The History of Chivalry Volume I Part 15

Liberality was a virtue of every true knight, and the officers-at-arms were more particular in tracing the lines of his pedigree, than in checking him from overleaping the bounds of a prudent and rational generosity.

One day's amus.e.m.e.nt did not always close the tournament: but on the second morning the knights resigned the lists to their esquires, who mounted upon the horses, and wore the armour and cognisances of their lords. They also were conducted by young maidens, who possessed authority to adjudge and give the prize to the worthiest esquire. At the close of the day the festival was renewed, and the honours were awarded. On the third morning there was a melee of knights and esquires in the lists, and the judgment of the ladies was again referred to, and considered decisive.[317]

[Sidenote: Tournaments opposed by the popes.]

[Sidenote: The opposition was unjust.]

Such were the general circ.u.mstances and laws of tournaments during the days of chivalry. These warlike exercises even survived their chief purpose, for they formed the delight of nations[318] after the use of artillery had driven the graceful and personal prowess of chivalry from the battle-field.[319] In all the time of their existence they were powerfully opposed by the papal see, avowedly on the ground of humanity.

There was some little excuse for this interference; for though the lances were headless, and the swords rebated, yet the shock of the career sometimes overthrew men and horses, and bruises were as deadly as the lances' wounds. The historians of the middle ages, who generally echoed the wishes of the Vatican, carefully record every instance where a life was lost in a tournament; and, perhaps, a dozen such unfortunate events are mentioned by the chroniclers of all European nations during the fourteenth century: a number exceedingly small when we reflect upon the nature of the conflict; that the time now spoken of was the very noonday of chivalry; and that not a circ.u.mstance of public joy, not a marriage among the n.o.bles and high gentry of the land, but was celebrated by a tournament. The Vatican might thunder its denial of Christian sepulture to those who fell in a tilting ground; but still the knights would don their gorgeous harness to win the meed of n.o.ble chevisance. While learned casuists were declaring from the pulpits that they who were killed at tournaments were most a.s.suredly d.a.m.ned[320], heralds' trumpets in every baronial court were summoning knights and squires to gentle exercise and proof of arms; and though fanatical monks might imagine visions where knights were peris.h.i.+ng in h.e.l.l flames[321], yet gallant cavaliers, warm and joyous with aspirations for fame and woman's love, could not be scared by such idle phantasms.

It was not, however, from any sincere considerations for humanity that the popes opposed themselves to the graceful exercises of the age; for, at the celebrated council held at Lyons in 1245, it was openly and for the first time declared, that tournaments were iniquitous, because they prevented the chivalry of Europe from joining the holy wars in Palestine. The sh.o.r.es of Syria might drink torrents of Christian blood, and the popes would bless the soil; but if in the course of several centuries a few unfortunate accidents happened in the lists of peace and courtesy, all the graceful amus.e.m.e.nts of Europe were to be interdicted, and the world was to be plunged into the state of barbarism from which chivalry had redeemed it. Tournaments were also interdicted on account of their expensiveness.

Wealth poured forth its treasures, and art exercised its ingenuity in apparelling the barons, knights, and ladies; and even the housings of the horses were so rich as to rival the caparisons of Asiatic steeds: but the popes could see no advantage to the social state in all this gay and prodigal magnificence, and they wished that all the treasures of the West should be poured into the Holy Land.[322]

[Sidenote: The joust.]

The joust was the other chief description of military exercises. It was so far inferior to the tournament, that he who had tourneyed, and had given largess to the heralds, might joust without further cost; but the joust did not give freedom to the tournament, nor was it the most favourite amus.e.m.e.nt, for baronial pomp was not necessary to its display, and many a joust was held without a store of ladies bright distributing the prize.

There were two sorts of jousts, the _joute a l'outrance_, or the joust to the utterance, and the _joute a plaisance_, or joust of peace.

[Sidenote: Description of the joust to the utterance.]

And, first, of the serious joust. The joust to the utterance expressed a single combat between two knights, who were generally of different nations. In strictness of speech, the judicial combat was a joust _a l'outrance_, and so was every duel, whether lawful or unlawful; but with such jousts chivalry has no concern.[323]

[Sidenote: Joust between a Scotch and English knight.]

