A 14th century tourney

[Cet]

However, a lot of the exceptions are for jousts or mounted tournaments, which have different requirements from a combat on foot within the lists.

So you're saying that having a set up of pavillions and furniture within the list was typical of late 14th century deeds of arms performed on foot

[Jeff J]

However, a lot of the exceptions are for jousts or mounted tournaments, which have different requirements from a combat on foot within the lists.

So you're saying that having a set up of pavillions and furniture within the list was typical of late 14th century deeds of arms performed on foot

We're talking how many people? Up to a dozen? Would we be having individual pavilions inside or just a pair as the staging area? It'd be nice to have both - a row of pavilions outside representing each and then a set inside as depicted in the rendering Jehan provided (btw - nice artwork!)

[Cet]

We're talking how many people? Up to a dozen? Would we be having individual pavilions inside or just a pair as the staging area? It'd be nice to have both - a row of pavilions outside representing each and then a set inside as depicted in the rendering Jehan provided (btw - nice artwork!)

Right now I'm more interested in what would be representative of period practice as I think that should be our model.

If hard kit requirements settle out along the lines of the stricter standards being proposed I'd expect at most 10 combatants and probably less.

[Winterfell]

I agree with Cet. The focuse is moving a bit away from the tournament itself and focusing on the "pretty things" outside of the main spectacle.

Concerning the overall look of the tournament field setting:
This is based on several styles and rules of tournaments and official duels from the 14th and 15th centuries.
Please keep in mind that this from memory as I am not sitting next to my library:
The field of the tournament is 60 feet long by 40 feet wide with two openings, facing east and west, and a gate to close the ring up. A double ring of fences as high as a man's chin shall encircle the field. In front of each opening is a pavilion for the combatants outside of the ring. Inside the ring are allowed the following. The marshal and up to four of his lieutenants, who shall ensure a fair fight shall be stationed upon the field within the fenced area. Only the combatants, the marshal and his lieutenants may be upon the field when the fighting begins. The combatants will enter the field at the same time, as they are equal in the eyes of God.

For a single combat between two combatants, the marshal will drop his baton and his lieutenants shall drop to the ground and remain there so as not to distract the combatants. The audience shall make no noise or sudden movements to distract or aid the combatants in anyway. Any who do are removed from the area.

The presiding king, prince, duke, baron, or lord and those of his selection shall sit upon a raised dais to view the fighting. There may also be provided a viewing stand upon the left and right of the dais, those of gentle birth may sit upon a cushion, while the common citizenry shall stand where they can. Only one side shall be provided with a dais and viewing stand. No one shall stand, or hang upon the fences that surround the field.

The combat shall begin when the marshal drops his baton and shouts “allez alleâ€

[Jehan de Pelham]

"We're talking how many people? Up to a dozen? Would we be having individual pavilions inside or just a pair as the staging area? It'd be nice to have both - a row of pavilions outside representing each and then a set inside as depicted in the rendering Jehan provided (btw - nice artwork!)"

That's not mine. I lifted it from the ARMA or HACA website, IIRC.

I sent it to my wife and said "I want one."

John
Jehan de Pelham, esquire and servant of Sir Vitus
www.mron.org

[Galleron]

However, a lot of the exceptions are for jousts or mounted tournaments, which have different requirements from a combat on foot within the lists.

So you're saying that having a set up of pavillions and furniture within the list was typical of late 14th century deeds of arms performed on foot

I need to qualify that a bit. We have a limited number of accounts of foot combats in the period, and they don't always make it clear where the arming pavilion, if any was located. The one 14th c. text I know of that says where the arming pavilions were puts them in the list, as do the more numerous and detailed accounts from the early 15th c.

http://willscommonplacebook.blogspot.co ... ithin.html

http://www.thehojos.com/~stmikes/SenDeed.htm

http://willscommonplacebook.blogspot.co ... abant.html

http://www.thehojos.com/~stmikes/Bourgoise.htm

For furniture in the lists, see:

http://willscommonplacebook.blogspot.co ... -1415.html

[Murdock]

would the regular 3 leg tressel table be used by people of all classes?

