Waarvoor is sandsakke in middeleeuse tweegevegte gebruik?

Waarvoor is sandsakke in middeleeuse tweegevegte gebruik?



We are searching data for your request:

Forums and discussions:
Manuals and reference books:
Data from registers:
Wait the end of the search in all databases.
Upon completion, a link will appear to access the found materials.

Ek was huiwerig om hierdie vraag in die geskiedenis of Shakespeare This Site te stel, maar ek het uiteindelik besluit dat dit meer 'n historiese vraag is. In die toneelstuk "King Henry The Sixth" is daar 'n fragment oor 'n tweegeveg tussen 'n leerling en sy meester, waar hul ingang so beskryf word:

[Gaan by een deur in, HORNER the Armourer en sy bure, drink so baie vir hom dat hy dronk is; en hy kom in met 'n drom voor hom en sy staf met 'n sandsak daaraan vasgemaak; en by die ander deur PETER, sy man, met 'n trommel en sandsak, en Prentices drink vir hom.]

Waarvoor was die sandsak? Wat was die sandsak?


Die sandsak is van 'n kwintain, ''steek dummy" as jy wil:

Op Offham green staan ​​'n Quintain, 'n ding wat nou selde ontmoet moet word, 'n masjien wat in die vroeë tye deur die jeug gebruik is, sowel as om hul eie aktiwiteite te probeer as die vinnigheid van hul perde om daarmee te hardloop. Die kruisstuk daarvan is breed aan die een kant en deurboor vol gate; en 'n sak sand word aan die ander kant gehang en draai om, terwyl dit met enige hou beweeg word. Die tydverdryf was dat die jeug te perd so vinnig as moontlik moes hardloop en die breë deel van sy loopbaan met groot krag getref het. Hy wat dit toevallig glad nie getref het nie, is met groot bespotting behandel; en hy wat dit tref, het sy flinkheid ten beste benut; ten minste moet hy 'n klap in sy nek kry uit die sandsak, wat onmiddellik van die ander kant van die kwintain omdraai. Die groot ontwerp van hierdie sport was om die behendigheid van perd en mens te beproef en om die bord te breek, wat ook al gedoen het, hy was die hoof van die sport van die dag.

Dit toets die vermoë van perd en ruiter om nie net die doelwit skoon te raak nie, maar om dit te doen sonder om spoed te verloor om die sandsak wat agterop die ridder se kop kom, te oorskry.

Bykomend tot hierdie eerbaar gebruik van sandsakke, blyk dit dat daar 'n lang, maar vergete, gebruik van sandsakke was as 'n tweestryd en straatgeveg wapen. Robert Excobar beskryf hierdie vergete gebruike in sy boek Saps, Blackjacks en Slungshots: 'n geskiedenis van vergete wapens. Die sandsak wat aan 'n paal vasgemaak is, is 'n sandsakkie, en is 'n taamlik dodelike wapen, soos Shakespeare self opmerk in die voortsetting van die toneel (Deel 2; Handeling 2, Toneel 3):

Hierdie sandsakke is nie die dun, plat stukke waaraan ons dink as verskansings teen beide koeëls en water nie, maar eerder lang ronde, omtrent die lengte van 'n arm en effens groter as die vuis.

Voor die verspreiding van handwapens en hul voorrade, is ons bekend van die term pistool-sweep van pulpfiksie, variasies van die sandklub en sandvlek was 'n aggressiewe manier om iemand vir 'n paar minute sinloos te maak, met 'n minimum van dodelike opset.

In die tweestryd wat deur Shakespeare beskryf word, put die tweegeveg a sandvlek (sandsak vasgemaak aan 'n paal) teen a sandklub (lang buis mou gevul met sand).


Enkelgeveg

Enkelgeveg is 'n tweegeveg tussen twee enkele krygers wat plaasvind in die konteks van 'n geveg tussen twee leërs.

Gevalle van enkele gevegte is bekend uit die klassieke oudheid en die Middeleeue. Die kampioene was dikwels vegters wat groter toeskouergroepe verteenwoordig het. Sulke verteenwoordigende wedstryde en verhale daarvan is wêreldwyd bekend.

Gewoonlik vind dit plaas in die niemandsland tussen die opponerende leërs, terwyl ander krygers kyk en hulself weerhou van veg totdat een van die twee enkele vegters gewen het. Dikwels is dit kampioenoorlogvoering, met die twee as die kampioene van hul onderskeie kante beskou.

Enkele gevegte kan ook binne 'n groter geveg plaasvind. Beide antieke en middeleeuse oorlogvoering het nie altyd op die lyn- of falanksvorming staatgemaak nie. Die Ilias beskryf veral die gevegte van die Trojaanse oorlog as 'n reeks enkele ontmoetings op die veld, en die middeleeuse kode van ridderlikheid, deels hierdeur geïnspireer, het die enkele geveg tussen individuele ridders op die slagveld aangemoedig waarin die verloorder gewoonlik nie gedood is nie, maar gevange geneem vir losprys. Hierdie tradisie het in die 14de eeu geëindig as gevolg van die gebruik van die langboog en die snoekplein teen berede ridders (Slag van Crécy, Slag van Laupen), en die tradisie van enkelgeveg is weg van die slagveld voortgesit, met die pas d'armes en die vroeg -moderne tweestryd.


Waarvoor is sandsakke in middeleeuse tweegevegte gebruik? - Geskiedenis

Ons redakteurs gaan na wat u ingedien het, en bepaal of hulle die artikel moet hersien.

Tweestryd, 'n geveg tussen persone, gewapen met dodelike wapens, wat volgens vooraf gereëlde reëls gehou word om 'n rusie of 'n erepunt te besleg. Dit is 'n alternatief vir die gebruik van die gewone proses van geregtigheid.

Die geregtelike tweestryd, of verhoor deur die geveg, was die vroegste vorm van tweestryd. Caesar en Tacitus rapporteer dat die Germaanse stamme hulle rusies deur 'n enkele geveg met swaarde besleg het, en met die Germaanse invalle het die praktyk vroeg in die Middeleeue gevestig geraak. Die geregtelike tweestryd is aangeneem omdat plegtige bevestiging of eed aflê in regsgeskille tot wydverspreide meineed gelei het en omdat die beproewing te veel aan die toeval of manipulasie deur priesters oorgelaat het. As 'n man voor 'n regter verklaar dat sy teenstander skuldig is aan 'n sekere misdaad en die teenstander antwoord dat sy beskuldiger lieg, beveel die regter hulle om in 'n tweegeveg te vergader, waarvoor hy die plek, tyd en wapens bepaal het wat beide vegters moes borg vir hul voorkoms. Die afwerp van 'n handskoen was die uitdaging wat die teenstander aanvaar het deur dit op te tel. Aangesien daar geglo is dat die verdediger van die reg in so 'n beroep op die "oordeel van God" nie die saak kan hanteer nie, maar dat die verloorder, indien hy nog leef, volgens die wet hanteer word.

Hierdie vorm van verhoor was oop vir alle vrymanne en, in sekere gevalle, selfs vir diensknegte. Slegs kerklikes, vroue, siekes en mans jonger as 20 of ouer as 60 kan vrystelling eis. In sekere omstandighede kon persone wat verhoor word, egter professionele vegters, of 'kampioene', aanstel om hulle te verteenwoordig, maar die skoolhoof sowel as sy verslane kampioen is onderworpe aan die wetlike straf.

