Deed of Arms at GW - horseman's armor and peasant arms?

Gaston de Clermont · Post by **Gaston de Clermont** » Sat Mar 29, 2008 4:44 pm

I'm concerned folks are loosing site of what an authenticity Nazi looks like. It's not the authenticity that most folks really have the problem with, it's the mean attitude. Just being right about a subject (I fought in the deed, and I'm quite sure the weapons were pretty appropriate) doesn't give you carte blanche to deride someone else. Sure it's satisfying to tear apart their ignorance, but if you're not gentle about it you might be loosing a convert to the cause.

You don't have to be JC. But flies, honey, vinegar.

Gaston de Clermont · Post by **Gaston de Clermont** » Sat Mar 29, 2008 5:07 pm

I'm in the red, black and white leading off a prisoner in the Deed at Gulf War.

audax · Post by **audax** » Sat Mar 29, 2008 5:20 pm

Looking sharp, Gaston.

Barnet · Post by **Barnet** » Sat Mar 29, 2008 7:04 pm

When I grow up I want to be just like Gaton, cept with more hair :shock:

audax · Post by **audax** » Sat Mar 29, 2008 8:27 pm

He sports the cleandome look pretty well.

Jehan de Pelham · Post by **Jehan de Pelham** » Sun Mar 30, 2008 1:20 am

Since you are a belted knight, and therefore a man of some parts, and since you speak so patiently in disagreement, I deem that you are wise and courteous also, I will agree to relook this circumstance from your assumption that the statement was made with no taint of sneering or puffed up looking down one's nose at the works of others.

In such a case as that, I would recommend--thinking that I know what I know to be true, that the harness was not horse harness, and the weapons were not peasant weapons--this exchange:

"Yeah, it was nice, but they were fighting on foot in horseman's armour using peasant weapons (the pole weapons)."

"As you say. Come with me. I have some excellent drink."

And by so leading the mistaken fellow, I ply him with strong drink and documentation, and also feast him, so that his resistance to correct information is so weakened and he is thereby brought over to right thinking on the matter.

Discussing the point further without recourse to documentation (which I used to bring with me for just such occasions), would be fruitless. So if the response to the invitation would be refusal and continuing to hold that position, I would listen or pretend to listen and say nothing except "Allow me to show you differently."

I cannot think of a better response, serving as it does both truth and addresses the lack of information that led to the statement.

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

Bernhart von Bruck · Post by **Bernhart von Bruck** » Sun Mar 30, 2008 11:48 am

Chello!

lmao....and now that I've shorted out my flatscreen monitor by spewing it with milk, my dear Jehan, you may send a check for $200 or ceramics of like value to.....

Tony

Steve S. · Post by **Steve S.** » Mon Mar 31, 2008 8:29 am

Discussing the point further without recourse to documentation (which I used to bring with me for just such occasions), would be fruitless. So if the response to the invitation would be refusal and continuing to hold that position, I would listen or pretend to listen and say nothing except "Allow me to show you differently."

This is exactly the situation I was in.

Steve

Steve S. · Post by **Steve S.** » Mon Mar 31, 2008 8:59 am

Is there any documentation about armour and weapons specifically for tournament in the 14th century?

Steve

Christoffer · Post by **Christoffer** » Mon Mar 31, 2008 10:57 am

Gaston's words would be just as true and valid, if he were a squire, or even some one who just started playing yesterday. The value of one's opinion is far more important than the rank they have achieved in this game.

Jehan de Pelham · Post by **Jehan de Pelham** » Mon Mar 31, 2008 4:40 pm

Is this an attempt to make courtesy out to be some sort of subservience?

Write as you like. I choose to give some credence to a person's station.

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

Nissan Maxima · Post by **Nissan Maxima** » Mon Mar 31, 2008 4:54 pm

Christoffer wrote: The value of one's opinion is far more important than the rank they have achieved in this game.

To paraphrase:
"The opinions of those who have more knowledge are more worthy."

Christoffer · Post by **Christoffer** » Mon Mar 31, 2008 5:08 pm

Wisdom is wisdom, if you fail to recognize it because you are hung up on station then you are going to miss out on some great ideas and thoughts.

The way you wrote what you did came across that the only reason you were giving credence to Gaston's thoughts were because of his knighthood and not because of any merit that thoughts might possess.

