder IIII fäl mit ain annder, Vnd II fäl das Kaiser besiczt vnnd widerparthey felt.

Pündt Rennen.[282] Item das pünndt Rennen sollen XII sein, dar vnnder sollen zween fäl sein das der Kaiser besiczt vnnd die Wider-parthey felt, Vnnd die vbrigen X Rennen solln baid besiczen.

Autzogen Rennen. Item Anczogen Rennen sollen XXV sein, Vnnd der Kaiser ist albeg den driten tail besessen, vnd sein wider parthey den II tail gefallen.

Teutsch gestech.[283] Item Es sollen sechs vnnd zwainzig teutscher gestech sein, Die fäl sol Kayserlich Mt noch stymben.

Welsch gestech.[284] Item Es sollen Acht vnd Dreissig Welscher gestech sein, Die fäl solle Kyserlich Mt noch stymben.

Tornier (The Tourney). Item Es sollen sein III Tornier.

Krönl (Krönlrennen). Item Es sollen sein III Rennen, in der gestalt das ainer ain Krönl der annder ainen scharfen Rennspiess hab, Die fäl solle Kay Mt noch stymben.

Velt Rennen.[285] Item Es sollen sein V veldt Rennen Summa der Rennen stechen vnd Tornier CXXVIII.[286]

FOOTNOTES:

[281] Another name for _Scharfrennen_.

[282] _Bundrennen._

[283] German Joust.

[284] Joust at the Tilt.

[285] _Feldrennen._

[286] 129?

APPENDIX E

ASHMOLEAN MSS. RELATING TO JUDICIAL DUELS

DISCOURSES ON LAWFUL COMBATS IN ENGLAND

No. 856. Par. 9. A Discourse “Of the antiquity, use, and ceremony of lawfull combates in England.” 115-125. 12. A Discourse “Of the antiquitie, use, and ceremony of lawfull combates in England, written by Mr. James Whitelock of the Middle Temple.” 149-153. 13. “The antiquity, use, and ceremonyes of lawfull combates in England.” 154-156. 14. “The antiquity, use, and ceremony of lawfull combates in England.” 157-172. “Ex collect’ Guil: Dugdale.”

No. 865. 10*. A treatise of “The wageing of Bataill between two partyes. First. The quarrell and bills of the appellant and defendant must be pleaded in the court.” 58-276. “_The fee of the Constable is the lystes, the barris, and stagis belonginge to the same._ Thus endeth the wageing of battaill before the King.”

1115. 97. Erotulis publicis quaedam annotationes; primo de Militbus Ordinis, et de Windesora; postea de, constabulariis castri Windesorae, de duello, et de insigniis armorum. 225-6b. Extracts by Ashmole, chiefly from the Patent Rolls and Close Rolls, Hen. III-Ric. II.

No. 840. 47. A short extract by Sir W. Dugdale “Out of a discourse in French concerning the antient manner of Combates.” 211.

764. 7. “De la droite ordonnance du Gaige de Bataille par tout le royaume de France. Phelipe _par la grace de Dieu Roy de France a touz ceulx qui ces presentes lettres verront salut_.” This letter of King Philip IV, written in 1306, limits the practice of wager of battle, and is prefixed toregulations for the whole course of combat. 44-54ᵇ.

856. Order in England, temp. Ric. II. 4*. A book “Of the manner and order of combating within the listes, delivered by Thomas Duke of Gloucester unto King Richard the second.” 83-89. Transcribed “Ex MS. in Bibl’ Hatton,” _with the listes_, scaffold, and tymber used at the 83-89. said battaile. Compare Art. 23. 16. “The manner of Donnald Ld Rey, and David Ramsey esq. their comeing and carriage at their tryall, upon monday, the 28 of November 1631, before the Ld of Lynsey, Lord High Constable of England, and others.” This is a very full report of the trial. 175-227.

824. V. Another account of the same. 34-46ᵇ.

856. Treatise, temp. Hen. VI.

22. “Loo my leve lordes, here now next folowing is a Traytese, compyled by Johan Hill, armorier and sergeant in the office of Armorye wt kynges Henry ye 4th and Henry ye 5th, of ye poyntes of Worship in Armes that longeth to a Gentilman in Armes, and how he shall be diversly armed and gouverned, under supportacion and favour of alle ye reders to correcte adde and amenuse where nede is, by the high commaundment of the princes that have powair soo for to ordeyne and establisshe. _The first honneur in armes is a gentilman to fight in his souverian lords quarell in a bataille of treason._” 376-383. A.D. 1434.

23. “And here next foloweth the maner and fourme of makyng of the thre Oothes that every appellant and defendant owe to make openly in the feelde before the Kyng and the Conestable and Mareschal, the same day that they shal do thair armes, both in Frensshe and in Englisshe; compyled and abstracte oute of a notable Traityes made of the rieule and gouvernance of the feelde in armes, by Thomas of Wodestoke sumtyme Conestable of Englande and uncle to Kyng Richard (the second), to whom he presented the saide traities, submitting it to his noblesse to correct, adde, and amenuse as his highnes best liked.” 383-391.

“_La fee du Mareshal est les listes, les barrers, et les estages dycelles etc._”

6*. “The Earle Marshall’s order in the quarrell betwixt Anthony Felton and Edmond Withepole esquires, xxiij May 1598.” 105-107.

7. “The manner of the challendge made by the Earle of Northumberland against Sir Francis Yeare,” both by letter dated 24 Apr., 1602, and by inter-messages, until forbidden by the Queen’s commandment. 107-111. “Ex MS. in Bibl’ Hatton.”

8*. A statement of “The French King’s edict constitutinge duellos to be punished in the nature of treason, within his dominions.” 112-14.

9. A Discourse “Of the antiquity, use, and ceremony of lawfull combates in England.” 115-125. “Ex. MS. in Bibl’ Hatton.”

10. “Duello foild. The whole proceedings in the orderly disolveing of a designe for single fight betweene two valient gentlemen; by occasion whereof the unlawfulnesse of a duello is preparatorily disputed, according to the rules of honour and right reason; written by Lord Henry Howard Earle of Northampton.” 126-145.

11. “A Discourse touching the unlawfulness of private combates, written by Sr Edward Cooke Lord Chiefe Justice of England, at the request of the Lord Henry Howard Earle of Northampton.” (3 Oct., 1609). 146-8. “Ex. MS. in Bibl’ Hatton.”

15. His Maᵗˢ: declaration against duells, published at his Maᵗˢ: chappell at Bruxells upon sonday the 24th of November 1658. 172.