In die meeste lande het tweegevegte ook gedien om onpersoonlike vrae te bepaal. In Spanje is daar byvoorbeeld in 1085 'n tweegeveg gevoer om te besluit of die Latynse of die Mozarabiese ritueel in die liturgie in Toledo gebruik moet word: die Mozarabiese kampioen, Ruiz de Mastanza, het gewen. Die prosedure van hierdie tweestryde is in detail uiteengesit. Hulle het plaasgevind in champs clos (lyste), gewoonlik in die teenwoordigheid van die hof en hooggeregtelike en kerklike hooggeplaastes. Elke deelnemer het voor die geveg gesweer dat sy saak regverdig was en dat sy getuienis waar was en dat hy geen ander wapens as die voorgeskrewe wapens en magiese hulpmiddels gehad het nie. As een van die vegters gewond of gewerp is, het sy teenstander gewoonlik 'n knie op sy bors gelê en, tensy om genade gevra, 'n dolk deur 'n gewrig in die pantser gedryf.

William I het die geregtelike tweestryd in die 11de eeu aan Engeland voorgestel, dit is uiteindelik in 1819 afgeskaf. In Frankryk het noodlottige geregtelike tweegevegte so gereeld geword dat daar vanaf die 12de eeu gepoog is om dit te verminder. Die laaste een wat deur 'n Franse koning gemagtig is, het op 10 Julie 1547 plaasgevind.

Ere -tweegevegte was privaat ontmoetings oor werklike of verbeelde slagtings of beledigings. Die praktyk, wat aansienlik vergemaklik word deur die manier om 'n swaard te dra as deel van die alledaagse klerekas, het blykbaar vanaf die einde van die 15de eeu uit Italië versprei. Mans het met die geringste voorwendsel baklei, en dikwels, aanvanklik, sonder getuies, aangesien hierdie geheimhouding misbruik word (bv. Deur hinderlae), het dit gou normaal geword dat tweestryders deur vriende of sekondes vergesel word. Later het hierdie sekondes ook baklei om hul vriende waardig te wees.

Eregevegte het in Frankryk so algemeen geword dat Karel IX in 1566 'n verordening uitgevaardig het sodat iemand wat aan 'n tweegeveg deelneem, met die dood gestraf sou word. Hierdie verordening het die model geword vir latere bevele teen tweestryd. Die praktyk het egter langer bestaan ​​as die monargie in Frankryk. Vanaf die revolusionêre tydperk was dit 'n kenmerk van politieke geskille, en politieke tweestryde was gereeld in die 19de eeu. In die 20ste eeu het tweestryde nog steeds af en toe in Frankryk plaasgevind - al was dit maar net ter wille van die vorm, met voorsorgmaatreëls sodat nie die swaard of die pistool fataal kon wees nie, of selfs vir die publisiteit, die laaste opgetekende tweestryd wat in 1967 plaasgevind het. is tot en met die Eerste Wêreldoorlog deur die militêre kode goedgekeur en is weer (1936) onder die Nazi's gewettig. Die fascistiese regime in Italië het ook tweestryd aangemoedig. Die Mensur (studente -tweestryd) is steeds 'n kenmerk van die Duitse universiteitslewe as 'n vorm van 'n sportbyeenkoms. Die meeste Duitse universiteite is al lank gevestig Verbindungen (vegkorps) met streng reëls, geheime vergaderings, kenmerkende uniforms en groot aansien. In sulke tweestryde, wat 'n metode van swaardspeling betref wat verskil van die van normale heinings, kan studente letsels op die kop en wang kry wat as waardigheid beskou word.


Die geskiedenis van tweestryd


Tweegeveg word intrinsiek geassosieer met die ridderlike erekode wat deur Middeleeuse ridders beoefen word. Alhoewel dit dikwels verband hou met die koninklike howe van Frankryk en Engeland, is tweestryd ook in die antieke wêreld bekend en word dit in die Griekse en Egiptiese ikonografie uitgebeeld.

Sodra hulle verloof was, vermoor duelliste selde hul teenstanders. Gebonde aan 'n streng gedragskode, sou 'n heer die tweegeveg gebruik om sy eer te verdedig en om tevredenheid te eis. 'N Tweegeveg is voorgestel wanneer 'n individu doelbewus iemand van dieselfde rang beledig het, of moontlik om 'n vrou se reputasie te verdedig.

Die tyd en plek is gereël deur 'n tweede wat deur elke individu aangewys is - hulle het ook ooreengekom oor 'n geskikte plek. Die tweestryd sou vroegoggend of laataand in 'n afgeleë gebied plaasvind, om te verseker dat die gebeurtenis onbetwis bly deur die owerhede en vry van regsgevolge as die dood sou ontstaan.

In die ou Egipte het tweegevegte in tempels plaasgevind as vermaak. Die wapens wat gebruik is, is onder meer slee -hamers, maces en kettings. Maar die mees dramatiese tweegevegte het in antieke Rome plaasgevind. Die Retiarius was gewapen met 'n net en 'n drietand; sy enigste beskerming was 'n skouerbeskerming. Hy gebruik sy wapen om 'n afstand tussen hom en sy teenstander te skep. Sy aanval was so ontwerp dat hy sy teenstander in die net kon vang.

In die Middeleeue is verskillende swaarde tydens tweestrydwedstryde gebruik-die algemeenste wapens is mandjies geharde swaarde. Baie here is egter opgelei met die verkragter en die kort swaard wat ontwerp was as stootwapens. Die tweestryders het sny- en stootaksies gebruik wat hulle in staat gestel het om teen die liggaam van hul teenstander te spring. Die deelnemers het gemik op kwesbare dele van die liggaam, naamlik die nek en die dy.

Na die uitvinding van vuurwapens is tweegevegte met pistole geveg. Dit was gevaarlik en het dikwels ernstige beserings tot gevolg gehad. Deelnemers gebruik gewaardeerde vuurpylpistole met enkele skote wat in pare gehou word, en geen agbare Engelse man reis sonder sy gewere om hom te beskerm nie. Die twee mans kies 'n geweer wat hulle regop in hul hand gehou het, en word gevra om 'n entjie te loop totdat hulle 'n merker in die grond bereik het. Hier sou hulle omdraai, vorder en skiet. Alhoewel die onteerde party die tweestryd op enige tydstip kon stop, was dit dikwels die eerste bloed wat die verrigtinge beëindig het.

All About History is deel van Future plc, 'n internasionale mediagroep en toonaangewende digitale uitgewer. Besoek ons ​​korporatiewe webwerf.

© Future Publishing Limited Quay House, The Ambury, Bath BA1 1UA. Alle regte voorbehou. Engeland en Wallis se maatskappy se registrasienommer 2008885.


Verhoor deur Combat, of Middeleeuse egskeidingshof

Adrian & mdash 16 Februarie 2016

Tradisionele proef deur Combat

Noudat die romanse van Valentine's Day verby is, is dit tyd dat die breek begin. Studies het getoon dat skeidings en egskeidings 'n styging neem na “ verwagtingsvakansies ” soos V-Day. As u meer daarin belangstel om u verhouding te beëindig as om te wag totdat die Corpse Flower blom, wil u miskien die middeleeuse proses oorweeg wat paartjies gebruik het om hul verskille op te los.

'N Professor aan die Universiteit van Oklahoma, Kenneth Hodges, het 'n ou Duitse manuskrip gevind, volledig met illustrasies, waarin die regte prosedure en strydtegnieke uiteengesit word vir wanneer mans en vrouens nie 'n ander keuse hoef te hê as om deur 'n geveg te verhoor nie.