Gaston de Clermont · Post by **Gaston de Clermont** » Mon Mar 31, 2008 5:33 pm

Steve -SoFC- wrote:Is there any documentation about armour and weapons specifically for tournament in the 14th century?

Steve

A great general source Duke Finnvarr compiled from Froissart:
http://www.nipissingu.ca/department/his ... /deeds.htm
Specific examples:
http://www.nipissingu.ca/department/his ... ickery.htm -see the battle axe reference at the end
http://www.nipissingu.ca/department/his ... rdeau2.htm -again the battle-axe is used, though this time specifically on horseback. They may well mean a shorter version that what was perfered in our deed.
http://www.nipissingu.ca/department/his ... edyonn.htm -more battle-axes
http://www.nipissingu.ca/department/his ... rdeau1.htm
In this one they joust, and then fight on foot with the same armour: http://www.nipissingu.ca/department/his ... /trial.htm
He's also published a book on the subject. Longer axes became more popular in the 15th century as armour improved so the examples of pole axe and long sword fights there are easy to come by.

As much as I'd like to believe my opinions have an inherent "truthiness" there is reason to weigh the opinions of those with higher rank more strongly. To gain those ranks they've had to tread the path a bit, and hopefully have gained a somewhat enlightened perspective. If the subject were modern warfare I would surely defer to John's opinion. He has experience and rank there that I don't.

Is anyone else weirded out by Nissan parapharsing Charny? You know you want to be 14th century. All the cool kids are doing it! I'd love to see your passion and prowess applied to these deeds of arms.

Jean Paul de Sens · Post by **Jean Paul de Sens** » Mon Mar 31, 2008 6:16 pm

I've been thinking a lot about the responses of Jehan and Gaston. For the record, I have a special fondness for these two gentleman, and they are both strong of heart. While I have never met Jehan in person, I have shared good conversation with Gaston, and account him an ideal of what a knight should be, modern or SCA.

I do feel that for me the important reason I feel Jehan's initial response to be acceptable is that Steve stated that it was a friend of his that gave the original statement.

While our friends often share our likes and interests, I've noted a peculiar affinity for them to miss gentle remonstrance.

In short, when my friends are concerned, sometime the clue-by-four is the most appropriate tool.

Now for a person of whom I do not know, or of whom I'm not familiar, I would employ Gaston's method.

In short, if I'd thee or thou him, I'd follow Jehan's original response.
If I'd use you, or well, you, I'd use Gaston's approach.

Jean Paul

Steve S. · Post by **Steve S.** » Mon Mar 31, 2008 8:51 pm

You all will be happy to know that the pictures provided have changed the mind of my friend.

My friend would like to know more about this picture:

What is this an illumination of?

Also, what were the rules for the deed of arms for weapons?

Steve S. · Post by **Steve S.** » Mon Mar 31, 2008 9:09 pm

I do feel that for me the important reason I feel Jehan's initial response to be acceptable is that Steve stated that it was a friend of his that gave the original statement.

In short, when my friends are concerned, sometime the clue-by-four is the most appropriate tool.

I am always mindful of the feelings of my friends, and so I would never be so blunt with them, especially without being able to quote chapter and verse to explain why they were wrong. The discussion immediately following the Deed of Arms comment was about the effectiveness of maille, about which I corrected my friend at length

.

And friendship aside, I would never be so blunt with the person under discussion. I wish I could say more without giving away the identify of my friend, whom I love dearly and would not betray his ignorance in public here, and I am probably saying too much right now, but suffice it to say that those of you who respect the stations within the SCA would never speak so to this person, either. I don't believe Jehan would, either.

In closing, I will say that I did not come here seeking the means to rebuke my friend's ignorance, but rather the means to remedy it, and that was achieved. Brute force may have worked also, but gentle persuasion with evidence has earned a convert.

Thank you all.

Murdock · Post by **Murdock** » Mon Mar 31, 2008 10:34 pm

"What is this an illumination of?"

Guys fighting in armour

Steve S. · Post by **Steve S.** » Mon Mar 31, 2008 11:57 pm

Seriously, what source is this picture from?

Steve

Jehan de Pelham · Post by **Jehan de Pelham** » Tue Apr 01, 2008 1:16 am

"I don't believe Jehan would, either."

Then I doubt I would, too. Remember, all the information that was given was that someone had said what was said.

I have so many words that I might have difficulty selecting which ones to use without enough information to select them, but rarely have I mis-spoke when the matter was clear. In almost all cases, in person I am a very gentle person, and even what I wrote the first time, I would have found a way to say humbly enough to express my horror in a kindly fashion.