APPENDIX F

HARLEIAN MSS. CATALOGUE OF DOCUMENTS RELATING TO JUDICIAL DUELS

Vol. Page Cod. Art. I. 249 424 13. } I. 492 980 134. } III. 122 4176 2 _et_ 4 } Treatises on Duels. _et seq._ } III. 332 6149 19. } I. 490 980 36. Instances of Trial by Duel. III. 319 6069 60-67. } III. 505 7021 22. } Tracts on Single Combats. I. 490 980 46. Instances of Trial. III. 322 6079 36. Between Dukes of Hereford and Norfolk. III. 370 6495 1. Mr. Dan, Archdeacon and Francis Mowbray. III. 122 4176 2. James Whitlock. Discourses on Combats in England.

EXTRACTS I. 249 424 13. The Way of Duells before the King; with the Office of the Constable and Earl-Marshal, ＆c. upon such occasions. 42 I. 490 980 36. Instances of Trials in England by Ordeal ＆ Duel. ibid. I. 491 980 46. What happened to Sir Nicholas de Segrave, anno. 32 Edw. I. who being accused of Treason, offered to justifie himself by Duel; and afterward went over the Sea (without License) to fight with his enemy. ibid. I. 492 980 134. Of legal duels, or Combats. 128 III. 122 4176 2. Of the antiquity, use and ceremony of Combats in England: by James Whitlock, ＆c. 12 III. 122 4176 4. Concerning Duells in Spaine. 37 III. 319 6069 66. Du Combat appelle Buhort. 113 III. 319 6069 67. Du Combat appelle Bas ou Barriers. ib. III. 322 6079 36. A Combat between D. of Hereford ＆ Tho. Mowbray first D. of Norfolk, ＆ Marshal of England. 29 III. 332 6149 19. De Duellis. 164b III. 370 6495 1. A Tract with this title, “A tru report of sundry memorable Accidents befalling Mr. Daniel Archdeacon, before and after the Combat appointed betweene him ＆ Francis Moubray. Written first in French, by a faythfull frynd of Mr. Daniel Archdeacon, and sent to another frynd of theirs, and since translated in English by a faythfull frynd to him ＆ to that honest cause.” 26 leaves. At the end are some Anagrams ＆ Acrostics in French, on the name of Daniel Archdeacon and a table of the contents of the tract.

III. 505 7021 22. A Catalogue of such Combats as have been anciently granted by the Kings of England.

APPENDIX G

COTTONIAN MSS. RELATING TO JUDICIAL DUELS

Nero. D II. 17. La form et maniére comment l’appellant et defendant doivent plaider devant le conestable et mareschal. 252

Vesp. C XIV. 234. The manner how the defendants do answer the Prince’s highness challenge; being a list of names. 568 235. Of Combats in Mr. Garter’s house. May 23, 1601. (a draught) 569 236. The Ordinances that belong in gayging of battayle, made by quarrell, after the constitutions made by King Philip of France. 570

Faust. E V. 2. Of single Combats. 4

Tiberius. E VIII. 14. Modus faciendi duellum coram rege (Gallice). 50b The same under Nero. D VI. 82

Vitel. C IV. 10. De certamine singulari coram constabulario et marescallo Angliae (Gallice). 129 11. De officio Marescalli (Lat. et Gal.). 132b

Titus. C I. 25. B. A collection of papers on duels, i.e. lawful combats. 26. A brief historical dissertation on duels; by R. Cotton. 1609. 201 27. Seven tracts on the antiquity, use and ceremony of lawful combats in England; by Davies, Whitlock, Holland, Agard and others. 205 28. A challenge for a duel between Henry Inglose, Esq.; and Sir John Tiptoft, Knt, to be fought before the Duke of Bedford, high constable. (Fr.) 1415. 229 29. Five writs relating to combats before the constable and marshal. 230 30. A list of patents relating to the office of marshal; from 27 Edw. III. to Henry VI. 232 31. Ten original instruments, being chiefly royal mandates of Henry VI. several of them signed by him; concerning lists and combats. 234 32. Notes of certain turns to be put in form, and then to be concluded by the whole council, touching the regulation of duels: in the hand-writing of K. James I. 238b 33. A treatise on duels, in two books. 239 34. A collection of notes, papers, ＆c., on duels (chiefly French). 346 35. What manner of duels they use in Italy, and why they hold it not fit to answer a challenge. (Ital.) 370b 36. Forme di pace fatte da diversi; being compromises of quarrels. 374 37. “Duello foiled,” being a treatise in which the lawfulness of duels is disputed according to the rules of honour and right reason. 393 38. Two papers on measures taken against duels. 402 39. Of a lye; how it ought to be dealt in by an E. marshal. 404 40. Notes on the laws in Spain for preventing single combats. 407 41. Note out of the D. of Bullion’s discourse touching the lye and the blow. 408 42. Three questions proposed to the count d’Angoseiola (banished from Palma and living in Savoy) in matters of duel. (Italian.) 409 43. Placcart des Archiducs contre les defies et duels (printed). Bruxelles. 1610. 413 44. A paper concerning laws against duels. 416 48. De la droit ordannance du gaige de battaille, partout le Royaume de France. 434

APPENDIX H

Letter from Thomas Duke of Gloucester and Constable of England to King Richard II concerning the Manner of conducting Judicial Duels.