Hierdie oordeelmetode is gewoonlik deur mans uitgevoer, maar vroue was nie immuun teen deelname nie. As 'n vrou van 'n misdaad beskuldig word en wil hê dat haar lot onpartydig bepaal moet word, kan sy 'n verhoor eis en 'n kampioen aanwys om in haar plek te veg. In gevalle waar vroue vir hulself veg, blyk dit dat hul teenstanders hul mans is, miskien omdat die persoon wat sy gewoonlik as haar kampioen sou kies, die persoon is teen wie sy tans veg.

Die proses

Volgens die manuskrip is die man in 'n gat geplaas wat tot by sy middel gekom het, en hy was gewapen met 'n stok. Die vrou sou aan die rand van die gat staan, en 'n doek met 'n klip van vier of vyf pond aan die een kant daarvan. Sy stok en haar slinger was albei ewe lank. Vermoedelik was die man in die gat in 'n poging om die speelveld gelyk te maak.

Ondanks die vermeende voordeel van die sterkte van die man, sal die manuskrip beslis maniere bied om 'n vegter suksesvol te wees.

Hier het sy van hom weggebreek en probeer om hom te wurg.

Hier het hy haar na hom toe getrek en neergegooi en wil haar wurg.

Kort na afsterwe of aftakeling is dit onduidelik hoe 'n wenner beslis sal word. Maar dit is moontlik dat een van die volgende situasies daartoe kan lei dat die een of die ander party as die oorwinnaar aangewys is.

Hier het sy hom op sy rug gelê en wil hom wurg en uit die gat sleep.

Hier het hy haar na hom toe getrek en in die gat gegooi.

As u Valentynsdag nie volgens plan verloop het nie, het ons gehoop dat u 'n meer burgerlike manier kan vind om u verskille met u geliefde uit te werk. Maar as dit nie die geval is nie, moet u hierdie reëls volg vir u verhoor deur te veg en alles binne die reëls te hou.


12 Middeleeuse beledigings vir die karkas in u lewe

Mense het baie talente - oorlog, kookkuns, bisarre seksuele posisies - maar een wat deur alle menslike samelewings vasgevang is, is die kuns van die belediging. Hulle was teenwoordig in elke menslike beskawing wat rekords gelaat het, insluitend 'n paar skreeusnaakse Romeinse graffiti. Die skerpsinnigheid van sommige van die grootste intellektuele van die geskiedenis het voortgeduur in hul beroemde beledigings - Groucho Marx, Oscar Wilde en Winston Churchill kom by my op. Maar middeleeuse beledigings is 'n besondere merk van die floried, woedend en mal, en hulle is eerlik so aanstootlik dat hulle waarskynlik uit die mode moet bly, waar hulle hoort.

U kan baie vertel oor 'n samelewing en sy waardes deur sy beledigings. Dit is redelik duidelik: as u meegedeel word dat u voorouers varke is, is die geslagslyn baie belangrik (soos in die moderne China), en as iemand u 'n koolvreter noem, is daar beslis 'n morele fout met kool as voedsel. Die beledigings van die Middeleeuse Europa gee die volgende gedagtes: reputasie was alles, en beledigings was 'n ernstige bekommernis - u kan iemand hof toe bring vir laster - maar dit verskil radikaal van mans en vroue. Mans word gewaardeer deur hul sosiale status, vroue deur hul kuisheid en gedrag. As u hulle wou beledig, was dit wat u gemik het.

Die beledigings wat ons deesdae gebruik, is redelik beperk: hulle is kru, dikwels seksueel, en het nie dieselfde poëtiese ring as in die ou dae nie. Maar hierdie Middeleeue, so sjarmant as wat hulle mag lyk, sou waarskynlik nie so goed werk in die moderne era nie.

1. & quotBase voetbalspeler & quot

Voorbeeld sin: Ek kan nie glo dat u met so 'n voetbalspeler sou uitgaan nie, sy ouers besit nie eens 'n seiljag nie. & quot

Betekenis: Laaggebore. Voetbal, destyds toe hierdie belediging in Shakespeare's King Lear gespuit is, was 'n spel vir die laer klasse en was bekend daarvoor dat dit wetteloos en gewelddadig was. (Ja, meer as deesdae het speletjies gereeld deur middestede gewaai, honderde mense betrek en verskeie sterftes veroorsaak.)

& quot2. Crooked-Nosed Knave & quot

Voorbeeld sin: & quotJy maak asof jy privaatskool toe gegaan het, maar jy is net 'n krom neus. & quot

Betekenis: Klasseloos en belaglik. Dit kom eintlik uit 'n lastergeding in 1555 in Engeland, waar 'n man met die naam John Bridges beweer het dat 'n ou genaamd Warneford dit in die openbaar genoem het. Dit was duidelik 'n ernstige belediging.

3. & quotChurl & quot

Voorbeeld sin: & quot Haal my pantoffels as jy soos 'n geritsel gaan optree. & quot

Betekenis: Boeragtig, grof. Dit kom van die Ou -Engelse woord ceorl, wat letterlik 'n man een vlak bo 'n slaaf beteken het. (Dit het ook vreemd geword in die Russiese woord vir koning, korol.)

4. & quotCox-Comb & quot

Voorbeeld sin: & quotVyf selfies in dertig sekondes? Jy is so 'n kolk, Kanye West sal jaloers wees. & Quot

Betekenis: 'N Ydel, onnosel persoon. Die hanekam bo-op 'n haan se kop word gebruik vir die paring van uitstallings en om in die algemeen rond te kyk en selfbelangrik te lyk. Nie 'n groot stuk nie.

5. & quotDoxy & quot

Voorbeeld sin: Ek sê nie sy is 'n doxy nie, maar dit lyk asof sy vreeslik baie tyd saam met die ou deurbring met die tronkstraf. & quot

Betekenis: 'N Promiskueuse vrou. Dit was eintlik minder 'n belediging as 'n tegniese term in die Middeleeue.

6. & quotGlos Pautonnier & quot

Voorbeeld sin: & quot Jy het my skyfies gesteel? Almal van hulle? You glos pautonnier! & Quot

Betekenis: Gulsige skelm. Die woorde is Oud -Frans en word met groot oorgawe in epiese verhale uit die Middeleeue weggegooi. Dit is 'n gladder manier om iemand 'n pizza-steeler te noem.

7. & quotPuterelle & quot

Voorbeeld sin: As jy aanhou om toplose foto's op Instagram te plaas, sal mense jou 'n puterelle begin noem.

Betekenis: 'N Vrou met 'n swak reputasie. Dit kom ook uit Ou -Frans (& quotputain & quot bly vandag 'n moderne Franse vloekwoord). U sal sien dat die mees uitgebreide ding wat u kan doen om 'n vrou in die Middeleeue te beledig, haar deugde veroordeel, dit was haar belangrikste eienskap.

8. & quotSkamelar & quot

Voorbeeld sin: & quot Nee, skamelar, jy kan nie $ 500 leen nie, kom nou uit my huis uit. & quot

Betekenis: Skrop, parasiet. As u ooit u middag wil deurbring met 'n paar heerlike argaïese beledigings, haal die gedig waaruit dit kom, op, 'The Flyting Of Dunbar And Kennedy' in Old Scots. Dit is nie net in rym nie, maar die meeste beledigings is alliteratief!

9. & quotMandrake Mymmerkin & quot

Voorbeeld sin: & quot Nege duim? Asseblief, ek het van Angela gehoor dat u 'n mandrake mymmerkin was. & Quot

Betekenis: Klein mannetjie, marionet, kinderagtig. 'N Mandrake, soos jy sal onthou as jy jou Harry Potter gelees het, is 'n plant wat bedoel is om op 'n klein mensie te lyk, terwyl 'n mannetjie (waaruit ons ons woord kry) ook 'n klein man of kind was. Dit kom ook uit die uitroep van Dunbar en Kennedy.

