The History of Chivalry Volume I Part 4

[Sidenote: The pennon.]

Its length was fitted to the vigour and address of him who bore it, and its iron and sharpened head was fashioned agreeably to his taste.[85] To the top of the wooden part of the lance was generally fixed an ensign, or piece of silk, linen, or stuff. On this ensign was marked the cross, if the expedition of the soldier had for its object the Holy Land, or it bore some part of his heraldry; and in the latter case, when the lance was fixed in the ground near the entrance of the owner's tent, it served to designate the bearer. Originally this ensign was called a gonfanon, the combination of two Teutonic words, signifying war and a standard.

Subsequently, when the ensign was formed of rich stuffs and silks, it was called a pennon, from the Latin word pannus.[86] The pennon cannot be described from its exact breadth, for that quality of it varied with the different fancies of knights, and it had sometimes one, but more often two indentations at the end.

When the pennon was cut square on occasion of a simple knight becoming a knight banneret it received the t.i.tle of a banner, the ancient German word for the standard of a leader, or prince.[87]

[Sidenote: The axe.]

[Sidenote: The maule and martel.]

To transfix his foe with a lance was the ordinary endeavour of a knight; but some cavaliers of peculiar hardihood preferred to come to the closest quarters, where the lance could not be used. The battle-axe, which they therefore often wielded, needs no particular description. But the most favourite weapons were certain ponderous steel or iron hammers, carrying death either by the weight of their fall or the sharpness of the edge.

They were called the martel and the maule, words applied indifferently in old times; for writers of days of chivalry cared little about extreme accuracy of diction, not foreseeing the fierce disputes which their want of minuteness in description would give rise to. This was the weapon which ecclesiastics used when they buckled harness over rochet and hood, and holy ardour impelled them into the field; for the canons of the church forbad them from wielding swords, and they always obeyed the letter of the law. Some cavaliers, in addition to their other weapons, carried the mallet, or maule, hanging it at their saddle bow, till the happy moment for 'breaking open skulls' arrived. When it was used alone, this description of offensive armour was rather Gothic than chivalric; yet the rudeness of earlier ages had its admirers in all times of chivalry, the affected love of simplicity not being peculiar to the present day. A lance could not execute half the sanguinary purposes of Richard Coeur de Lion, and it was with a battle-axe[88], as often as with a sword, that he dashed into the ranks of the Saracens. Bertrand du Guesclin had a partiality for a martel, and so late as the year 1481 the battle-axe was used.

Among the hosts of the Duke of Burgundy was a knight named Sir John Vilain. He was a n.o.bleman from Flanders, very tall, and of great bodily strength: he was mounted on a good horse, and held a battle-axe in both hands. He pressed his way into the thickest part of the battle, and, throwing his bridle on the neck of his steed, he gave such mighty blows on all sides with his battle-axe that whoever was struck was instantly unhorsed, and wounded past recovery.[89] Generally speaking, however, the polite and courteous knights of chivalry thought it an ungentle practice to use a weapon which was a.s.sociated with ideas of trade; and the romance-writers, who reflect the style of thinking of their times, commonly give the lance to the knight, and the axe or mallet to some rude and ferocious giant.[90]

[Sidenote: The sword.]

[Sidenote: Fondness of the knight for it.]

The usual weapon for the press and melee was the sword, and there were a great many interesting a.s.sociations attached to it. The knight threw round it all his affections. In that weapon he particularly trusted. It was his _good_ sword, and with still more confidence and kindness he called it his _own good_ sword. He gave it a name, and engraved on it some moral sentence, or a word referring to a great event of his life. Not indeed that these sentences were confined to the sword; they were sometimes engraven on the frontlet of the helmet, or even on the spurs[91], but the hilt or blade of the sword were their usual and proper places. The sword rather than the lance was the weapon which represented the chivalry of a family, and descended as the heir loom of its knighthood. When no one inherited his name, there was as much generous contention among his friends to possess his good sword, as in the days of Greece poetry has ascribed to the warriors who wished for the armour of Achilles.[92] The sword was the weapon which connected the religious and military parts of the chivalrique character. The knight swore by his sword, for its cross hilt was emblematical of his Saviour's cross.

David in his daies dubbed knights, And did hem _swere on her sword_ to serve truth ever.

