The Armour Archive

In the KOM thread I had asked about unhorsing and ransoms. It was replied that unhorsings were less common. So was unhorsing not a part of the point system?

What about broken lances back then? Is that why some of the groups don't like KOM?

Do the other jousting groups not allow broken lances and unhorsing?

Thanks in advance!

Rules for jousting very greatly over time and place. Broken lances appears to be the most common scoring method but certainly there were times and places where unhorsings were the goal. In Tudor and Elizabethan England we have surviving scoring checks showing point scoring for touches to the body or the head and for breaking the lances on those targets but none for unhorsing. Maximillian l(and others) left tournement books which described separate courses where either unhorsing or lance breaking could be the goal but not usually both. Often victors were determine by the ladies in attendance and they were not bound by points in determining their champion.
Balsa tips are used to replicate breaking lances for many modern jousters. Tapered lances are for more expensive to have produced these days then they were and replaceable tips are usually considered a fair exchange.
Realgestech - what KoM call what they do - doesn't seem to be a very common historical term. When I have found it, it has translated to the "Royal joust" which seems to me to be where the royals actually participated in the joust. These jousts seem to include the scoring of lance breaks and the use of weakened lances but not unhorseings. I have also seen seperate references to the "gridded grande guard" reenforcing plate which is a defining feature of these modern "realgestechs" and they are said to be gridded assist in the breaking of lances. Historically they were used with iron coronels which could catch the grids but the modern jousters use blunted lances which have a reduced chance of doing so. Factually they make the riders top heavy and therefore tippy.
5-6 modern "troops" use similar rules to the KoM on a regular basis. Some don't use the gridded grand guard all the time, some use short balsa tips or other variations for the mix. Rod walker is talking about a combo style using the grided reenforcing plate with the tapered lance and 3ft balsa dowel.
Groups that use tapered lances generally don't score unhorsings, generally use strapped shields as there is a greater variety of armour styles when you aren't restricted to bolting a plate to your harness.
Most of the complaints I have heard about KoM have not been about the jousting style itself.

Cool info, thanks.

So is the wood in the lances used today similar to that used historically?

And I've always wondered after watching A Knights Tale, did some of the jousters 'tip' the lance to make it more dangerous or was that just the Hollywood treatment?

They used plenty of war lances, so, no need to make them more dangerous, especially considering that the goal was not to kill but just to defeat the opponent.
If in a joust of peace one would be caught using a war lance, he would be soon fall in disgrace, as the world of knights and thus jousters relied 100% on renown , fame, courage and chivalry, and they would not have seen with favor cheating to cause deliberate harm to the opponent.

You would ask why use war lances on a friendly joust, I dare to say: "are you so coward to not dare meet me with a war lance?" No need to ask, because they asked for steel, and I've never read that someone declined a war tip. Crazy boys.

early non-combat jousts often used rebated battle tips or untipped lances until the developement of the coronel. There were occasions and places where sharps tips were used though. Most of Maximillians styles were variations of jousting with sharp tips but I believe the most commonly performed styles used coronels. I have heard reference to a single style wherein one jouster would use a sharp but the other a coronel but the armour for jousting with sharps was specifically designed to be used against a sharp tipped lance to provie the josuter with the utmost protection. Genrealyl speaking everyone at a tournement used the same lances and there are records of tournement organizers purchasing hundreds of lances for single occasions.

Yep.. once you are into that area of jousting armor, it's purpose built, just for that. Far heavier and more protective than something you'd be trudging about the field in.

There's one in the ROM that I'm not sure if I got a photo of or not, but it's damned thick.

I did! Two.. and a provenance card..

I always find if funny when the description says the knight could tilt his head bac kat the moment of impact and be entirely protected. You see that big stud coming out of the visor, it was attached to a huge shield, no way you could move your head in that thing.