10. & quotHeidgebore & quot

Voorbeeld sin: & quot Hou op met vroue toeter ou, wat is jy, gebore deur 'n heining? & quot

Betekenis: Laaggebore, buite-egtelik. Dit is nie te moeilik om dit te ontleed nie - as u in 'n heining gebore is, is die kans groot dat u ma nie 'n lekker huweliksbed gehad het om in te kraam nie. Haai, dit is darem beter as 'n sloot, reg?

11. & quotLevereter & quot

Voorbeeld sin: & quotDie politikus is so 'n hefboom dat hy sy eie kinders vir 'n bietjie deeg sou opdroog. & quot

Betekenis: Letterlik & quotliver-eter, & quot corrupt, of ontneem die wêreld die nodige voeding. Hierdie wonderlike belediging dateer uit die 1400's Gent, en is 'n wonderlike voorstelling van korrupte sakelui wat hul sak uitstrek ten koste van almal.

12. & quotRonyon & quot

Voorbeeld sin: "My eks is so 'n ronyon dat sy babas en klein hondjies bang maak."

Betekenis: 'N Skerp vrou, oud en skurf. Weer Frans van oorsprong, hierdie een kom van rogneux, bedek met skurwe. Shakespeare was baie lief vir hierdie een in die Elizabethaanse tydperk, en dit verskyn in Lady Macbeth and the Merry Wives Of Windsor.


Inhoud

Anders as beproewing in die algemeen, wat in baie kulture wêreldwyd bekend is, is beproewing deur gevegte hoofsaaklik bekend uit die gebruike van die Germaanse mense. Dit was in gebruik onder die ou Boergondiërs, Ripuariërs, Alamane, Langombarde en Swede. Dit was onbekend in die Angelsaksiese wet, Romeinse reg en Ierse Brehon-wet, en dit kom nie voor in die tradisies van die Midde-Oosterse oudheid nie, soos die kode van Hammurabi of die Torah.

Die praktyk word gereguleer in verskillende Germaanse regskodes. Omdat die Germaanse stamwet gewortel is, het die verskillende streekswette van die Frankiese Ryk (en die latere Heilige Romeinse Ryk) verskillende gegewens voorgeskryf, soos toerusting en gevegsreëls. Die Lex Alamannorum (resensie Lantfridana 81, gedateer tot 712–730 nC), word 'n verhoor voorgeskryf in die geval van twee gesinne wat die grens tussen hul lande betwis. 'N Handjievol aarde wat uit die betwiste stuk grond geneem is, word tussen die deelnemers gesit en hulle moet dit met hul swaarde aanraak, elkeen sweer dat hul aanspraak geoorloof is. Die verlore party moet, bo en behalwe sy aanspraak op die grond, 'n boete betaal.

Hoofstede wat die gebruik daarvan beheer, verskyn vanaf die jaar 803. [1] Lodewyk die Vroom het gevegte tussen getuies van elke kant voorgeskryf, eerder as tussen die beskuldigde en die beskuldigde, en kortliks toegelaat dat die kruisproef in sake waar geestelikes betrokke was.

In die Middeleeuse Skandinawië het die praktyk gedurende die Vikingtydperk in die vorm van die Holmgang bestaan.

'N Ongewone variant, die huwelikstryd, het gevegte tussen man en vrou behels, met eersgenoemde op een of ander manier liggaamlik gestrem. Die verloorder is vermoor. [2]

Otto die Grote het in 967 die gebruik van Germaanse stamreg uitdruklik goedgekeur, selfs al het dit nie in die meer 'imperiale' Romeinse reg verskyn nie. Die gevierde saak van Gero, graaf van Alsleben, is 'n goeie voorbeeld. Die Vierde Lateraanse Raad van 1215 het regterlike tweestryde verval, en pous Honorius III het in 1216 die Teutoniese bevel gevra om die oplegging van geregtelike tweestryde op hul pas bekeerde onderdane in Livonia te staak. Die volgende drie eeue was daar latente spanning tussen die tradisionele streekswette en die Romeinse reg.

Die Sachsenspiegel van 1230 erken die geregtelike tweestryd as 'n belangrike funksie om skuld of onskuld vas te stel in gevalle van belediging, besering of diefstal. Die vegters is gewapen met swaard en skild en mag linne en leerklere dra, maar hul kop en voete moet kaal wees en hul hande moet slegs met ligte handskoene beskerm word. Die beskuldigde moet die beskuldigde op die aangewese plek van geveg wag. As die beskuldigde nie verskyn nadat hy drie keer gedagvaar is nie, kan die beskuldigde twee snye en twee steke teen die wind uitvoer, en sy saak sal behandel word asof hy die geveg gewen het. [3]

Die Kleines Kaiserrecht, 'n anonieme regskode van c. 1300, verbied geregtelike tweegevegte heeltemal en verklaar dat die keiser tot hierdie besluit gekom het omdat hy gesien het dat te veel onskuldige mans deur die praktyk skuldig bevind word net omdat hulle fisies swak was. Regterlike tweestryde was nietemin steeds gewild gedurende die 14de en 15de eeu.

Gevegsverhoor speel 'n beduidende rol in die Duitse omheiningsskole in die 15de eeu. Hans Talhoffer beeld veral tegnieke uit wat toegepas moet word in sulke tweestryde, afsonderlik vir die Swabiese (swaard en skild) en Frankiese (mace en shield) variante, hoewel ander Fechtbücher soos dié van Paulus Kal en die Codex Wallerstein toon soortgelyke materiaal. Terwyl gewone mense hul saak voor 'n tweestryd aan 'n regter moes voorlê, het lede van die adel wel die reg gehad om mekaar uit te daag vir tweegevegte sonder die betrokkenheid van die regbank, sodat hierdie soort tweestryde apart was van die geregtelike tweegeveg Middeleeue en is nie geraak deur laasgenoemde se afskaffing in die vroeë 16de eeu deur keiser Maximilian I nie, wat ontwikkel het tot 'n gentlemanly tweestryd van die moderne tyd wat eers in die 19de eeu verbied is.

Hans Talhoffer in sy 1459 Thott codex noem sewe oortredings wat in die afwesigheid van getuies ernstig genoeg geag is om 'n geregtelike tweestryd te regverdig, nl. moord, verraad, dwaalleer, verlating van die heer, "gevangenisstraf" (moontlik in die sin van ontvoering), meineed/bedrog en verkragting.

Slaggeveg, soos die strydproses in Engels genoem is, blyk te wees ingevolge die Normandiese verowering in die gemenereg van die Koninkryk van Engeland ingebring en het dit vir die duur van die hoë en laat middeleeue in gebruik gebly. [4]

Die laaste sekere gevegsverhoor in Engeland het in 1446 plaasgevind: 'n bediende beskuldig sy meester van verraad, en die meester drink te veel wyn voor die geveg en word deur die dienaar doodgemaak. [5] In Skotland en Ierland is die praktyk tot in die sestiende eeu voortgesit. In 1446 is 'n gevegsondersoek gereël tussen twee stryende Ierse magnate, James Butler, 5de graaf van Ormonde, en die prior van Kilmainham, maar koning Henry VI tree persoonlik in om hulle te oorreed om hul geskille vreedsaam te besleg. [6]