In firste the quarelis and the billis of the appellaunt and of the defendaunt schal be pletid in the courte.before the constable and marchall. And when they may not prove ther cause by witnesse.nor bi non other manner but detrmine ther quarell bi strengthe.the ton for to prove his entent up on the tother. And the tother in the same manner for to defende him. The constable hath power for to ioyne that batayle as vecarie genrall undir god ＆ the kynge and the bataile conioynt by the Constable.he schal assigne them day and place.so that the day be not within xl.dayes after the saide batell soo conioynt.but yf it be bi the consentinge of the seyde appellaunt and defendaunt. Than he schall awarde them.poyntes of armes.other wise callid wepenes.ayther of them schal have.that is to say.longe swerde schorte swerde and dagger.so that the appellant and defendaunt.fynde sufficianunt surete ＆ plegges that echou of them schal come at his seyde day.the appellaunt for to doo his power up on the defendaunt.and the defendaunt in his defence up on the appellaunt. And this to be done.schall be gevyn un to the appellaunt hour terme and soon.for to make his preve and der (sic) and for to bethe firste within the listes. for to quite his plegges. And of the same wise of the defendaunt. And noon of hem schall do hevinesse.ille harme awaite assaute.nor non other grevaunce.nor ennye bi them nor bi non of ther frendes welwillinge.nor bi non other who soo ever it be. The kynge schal fynde the felde.for to feght in. And the (f. 125b) listes schal be made and devisid by the constable. And it is to be considerid that the listes schal be.lx.pases of lengthe and xl.paces of brede in good manner.and that the erthe be ferme stable and harde.and even made, without grete stones and that the erthe be plat.and that the listes be strongli barred rounde aboute and a gate in the este and a nother in the weste with good and stronge barrers of vij.foote of heyght or more. And it is to wite that ther schulde be faux listes withouten the principal listes betwene the whiche the men of the constable and the marchall and s’gauntes of armes of the kynges schulde be for to kepe and defend yf any wolde make any offence or fray azens the cries made in the courte in any thinge that myght be agayns the kynges Roiall mageste or lawe of armes and these men schulde be armed at all poyntes. The Constable schal have there as many men of armes as he will and the marchall also bi the assignacion of the Constable and ellis not the whiche men schal have the kepynge as is seyde. The s’gauntes of armes of the kynge schal have the keping of gates of the listes and the arestinges yf any schal be made bi the comaudemt of the seyde Constable and Marchall. The day of bataile the kynge schal be in a sege or in a shaffold on heght and a place schal be made for the Constable and marchall at the stayre foot of the seyde shaffold there where thei schal be. And than schal be axed the plegges of the appellaunt and defendaunt for to come in to the listes afore the kynge and present in the courte as prisioners un to the appellaunt and defendaunt be come in the listes and have made ther othes. When the ap (f. 126) pellaunt cometh to his iorney he schale come to the gate of the listes in the Este in such manner as he will feght with his armes and wepenis assignid to him bi the courte and ther he schal abide til he be led in bi the Constable so that when he is comen to the seyde gate the Constable and marchall schal goo thedir. And the Constable schal axe him what man he is whiche is comen armed to the gate of the listes. And what name he hathe and for what cause he is comen. And the appellaunt schal answere I am suche aman. A. de. K. the appellaunt the whiche is come to this iorney ＆c for to doo ＆c. And than the Constable schal open the viser of his basinet soo that he may playnli see his visage and if it be the same man that is the appellaunt than schal he make open the gates of the listes and schal make him entre with his seyde armes poyntes vitailes and other leuefull necessaries up on him and also his counsell with him and than he schal lede him afore the kynge and than to his tente where he schal abide til the defendaunt be comen. In the same manner schal be done of the defendaunt but that he schal entre in at the weste gate of the listes. The Constable clerk schal write and sette in the regestre the comyge and the houre of the entringe of the appellaunt and how that he entreth the listes on fote and also the harnyes of the appellaunt how that he is armed and with how many wepenis he entreth the listes and what vitailes and other leueful necessaries he bringeth in with him. In the same manner schal be don to the defendaunt. Also the Constable schal mak take hede that non other before ne behinde the appellaunt (f. 126b) nor the defendaunt brynge more wepin nor vitailes other then were assignid bi the courte. And yf it be soo that the defendaunt come not be time to his iorney and at the oure and terme limit bi the courte the Constable schal comaunde the marchall for to make calle him at the four corners of the listes the whiche schal be done in manner as it foloweth. Oyes. Oyez. Oyez. C. de. B. defendaunt come to yowre Jorney whiche ye have undirtake at this day for to aquite yowre plegges before the kinge the constable and marchall in yowre defence agayns. A. de K. appellaunt of that that he hathe put up on yow. And yf he come not be time he schal be callid the secunde time in the same manner and at the ende he schal say come the day passeth faste and yf he come not at that time he schal be callid the thridde time. But that this be betwixe hye tierce and none. In the same manner as before and at the ende he schal say the day passeth faste and the oure of none is nye soo that ye come bi the seyde oure of none at farrest in pitt that may come. But how soo ever the Constable hathe yevy oure and terme un to the defendaunt for to come to his Jorney never the lesse yf that he tarie un to the oure of none the Jugement schulde not bi right goo agayns him whethir it be in cas of treson or not. But soo is it not of the appellaunt for he muste holde the houre and time limitid bi the courte withoute any plonginge or excusacon what soo ever be it in cause of treson. The appellaunt and the defendaunt entrede in the (f. 127) listes with ther armoure wepenes vitailes and leuefull necessaries and counsell as is seyde and as thei are assigned bi the courte. The Constable schal wete the kinges wille yf he wil assigne any of his noble lordes or knyghtes of worschipe un to the sayde pties and yf he wil that the othes be made afore him or afore the Constable and marchal. And the appellaunt and defendaunt schal be serchid bi the Constable and marchall of there poyntes of armes otherwise callid wepenis that they be vowable without any man disseyte on them and yf thei be other than reson axeth they schal be taken away ffor reson good feythe and lawe of arms wil not suffre no gile nor dissayte in soo gret a dede. And it is to wite that the appellaunt and defendaunt may be armed as sewrely upon ther bodies as they will. And than the Constable schal sende firste after the marchall and than for the appellaunt with his counsell for to make his othe. The Constable schal axe him yf he wil any more protest and that he putte forthe all his ptestacions bi writinge for fro that time forthe he schal make no ptestacion. The constable schal have his clerke redy in his presence that schal ley forthe a masse book open. And than the Constable schal make his seyde clerke rede the bille of the appellaunt enterly on heyght and the bille redde the constable schal say to the appellaunt A. de K. thou knowest wel this bille and this warant and wedd’ that thou gave in oure courte thou schal lay thi right honde here up on these seyntes and schal swere in maner as foloweth (f. 127b). Thou. A.de.K. this thi bille is sothe in all poyntes and articles fro the beginyge contenynge theirn to the ende and that is thine entente to preve this day on the forsayde. C.de.B. so god the helpe and theise halowes and this othe made he schal be led agayne to his place. The constable schal make the marchal calle the defendaunt and soo schal be done to the defendaunt in the same manner as to the appellaunt. And than the Constable schal make calle bi the marchall