Mike England wrote:I always find if funny when the description says the knight could tilt his head bac kat the moment of impact and be entirely protected. You see that big stud coming out of the visor, it was attached to a huge shield, no way you could move your head in that thing.

Well, when you straighten up, your head DOES tilt up.. and puts the bevor higher than the eyeslots.

and any time I've seen folks joust in these getups, that's exactly what they do.. lean over, get their target, couch, then lean back just before impact.

I've heard lots of discussions about jousting with stechhelms and you could concieveably lean back with one of those on but a rennhut usually, via that big bolt, attaches to a large leather covered steel shield which would prevent movement. I have never heard of anyone doing a modern rennen (sharp tip joust). Usually rennhut's look more like Sallets so I find that one very interesting.

Replaceable tips are documented in the 16th century.

We have a great exhibit (including lances!) up now at the Higgins.

Maeryk wrote:

Mike England wrote:I always find if funny when the description says the knight could tilt his head bac kat the moment of impact and be entirely protected. You see that big stud coming out of the visor, it was attached to a huge shield, no way you could move your head in that thing.

Well, when you straighten up, your head DOES tilt up.. and puts the bevor higher than the eyeslots.

and any time I've seen folks joust in these getups, that's exactly what they do.. lean over, get their target, couch, then lean back just before impact.

Once again, this is a fallacy.

Jousters would never lean back and blind themseves before striking. You need to be able to see to strike. There is also the issue that these frogmouth style helms are usually botlted or strapped to your cuirass and of course used with an arret and lances with grapers. So if you lean back your lance will lift at it is effectively attached to your cuirass as well via the arret and graper. This means you miss. Also leaning back means you will be unhorsed far eaiser.

This is one of those persitent armour myths.

So why did these helms evolve Rod?

I mean, it's apparent this is how you do it now.. but I'm wary to accept you can speak for those 500 years in the grave.

Maeryk wrote:So why did these helms evolve Rod?

I mean, it's apparent this is how you do it now.. but I'm wary to accept you can speak for those 500 years in the grave.

On this subject I can 100% speak for how it is done.

These helms evolved to offer the best protection from broken lances whilst offering the best vision. I have taken numerous strikes to the eyeslit in mine because the helm does wht it is designed to do. The shape means anything below the eyeslit is deflected away and anything on or above the eyeslit is likewise deflected away.

I have copious digital copies of manuscripts showing these helms in use and not one jouster is blinding themselves. I have numerous re-printed jousting treatises and not a single one of them says for the jouster to blind themselves, in fact they all stress being able to see your lance tip strike.

Its also worth mentioning that many of the joust harnesses with frogmouths also have a cradle to hold the rear part of the lance as well as the arret. you literally move your entire torso to aim those things, so leaning back at the last second is the last thing you want to do.

So yes, it is a myth.

Rod Walker wrote:

Maeryk wrote:So why did these helms evolve Rod?

I mean, it's apparent this is how you do it now.. but I'm wary to accept you can speak for those 500 years in the grave.

On this subject I can 100% speak for how it is done.

These helms evolved to offer the best protection from broken lances whilst offering the best vision. I have taken numerous strikes to the eyeslit in mine because the helm does wht it is designed to do. The shape means anything below the eyeslit is deflected away and anything on or above the eyeslit is likewise deflected away.

I have copious digital copies of manuscripts showing these helms in use and not one jouster is blinding themselves. I have numerous re-printed jousting treatises and not a single one of them says for the jouster to blind themselves, in fact they all stress being able to see your lance tip strike.

Well, cool then! (and no, that's not sarcastic)

I can see your point Rod. (and it does make perfect sense). It does bring up a question. Does the armor/helm combo have a tendency to put the rider into a bit of a fetal position? It would make riding the canter a bit...awkward?