P. PLOUGHMAN.

The word Jesus was sometimes engraven on the hilt to remind the wearer of his religious duties. The sword was his only crucifix, when ma.s.s was said in the awful pause between the forming of the military array and the laying of lances in their rests. It was moreover his consolation in the moment of death. When that doughty knight of Spain, Don Rodrigo Frojaz was lying upon his shield, with his helmet for a pillow, he kissed the cross of his sword in remembrance of that on which the incarnate son of G.o.d had died for him, and in that act of devotion rendered up his soul into the hands of his Creator.[93]

The handle of the sword was also remarkable for another matter. The knight, in order not to lose the advantage of having his seal by him, caused it to be cut in the head of his sword, and thus by impressing his seal upon any wax attached to a legal doc.u.ment, he exhibited his determination to maintain his obligation by the three-fold figure of his seal, the upholden naked sword, and the cross.[94]

The sword of the knight was held in such high estimation, that the name of its maker was thought worthy of record. Thus when Geoffery of Plantagenet received the honor of knighthood, a sword was brought out of the royal treasury, the work of Galan, the best of all sword smiths.[95] Spain was always famous for the temper and brilliancy of its swords. Martial speaks in several places of the Spanish swords which, when hot from the forge, were plunged in the river Salo near Bilbilis in Celtiberia. The armourers at Saragossa were as renowned in days of chivalry as those of Toledo in rather later times, for it was not only the sword of Toledo that became a proverbial phrase for the perfection of the art. Sometimes the armourers had establishments in both towns. The excellence, however, of the swords of Julian del Rey, who lived both at Saragossa and Toledo, is referred to by the keeper of the lions in Don Quixote. The weapons of this artist had their peculiar marks. El perillo, a little dog; el morillo, a Moor's head, and la loba, a wolf.[96]

But perhaps it may be thought I am pa.s.sing the bounds of my subject. To return then to earlier days. The girdle round the waist, or the bauldrick descending from the shoulder across the body was simple tanned leather only, or sometimes its splendour rivalled that of prince Arthur in the Fairy Queen.

Athwart his breast a bauldrick brave he ware That shind like twinkling stars, with stones most precious rare;

And in the midst thereof, one precious stone Of wond'rous worth, and eke of wondrous mights, Shapt like a lady's head, exceeding shone, Like Hesperus among the lesser lights, And strove for to amaze the weaker sights: Thereby his mortal blade full comely hung In ivory sheath, ycarv'd with curious slights, Whose hilt was burnish'd gold, and handle strong Of mother perle, and buckled with a golden tong.

Book 1. c. 7. st. 29, 30.

[Sidenote: Swords in romances.]

Many of the historical circ.u.mstances just now related regarding the sword of the knight are pleasingly exaggerated in the beautiful extravagancies of romantic fabling. The most famous sword in the imagination of our ancestors was that of king Arthur; it was called Escalibert (corrupted into Caliburn). The romance of Merlin thus explains the name. Escalibert est un nom Ebricu qui vault autant a dire en Francais, comme tres cher fer et acier, et aussi dissoyent il vrai. The history of this sword enters largely into the romances of Arthur, and the knights of the round table, and the subject was fondly cherished by those who detailed the exploits of other heroes. The fame of Caliburn was remembered when Richard the first went to the East. The romances affirm that he wore the terrible and trusty sword of Arthur. But, instead of mowing down ranks of Saracens with it, he presented it to Tancred, king of Sicily.

And Richard at that time gaf him a faire juelle.

The good sword Caliburne, which Arthur luffed so well.[97]

The romancers followed the practices of the northern scalds[98], of naming the swords of knights: that of Sir Bevis of Hampton was called Morglay; and that of the Emperor Charlemagne himself Fusberta joyosa.[99] The poets were also as faithful delineators of manners as their predecessors the romance writers had been, and therefore we find in Ariosto that the sword of the courteous Rogero was called Balisarda, and that of Orlando, Durindana.

In the romance of Sir Otuel, the address of the same Orlando to his sword is perfectly in the spirit of chivalry.

Then he began to make his moan And fast looked thereupon, As he held it in his hond.

"O sword of great might, Better bare never no knight, To win with no lond!

Thou hasty--be in many batayle, That never Sarrazin, sans fayle Ne might thy stroke withstond.

Go! let never no paynim Into battle bear him, After the death of Roland!

O sword of great powere, In this world n'is nought thy peer, Of no metal y--wrought; _All Spain and Galice_, Through grace of G.o.d and thee y--wis, To Christendom ben brought.