the appellaunt agayne and schal make him leye his honde as he did afore up on the masse book and schal say. A.de.K. thou swerest that thou ne haste ne schalt have mo poyntes ne poyntes on the ne on thi bodi within these listes but thei that ben assignid bi the courte that is to say. a longe swerde schorte swerde and dagger nor non other knyf litill nor mekill ne non other instrument ne engyn of poynte ne other wise ne stone of vrtu ne herbe of vrtu ne charme ne expirmet ne karecte no non other inchauntemt bi the ne for the bi the whiche thou tristest the better to overcome the forseyde. C.de.B. thin advsarie that schal come ayens the with in these listes this day in his defence. Ne that thou ne trustest in non other thinge but onli in god and thi body and on thi rightful quarell so helpe the god and these halowes and the othe made he schal be led agayne to his place. In the same wise schal be done to the defendaunt. The whiche othes made and ther chambirleyns and srvauntes put a way. the Constable schal make calle bi the marchall the appellaunt and the defendaunt also the whiche schal be ledde (f. 128) and kepte bi the men of the Constable and marchall before them and the Constable schal say to bothe the pties. Thou A.de.K. appellour schal take. C.de.B. defendoure bi the rigt honde and he the. And we defende yow and echone of yow in the kinges name and up on the pill that longeth therto and up on pill of lesinge yowre quarell the whiche that is founden in defaute that non of yow be so hardy to doo to other ille ne grevauce thirstinge nor other harme bi the honde up on the pill afore sayde and this charge gevy. the Constable schal make yeve ther right hondis to gedir and ther lifte hondes up on the missale sayinge to the appeloure. A.de.K. appelloure thou swerest bi the feythe that thou yevest in the honde of thine advsarie. C.de.B. defondoure and bi all the halowe that thou toucheste with thi lifte honde that thou to-day this day schal doo all thi trewe power and entente bi all the weyes that thou beste may or kanste to preve thine entente on. C.de.B. thine advsarie and defendoure to make him yelden him up to thine honde and creant to crie or speke or ellis make him die bi thine honde to fore that thou wende oute of these listes bi the tyme and the sunne that the is assignid bi this courte bi thi feythe and soo helpe the god and these halowes. C. de. B. defendoure thou swerest bi thi feythe that thou yevest in the honde of thine advsarie A.de.K. appelloure and bi all the halowes that thou touchest with thi lifte honde that to day this day thou schall doo all thi trewe power and entente bi all the weyes that thou beste may or kanste to defende thine entente of all that (f. 128b) that is put on the bi. A.de.K. thin advsarie appelloure bi the feythe and soo helpe the god and all these halowes. And than the Constable schall comaunde the marchall for to crie at the foure corners of the listes in manner as foloweth. Oyez. Oyez. Oyez. We charge and comaunde bi the kynges Constable and marschall that non of gret valew ＆ of litill estate of what condicion or nacion that he be. be so hardy hens forewarde for to come negh the listes bi foure foote nor to speke nor to crie nor to make contenance nor token nor semblaunce nor noyse where bi nouther of these two prties. A.de.K. appellor ＆. C.de.B. defendour may take avauntage the ton up on the tother up on pill of lesinge lyf and membre and ther goodes at the kinges wille. And after the Constable and marchall schal avoyde all manner of pepill oute of the listes except their luftenauntz and two knyghtes for the Constable and marchall whiche schal be armed up on there bodies but they schal have nother knyf nor swerde up on them nor non other wepenes wherbi the appellaunt other the defendaunt may have therof any avauntage bi negligence of kepinge of them. But the two luftenauntz of the Constable and marchall schal have in there handes outher a spere wtoute yren for to depte them yf the kinge will make them abide in ther feghtinge whether it be to reste them or other thinge what som ever him liketh. And it is to be knowen that if yf any adminstracion schulde be made to the appellaunt or to the defendaunt of mete or of drinke or any other necessarie thinge leeful after (f. 129) that the counsell of frendes and s’vauntz ben put away of the appellaunt and of the defendaunt as is seyde the seyde adminstracion apteneth to the herawdes and also all the cries made in the seyde courte the whiche kingsz heraudes and pursevauntes schal have a place for the assignid bi the Constable and marchall as nye the listes as may goodli be soo that they may see all the dede ＆ to be redy yf thei be callid for to doo any thinge. The appellaunt in his place kepte bi som men assignid by the Constable or marchall ＆ the defendaunt in his place in the same wise. Bothe two made redy and arayed ＆ with feleschipe bi ther kepers above sayde the marchall with the ton ptie ＆ the levetenant of the Constable with the tother. The Constable sittinge in his place above sayde afore the kinge as his viker genrall and pties made redy for the feghte as is sayde bi the comaundement of the kinge. The constable schal say with hye voyce as foloweth. lessiez lez aler. that is to say lat them goo and reste a while. lessiez lez aler and reste a nother while. lessiez lez aler ＆ fair leur devoir depdieu. that is to say lat them goo and doo ther devour in goddes name. And this seyde eche man schal depte fro bothe pties soo that they may incountre ＆ doo that them semeth beste. The appellaunt ne the defendaunt may nouther ete nor drinke fro that time forthe withoute leve ＆ licence of the kinge for thinge that myght falle but yf thei wol do it bi the consentinge betwixe them. Fro this time forthe it is to be considered diligentli bi the constable that yf the kinge will make the pties feghtinge depte reste or abide (f. 129b) for wham som ever cause it be that he take good kepe how thei are deptid so that thei be in the same estate and degre in all thinges yf the kinge wil sure or make them goo to gedir agayne and also that he have good harkeninge and syghte un to them yf outher speke to other be it of yeldinge or other wise for un to him longeth the witnesse and the recorde of the wordes fro that time forthe ＆ to non other. And yf the seyde batell of treson he that is convicte ＆ discomfit schal be disarmed in the listes bi the comaundement of the Constable and a corner of the listes broken in the reprove of him bi the whiche schal be drawen oute with hors fro the same place there he is soo disarmed thorow the listis un to the place of iustice where he schal be hedid or hongid after the usage of the cuntre the whiche thinge apenteth to the marchall and to ovrsee and to pforme his seyde office and to put him in execucion and to goo or ride and to be alwey bi him til it be done and all pformed and aswel of the appellaunt as of the defendaunt for good feythe and right and lawe of armes will that the appellaunt renne in the same peyne that the defendaunt schulde doo if he were covicte and discomfit. And yf it happen soo that the kinge wolde take the quarell in his hande and make them acordid withoute more feghtinge. Than the Constable takinge the ton ptie and the marchall the tother and lede them afore the kinge and he schewinge them his wille the seedy Constable and marchall schal lede them to the on ptie of the listes with all there pointz and armor as thei are founden and havyge when the (f. 130) kynge took the quarell in his honde as is seyde. And soo they schal be led oute of the gate of the listes evenly so that the ton goo not afore the tother bi no wey in noo thinge for senne the hath taken the quarell in his hande it schulde be dishonest that outher of the pties schulde have mor disworschipe than the tother. Wherfore it hath ben seyde bi many aunciaunt men that hee that gooth first oute of the listes hath the disworschipe and this is aswel in cause of treson as in other cause what soo ever it be. The fee of the herawdes is all the poyntes ＆ armor brokin theis pt he taketh away or leveth after that he is entrid the listes aswel of the appellaunt as of the defendaunt and all the poyntes and armor of him that is discomfit be it the appellaunt other the defendaunt. The fee of the marchall is the listes the Barrers and the postes of them.