Or would the upper class have something more substantial.

Or is a rich fellas tressel table just bigger/ nicer but the same basic design???

[SyrRhys]

would the regular 3 leg tressel table be used by people of all classes?

Or would the upper class have something more substantial.

Or is a rich fellas tressel table just bigger/ nicer but the same basic design???

Hi,

I think that even a wealthy individual would be likely to have a trestle table when out of doors; consider the obviously well-accoutered individual in this picture:
http://www.chronique.com/Library/Armour/Armyd.htm
who is being armed from a nice trestle table. I hope that helps!

[Murdock]

that was sorta my thinking but in that pic isn't the knight supposed to be in a house or some other permenant structure?

If nothing else isn't that just a table for his gear?

But it's good for me i can actually build one of them

[Jehan de Pelham]

I have seen sufficient evidence to lead me to the conclusion that tables weren't anything special in the 14th century--what was put over the board was.

John
Jehan de Pelham, esquire and servant of Sir Vitus
www.mron.org
Proprietor, The Compagniye Store

[Tom B.]

Sir Rhys,

Would a coronel be appropriate on the type of spear you were suggesting?
I was thinking that it might look a lot better than just about any other alternative; of course the break away would have to be fairly light. I know that these are used by the jousting community with their break away lances. Nice looking rubber ones are commercially available from Historic Enterprises.

http://www.historicenterprises.com/cart.php?m=product_detail&p=472&c=80

Someone would have to do some testing to find the proper configuration but, I think it might work and would look good.

Tom

[Murdock]

I think the oned from HE are technically illegal in the SCA

buuutttttttt

I certianly would love to see em at the Emprise just because they look so much better.

Not really worried about em going through my visor.

[Chris G.]

I think the oned from HE are technically illegal in the SCA

buuutttttttt

I certianly would love to see em at the Emprise just because they look so much better.

Not really worried about em going through my visor.

I apologize if any of the points I'm about to make have been addressed, I've read through this whole thread but given its length, I might have missed something.

I wonder if something could be made in the style of the HE coronels but with the internal construction similar to the Mandrake low profile thrusting tips. The chief design problem would be making a coronel with protrusions that aren't considered sharp and wouldn't enter more than 1/2" into a helm. My concern is that by the time you design them to fit the rules, they would no longer have the asthetics of a coronel. I have a few thoughts on how it might work that I'll try to get sketched out and posted later today.

I think it was mentioned earlier using 8 ft spears. So long as rattan was used for their construction, a 2" cross section with 2" of progessive give is all that would be required. Since fiberglass spears need an extra inch of diameter, I don't think they will look as good compared to their rattan counterparts. I also don't see anyone making an 8 ft fiberglass spear while I can more easily see people making 8 ft rattan spears as it could be later cut down to function as a polearm or great sword.

[Murdock]

I didn't intend to use fibergalss as it it jarringly modern

[SyrRhys]

Sir Rhys,

Would a coronel be appropriate on the type of spear you were suggesting?
I was thinking that it might look a lot better than just about any other alternative; of course the break away would have to be fairly light. I know that these are used by the jousting community with their break away lances. Nice looking rubber ones are commercially available from Historic Enterprises.

http://www.historicenterprises.com/cart.php?m=product_detail&p=472&c=80

Someone would have to do some testing to find the proper configuration but, I think it might work and would look good.

Tom

Hi Tom,

Page up--I asked the same question myself a page or so ago. Galleron indicated that there's no evidence for the use of these type of heads (which I think are called roquets) in foot combats until much later in history.

That being the case, I wouldn't want to use them: It would be like the guys who want to fight with sword and buckler in fully-armored contests--it's more about doing something different than what the SCA does than it is about doing something right.