In a time of peace, during the year 1398, there were sundry jousts and combats between Scots and Englishmen, for proof of their valiant activity in feats of arms, and to win fame and honour. The most remarkable encounter was that which took place between Sir David de Lindsay, first Earl of Crawford, and the Lord Wells, in the presence of Richard II. and his court. They agreed[324] to run certain courses on horseback, with spears sharply ground, for life or death. The place appointed for these jousts was London bridge; the day was the feast of St. George. The doughty knights appeared sheathed in armour of proof, and mounted on mighty war-horses. They ran together with all the fierceness of mortal hate; and though they attainted, yet both kept their saddles. Lord Crawford retained his seat with such remarkable firmness that the people cried out that a.s.suredly he was locked in his saddle. Incontinently that right n.o.ble knight leaped from his steed, and again, armed as he was, vaulted on his back, and amazed the beholders by his perfect horsemans.h.i.+p. The battle was renewed on foot; the skill of the Scotsman prevailed, and the life of the Lord Wells was in his power. De Lindsay now displayed the grace and courtesy of his chivalry, for he raised his foe from the ground, and presented him as a gift to the queen, wis.h.i.+ng, like a true knight, that mercy should proceed from woman. The queen thanked the valiant and courteous Scot, and then gave liberty to the Lord Wells.[325]

[Sidenote: Jousting for love of the ladies.]

Woman's love was as frequent a cause for a joust to the utterance as national rivalry. Many a knight would sally from a besieged town during a suspension of general hostilities, and demand whether there was any cavalier of the opposite host who, for love of his lady bright, would do any deed of arms. "Now let us see if there be any amorous among you[326],"

was the usual conclusion of such a challenger, as he reined in his fiery steed, and laid his spear in its rest. Such an invitation was generally accepted; but if it pa.s.sed unheeded, he was permitted to return to the gates of his town; for it would not have been thought chivalric to surround and capture a cavalier who offered to peril himself in so n.o.ble a manner.

[Sidenote: A singular instance of it.]

Two parties of French and English met by adventure near Cherbourg, and, like valiant knights, each desired to fight with the other. They all alighted, except Sir Launcelot of Lorrys, who sat firm and erect upon his horse, his spear in his hand, and his s.h.i.+eld hanging from his neck. He demanded a course of jousting for his lady's sake. There were many present who right well understood him; for there were knights and squires of the English part in love as well as he was. All was bustle, and every man ran to his horse, anxious to prove his gallantry against the n.o.ble Frenchman.

Sir John Copeland was the first who advanced from the press, and in a moment his well-pointed ashen lance pierced through the side of Lorrys, and wounded him to death. Every one lamented his fate, for he was a hardy knight, young, jolly, and right amorous[327]; and the death of a gallant cavalier was always lamented by his brethren in arms; for the good companions.h.i.+p of chivalry was superior to national distinctions.

[Sidenote: Joust between a French and an English squire.]

This n.o.ble feeling of knighthood was very pleasingly displayed in a circ.u.mstance that happened in France, during the year 1380. The Duke of Brittany profited by the weakness and confusion consequent on the death of King John, and easily made his peace with the court of the new monarch.

The Duke of Buckingham, uncle of Richard II. of England, had been acting as the ally of the Duke of Brittany; but now, as the war was over, he prepared to conduct most of his army home. He had been joined by some knights from Cherbourg, then an English town, and in the new martial arrangements it was agreed that they should return to their garrison; but they were not allowed to wear their harness during their march. The Constable of France, who was then at the castle of Josselyn, gave them safe-conduct. After embracing their good companions at Vannes, they mounted their palfreys, and commenced their course. An hour's riding brought them to Josselyn, and they rested awhile in the town, without the castle, intending merely to dine there, and then depart. While they were at their lodging, certain companions of the castle, knights and squires, came to see them, as was the wont of men of war, and particularly Englishmen and Frenchmen.

A French squire, named John Boucmell, discovered among the stranger band a squire called Nicholas Clifford, with whom, on former occasions, he had often exchanged looks and words of defiance. Thinking that a very fair opportunity for chevisance had presented itself, he exclaimed, "Nicholas, divers times we have wished and devised to do deeds of arms together, and now we have found each other in place and time where we may accomplish it.

Let us now, in presence of the Constable of France, and other lords, have three courses on foot with sharp spears, each of us against the other."

Nicholas replied, "John, you know right well that we are now going on our way by the safe-conduct of my lord your constable. What you require of me, therefore, cannot now be done, for I am not the chief of this safe-conduct, for I am but under those other knights who are here. I would willingly abide, but they will not."