INDEX

A “Abilment for Justus of the Pees,” 67, 68 Accidents in the lists, 11 Additional or reinforcing pieces, 40 Ameliorations in the tourney, 39 _Antiquarian Repertory_, 44, 48 _Anzogenrennen_, 100, 114 _A Outrance_, The term, 9 _Archæologia_, 69 _Archæological Journal_, 69, 102 _Armatura Spigolata_, 108 Armet with disk behind, 83 _Armorial de la Toison d’Or_, 44, 143 _Armouries of the Tower of London_, by Charles J. ffoulkes, 91 Armour of the Black Prince, 29 — imported from Germany, 38 — for the lists, 38, 40 — German and Italian forms, 38, 40 — worn by Maximilian I. at Worms in 1495, 39 — for running with pointed lances (_Scharfrennen_), 40, 98, 99 — for combats on foot, 41, 105 — bards and trappers of the fifteenth century, 45, 65 — imported from Italy and Germany, 107 — made in England, 107 Armyng points, 69 “Armyng” swords, 114 Articles of combat for the tournament at Westminster in 1511, 118 Ashmolean MSS., 44; “Certain Triumphs,” 81 Attaints made at the tournament at Westminster in 1511, 120

B Bards, 22, 108, 109 “Barriers” and foot combats, 41, 54, 86, 105, 117, 122, 124, 131, 133 “Barriers and Foot Combats,” a paper by Viscount Dillon, 126 Bases, 108, 116 Bâton of illegitimacy, 86 Bayard, 111 Bayard’s fight at “barriers,” 111 Beauchamp pageants, 45 Bec de faucon, 54 Behourd, The, 2 Bertrand du Guesclin, 28 Bibliothèque de Bourgogne, 44 Bisague, 69 Blending of the tournament with the pageant, 41, 78 Boeheim Wendelin, 85; _His Waffenkunde_, 42 Boucicaut, 32 Brantôme, 166 Brasses, 10, 65 Breastplates for _rennen_ and _stechen_, 95 Bulk of the armour of the sixteenth century made in Germany, 86 Bulls against tournaments, 11 _Bundrennen_, 100, 104 Burgmaier Hans, 89, 104 Burgonet, 106 Burres, 69

C Cap of Maintenance, The, 37 Carrousels or Karoussels, 85, 107 Carter’s _Painting and Sculpture_, 23 Casualties at tournaments, 115 Caxton’s Epilogue, 82 — reference to the Royal Joust at London in 1390, 35 Cervillière, 37 Chain-mail, 21 Challenges for the _pas d’armes_ L’Arbre de Charlemagne in 1443, 59 Challenge by an esquire of Arragon in 1400, 49 Chamfron, The, 74, 109 _Chapitres d’Armes_, 9, 48, 57, 58, 114, 122 Chargers for the tourney and their equipment, 43 — often ridden blindfolded, 43 Charles the Bold, 43, 81, 88 Charles V, the Emperor, 88 Chastelain’s _Chroniques, Jacques de Lalain_, 44 Chaucer’s _Knight’s Tale_, 27 “Checques” or scoring tablets, 120 Chroniclers of the Tournament, 9 — Mediæval Latin, 9 Chronicle of Robert of Gloucester, 11 _Chronique de Monstrelet_, 44 _Chroniques de St. Remy_, 102 Collar of SS, 55, 66 Collections of Armour, 84 Colombière’s _Theater d’Honneur et de Chevalrie_, 153 Combat _à outrance_ near Vannes, 30 — on horseback at Arras in 1425, 53 — between three Portuguese and three Frenchmen in 1415, 53 Combat at Arras between five Frenchmen and five Burgundians, 55 — _à outrance_ between de Ternant and Galiot de Baltasin in 1446, 109 Combats on foot, 105 Commines, P. de, 80 “Comyng in to the felde,” 67, 70 _Consilium Albiense_, 2 Coronal of the lance, 15, 69 Cost of jousting harnesses in the sixteenth century, 91 _Coup ou la lance des Dames_, 15 _Coup de Jarnac_, 165 _Course au pavois_, 100 Course of _Gestech_, run at Jena in 1487, 84 — _à la targe futée_, 99 — _à la queue_, 27 — _appelée Bund_, 100 Crests, 36, 37, 42 Crinet, 109 Crowds attending tournaments apt to become partisans, 12 Cuirass employed in _Rennen_, 98 Cushion or mattress placed on horse’s chest in jousting, 93 Cuisses, 70 Cyclas, 21

D Dagworth, Sir Nicholas, 28 — brass in Blickling Church, 28 Death of Duke Philippe le Bon in 1467, 77 Decline of the tournament, 85 Decline of armour and its causes, 138 Decoration of lists _temp._ Henry VIII, 116 Deeds of Arms at Bordeaux in 1389, 32 — — — in 1402, 51 — — — at Valentia in 1403, 51 Definition of Esquires and Kings of Arms, 63 Definition of _Scharfrennen_, 97 Degradation of a Knight, 124 De La Marche, 73 Demi-harnesses, 109 De Pluvinal, 85 Differences in costume between knights and esquires, 65 Dillon, Viscount, 63, 68, 85, 105, 108 Disorderly tournament at Rochester in 1251, 16 Duel at Montereau in 1387, 30 — between the Dukes of Brittany and Bourbon, 46 — between the Bastard of Burgundy and Lord Scales in 1467, 76 Dugdale, Sir William, 148 _Dülgen_ or _Dilgen_ (Dichlinge) jousting-cuisses, 64, 98 Duke of Orleans challenges Henry IV of England, 51 Duties of “pursuivants d’armes,” 129

E Edicts issued against tournaments, 11, 13 Effigies, 10, 20, 21 Effigy in St. Bride’s Church, Glamorganshire, 37 — Hoveringham Church, 65 — of Sir Richard Beauchamp, 66 Eglington Tournament in 1839, 139-142 _Ehrenpforte_, 89 English iron found unsuitable for armour making, 107 Enriched armour, 67, 109 Espinette, The, 36 _Excerpta Historica_, 82 Expression, The, “trapped and barded” defined, 109

F Fatal accident in jousting to the Earl of Pembroke in 1390, 37 — — — — Henri II of France, 104, 126 Favine’s _Theatre of Honour and Knighthood_, 2, 6, 152 Feats of Arms at Entença, 31 — — Edinburgh in 1448, 64 — — near St. Omer in 1446, 71 — — at Bruges in 1446, 72 — — at Arras in 1446, 73 Fees to officers of arms, 135 _Feldrennen_, 101 _Feldturnier_, 101 Fêtes d’armes at St. Ingelbert in 1389, 5 — at Paris in 1559, 104, 125 — at Bruges in 1468, 78 Fêtes de l’Arbre d’Or in 1468, 79 ffoulkes, Chas. J., 91 Field of the Cloth of Gold, 122 Fifteenth Century, The, 38 Fight on foot between John Astley and Philip Boyle of Arragon, 67 Fine “hoasting” harness of the middle of the sixteenth century at Berlin, 109 First joust of the Comte de Charolais at Brussels in 1452, 74 First coming into the tiltyard of Prince Charles of Wales in 1619, 134 Fitzstephen, William, 9, 10 Fourteenth century a period of transition, 23 _Freiturnier_, 106 French King’s ordinance in 1409, 49 Friedrich of Saxony running in _Gestech_, 97 _Freydal_, 87, 88, 94, 97, 100, 101, 103, 105 Froissart, 23, 44, 155 _Fussturnier_, 106