[Murdock]

The big foam tips just look ssooooooooooo shitty and are still wrong.

Brians look better, the coronels look better. They still worng but they're prettier.

I doubt we could get em on the field legally so it's kinda a moot point.

[Cet]

We could use lowprofile thrusting tips on spears on an experimental basis as long as they are marked accordingly and the participants and sponsering KEM agree.

[SyrRhys]

I think the oned from HE are technically illegal in the SCA

buuutttttttt

I certianly would love to see em at the Emprise just because they look so much better.

Not really worried about em going through my visor.

Again, as I said to Tom:

Based on what Galleron wrote about these not being used on foot until much later I think we should avoid them. There's far too much emphasis in things like this on doing something different just to change the way SCAdians do it, regardless of whether the change is actually any more appropriate or not.

There's a guy at Pennsic who sells rubber pole arm heads in a variety of interesting and accurate shapes. I don't like them because they have insufficient mass for what they're supposed to represent, however, he also makes spear head pieces that tape to either side of the spear shaft and these can look quite nice, especially if we were to taper our spear shafts as Galleron suggests.

[Chris G.]

Ok, so a coronel shape is wrong for this time period.

SyrRhys,

I'm not following how that spear head is constructed. Do you have any pictures or sketches of this design?

As for tapering the spear shafts, would it be a straight taper or a dual taper? What would be appropriate for the maximum diameter?

[Murdock]

"We could use lowprofile thrusting tips on spears on an experimental basis as long as they are marked accordingly and the participants and sponsering KEM agree. "

We could use them with the "wings" that Rhys is suggesting from Master Jamie and that would look inda more spear ish and they'd be wider than 1 and 1/4 inches total.

[Chris G.]

Ok, I think I understand, the foam is on the sides of the thrusting tip to give it a spear profile.

As for using the low profile thrusting tips, I figured the two-handed thrusting tipswere a more likely candidate, since they already have the cross section required for rattan spears. They just lack the 2" of give, but I guess it comes down to what you could get approved for experimental use and what most closely reflects the look described by Galleron.

[Murdock]

"They just lack the 2" of give"

sure they do. Heck concrete has 2 inches of give if ya push hard enough...

[SyrRhys]

Ok, so a coronel shape is wrong for this time period.

SyrRhys,

I'm not following how that spear head is constructed. Do you have any pictures or sketches of this design?

There are two pieces of rubber shaped like a spear head cut in half lengthwise. You tape them to the shaft of your weapon and voila! they look kind of like a spear head. You can see a picture of one I made here:
http://home.armourarchive.org/members/f ... upshot.jpg
being held by Sir Gaston (the one beside me with the crest on his helm).

They would look better on a properly-tapered shaft; Mac proved to me that almost all spear shafts should be tapered. The length is problematic: Galleron and I have both reached a conclusion of 8 feet looking at some fechtbücher pictures, however I was looking at some other paintings last night and a length of 6.5 feet isn't wrong, either.

[Chris G.]

I like the look of those.

With the taper of the spear, is it appropriate for them to taper from maximum diameter at the base narrowing towards the head, or would the maxiumum thickness be somewhere in the middle, narrowing towards each end, similar to the Jeff Hedgecock's lances shown in this thread.

http://forums.armourarchive.org/phpBB2/ ... 8&start=35

[Murdock]

YEah they look awesom buuuttt
they're real jousting lances

Course with a BIIIggggggggggg lather you could do the same thing with a thick piece of rattan.

OR someone could build a grip that slipped on to the rattan.

"http://www.pixures.be/medias/photos/pbchl002/dhr06089.jpg"

i'm lookling at the box

i also liked the blackl ones with the cresents on em at the top of the other thread.

