tournaments-msg

tournaments-msg - 2/25/06

Medieval tournaments.

************************************************************************

NOTICE -

This file is a collection of various messages having a common theme that I have collected from my reading of the various computer networks. Some messages date back to 1989, some may be as recent as yesterday.

This file is part of a collection of files called Stefan's Florilegium. These files are available on the Internet at: http://www.florilegium.org

I have done a limited amount of editing. Messages having to do with separate topics were sometimes split into different files and sometimes extraneous information was removed. For instance, the message IDs were removed to save space and remove clutter.

The comments made in these messages are not necessarily my viewpoints. I make no claims as to the accuracy of the information given by the individual authors.

Please respect the time and efforts of those who have written these messages. The copyright status of these messages is unclear at this time. If information is published from these messages, please give credit to the originator(s).

Thank you,

Mark S. Harris AKA: THLord Stefan li Rous

Stefan at florilegium.org

************************************************************************

From: VIS%AI.AI.MIT.EDU at MINTAKA.LCS.MIT.EDU ("Thomas R. Courtney")

Date: 19 Apr 90 04:50:02 GMT

Organization: Society for Creative Anachronism

Recently, a gentle (I think it weas Kwelland-Njall) suggested that blow

strength not be the ultimate test for whether a blow was good, asserting

"It is unchivalrous, as this is not mortal combat, but rather an exercise

in the arts of war by gentles of honor and chivalry."

This statement got me to thinking: what do we actually model in a tournament?

Actually, this question has bothered me for a long time, for I fear the answer

is either "nothing" or "practice at the pells". All of my study leads me to

conclude that tournament combat was a dangerous affair. People died in them,

the Church tried to ban them, the kings of England and France tried to license

them. Maurice Keen, in his excellent book "Chivalry", gives a good

description:

Nearly all the early accounts of tournaments that offer any detail come in

fact from literary sources, which are open to the suspicion of having

glamourised unduly the picture that they give of them. If some allowance is

made for literary romanticisation, however, the descriptions of tournaments

in, for instance, the romances of Chretien de Troyes tally reasonably well

with historical accounts, say those in the verse biography of William the

Marshall. Both alike make it clear that the tournaments of the twelfth

century were very rough occasions, only just distinguishable from real

battle. A day for the tournament was announced, perhaps two or three weeks

beforehand (more in the case of a great tournament), and publicised by

messengers. The site of the tournament was settled in advance, and would

cover a wide area, permitting the fighting to range over the countryside and

into villages. The limits that we usually hear of are that the tournament

shall take place between two townships, between Rougemont and Montbeliard,

for instance, or between Warwick and Kenilworth (as in Richard I's ordinance

for tournaments in England). There were no lists, and the only places where

the participants could be safe were the roped off refuges where they were

permitted to rest and disarm. Those taking part were usually divided into

two teams, the Angevins and the French, as it might be, or in England

Northerners and Southerners, and customs quickly developed as to which side

knights from a given area or "march" should join. The earliest accounts say

nothing of judges or referees, and though the principle weapons were lance

and sword, virtually no holds were barred (though the use of bolts and

arrows seems to have been frowned on). Prisoners were taken, and held to

ransom, and their horses and armour were the legitimate spoil of their

captors. Cretiens description in "Erec et Enide" of the tourney in the plain

below Tenebroc well conveys the confusion when the fighting began: "On either

side of the ranks tremble and a roar rises from the fight. The shock of

lances is very great. Lances break and shields are riddled, the hauberks

receive bumps and are torn asunder, saddles go empty and horsemen tumble,

while the horses sweat and foam. Swords are quickly drawn on those who fall

noisily, and some run to receive the promise of ransom, others to stave off

this disgrace." The line could indeed be thin between mock war and the real

thing.

Pretty rough stuff, and not very much like what we do. Later, things became

more organised, but apparently no less dangerous. Henry II of France was

mortally wounded in a tournament in 1559.

Furthermore, though dangerous, I get the impression that tournaments were not

as important in medieval times as they are for us. Participation in tournament

was a step on the path to chivalric perfection, not an end in itself.

This leads me to the conclusion that a core experience of SCA life, the

tournament, is a very poor distortion of what happened in the medieval world.