The French squire replied, "You shall not excuse yourself by this means: let your company depart, if they list, for I promise you, by covenant, that when the arms are performed between you and me, I will bring you to Cherbourg without peril. Make you no doubt of that."

Nicholas answered, that he did not mean to gainsay his courtesy, but that he could not fight, as he and the rest of the English were journeying without their armour.

This objection was readily answered by the Frenchman, who proffered his own stores of harness; and Nicholas, though exceedingly indisposed to a joust, was obliged to say, that if the lords whom he accompanied would not permit the encounter there, he promised him, as soon as he arrived at Cherbourg, and was apprised of John's arrival at Boulogne, he would come to him, and deliver him of his challenge.

"Nay, nay," quoth John, "seek no respite: I have offered, and continue to offer, so many things so honourable, that you cannot depart and preserve your good name, without doing deeds of arms with me."

The Frenchmen then retired to the castle, leaving the Englishmen to dine in their lodging.

After dinner the travelling knights repaired to the castle, to require from the Constable a troop of cavaliers to conduct them through Brittany and Normandy to Cherbourg. The subject of the challenge had been much discussed by the Frenchmen, and as the execution of it appeared to be within their own power, they earnestly requested their leader to forbid the further journey of the Englishmen, while the deed of arms remained unaccomplished. The Constable received the strangers sweetly, and then, softening the harshness of his words by the chivalric courtesy of his manner, he said to them, "Sirs, I arrest you all, so that ye shall not depart this day; and to-morrow, after ma.s.s, you shall see deeds of arms done between our squire and yours; and you shall dine with me, and after dinner you shall depart with your guides to Cherbourg."

The English were right glad to be summoned to a chivalric sport, and, after drinking of the Constable's wine, they took their leave, and returned to their lodging.

On the next morning each squire heard ma.s.s, and was confessed. They then leapt on their horses, and, with the lords of France on one part, and the Englishmen on the other, they rode all together to a fair plain, near the castle of Josselyn.

John Boucmell had prepared, according to his promise, two suits of harness, fair and good, and offered the choice to Nicholas; but the Englishman not only waved his choice, but, with still further courtesy, a.s.sisted John to arm. The Frenchman, in return, helped him to don the other suit of harness.

When they were armed they took their spears, and advanced against each other on foot, from the opposite ends of the lists. On approaching they couched their spears, and the weapon of Nicholas struck John on the breast, and, sliding under the gorget of mail, it entered his throat. The spear broke, and the iron truncheon remained in the neck. The English squire pa.s.sed onwards, and sat down in his chair. The Frenchman appeared transfixed to the spot, and his companions advanced to him in alarm. They took off his helmet, and, drawing out the truncheon, the poor squire fell down dead. Grief at this event was general, but the saddest and sincerest mourners were Nicholas and the Earl of March, the former for having slain a valiant man of arms, and the other because John Boucmell had been his squire. The Constable spoke all the words of comfort to his n.o.ble friend which his kindness could prompt, and then made the knightly spectators repair to the castle, in whose hospitable hall every disposition to jealousy and revenge was discarded. After dinner the English troop bade farewell to the n.o.ble Constable, and, under the conduct of the gentle knight, the Barrois of Barres, they resumed their course to Cherbourg.[328]

[Sidenote: Jousts of peace.]

I come now to describe the joust _a plaisance_. Jousts of this friendly description often took place at the conclusion of a tournament; for a knight who had shown himself worthy of the tourneying prize caracoled his prancing steed about the lists; and, animated by the applauding smiles of dames and damsels, he called on the surrounding cavaliers by their valiancy, and for love of the ladies, to encounter him in three strokes with the lance.

[Sidenote: Skill of jousters.]

More frequently jousts were held at places appointed expressly for the occasion. When they were jousts of peace, the mode of combat was always specifically described. A knight would often challenge another for love of his lady to joust three courses with a spear, three strokes with a sword, three with a dagger, and three with an axe.[329] It was the rule for knights to strike at each other only on the body, or within the four quarters, as the times phrased their meaning. The loss of his good name and the forfeiture of his horse and arms were the penalties of violating this usage. Sometimes the weapons were similar to those used in tournaments; but more frequently they were weapons of war[330]; and though the lances were sharp, and the bright swords were not rebated, seldom was blood shed in these jousts, so truly admirable was the military skill of the soldiers in chivalry. The tournaments are interesting in the general circ.u.mstances of their splendour and knightly gallantry; but the jousts give us a far more curious knowledge of ancient manners.