G Garde-rein, 95 Garter, Institution of the Order of the, 4 _Gedritts_, A, 99 _Gemeine deutsche Gestech_, 93, 94, 104 Germany captures the trade in armour from Milan, 38 _Geschiftrennen_, 99 _Geschifttartscherennen_, 100, 104 _Geschiftscheibenrennen_, 100, 105 _Gestech_ or _Stechen_, 93 _Gestech im Beinharnisch_, 93, 97, 104 _Gestech im hohen zeug_, 93 _Gestech_ ran at Leipzig in 1489, 96 Glossarium, Du Cange, 1 Göding, Heinrich, 89 Gothic armour, 65 Gothic armour of the connoisseur, 66, 108 Grand Assize, The, 147 Grand-guard, 63 Grand tournament at Brussels in 1428, 54 Grapers, 69 Great armour-smiths of the fifteenth century, 66 Great armour-smiths’ families, 38 Great wardrobe of Edward III, 26 Great jousting-helm, 94 Greaves, 70 Grelots, 103 Gunpowder and early ordnance, 23 Gurlitt, 85, 106

H _Hach d’armes_, 62 Haenel, Professor, 85, 89 _Halbierung_, 101 Hall’s _Chronicle_, 85, 116 — florid account of the tournament at Westminster in 1511, 119 Hammer-headed axes, 74 Hardyng’s _Chronicle_, 18 Harness for the tourney became sharply divided from “hoasting” armour, 40 Harnesses in Paris and London, for _Gestech_, 94 — at Nuremburg, for _Gestech_, 96 — for _Freiturnier_, 106 — for _Fussturnier_, 106 — for _Realgestech_, 106 Hastiludia, or spear-play, 2 Hastilude at Lincoln, 26 Hefner’s _Trachten_, 23 Helm for _Kolbenturnier_, 41 Helmet for foot-fighting, 67 Henry VIII imports German armour-smiths, 107 Henry VIII and Maximilian I take great delight in the tourney, 115 Henry VIII a successful jouster, 124 Heraldic bearings, 22 Hewitt’s _Ancient Armour_, etc., 36, 45, 69, 154 _History of the Life and Acts of Richard Beauchamp, Earl of Warwick_, by John Rouse, 45 _Histoire Des Ducs De Bourgogne_, 53 “Hoasting” armour, 107 _Hohenzeuggestech_, 93, 94, 104 Holinshed’s _Chronicles_, 25, 85, 116 _Horda Angel-Cynnan_, 52 Horses charged at an amble in jousting, 94 Horse’s collar of bells, 96 “How a man schall be armyd at his ese when he schal fighte on foote,” 71 “How lances shall be broken,” 80

I Illuminations in Chronicles, 10 — of jousting at the tilt, 67 — depicting the arming of a man for a combat on foot, 70 Illustrations of _Geschifttartscherennen_ and _Geschiftscheibenrennen_, 100 — —_Anzogenrennen_, 100 — — _Krönlrennen_, 100 — — tournaments of the sixteenth century, 67 Influence of the tournament, 138

J Jambers, 108 Jean de Féore de St. Remy, 45 Jocelin of Brakelond, 12, 16 John Astley’s fight on foot with Phillippe Boyle of Arragon in 1442, 56 Joust, The: William of Malmesbury’s definition, 3 Joust at the tilt: its origin and salient features, 102 — Cuirass employed, 103 Jousting armour at Dresden, 84 — exploits of Richard Beauchamp, Earl of Warwick, 52 — helm, 93 — shield, 64, 96 — salade, 98 — cuisse, 98 — lances, 41 — in the open, 39 — traditions of Burgundy transferred to Germany and Austria, 81 — played a great part in the daily routine of the German Courts, 42 Jousts of courtesy with pointed lances, 97 — — Peace, 9 — — War, 9 — at Blei in 1256, 17 — of the early part of the fourteenth century, 23 Jousts pictured in _Codex Balduini Treverencis_, 25 Joust at Cheapside in 1330, 25; at Dunstable in 1341, 25; those held in 1347, 26; at Northampton, Dunstable, Canterbury, Bury, Reading, and Eltham, 26; at Rennes in 1357, 28; jousts held in honour of the marriage of Charles VI of France, 31; jousting in Scotland in 1398, 37; at the coronation of Queen Jane, 52; jousting at the tilt at Dijon in 1443, 59; at Tours in 1446, 61; at Ghent in 1445, 62; between John Astley and Philip Boyle, 67; between John Astley and Pierre de Masse, 1438, 68; jousts and pageants at Lille in 1453, 75; jousting at Paris in 1468, 81; “iust roial” at the marriage of Richard Duke of York, 81; joust at the tilt between William IV of Bavaria and the Pfalzgraf Friedrich of the Rhine in 1510, 103; joust at Paris in 1513, 114; at Naumburg in 1505, 114; at Lille in 1513, 114; jousts at the tilt in honour of the coronation of Henry VIII, 116; at Richmond in 1510, 117; at Greenwich in 1513, 120; at Greenwich in 1517, 121; jousting at the Field of the Cloth of Gold, 122; jousting at Greenwich in 1536, 124; jousts and barriers held in 1558, 125; jousts at Westminster in 1581, 131. _Joûte Allemand_, 93 _Joûte au harnois de jambe_, 93 _Joûte à la haute barde_, 93 _Joûtes à outrance_, 9 Judicial combats properly classed with the tournament, 8 — Duel, The, 145 — — _temp._ Richard II, 154; at Paris 1386, 155; between Dukes of Hereford and Norfolk, 156; between men and their wives, 158; with spiked clubs, 159; duel at Arras in 1431, 161; at Quesnoy in 1405, 161; at Smithfield in 1446, 163; duel compounded in 1446, 162; duel at Valenciennes in 1455, 163; in France in 1547, 165; at Haddington in 1548, 165. — duels became rare _temp._ Queen Elizabeth, 166 — duel of the knightly order in 1603, 167 — — ordered in 1571, 167; and in 1817 Jupon, 28 _Justes mortelles_, 97 Juvenal des Ursins, 31, 155