I do not claim we should make combat dangerous (I like being able to fight

with

my friends week after week), but it seems to me we are giving ourselves a

very bad lesson in what chivalry was or wasn't.

Tom Courtney

aka Vissevald Selkirksson

From: joshua at paul.rutgers.edu (Joshua Mittleman)

Date: 19 Apr 90 20:03:16 GMT

Organization: Rutgers Univ., New Brunswick, N.J.

Duke Vissevald makes some excellent points in comparing SCA

tournaments with medieval tournaments. I would offer two thoughts.

He writes:

> Furthermore, though dangerous, I get the impression that tournaments were

not

> as important in medieval times as they are for us. Participation in

> tournament was a step on the path to chivalric perfection, not an

> end in itself.

I think this may be true in one sense, but not in another. The best

of the tournament participants, if we may take William the Marshall as

a case in point, occupied a position in society similar to a star

athlete in today's world. The tournament brought fame and fortune

directly, and, by way of the contacts and recognition that might come

to the star, possibilities for advancement in other fields. Williams

career began on the tourney circuit, where he won reknown and wealth

through his exploits. By shining in this arena, he came to the

attention of powerful nobles, who hired on top tournament knights like

a baseball club owner buying up outfielders. Through the patronage of

these nobles, he rose to nearly royal rank.

Our tournaments may perhaps more closely resemble the staged combat,

the pas d'armes. A nobleman might let it be known that he and six

other knights would stand the field against all comers, or that they

would challenge three other groups of knights: 7 at lance, seven at

sword, and seven at mace. If the romance accounts are to be accepted,

these combats would be accompanied by pagentry, feasting, and general

entertainment, often with a mythological or fantastic theme. The best

SCA events seem to follow this pattern. Lord Galleron de la Chenille

and the good folk of Hartshorndale have tried to more closely recreate

this kind of tournament in the SCA, and Lord Galleron and Baron Dawyd

are currently writing a paper on how medieval tournaments might more

effectively be re-created.

Arval.

From: rick at oliveb.OLIVETTI.COM (Rick Meneely)

Date: 11 May 90 02:37:29 GMT

Tourney ransom/ Knightly overhead:

----------------------------------

Tom Courtney, aka Vissevald Selkirksson writes:

> It was suggested that the ransom price for armour and horse was inexpensive

> an example of the golden rule. This may be true, but I think there may have

> been a simpler explanation. The markdown may have occurred simply because

> selling the booty to show a profit took both time and expertise at selling.

Being a knight was expensive. The main reason for it's decline in the

12th century was probably due to this expense.

"The price of knightly equipment, too, had mounted to the point where the

initial outlay might cost a knight a year's income." - 'The Knight in

History'; Frances Gies

Some prices I have extracted are...

Genoa - first half of 13th century:

* Helm - 16-32 shillings

* Hauberk 120-152 shillings; with accessories approx. 200 shillings.

I also have a reference to William Marshal getting a horse worth over

40 pounds for only 7 pounds through craftiness.

What the expected yearly income for a knight was...I don't know. Does

anyone have some fiqures?

Apparently tourney rules varied a great deal. SOMETIMES armour and horses

were ransomed. SOMETIMES ransoms were arranged BEFOREHAND. While a high

ransom was seen as expressing the worth of the captive and was not looked

badly upon. Ransom raising seems to have been a collective effort at the

end

of a tourney. This means that you could afford to pay more ransom through

friends than you could alone. Also knights were not unknown to ...DEBT.

"In England, as the cost of knighthood increased, some knights with small

landholdings clubbed together to pay the expenses of the service of one

of their number". - 'The Knight in History'; Frances Gies

A clause in the Magna Carta forbids the gift or sale of land equivalent

to a knight's fee thereby owning the service of a knight. While many

had to pledge their lands and armor to raise money.

WHAT DOES ALL THIS MEAN?...Well for one thing knights may have had

fame, but very few had fortune. Yes, some even went Chapter 11.

