The History of Chivalry; Or, Knighthood and Its Times, Volume 1 (of 2)Mills, Charles
Philosophy
The History of Chivalry; Or, Knighthood and Its Times, Volume 1 (of 2)
Mills, Charles
Chivalry
It was not, however, from any sincere considerations for humanity that the
popes opposed themselves to the graceful exercises of the age; for, at the
celebrated council held at Lyons in 1245, it was openly and for the first
time declared, that tournaments were iniquitous, because they prevented
the chivalry of Europe from joining the holy wars in Palestine. The shores
of Syria might drink torrents of Christian blood, and the popes would
bless the soil; but if in the course of several centuries a few
unfortunate accidents happened in the lists of peace and courtesy, all the
graceful amusements of Europe were to be interdicted, and the world was to
be plunged into the state of barbarism from which chivalry had redeemed
it. Tournaments were also interdicted on account of their expensiveness.
Wealth poured forth its treasures, and art exercised its ingenuity in
apparelling the barons, knights, and ladies; and even the housings of the
horses were so rich as to rival the caparisons of Asiatic steeds: but the
popes could see no advantage to the social state in all this gay and
prodigal magnificence, and they wished that all the treasures of the West
should be poured into the Holy Land.[322]
[Sidenote: The joust.]
The joust was the other chief description of military exercises. It was so
far inferior to the tournament, that he who had tourneyed, and had given
largess to the heralds, might joust without further cost; but the joust
did not give freedom to the tournament, nor was it the most favourite
amusement, for baronial pomp was not necessary to its display, and many a
joust was held without a store of ladies bright distributing the prize.
There were two sorts of jousts, the _joute à l'outrance_, or the joust to
the utterance, and the _joute à plaisance_, or joust of peace.
[Sidenote: Description of the joust to the utterance.]
And, first, of the serious joust. The joust to the utterance expressed a
single combat between two knights, who were generally of different
nations. In strictness of speech, the judicial combat was a joust _à
l'outrance_, and so was every duel, whether lawful or unlawful; but with
such jousts chivalry has no concern.[323]
[Sidenote: Joust between a Scotch and English knight.]
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account