Die strydweddenskap was nie altyd beskikbaar vir die verweerder in 'n appèl van moord nie. As die verweerder in die onderhou (dit wil sê in die daad van die pleeg van sy misdaad), as hy probeer het om uit die gevangenis te ontsnap, of as daar so 'n sterk bewys van skuld was dat daar geen effektiewe ontkenning kon wees nie, kon die verweerder nie uitdaag nie. Net so, as die eiser 'n vrou, ouer as 60 jaar, 'n minderjarige, [7] kreupel of blind was, kon hulle die uitdaging afkeur, en die saak sou deur 'n jurie bepaal word. Eweknieë van die koninkryk, priesters en burgers van die stad Londen (die laaste op grond van hul waarborg van ou vryhede onder Magna Carta) kan ook die stryd verwerp as hulle uitgedaag word. As die werklike geveg plaasgevind het, sou dit voorkom in geregtelike lyste, 18 vierkante meter, na die aflegging van ede teen heksery en towery. As die verweerder verslaan en nog geleef het, moes hy ter plaatse gehang word. As hy egter sy teenstander verslaan, of as hy sy teenstander van sonop tot sononder kon afweer, het hy vrygelaat. As die eiser die woord gesê het begeer ("Ek is oorwin") en die stryd laat vaar, sou hy berug verklaar word, die voorregte van 'n vryman ontneem word en aanspreeklik gehou word vir skade aan sy suksesvolle teenstander. [8]

Middeleeue Redigeer

Die vroegste geval waarin 'n gevegsgehalte aangeteken is, was Wulfstan v. Walter (1077), [9] elf jaar na die verowering. Die name van die partye dui daarop dat dit 'n geskil was tussen 'n Saks en 'n Normand. Die Tractatus van Glanvill, omstreeks 1187, blyk dit as die vernaamste manier van verhoor te beskou het, ten minste onder aristokrate wat die wapen mag dra. [10] [11]

Omstreeks 1219 het die verhoor deur die jurie die verhoor vervang deur beproewing, wat sedert die Assize of Clarendon in 1166 die bewys van kroonoproepe was. Met die opkoms van die regsberoep in die dertiende eeu het advokate die veiligheid van lewens bewaak en ledemate van hul kliënte, het mense weggestuur van die stryd. 'N Aantal wettige fiksies is bedink om litigante in staat te stel om van die jurie gebruik te maak, selfs in die soort aksies wat tradisioneel deur 'n geveg probeer is. Die praktyk om verhoor deur die geveg af te weer, het gelei tot die moderne konsep van prokureurs wat litigante verteenwoordig. [ aanhaling nodig ]

Burgerlike geskille is anders hanteer as strafsake. In siviele sake kon vroue, bejaardes, liggaamslamheid, minderjariges en - na 1176 - die geestelikes 'n jurieverhoor kies of kampioene wat in die plek daarvan sou veg, kon laat veg. Huurkampioene was tegnies onwettig, maar dit is duidelik in die rekord. 'N 1276 -dokument uit die biskop Swinefield se huishoudelike rekords maak die belofte om Thomas van Brydges 'n jaarlikse retensiefooi te betaal vir die optrede as kampioen, met ekstra toelae en uitgawes betaal vir elke geveg. [12] In kriminele sake is daar dikwels 'n 'goedkeurder' gekies uit die medepligtiges van die beskuldigde of uit 'n gevangenis om die stryd om die kroon te voer. Gekeurdes het soms hul vryheid gekry nadat hulle vyf proewe gewen het, maar soms is hulle in elk geval opgehang. [13]

In die praktyk word 'n persoon wat deur 'n geveg verhoor word, bygestaan ​​deur 'n tweede, wat dikwels 'n eekhoring genoem word. Die rol van die kaptein was om die geveg by te woon en om die besonderhede van die seremonie met die opponerende span te reël. Met verloop van tyd sou die skare ontmoet en die geskille tydens onderhandelinge oor gevegte oplos. Daar is genoeg tyd hiervoor gemaak deur 'n proses te skep om die saal en toom van perde na gebedsrolle en betowerings te kontroleer en dat litigante handskoene moet ruil (die oorsprong van "die handskoen neerwerp") en soms na aparte kerke moet gaan en vyf gee pence (vir die vyf wonde van Christus) aan die kerk.

Vroeë gevegsondersoeke het verskillende wapens toegelaat, veral vir ridders. Later het die gewone mense oorlogshammers, knuppels of kwartstappe met skerp ysterpunte gekry. Die tweelinggrond was tipies 60 vierkante meter. Gewone mense het 'n reghoekige leerskild toegelaat en kan gewapen wees met 'n leerpak, bloot op die knieë en elmboë en bedek met 'n rooi jas van 'n ligte sy sendal. [14] Die litigante verskyn persoonlik. Die geveg sou voor die middag begin en voor sononder afgehandel wees.

Elkeen van die vegters kon die stryd beëindig en sy saak verloor deur die woord "craven", [4] uit die Ou Frans te skreeu vir "gebroke", wat erken dat "(ek is) oorwin is." Die party wat dit wel gedoen het, hetsy regter of kampioen, is met outlawy gestraf. Die geveg het voortgeduur totdat een party dood of gestremd was. Die laaste man wat staan, het sy saak gewen.

Teen 1300 het die gevegsinspanning amper gesterf ten gunste van die verhoor deur die jurie. Een van die laaste massa -proewe in Skotland, die Slag van die Clans, het in 1396 in Perth plaasgevind. Hierdie byeenkoms het die vorm aanneem van 'n geveg tussen spanne van ongeveer dertig man elk, wat Clan Macpherson en Clan Davidson op die North Inch voor die koning, Robert III, verteenwoordig. Die stryd was bedoel om 'n geskil op te los oor watter stam die regterflank sou hou in 'n komende stryd van beide stamme (en verskeie ander) teen Clan Cameron. Daar word vermoed dat die Clan Macpherson gewen het, maar slegs twaalf mans het van die oorspronklike sestig oorleef. [15]

16de eeu Edit

Daar word vermoed dat die laaste gevegsondersoek onder die gesag van 'n Engelse monarg plaasgevind het tydens die bewind van Elizabeth I op die binnehof van Dublin Castle in Ierland op 7 September 1583. Die geskil was tussen lede van die O'Connor -stam ( ie, sept) in King's County (moderne County Offaly), wat deur twee regters (waarna in die verslag hieronder verwys word) oorreed is om die saak voor die Ierse raad vir beslegting te bring.

Die geskil het waarskynlik betrekking gehad op dinastiese mag binne die gebied van die O'Connors, en die partye, Teig en Conor, het mekaar beskuldig van verraad dat die privaatraad hul wens toegestaan ​​het dat verhoor op 'n geveg die volgende dag en vir 'n ander sodanige verhoor tussen twee ander lede van dieselfde sept sal op die volgende Woensdag plaasvind. Die eerste geveg het plaasgevind soos aangewys, met die vegters "in hul hemde met swaarde, teikens en skedels". An account of the proceedings as observed by one of the privy councillors is given in the State papers Ireland 63/104/69 (spelling adapted):

The first combat was performed at the time and place accordingly with observation of all due ceremonies as so short a time would suffer, wherein both parties showed great courage by a desperate fight: In which Conor was slain and Teig hurt but not mortally, the more was the pity: Upon this Wednesday following Mortogh Cogge [O'Connor] appeared in the same place brought by the captains to the listes, and there stayed 2 hours making proclamation against his enemy by drum and trumpet, but he appeared not . The only thing we commend in this action was the diligent travail of Sir Lucas Dillon and the Master of the Rolls, who equally and openly seemed to countenance the champions, but secretly with very good concurrence, both with us and between themselves, with such regard of her Majesty's service, as giveth us cause to commend them to your Lordships.

The Annals of the Four Masters also refers to the trial and censures the parties for having allowed the English to entice them into the proceedings. It is also referred to in Holinshed's chronicles. This was a trial not at common law but under consiliar jurisdiction.