That said, even Kings and Knights and all other brands of men and women on two legs, high and low, can be mistaken, and one can find the words to get the point across in almost all circumstances, unless one is unfortunate enough to be near a madman of high stature who requires truth to be as he fancies it, in which case, God Keep You.

As far as the picture is concerned, that is a battle around the arms of France. As such, this is certainly no squabble between peasants, but a manful contest between noble cousins. It is almost the best proof possible of the use of poll axes by noblemen on foot that could have been presented, at least as far as visual representations. One can dicker over whether or not the illustrator knew his stuff, but I am of the opinion that illustrators who drew noblemen doing stuff that peasants do would lose their clients, or their employment.

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

P.S.: Cristoffer, wisdom is indeed wisdom. If it were not, it would be "cabbage," or "bucket," or some other word to represent its meaning according to its function. Here is a little wisdom: To shape one's speech to be pleasant and to recognize the achievements of others is politeness. When it is so ingrained into your speech as to be indistinguishable from the other parts of what you say, so that it seems natural, then it is even more pleasant. In a martial caste society, it is meet and good to take into account the station of whom you address, but if you read again you will discover that like Steve's friend, I too was won over by courtesy. Therefore the lesson of this discussion is that courtesy is a powerful inducement to friendship and also to imparting information. Because rarely do people listen to a dick, whoever they are

Murdock · Post by **Murdock** » Tue Apr 01, 2008 9:20 am

i gotta find the book i have it in Steve

the place i have it saved has no context for it

Steve S. · Post by **Steve S.** » Tue Apr 01, 2008 9:30 am

Then I doubt I would, too. Remember, all the information that was given was that someone had said what was said.

I meant no offense to you Jehan - I know you to be an honorable man and in fact I was trying to be like you and Sir Vitus in my discussions with my friend. You are my role model.

As far as the picture is concerned, that is a battle around the arms of France. As such, this is certainly no squabble between peasants, but a manful contest between noble cousins. It is almost the best proof possible of the use of poll axes by noblemen on foot that could have been presented, at least as far as visual representations. One can dicker over whether or not the illustrator knew his stuff, but I am of the opinion that illustrators who drew noblemen doing stuff that peasants do would lose their clients, or their employment.

To be clear: I'm not debating what is shown in the picture. I believe it was this very picture that convinced my friend of his error, and he wants to know where the picture came from.

I would say, though, friend Jehan, that on page one of this thread you've got pictures of men in noble armour shooting bows in war and digging under castle walls as a sapper, so a little bit of caution is in order when looking at these pictures, but I agree with you completely concerning the picture of the men fighting under the banner of France.

Steve

Jehan de Pelham · Post by **Jehan de Pelham** » Wed Apr 02, 2008 4:54 am

I thank you for your generosity in this matter. You of course have unlocked the key to my heart through such a compliment that I cannot choose but to respond courteously. It is always dangerous when men of valor converse because who knows which bull will decide to begin a contest of a different nature! :lol:

I think that your concern about the similarity of the armor in the two illustrations brings up an excellent point that should become common knowledge among those who study the medieval martial culture, and it is this:

Armor in itself does not indicate nobility. It can be a symbol of status, but it is not necessarily so, because it is also mere equipment.

What I mean to say is this: Context will show the truth of the matter, unless it is undiscernable. I'll try and explain, because it's a little unclear in my own mind just as I wrote that.

In the one illustration, we see the banner of France. Therefore, I make the conclusion that the men at arms contending beneath it would be at the least noble cousins or gentlemen, and at least on the side of France. Why? Because you would not entrust the defense of your King's banner to low-born churls. Okay, a conclusion based on an assumption, but I could support it with recourse to documentation if needed and I had the inclination.

On the other, we see men at arms in the heavy toil of breaking down a strong place. There is no indication of whether these men at arms are noble or not, but we see certain things being done: Manual labor in a military context, archery, which was abhorred to some degree by some noblemen as unvalorous but a useful necessity, and so forth. Because of this, and because my readings lead me to suspect this, I conclude that perhaps what we see are men at arms of non-noble station.

Notice how I am guarded in my conclusions, but of course at some point in all endeavors you have to reconcile yourself to what you know and don't know and proceed as confidently as your courage allows. My experience as a Soldier emboldens me to go into life not knowing the whole picture and trusting to my good sword arm and luck. :lol:

Now, how does one reach this sort of "Truthiness?" It's difficult to know anything, but you can feel at least that you've done your due diligence by reading, by poring over illustrations, and by discussing such matters with others who also investigate it.