K _Kampfschurz_, 105 “Kerchief of Plasaunce,” 27 King Philippe Augustus sends a challenge to King Richard I, 13 King Edward III invades France, 26 King Henri IV challenges Mayenne to single combat, 127 King René’s writings illustrated by himself, 46 “Kinges of Armes and Hauraldes,” 131 Kings of Arms, 16 Knight-errantry, 11 Knightly panoply of the thirteenth century, 21 Knightly armour of late in the thirteenth century, 28 _Kolbenturnier_, 41, 94 _Kolben_ or baston, 41 _Krönlrennen_, 101

L Lance, The, 18, 69, 90, 96, 98, 108 Lances rebated in 1252, 3, 15 Lance-heads, 41 Lance-rest, 40, 95 La Statuta d’Armes de Turneys _temp._ Henry V, 53 Latest phrase of _cap-à-pie_ armour, 138 Laton, 66 Law for judicial combats in abeyance for a long period, 167 Law for trial by combat repealed _anno_ 1818, 168 Leitner, Querin von, 85 Letters of safeguard, 115 Lists, 77, 122, 147 Lists described, 14; their officials, 15; only five authorized in England, 14; frequently artificially lighted, 42; strewn with sand or tanning refuse, 40 Lists for foot combats, 67 Lists at Dijon in 1443, 57; at West Smithfield in 1467, 76 Literature concerning tournaments, 85 Locking gauntlet, 49, 106 Lombarde, 10

M _Magenblech_, 98 Main courses of the joust, 92 _Maneige Royal_, 85 Manifer or mainfare, 64 Mantling or Lambrequin, 37, 95 Manuscripts in Burgundian Library, 143 Marche, De La, 77, 78 Marie of Burgundy, 88 Matthieu de Courci, 65 Matthew Paris, 9 Matthew of Westminster, 9 Mattress, A, protects the horse’s breast, 39 “Maximilian” armour, 108 Maximilian I, 43, 87 — — engages armour-smiths at Milan, 39 — of Austria a successful jouster, 124 Maximilian II mounted for _Scharfrennen_, 99 Mechanism in shields for _Genschifttartscherennen_ and _Geschiftscheibenrennen_, 100 _Mêlée_, The, 46, 100; much supplanted by the joust, 41 _Mémoires de la Marche_, 44, 76 _Mémoires de Sire de Haynin_, 46 Menestrier, 85 Method of tilting described, 39 Meyrick, 63, 69 Meyrick’s _Critical Essay on Antient Armour_, 46 Milan the chief seat for the manufacture of body-armour, 38 _Military and Religious Life in the Middle Ages_, 62 Modern revivals of the tournament, 139 Monkish chronicles, 34 Monstrelet, 44 Montfaucon, 153 Moton or Bisague, 69 Motons, 83, 95 Mounted models at Dresden, 84 Much that is fanciful and unreal written about tournaments, 85

N Narrow escape from death of Henry VIII in tilting, 123 New forms of jousting with variants, 86 New forms of civil dress always reflected in armour, 107 New modes of armour of fifteenth century had their birth in Italy, 66 _Nugæ Antiquæ_, 46 Number of courses usually run at a joust tended to increase, 29

O Ordeal, Early form of, 147 Order of the Garter, 26 — Golden Fleece, 44 “Ordinance of kepyng of the Felde,” 131 Ordinances, statutes, and rules promulgated by John Tiptoft in 1466, 46 Origin of the joust, 3 _Origines Juridiciales_, 148 Orle or wreath, 37

P Pageantry combined with tournaments often of incredible puerility, 116 Paper on “A MS. Collection of Ordinances of Chivalry of the fifteenth century,” 67 Paris, Matthew, on the Round Table, 3 _Pas d’armes_ at Arras in 1435, 55; at L’Arbre de Charlemagne near Dijon in 1443, 57; at West Smithfield in 1467, 76; at Greenwich _temp._ Henry VII, 82; at Ayre in Picardy in 1494, 111; Pas de la Pélerine in 1446, 71; L’Arbre d’Or in 1468, 61; at end of fifteenth century, 48; at Westminster in 1501, 113 — — frequently combined with masques and mummeries, 75 Pas-gard, The, 63, 106, 108 Patents taken out in England for models of horses for jousting fitted with mechanical appliances for impulsion, 91 “Peasecod-bellied” breastplates, 104 Peffenhauser, Anton, 91, 106 Penalties inflicted for the infraction of tournament rules, 12 Pensill, The, 70 Père, Daniel, 13 Permanent lists, 107 Perquisites of officials of lists, 15 Persons exempted from judicial duels, 148 Peytral, The, 109 _Pfannenrennen_, 101, 105 _Pfeifenharnis_, 109 Philippe le Bon, 45 Pictorial representations of jousts and tournaments, 23 Pictures of jousts in the _Gewehrgallerie_, Dresden, 89; picture at Dresden of models of horses impelled for charging by a mechanical apparatus, 90; of the procession to the lists at the tournament at Westminster in 1511, 117; of a legal duel, 151; of an informal legal duel, 153; of a knightly judicial duel, 164 _Pièces d’avantage_, 63 Poldermiton, The, 64, 96 Position of peaks or tapuls on the breastplate, 110 Preuilli, Geoffroi de, 1 Prince Dolphin of Auvergne, 132 Prizes, 16, 76, 86, 111, 114, 125, 127 Proofs by fire and water, 146

Q Queue, The, 40, 95 Quintain, The, 6, 75

R Ranulph de Glanville, 148 _Rasthaken_ or queue, 104 _Realgestech_, 103, 106 Realistic tournament at Paris, 31 Records of tournaments in the College of Arms, London, 85; among the Ashmolean, Harleian, and Cottonian MSS, 85 Reinforcing pieces, 63, 64; first appear in England in the reign of Edward IV, 40; worn at Ghent in 1445, 63 René d’Anjou, 55, 131 _Rennen_, 89; at Minden between August of Saxony and Johann von Ratzenberg, 99 Representations of the tourney on tapestry and carvings on ivory, 10 Revival of the tournament in the reign of Queen Elizabeth, 125, 126 Robert of Gloucester, 9 Rockenburger, Sigmund, 99 Roger de Hoveden, 9; his _Annals_, 12 “Roiall iustes” at Smithfield in 1358; at London in 1359, 27; and 1362, 28 Roll of purchases for the tournament at Windsor Park in 1278, 18 Roll in the Heralds’ College of the “iusts” at Westminster in honour of Queen Katherine, 117 Romance of Richard Cœur de Lion, Sir Ferumbras, and others, 23; Roman de Rou, 9; du roy Miliadus, 23; Perceforest, 27; Petit Jehan de Saintré, 45; Three King’s Sons, 130 Round Table (_Tabula Rotunda_) Definition, 6; Reason for the institution given by Dugdale, 4; Round Table held by the Earl of Mortimer at Kenilworth in 1279, 3, 17; Actual Round Table at Winchester, 4; Henry III forbad the holding of a round table in 1251, 13; Round Table at Windsor in 1344, at Valenciennes in same year, 6; at Windsor in 1343, 1345, 1352, 4, 26; at Lichfield in 1348 or 1349, 26 Routine of an early tournament, 15 Royal Jousts, 24; in 1513, 1515, 1519, 1520, 121; 1539, 124 Rules for the tournament promulgated by King René, 46 — — — the _Mêlée_ and for “Barriers,” 47 — in France for judicial combats, 151; for conducting them in England _temp._ Richard II, 160; _temp._ Richard III, 161; _temp._ Henry VIII, 165 Running at the Ring, 6, 7 _Rüsthaken_, or lance-rest, 95, 104