From: leif at sugar.hackercorp.com (Lee King)

Date: 12 May 90 20:12:27 GMT

Organization: Sugar Land Unix - Houston

> Tom Courtney, aka Vissevald Selkirksson writes:

> > It was suggested that the ransom price for armour and horse was

inexpensive as

> > been a simpler explanation. The markdown may have occurred simply because

> > selling the booty to show a profit took both time and expertise at

selling.

> Being a knight was expensive. The main reason for it's decline in the

> 12th century was probably due to this expense.

> "The price of knightly equipment, too, had mounted to the point where the

> initial outlay might cost a knight a year's income." - 'The Knight in

> History'; Frances Gies

> Some prices I have extracted are...

> Genoa - first half of 13th century:

> * Helm - 16-32 shillings

> * Hauberk 120-152 shillings; with accessories approx. 200 shillings.

> I also have a reference to William Marshal getting a horse worth over

> 40 pounds for only 7 pounds through craftiness.

> What the expected yearly income for a knight was...I don't know. Does

> anyone have some fiqures?

Yes, knighthood was expensive. For example, the Assize of Arms

of Henry II of England declared: "Let every holder of a knight's fee

have a hauberk, a helmet, a shield and a lance." Add the three horse

required of a knight and the upkeep of any valets or armigers, and

you come to a pretty penny for even a fairly undistinguished knight.

Knighthood was so expensive that many, although possessing the

ways and means, refused dubbing to avoid participating in the honor and

expenses of knighthood. Philippe Contamine, in _War in the Middle

Ages_, writes that in late 13th Century England, there were some 1,250

knights (earls and barons included), of whom only ~500 were capable of

mobilization. At the same time, there were up to 1,750 non-knights who

had sufficient revenues and fees to become knights if they had so

desired. The Crown, through distraints of knighthood, made 26 attempts

between 1224 and 1272 to enlist all men possessing the knightly fee of

L20 (20 pounds).

Although I could find no figures for total knightly income, per

se, I did find figures for scutage (fees paid in lieu of military

service), wages paid militia, fief rents (fief de chambre) and fees which,

although

amounting to payment for volunteers, was apparently not considered

such, but more of a campaign indemnity paid to allow the warriors to

meet the supplementary expenses of war.

In the first category, at the end of the 12th Century, the 50

knights of Bury St Edmunds paid the abbot 29d every 20 weeks rather

than mount watch. The rate of scutage in England in the second half of

the 12th Century was levied at the rate of 6d (6 pence) per day, that is

240d or L1 per the standard 40 day period of service. Contamine also

says that, "In 1227 Frederick II, preparing his crusade, ordered that

in the kingdom of Sicily 'every fief-holder should pay for each fief

eight ounces of gold and every eight fiefs should provide a knight'; in

other words, from each group of eight fees the King-Emperor would get

one knight and 64 ounces of gold which represented about a year's pay

at current rates"(91.)

One of the uses of the money thus collected was the payment of

militia. In Perugia and Florence in the 13th Century, the militiamen

were paid from the first day of the campaign. This pay amounted to 5s

per foot soldier, 10s for a man with one horse, 15s for a man with two

horses (Perugia), 3s for crossbowmen, 2s 8d for archers, 2s 6d for

pavesiers and 2s for ordinary foot soldiers in Florence.(91)

Fief rents were, in effect, annual pensions paid for eventual

service. Contamine gives the case of Fernand de Jean as an example.

This worthy, a Castilian knight who had abandoned the service

of the king of Castile, had been in receipt of an annual income of 300l

(300 livres) from that source. For his first year in service to Philip

III of France, he received the same sum during pleasure of for life in

exchange for homage to Phillip III above all others (except Philip's

nephews, sons of his sister Blanche, and Fernando of Castile). He was

required to serve Philipe with 10 knights freely for 40 days a year,

presenting himself and men within 6 weeks of summons. He was only

required to serve only the lands of the king of Aragon, Castile, and

Portugal, in the kingdom of Navarre, in Gascony and in the county of

Toulouse. After the 40 days he would draw a daily wage of 7s 6d

(tournois), with no provisions for replacing of lost horses.(92-93)

Finally, Contamine gives the daily rates for soldiers in

England and France c. 1150-c.1300 as

Knights foot soldiers

1150-70 6d

c.1165 8d 1d

c.1196 1s

c.1215 2s 2d

c.1250 2s