[Gwydion Caithnes]

There's a guy at Pennsic who sells rubber pole arm heads in a variety of interesting and accurate shapes. I don't like them because they have insufficient mass for what they're supposed to represent

Yeah, I know - that's because, except for the axe-heads (and maybe even for those) they aren't meant to be used without additional foam padding. At least, I don't think they are - and here's why: Last year I bought a mace head from him, taped it up (sans foam), and then realized that there is absolutely NO "progressive give." Put some foam on the striking surfaces - problem solved, and they look a lot more "correct."

Bought his "Italian bill" design this year, and can't wait to strap it to a pole and pad it. Should look(and work) spiffy.

[Chris G.]

I wasn't suggesting the spears be constructed like those lances, I was using that as a reference for a weapon with a dual taper. My main question was which type of taper would be approriate.

[SyrRhys]

I like the look of those.

With the taper of the spear, is it appropriate for them to taper from maximum diameter at the base narrowing towards the head, or would the maxiumum thickness be somewhere in the middle, narrowing towards each end, similar to the Jeff Hedgecock's lances shown in this thread.

http://forums.armourarchive.org/phpBB2/ ... 8&start=35

While there is some evidence for using lances directly off the horse (e.g., the von Danzig and Goliath Fechtbücher), the kind of lances you're looking at are from the 15th century. 14th-century spears are what's called for here, just tapered from butt to tip.

[Murdock]

"and then realized that there is absolutely NO "progressive give." Put some foam on the striking surfaces "

Neither does the rattan. There is no reason we need to pad those if we allow unpadded poles, they weigh nothing and are still more padding than bear rattan.

[Chris G.]

I was a bit unclear before in referencing the lances.

So proper construction is a straight taper.
What do you suggest as the starting diameter?

[Guy Dawkins]

would the regular 3 leg tressel table be used by people of all classes?

Or would the upper class have something more substantial.

Or is a rich fellas tressel table just bigger/ nicer but the same basic design???

would the 'lower classes' have had tables or the need of them?

[SyrRhys]

I was a bit unclear before in referencing the lances.

So proper construction is a straight taper.
What do you suggest as the starting diameter?

Check on an earlier page of this discussion. Galleron said he was going to try to start with 2" rattan.

[Jeff J]

would the 'lower classes' have had tables or the need of them?

You mean in general, or at the emprise? In general - "ummm... yeah"

At the emprise - not really.

[Ottokar]

I think it was mentioned earlier using 8 ft spears. So long as rattan was used for their construction, a 2" cross section with 2" of progessive give is all that would be required.

2" of 'give' is a misreading of the rules. There must be 2" of material in front of the tip of the end of the shaft. You would have to have 100% compression to get 2" of give out of 2" of material. Which is, BTW, the same rule for 2-handed swords and pole weapons.

E. Rattan Spears
1. Rattan spears shall not have a cutting or smashing head.
2. Shafts may be of rattan of no less than 1¼ inch (31.8mm) in diameter.
3. Thrusting tips shall be no less than 2 inches (50.8mm) in diameter/cross-section and have 2 inches (50.8mm) of resilient material in front of the rigid tip of the weapon, thereby providing progressively resistant give.
4. Total spear length shall not exceed 12 feet (3.658m).

http://sca.org/officers/marshal/combat/ ... ndbook.pdf

[Gwydion Caithnes]

"and then realized that there is absolutely NO "progressive give." Put some foam on the striking surfaces "

Neither does the rattan. There is no reason we need to pad those if we allow unpadded poles, they weigh nothing and are still more padding than bear rattan.

Well, quoting "Da Rulz..."

Single-Handed Mass Weapons

1. Hafts shall be of rattan of no less than 1¼ inches (31.8mm) in diameter.

2. The head shall be firmly and securely attached to the haft. The head shall allow at least a ½ inch (12.7mm) of progressive give between the striking surface and the weapon haft.

The rationale might be that the foot-poundage in a mass weapon is much higher than that of a stick of rattan. It's not simply a function of hardness - it's the mass as well.

Those rubber heads Rhys was referring to don't give a 1/2 inch.

But I derail...