S Sabatons, 70 Saddles: each form of joust had its special type, 39, 42, 43, 93, 94, 98, 102 Safeguards granted for tournaments, 85 Sainte-Palaye on the tournament, 139 _Scharfrennen_, or _Rennen_, 89, 93, 97; realistic representation at Dresden, 99 _Scharmützel_ at Dresden in 1553, 106; at Eltham in 1515, 121; at Westminster in 1581, 132 Schaufflein, Hans, 88 _Schwänzel_, 95, 99 Scoring of points in jousting, 49, 131 Scoring “Checques,” 127, 129, 130 Seals, 10 Seigneur de la Marche, 45 Serious accidents in jousting, 55, 56 Seusenhofer, Conrad, 92, 108 Shields, 37, 99, 100, 101, 104 Singular judicial duel between Jews, 153 — form of judicial duel, 159 Skirmish at Toury in 1380, 29 Societé de Bibliophiles Belges, 46 “Solemne iusts enterprised in 1400,” 49 “Solemn Triumphes” at Richmond in 1494, 84; at London in 1502, 114 Some fashions of armour in the sixteenth century very ineffective, 107 Speyer, Peter von, 109 Spurs, 99 Standard of mail, 65 Statuta de Armis, 19 _Stechen_, 89 Stephen, King, 10 _Stirnplätter_, 63, 98 Strengthening jousting harness, 38 Subterranean jousting at Montereau in 1420, 53 Suits at Paris and Dresden for jousting at the tilt, 103 _Schweifrennen_: see _Scharfrennen_, 97

T _Tabula Rotunda_ held at Wallenden in 1252, 3 Tapestry at Valenciennes, 42, 83 Taxes levied on tournaments, 12 Tenans, Rôle of the, 33 “Tenants” at the tournament at Westminster in 1511, 118 Terms: “tourney” and “joust” often confounded with one another, 3 _Testamenta Vetusta_, 28 _Theuerdank_, 88 Thomas of Walsingham, 17 Tilt, The, 39, 67 Tilting in Tudor times, 102 “Tilting in Tudor Times,” a paper by Viscount Dillon, 130 Tilt, tourney and barriers, 133 “To arme a man,” 67, 71 “To cry a Justus of Pees,” 67, 69 “To cry a tourney,” 25 Tomaso da Missaglia, 66 Tonlet armour, 67, 108 Tournaments, Origin of, 1; Definition by Roger de Hoveden, 1; by Claude Favchet, 1; Introduction claimed for Germany, 2; Rules of 1066, 1; Introduced into England from France, 10; Revived in England by Richard I, 12; tournaments of twelfth and thirteenth centuries, 11; rough and brutal up to reign of Edward I, 11; Banned by Church and State, 11; controlled by Royal Ordinances, 12; very popular in France, 13; Edicts issued against them, 14, 16; Forbidden in 1302, 24 Tournaments held in 1247 and 1248, 16; at Brackley in 1250, 12; at Neuss, 11; at Chalòns in 1274, 16; at Condé in 1327, 24; at London in 1342, 25; at Mons, 28; at Nantes, 30; at Cambray in 1385, 29; at St. Ingelbert about 1389, 32; at London in 1390, 34; at Windsor about 1395, 35; at Brussels in 1452, 74, 75; on the coronation of Edward IV, 76; at Paris in 1515, 114; at Hampton Court in 1570, 126; at Westminster in 1572, 129; at Westminster in 1581, 132; at Windsor in 1593, 133 Tournaments attained their highest development about the middle of the fifteenth century, 85; were much fostered at the Courts of Aix and Burgundy, 43; closely associated with pageants and mummeries in the sixteenth century, 86; neglected in the reigns of Edward VI and Queen Mary, 124; greatly prevailed at the German Courts, 86 Tournament of the Royal Amaranthus in 1620, 137; the revival at Brussels in 1905, 142-144 Tourney. The term and its application, 114; as practised by the Londoners in the reign of King Stephen, 10 Tourney books. René d’Anjou’s, 41, 93; Electors of Saxony, 89; Duke Henry of Braunschweig-Luneberg, 92; Duke William IV of Bavaria, 92; Maximilian I at Sigmaringen, 42, 89; Zuganovitz Stanislaus, 92 _Traité de Tournois_, par Louis de Bruges, 45 _Traicte de la forme et Devis d’ung Tournois_, 131 Transition from chain-mail to plate-armour, 21, 65 Trappers, 91, 103, 116 Treatises against judicial duels, 167 Trial by combat: civil cases, 149; criminal cases, 149; the custom never took deep root in England, 148; its scope and history, 146; working of the institution in Germany, 157; judicial duel at Westminster in 1380, 154; at Sedan, 166; combat allowed as late as 1817, 168 Triumph at Earl’s Court in 1912, 144-45 _Triumph of Maximilian_, 89, 109 “Triumphant iusts and turnies” in the second year of Henry V, 53 Trivet, 16 Typtofte Rules _anno_ 1446, 46

V Vamplate, The, 36, 40, 98 Varlets, 14 Vauldray, Claude de, 111 _Verein für historische Waffenkunde_, 89 “Volante-Piece,” The, 63

W Wace, 9 _Waffenkunde_, 93, 106 Wallace Collection of Armour, 94 _Wappenmeisterbuch of Hans Schwenkh_, 92, 103 Water Quintain in 1585, 133 Way, Albert, 67 Weapons for foot-fighting, 105 _Weisskünig_, 89, 100 _Welsch Gestech_ or Italian Joust, 93, 102, 104 White Hoods, 26 William of Malmesbury, 9 William of Newbury, 9, 10, 11 “Woalant piece over the head,” 82

PRINTED IN GREAT BRITAIN BY WILLIAM BRENDON AND SON, LTD. PLYMOUTH, ENGLAND