And this, too, is part of the life of arms.

I hope this has been helpful in understanding how I came to the conclusions I hold as naturally as I breathe on the matter.

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

Steve S. · Post by **Steve S.** » Wed Apr 02, 2008 12:09 pm

I agree with you 100%, and have held similar beliefs for some time.

Murdock: Please send the source when you get a chance.

Steve

Steve S. · Post by **Steve S.** » Wed Apr 09, 2008 12:20 pm

Hey Murdock, got a source for that picture yet?

Steve

Murdock · Post by **Murdock** » Wed Apr 09, 2008 12:37 pm

Nope

i fergot to look after that day

oops :oops:

Steve S. · Post by **Steve S.** » Sat Apr 12, 2008 8:57 pm

bump

Strongbow · Post by **Strongbow** » Sat Apr 12, 2008 9:41 pm

Steve, I believe that work is the Chroniques de France de Saint-Denis (British Library, Ms Royale 20.c.vii) c. 1390-1400 I think?

that scene, I believe, depicts a conflict between the French and English, though I don't know which one specifically.

Steve S. · Post by **Steve S.** » Tue Apr 15, 2008 7:41 am

My friend has looked through the Chroniques and says he cannot find the illustration. He wonders if the picture might be an allegory depicting some past event in anachronistic fashion.

My response would be that even if this were so, it still shows 14th century men fighting on foot, so even if the scene is representative of, say, some political issue, the way it is shown still indicates a way of armoured foot combat.

A cite for the illustration would be great.

Steve

James B. · Post by **James B.** » Tue Apr 15, 2008 8:44 am

Steve send him to Master Gallaron's blog: http://willscommonplacebook.blogspot.com/

He has 51 links about deeds of arms: http://willscommonplacebook.blogspot.co ... 0of%20Arms

On his site:

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

Richard Beauchamp vs. Pandolfo Malatesta 1408:

How at place and day assigned, resorting thither all the country, Sir Pandolf entered the place, nine spears before him. Then, the act of spears to the earl Richard worshipfully finished, after went they together with axes, and if the lord Galeot had not the sooner cried peace, Sir Pandolf, sore wounded on the left shoulder, had been utterly slain in the field.

Linked from his site:

http://www.nipissingu.ca/department/his ... /monst.htm

Deeds of Arms A Collection of Accounts of Formal Deeds of Arms of the Fourteenth Century:

First, to enter the lists on foot, each armed as seems best to them, having their dagger and sword upon their body as they wish, and having a pollaxe of such length as I shall give.

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

Continge vs. de Bars (1415) :

These arms were to be done on foot for a number of strokes; that is to say twelve strokes with the axe, twelve strokes with the sword and twelve strokes with the dagger.

Strongbow · Post by **Strongbow** » Tue Apr 15, 2008 9:24 am

Steve I can't find the EXACT image (I don't have access to all the Chronique images... does your buddy? If he does, I'll be glad to look for it), but the image on folio 13v is almost identical. And the art style is the same, indicating it's the same artist and extremely likely from the same source. It shows the same kind of weapons in use.

The Chroniques are a history of France, and so not allegorical. Many images are representing older French histry (for example the Crusades), but are depicted contemporarily. In the image posted here, the Lillies of France are clearly seen. I see no reason to think this doesn't represent men-at-arms in foot combat in the late 14th or very early 15th century.

James B. · Post by **James B.** » Tue Apr 15, 2008 9:29 am

I would also like to add that most of the deeds I saw on Master Gallaron's blog said "two handed sword" not single handed sword with a shield just to poke your bud with some more facts :wink:

Murdock · Post by **Murdock** » Tue Apr 15, 2008 11:49 am

Well Strong bow beat me to it

all it says in the book i have as a reference is

Chroniques de France de Saint-Denis (British Library, Ms Royale 20.c.vii

Strongbow · Post by **Strongbow** » Tue Apr 15, 2008 12:02 pm

Murdock... do you have that EXACT image or one very much like it? The one I've seen is on p 65 of Osprey's "Poitiers 1356" book. ALMOST the same, but not quite.

Steve S. · Post by **Steve S.** » Tue Apr 15, 2008 12:02 pm

Great info thanks.