Mike England wrote:Rules for jousting very greatly over time and place. Broken lances appears to be the most common scoring method but certainly there were times and places where unhorsings were the goal. In Tudor and Elizabethan England we have surviving scoring checks showing point scoring for touches to the body or the head and for breaking the lances on those targets but none for unhorsing. Maximillian l(and others) left tournement books which described separate courses where either unhorsing or lance breaking could be the goal but not usually both. Often victors were determine by the ladies in attendance and they were not bound by points in determining their champion.
Balsa tips are used to replicate breaking lances for many modern jousters. Tapered lances are for more expensive to have produced these days then they were and replaceable tips are usually considered a fair exchange.
Realgestech - what KoM call what they do - doesn't seem to be a very common historical term. When I have found it, it has translated to the "Royal joust" which seems to me to be where the royals actually participated in the joust. These jousts seem to include the scoring of lance breaks and the use of weakened lances but not unhorseings. I have also seen seperate references to the "gridded grande guard" reenforcing plate which is a defining feature of these modern "realgestechs" and they are said to be gridded assist in the breaking of lances. Historically they were used with iron coronels which could catch the grids but the modern jousters use blunted lances which have a reduced chance of doing so. Factually they make the riders top heavy and therefore tippy.
5-6 modern "troops" use similar rules to the KoM on a regular basis. Some don't use the gridded grand guard all the time, some use short balsa tips or other variations for the mix. Rod walker is talking about a combo style using the grided reenforcing plate with the tapered lance and 3ft balsa dowel.
Groups that use tapered lances generally don't score unhorsings, generally use strapped shields as there is a greater variety of armour styles when you aren't restricted to bolting a plate to your harness.
Most of the complaints I have heard about KoM have not been about the jousting style itself.

nice

For those of you that joust what is the best and worst thing about it for you?

What kind of horse do you use?

How much training did you and your horse go through?

I wanted to be a part of the SCA experimental jousting but my horse outgrew his horse trailer so no more events for us. I thought about attending the Canadian Jousting School - it looked like it would be fun to try.

I think you guys are rockstars!

As a regular user of frogmouth helm, I fully support Rod's comments.

Sight is directed straight forward with no need to specifically lean and no need to straighten up upon impact... not even with the OK headshot regulation that we used for several events.

http://forums.armourarchive.org/phpBB3/viewtopic.php?f=16&t=75401&hilit=Remo+Bottes

http://www.pixures.be/web2009marle/pages/mrl90448.htm

http://www.pixures.be/web2009marle/pages/mrl90495.htm

According to my knowledge it is the only BOLTED frog in use nowadays, as all others I have seen were bolted.
Best developpements were the head suspension padding and wheight suspension system.

liviatasia wrote:I wanted to be a part of the SCA experimental jousting but my horse outgrew his horse trailer . . .

Livia, what manner of horse is he . . .?

He's a Percheron. 18 hands, 2250 lbs. I got a lot of crap for trying to claim he was my Roman mount. Kept getting told how not only wasn't he period for Rome but not for any SCA time. Which I knew, but I couldn't help that he kept growing til he was eight.

Like sitting on a propane tank, isn't it?
My first horse was a shire.

Exactly! Then I ride a light horse and I feel like I'm riding a pencil.

liviatasia wrote:He's a Percheron. 18 hands, 2250 lbs. I got a lot of crap for trying to claim he was my Roman mount. Kept getting told how not only wasn't he period for Rome but not for any SCA time. Which I knew, but I couldn't help that he kept growing til he was eight.

Now that's a horse (well at least one that wouldn't look at me and expect to be the rider.) Seriously, he sounds gorgeous.

REAL Horses weigh a Ton!

On the back of my car my bumber sticker says "Unless it weighs a ton, it's just a horse!!"



Lloyd do your groups ever come to Oregon/Washington? We've got a pretty good jousting group that goes to the Clark County Fair in Vancouver Washington each summer. not sure who they are though.

And Shanes's group used to go to a Ren Faire in Oregon but nit sure if they still are. We need a better jousting presence up here!