Modern era Edit

It is uncertain when the last actual trial by battle in Britain took place. While some references speak of such a trial being held in 1631, records indicate that King Charles I intervened to prevent the battle. [16] A 1638 case is less clear: it involved a legal dispute between Ralf Claxton and Richard Lilburne (the latter the father of the pugnacious John Lilburne). The king again stepped in, and judges acted to delay proceedings. [17] [16] No record survives of the outcome of the case, but no contemporary account speaks of the trial by battle actually taking place. [18] [19] The last certain judicial battle in Britain was in Scotland in 1597, when Adam Bruntfield accused James Carmichael of murder and killed him in battle. [20]

Proposals to abolish trial by battle were made in the 17th century and twice in the 18th but were unsuccessful. [21] In 1774, as part of the legislative response to the Boston Tea Party, Parliament considered a bill which would have abolished appeals of murder and trials by battle in the American colonies. It was successfully opposed by Member of Parliament John Dunning, who called the appeal of murder "that great pillar of the Constitution". [22] Writer and MP Edmund Burke, on the other hand, supported the abolition, calling the appeal and wager "superstitious and barbarous to the last degree". [23]

Die writ of right was the most direct way at common law of challenging someone's right to a piece of real property. Die criminal appeal was a private criminal prosecution instituted by the accuser directly against the accused. It was not, unlike the contemporary appeal, a proceeding in a court of superior jurisdiction reviewing the proceedings of a lower court.

Such a private prosecution was last conducted in the case of Ashford v Thornton in 1818. [24] Pronouncing judgement in favour of the accused's plea claiming the wager of battle, Justice Bayley of the King's Bench said that:

One inconvenience attending this mode of proceeding [25] is, that the party who institutes it must be willing, if required, to stake his life in support of his accusation. [26]

Parliament abolished wager of battle the following year, in February 1819, in an Act introduced by the Attorney General Samuel Shepherd. [27] At the same time, they also abolished the writ of right and criminal appeals. [28] Despite this abolition, in 2002 a Welshman in Bury St. Edmunds refusing to pay a small penalty charge for a vehicle-registration violation demanded trial by combat with the Driver and Vehicle Licensing Agency his demand was rejected, and he was fined by a court. [29]

Judicial combat of 1386 Edit

In December 1386, one of the last trials by combat authorised by the French King Charles VI was fought in Paris. The trial was fought to decide a case brought by Sir Jean de Carrouges against squire Jacques Le Gris, whom he accused of raping his wife Marguerite when Carrouges was in Paris conducting business. After lengthy hearings at the Parlement de Paris, with Jacques LeGris claiming that he had not committed the crime and Marguerite being with child, it was decided that guilt could not be decided through a standard jury trial, and a judicial duel was ordered. The duel put three lives in the hands of fate. Those three lives being Jacques LeGris, the accused, Jean de Carrouges, and the accuser, Marguerite. In the duel, the survivor of said duel would be considered the winner of the claim. If Jacques LeGris won the duel, not only would Jean de Carrouges die but his pregnant wife would also be put to death for the crime of being a false accuser.

In late December, shortly after Christmas, the combatants met just outside the walls of the abbey of Saint-Martin-des-Champs in the northern Paris suburbs. After lengthy ceremony, battle was joined, and after a furious and bloody encounter Carrouges stabbed his opponent with a sword [30] and claimed victory, being rewarded with substantial financial gifts and a position in the royal household. The duel was watched by the royal court, several royal dukes and thousands of ordinary Parisians and was recorded in several notable chronicles including Froissart's Chronicles [31] and Grandes Chroniques de France. It has since been covered by several notable texts, including Diderot's Encyclopédie, [32] Voltaire [ aanhaling nodig ] and the Encyclopædia Britannica Eleventh Edition, and also by the 2004 book The Last Duel by Eric Jager. [33]

About A.D. 630, Gundeberga, wife of the Lombard King Arioald (626–636), is supposed to have been accused by a disappointed lover of a plot to poison the king and take another man. King Arioald consented that her innocence should be tested by a single combat between her accuser and a nobleman who undertook to defend her. The accuser having been slain, Gundeberga was declared innocent. [34] This was the first instance of a trial by combat in the history of Italy. [35] In the 730s, the Lombard king Liutprand (712–744) had lost confidence in the likelihood that the trial by battle would provide justice. [36] [37] He knew that the practice was subject to abuse. [38]

The jurisprudence of judicial duelling in Italy is particularly well documented in the 15th and 16th centuries. In particular, the treatises of Achille Marozzo (1536), Giovanni Battista Pigna (1554) and Girolamo Mutio (1560) have contributed to shed considerable light on the subject. [39]

The fundamental aspects of Italy's duelling customs were the following. The offended party (attore or agent) had to accuse the defendant (reo) of an injury of words or deeds he received, in matters that could not be reliably proven in a courtroom. In turn, the defendant had to issue a "mentita", meaning that he had to tell the agent "you lie", which consisted of an injury of words. After this, the agent had to issue a notarized cartello, or a notice of challenge, to the defendant, which, if accepted, would set the formal proceedings in motion.

The defendant had the important advantage of the election of weapons. This was done to ensure that the institution would not be abused by the strong to overpower the weak, although the system was gamed in many ways bordering on the illegal. [40]

The duel would take place on the land of a lord impartial to both parties, or if this was not practicable, alla macchia, meaning on public lands. The herald read the accusation out loud and gave the defendant one last chance to confess. If the latter did not do so, the duel would begin, and it was the responsibility of the issuer of the challenge to deliver (or attempt) the first blow. Incapacitating injuries or death would dictate victory, although other scenarios were possible as well. For instance, if the defendant could successfully parry all blows delivered by the agent until sundown, the defendant would be considered the victor. [41]

With the counter-reformation of the 16th century, duelling became illegal however, its customs were maintained and utilized by most middle to upper social classes until the beginning of the 19th century. [39]

At the time of independence in 1776, trial by combat had not been abolished and it has never formally been abolished since. The question of whether trial by combat remains a valid alternative to civil action has been argued to remain open, at least in theory. In McNatt v. Richards (1983), the Delaware Court of Chancery rejected the defendant's request for "trial by combat to the death" on the grounds that dueling was illegal. [42] In Forgotten Trial Techniques: The Wager of Battle, Donald J. Evans set out the possibility of a trial by battle in the setting of a lawyer's office. [43] A tongue-in-cheek motion during 2015 for trial by combat in response to a civil suit was rejected in 2016. [44]

In 2020, a man named David Zachary Ostrom requested trial by combat in response to a custody and property dispute with his ex-wife over their kids. [45] Following Ostrom requesting trial by combat, he was court-ordered to be administered a sanity test, and was temporarily restricted parenting rights with his kids. Upon successfully clearing his sanity test, David's parenting time was restored. David has since admitted that he initially made the request for trial by combat in order to get media attention around his case. [46]

On 6 January 2021, President Donald Trump's lawyer, and former New York Mayor, Rudy Giuliani called for trial by combat against political opponents who were in the US Capitol during the 2021 storming of the United States Capitol. [47] The incident made worldwide headlines for several days, resulting in many arrests, injuries and resignations. [48]

In The Fair Maid of Perth novel by Walter Scott, there is a trial by combat.

In George R. R. Martin's novel series A Song of Ice and Fire, and its television adaptation Speletjie van trone, trials by combat are a frequent plot device.

In C.S.Lewis's Prince Caspian, Peter Pevensie fought a trial by combat with Miraz.

In William Shakespeare's Hamlet, the title character fought a trial by combat with Laertes.