[Sidenote: Singular questions regarding jousts.]

But before I describe these martial amus.e.m.e.nts, let me call my reader's attention for a few moments to the subtlety of intellect with which questions respecting the circ.u.mstances that happened at jousts were discussed.

Two gentlemen agreed to fight on horseback, and he who first fell was to be deemed the vanquished man. By the chance of battle it happened that they both fell together, and the sage spirits of chivalry were agitated by the question, who should be accounted victorious. Some thought that the defender ought to have the honour, for in all doubtful cases the challenged person should be favoured; others contended, that as the fall of the challenger might proceed from his own force, and not the virtue of the enemy, the judgment ought to lie dead: but the best and general decision was this:--if the combat were for trial of skill or love of the ladies, the challenger ought to lose the honour; but if it were for the decision of any mortal quarrel, the battle ought to be resumed some other day, because in combats of that kind no victory was gained until one of the parties were either slain or yielded himself prisoner, or had with his own mouth denied the words whereon the combat was occasioned.

On another occasion, seven knights agreed with seven of their companions to run certain courses for honour and love of the ladies. When the joust took place, five of one side acquitted themselves right chivalrously, but their two brother-tilters were overthrown. On the other side, two only performed their courses well, the rest of that company lost many lances and ran very foul. It was then debated whether unto five well-doers and two evil, or unto two well-doers and five evil, the honour ought to be allotted. As the question did not regard the merit of any particular man, but which party in general best performed the enterprise, it was alleged that the party wherein were most well-doers ought to have the honour, notwithstanding the fall of two of their companions. This opinion was met by the acknowledged rule of arms, that the fall from horseback by the enemies' force or skill was the most reproachful chance that could happen to a knight. Therefore it was contended that the misadventure of two men only might reasonably be the loss of honour to the rest.[331] But further details of chivalric subtleties would afford little pleasure, and contenting myself with having shown that our ancestors' intellects were as sharp as their swords, we will progress to the tilting ground.

[Sidenote: An earl of Warwick.]

One of the earls of Warwick went to France dressed in weeds of peace, but carrying secretly his jousting harness. In honour of his lady he set up three s.h.i.+elds on three pavilions, and his heralds proclaimed his challenges, apparently from three different knights, among the lords, knights, and squires of honour in France. The devices on his s.h.i.+elds and the names he a.s.sumed were emblematical of love and war. Three skilful jousters of France on three successive days touched the s.h.i.+elds, and the earl, dressed in different guises, overthrew them all. They now became his friends: he entertained them with chivalrique magnificence, and gave jewels of price to them all. For himself he had acquired renown, and that was all he wished; for he now could return to his lady, and showing how he had sped in his chivalric courses, could proudly claim the reward of valour.[332]

[Sidenote: Celebrated joust at St. Ingelbertes.]

"Ye have heard oftentimes, it said, how the sport of ladies and damsels encourageth the hearts of young l.u.s.ty gentlemen, and causeth them to desire and seek to get honour."[333]

Such is Froissart's beautiful and romantic prelude to his account of a very interesting joust.

In the year 1389, the King Charles V. tarried several days at Montpellier, delighting himself with the pastime of the ladies; and the gentlemen of his court were no bad imitators of his fancy. Three cavaliers, in particular, were chiefly marked. They were the young Sir Boucicaut, Sir Raynold of Roy, and the Lord of St. Pye. Their valour was inspired by gallantry, and they resolved to achieve high feats of arms in the ensuing summer; and if it had been possible for a knight to entertain any other object in his imagination, than the favour of his sovereign lady, the gallant knights of France had a very n.o.ble motive to enterprise, for some reflections had lately been cast upon their honour by an English cavalier.

The n.o.ble knighthood that was in them felt a stain like a wound; and this imputation on their honor gave the form and color to the joust they meditated; for they resolved to perform their deeds of arms in the frontier near Calais, hoping that Englishmen might be incited to meet them.

The holding of the joust at such a place was not deemed courteous by some members of the king's council, for it was thought that the English would consider it presumptuous; and the more sage and prudent knights murmured their opinion, that it was not always right to consent to the purposes of young men, for incidents rather evil than good often sprang from them. The king, however, who was young and courageous, overruled all scruples, and ordered that the joust should proceed, because the knights had promised and sworn it before the ladies of Montpellier.