In Avatar: The Last Airbender, Agni Kais were trials by combat done with firebending.

In the Doctor Who episode "The Christmas Invasion", the Tenth Doctor (David Tennant) defeated the Sycorax leader in a trial by combat.

In Transformers: Age of Extinction, Optimus Prime won the allegiance of the Dinobots by defeating Grimlock in a trial by combat.

In Swart panter, T'Challa fought trials by combat with M'Baku and Erik Killmonger.

In The Flash, Solovar fought a trial by combat with Grodd for the throne of Gorilla City.

In Aquaman, the title character fought trials by combat with Ocean Master.


How Duels Work

In 1777, a committee of Irishmen drew up the dueling code that would come to be used widely throughout Europe and America. The 1777 Irish code was called the Code Duello, and you can read the complete set of rules at PBS.org: Code Duello. This code was so popular that people worldwide came to see it as the "official" rules of dueling. In fact, the U.S. Navy included the text of the Code Duello in the midshipman's handbook up until dueling by naval officers was finally banned in 1862 (Holland, pg. 142).

Highlights of the rules include the steps of an apology, might call off the duel proper dueling etiquette in terms of dignified behavior the role of seconds and what constitutes the end of a duel.

Apologies

An apology on the part of the challenged could avert a bloody duel if delivered properly. Keep in mind that most duels were carried out when one man offended another's honor. As such, the proper apology would logically help solve the problem, even once the duel had already begun. Die Code Duello dictates a complex method of deciding who should apologize first:

The rules also dictate when an apology can be accepted, thus preventing the duel, and when no verbal apology will be sufficient:

Dueling Etiquette

A duel is not a brawl. It is a controlled battle between gentlemen of honor. As such, a certain level of dignity was expected of all participants. Rule 13 is one that describes dignified dueling behavior. It is also one that was frequently broken, since many duelists did not really want to die, kill or maim. They only wanted to defend their honor. Rule 13 states:

Since the holding of the duel itself would usually be enough to satisfy honor, duelists might use dummy bullets, or declare ahead of time that they would fire their weapon into the air or at a non-vital area of their opponent's body. Die Code Duello frowned on this.

The Code also encourages duelists to sleep on their wounded pride and then duel with a calm demeanor the next day: Rule 15 states:

Seconds

The role of the seconds is spelled out in several rules. (Note Rule 18's reference to smooth-bored guns as opposed to rifled weapons.)

  • Rule 18. The seconds load in presence of each other, unless they give their mutual honors they have charged smooth and single, which should be held sufficient.
  • Rule 21. Seconds are bound to attempt a reconciliation before the meeting takes place, or after sufficient firing or hits, as specified.

Die Code Duello acknowledges that the seconds might get involved in the fight themselves, as mentioned in the previous section. The Code is highly specific as to how this involvement might occur:

  • Rule 25. Where seconds disagree, and resolve to exchange shots themselves, it must be at the same time and at right angles with their principals.

When a Duel is Over

Dueling "to the death" is not considered desirable in the Code Duello, although this may have been the ultimate end to many duels. Remember: Dueling is about recovering honor, not about killing. Rule 5 states:

Rule 22 addresses the issue as well:

Perhaps one of the most important rules of dueling does not involve the mechanics of the duel itself, but rather who is allowed to duel. In medieval Europe, dueling was the sport of noble-born men. Although commoners did fight and certainly did face each other in contests that could be called duels, an actual, honor-bound duel had to be conducted between two men of noble rank. One reason for this was economic -- swords are expensive weapons, and not every peasant had one. But it was also a means of distinguishing the upper and lower classes. Many countries had laws forbidding commoners to fight amongst themselves, while dukes, princes and even kings were expected to duel each other.

What reason did nobles have for constantly fighting each other to the death? Read the next section to find out.

Die Code Duello largely replaced earlier codes, including the Flos duellatorum (written in 1410) and Il duello (1550), both Italian dueling codes, as well as the German dueling rules set by the Fechtshulen dueling schools (Holland, pg. 24). A challenge could be issued on the spot by casting a glove, or "gauntlet," onto the ground before your opponent.


Inhoud

The medieval joust has its origins in the military tactics of heavy cavalry during the High Middle Ages. By the 14th century, many members of the nobility, including kings, had taken up jousting to showcase their own courage, skill and talents, and the sport proved just as dangerous for a king as a knight, and from the 15th century on, jousting became a sport (hastilude) without direct relevance to warfare.

Hoë Middeleeue Redigeer

From the 11th to 14th centuries when medieval jousting was still practised in connection to the use of the lance in warfare, armour evolved from mail (with a solid, heavy helmet, called a "great helm", and shield) to plate armour. By 1400, knights wore full suits of plate armour, called a "harness" (Clephan 28-29).

In this early period, a joust was still a (martial) "meeting", i.e. a duel in general and not limited to the lance. Combatants would begin riding on one another with the lance, but might continue with shorter range weapons after the distance was closed or after one or both parties had been unhorsed. Tournaments in the High Medieval period were much rougher and less "gentlemanly" affairs than in the late medieval era of chivalry. The rival parties would fight in groups, with the aim of incapacitating their adversaries for the sake of gaining their horses, arms and ransoms. [5]

Laat Middeleeue Redigeer

With the development of the courtly ideals of chivalry in the late medieval period, the joust became more regulated. This tendency is also reflected in the pas d'armes in general. It was now considered dishonourable to exploit an opponent's disadvantage, and knights would pay close attention to avoid being in a position of advantage, seeking to gain honour by fighting against the odds. This romanticised "chivalric revival" was based on the chivalric romances of the high medieval period, which noblemen tried to "reenact" in real life, sometimes blurring the lines of reality and fiction.

The development of the term knight (chevalier) dates to this period. Before the 12th century, cniht was a term for a servant. In the 12th century, it became used of a military follower in particular. Also in the 12th century, a special class of noblemen serving in cavalry developed, known as milites nobiles. By the end of the 13th century, chivalry (chyualerye) was used not just in the technical sense of "cavalry" but for martial virtue in general. It was only after 1300 that knighthood (kniȝthod, originally a term for "boyhood, youth") came to be used as a junior rank of nobility. By the later 14th century, the term became romanticised for the ideal of the young nobleman seeking to prove himself in honourable exploits, the knight-errant, which among other things encompassed the pas d'armes, including the joust. By the 15th century, "knightly" virtues were sought by the noble classes even of ranks much senior than "knight". [6] The iconic association of the "knight" stock-character with the joust is thus historical, but develops only at the end of the Middle Ages.

Die lyste, of list field, was the arena where a jousting event was held. More precisely, it was the roped-off enclosure where tournament fighting took place. [7] In the late medieval period, castles and palaces were augmented by purpose-built tiltyards as a venue for "jousting tournaments". Training for such activities included the use of special equipment, of which the best-known was the quintain.

Die Chronicles of Froissart, written during the 1390s, and covering the period of 1327 to 1400, contain many details concerning jousting in this era. The combat was now expected to be non-lethal, and it was not necessary to incapacitate the opponent, who was expected to honourably yield to the dominant fighter. The combat was divided into rounds of three encounters with various weapons, of which the joust proper was one. During this time, the joust detached itself from the reality on the battlefield and became a chivalric sport. Knights would seek opportunities to duel opponents from the hostile camp for honour off the battlefield.

As an example, Froissart [8] [9] records that, during a campaign in Beauce in the year 1380, a squire of the garrison of Toury castle named Gauvain Micaille (Michaille)—also mentioned in the Chronique du bon duc Loys de Bourbon as wounded in 1382 at Roosebeke, and again in 1386 in 1399 was in the service of the duke of Bourbon [10] [11] —yelled out to the English,

Is there among you any gentleman who for the love of his lady is willing to try with me some feat of arms? If there should be any such, here I am, quite ready to sally forth completely armed and mounted, to tilt three courses with the lance, to give three blows with the battle axe, and three strokes with the dagger. Now look, you English, if there be none among you in love.

The challenge was answered by a squire named Joachim Cator, who said "I will deliver him from his vow: let him make haste and come out of the castle."

Micaille came to meet his opponent with attendants carrying three lances, three battle-axes, three swords and three daggers. The duel began with a joust, described as follows:

When they had taken their stations, they gave to each of them a spear, and the tilt began but neither of them struck the other, from the mettlesomeness of their horses. They hit the second onset, but it was by darting their spears. [12]

The meeting was then adjourned, and continued on the next day.

They met each other roughly with spears, and the French squire tilted much to the satisfaction of the earl: but the Englishman kept his spear too low, and at last struck it into the thigh of the Frenchman. The earl of Buckingham as well as the other lords were much enraged by this, and said it was tilting dishonorably but he excused himself, by declaring it as solely owing to the restiveness of his horse. [13]

In spite of the French squire's injury, the duel was continued with three thrusts with the sword. After this, the encounter was stopped because of the Micaille's loss of blood. He was given leave to rejoin his garrison with a reward of a hundred francs by the earl of Buckingham, who stated that he had acquitted himself much to his satisfaction.

Froissart describes a tournament at Cambray in 1385, held on the marriage of the Count d'Ostrevant to the daughter of Duke Philip of Burgundy. The tournament was held in the market-place of the town, and forty knights took part. The king jousted with a knight of Hainault, Sir John Destrenne, for the prize of a clasp of precious stones, taken off from the bosom of the Duchess of Burgundy it was won by Sir Destrenne, and formally presented by the Admiral of France and Sir Guy de la Trimouille.

A knightly duel in this period usually consisted in three courses of jousting, and three blows and strokes exchanged with battle-axes, swords, and daggers. This number tended to be extended towards the end of the century, until the most common number was five, as in the duel between Sir Thomas Harpenden and Messire Jean des Barres, at Montereau sur Yonne in 1387 (cinq lances a cheval, cinq coups d'épée, cinq coups de dague et cinq coups de hache). Later could be as high as ten or even twelve. In the 1387 encounter, the first four courses of the joust were run without decisive outcome, but in the fifth Sir Thomas was unhorsed and lost consciousness. He was revived, however, and all the strokes and blows could be duly exchanged, without any further injury.

On another instance, a meeting with sharp lances was arranged to take place near Nantes, under the auspices of the Constable of France and the Earl of Buckingham. The first encounter was a combat on foot, with sharp spears, in which one of the cavaliers was slightly wounded the pair then ran three courses with the lance without further mishap. Next Sir John Ambreticourt of Hainault and Sir Tristram de la Jaille of Poitou advanced from the ranks and jousted three courses, without hurt. A duel followed between Edward Beauchamp, son of Sir Robert Beauchamp, and the bastard Clarius de Savoye. Clarius was much the stronger man of the two, and Beauchamp was unhorsed. The bastard then offered to fight another English champion, and an esquire named Jannequin Finchly came forward in answer to the call the combat with swords and lances was very violent, but neither of the parties was hurt.

Another encounter took place between John de Chatelmorant and Jannequin Clinton, in which the Englishman was unhorsed. Finally Chatelmorant fought with Sir William Farrington, the former receiving a dangerous wound in the thigh, for which the Englishman was greatly blamed, as being an infraction of the rules of the tourney, but an accident was pleaded just as in the case of the 1380 duel between Gauvain Micaille and Joachim Cator. [14]

The medieval joust took place on an open field. Indeed, the term joust meant "a meeting" and referred to arranged combat in general, not just the jousting with lances. At some point in the 14th century, a cloth barrier was introduced as an option to separate the contestants. This barrier was presumably known as tilt in Middle English (a term with an original meaning of "a cloth covering"). It became a wooden barrier or fence in the 15th century, now known as "tilt barrier", and "tilt" came to be used as a term for the joust itself by c. 1510 . The purpose of the tilt barrier was to prevent collisions and to keep the combatants at an optimal angle for breaking the lance. This greatly facilitated the control of the horse and allowed the rider to concentrate on aiming the lance. The introduction of the barrier seems to have originated in the south, as it only became a standard feature of jousting in Germany in the 16th century, and was there called the Italian or "welsch" mode. [15] Dedicated tilt-yards with such barriers were built in England from the time of Henry VIII.

Specialised jousting armour was produced in the late 15th to 16th century. It was heavier than suits of plate armour intended for combat, and could weigh as much as 50 kg (110 lb), compared to some 25 kg (55 lb) for field armour as it did not need to permit free movement of the wearer, the only limiting factor was the maximum weight that could be carried by a warhorse of the period. [16]

During the 1490s, emperor Maximilian I invested a lot of effort into perfecting the sport, for which he received his nickname of "The Last Knight". Rennen en Stechen were two sportive forms of the joust developed during the 15th century and practised throughout the 16th century. The armours used for these two respective styles of the joust were known as Rennzeug en Stechzeug, respectively.The Stechzeug in particular developed into extremely heavy armour which completely inhibited the movement of the rider, in its latest forms resembling an armour-shaped cabin integrated into the horse armour more than a functional suit of armour. Such forms of sportive equipment during the final phase of the joust in 16th-century Germany gave rise to modern misconceptions about the heaviness or clumsiness of "medieval armour", as notably popularised by Mark Twain's A Connecticut Yankee in King Arthur's Court. [17] [18] The extremely heavy helmets of the Stechzeug are explained by the fact that the aim was to detach the crest of the opponent's helmet, resulting in frequent full impact of the lance to the helmet.

By contrast the Rennen was a type of joust with lighter contact. Here, the aim was to hit the opponent's shield. The specialised Rennzeug was developed on the request of Maximilian, who desired a return to a more agile form of joust compared to the heavily armoured "full contact" Stechen. In die Rennzeug, the shield was attached to the armour with a mechanism of springs and would detach itself upon contact.

In France, the 1559 death of King Henry II of wounds suffered in a tournament led to the end of jousting as a sport. [19]

The tilt continued through Henry VIII and onto the reign of Elizabeth I. Under her rule, tournaments were seen as more of a parade or show than an actual martial exercise. [20]

The last Elizabethan Accession Day tilt was held in November 1602 Elizabeth died the following spring. Tilts continued as part of festivities marking the Accession Day of James I, 24 March, until 1624, the year before his death. [21] [22] In the early 17th century, the joust was replaced as the equine highlight of court festivities by large "horse-ballet" displays called carousels, although non-combat competitions such as the ring-tilt lasted until the 18th century.


Feudal Justice

Feudal Justice - Life in the Middle Ages - History of Feudal Justice - Information about Feudal Justice - Feudal Justice Facts - Feudal Justice Info - Middle Ages era - Middle Ages Life - Middle Ages Times - Life - Feudal Justice - Medieval - Mideval - Feudal Justice History - Information about Feudal Justice - Feudal Justice Facts - Feudal Justice Info - Middle Ages era - Middle Ages Life - Middle Ages Times - Information - Facts - Dark Ages - Medieval - Mideval - Feudal system - Manors - Middle Ages Times - Information - Facts - Dark Ages - Medieval - Mideval - Feudal system - Manors - Feudal Justice - Written By Linda Alchin


Kyk die video: Varkens in de middeleeuwen