Thou art good withouten blame; In thee is graven the holy name That all things made of nought."[100]

Regarding inscriptions on swords mentioned in the concluding lines, there is a very interesting pa.s.sage in the romance of Giron the courteous. On one occasion where the chaste virtue of that gentle knight and n.o.ble companion of Arthur was in danger, his spear, which he had rested against a tree, fell upon his sword, and impelled it into a fountain. Giron immediately left the lady with whom he was conversing, and ran to the water. He s.n.a.t.c.hed the weapon from the fountain, and, throwing away the scabbard, began to wipe the blade. Then his eyes lighted on the words that were written on the sword, and these were the words that were thus written:--Loyaulte pa.s.se tout, et faulsete si honneit tout, et deceit tous hommes dedans quals elle se herberge. This sentence acted with talismanic power upon the heart of that n.o.ble knight Giron the courteous, and so his virtue was saved.

[Sidenote: The shield.]

[Sidenote: Impresses.]

Leaving those pictures of manners which the old romances have painted, I come to the defensive harness of the knight, a subject which has many claims to attention. The shield was held in equal esteem in chivalric as in cla.s.sic times; for

"To lose the badge that should his deeds display,"

was considered the greatest shame and foulest scorn that could happen to a knight. The shape of the shield was oblong or triangular, wide at the top for the protection of the body, and tapering to the bottom.[101] Other shapes were given to it agreeably to the fancy of the knight, and it was plain or adorned with emblazonry of arms and other ornaments of gold and silver, according to his estate, and the simplicity or comparative refinement of his age. Some knights, as gentle as brave, adorned their shields with a portrait of their lady-love[102], or stamped on them impresses quaint, with a device emblematical of their pa.s.sion. Knights formed of sterner stuff retained their heraldic insignia, and their mottoes breathed war and homicide; but gallant cavaliers shewed the gentleness of their minds, and their impressed sentences were sometimes plain of meaning, but oftener dark to all, except the knight himself, and the damsel whose playful wit had invented them. We can readily imagine that those amorous devices and impresses were not so frequently used in the battle field as in the tournament, and that they were sometimes worn together with gentilitial distinctions.

[Sidenote: Various sorts of mail.]

The casing of the body is a very curious subject of enquiry. The simplicity of ancient times, in using the skins of beasts, is marked in the word _loric.u.m_, from the word _lorum_, a thong, and the word _cuira.s.se_ is traceable to _cuir_, leather. Body harness has three general divisions; mail; plate and mail mixed; plate mail entirely. Rows of iron rings, sown on the dress, were the first defences, and then, for additional defence, a row of larger rings was laid over the first. These rings gave way to small iron plates which lapped over each other, and this variety of mail is interesting, for armour now resembled the _lorica squammata_ of the Romans, and hence ancient mail of this description has generally been called scale-mail, while the ordinary appearance of armour being like the meshes of a net, gained it the t.i.tle of mail from the _macula_ of the Latins, and the _maglia_ of the Italians. Sometimes the plates were square, and sometimes of a lozenge form: but it would be considering the matter much too curiously to divide armour into as many species as the shapes and forms which a small piece of iron or steel was capable of being divided into.[103]

All this variety of mail harness was sown on an under garment of leather or cloth, or a more considerable wadding of various sorts of materials, and called a gambeson. If the garment were a simple tunic or frock the whole was called a hauberk. The lower members were defended by _chausses_, which may be intelligible to modern understandings by the words breeches or pantaloons. When the mailed frock and _chausses_ were joined, the union was called the haubergeon. In each case, the back and crown of the head were saved harmless by a hood of mail, which sometimes formed part of the hauberk or haubergeon, and sometimes was detached. In Spain, the hood and the other parts of the dress were united, if the case of the Cid be held as evidence of the general state of manners; for after his battles, he is always represented as slowly quitting the field with his gory hood thrown back. The mail covered also the chin, and sometimes the mouth; in the latter case the office of breathing being entirely committed to the care of the nose. Finally, the sleeves of the jacket were carried over the fingers, and a continuation of the _chausses_ protected the toes.

"A goodly knight all armed in harness meet That from his head no place appeared to his feete."

It is curious that foppery in armour began at the toe. It was the fashion for the knight to have the toe of the mail several inches in length and inclining downwards. To fight on foot with such inc.u.mbrances was impossible, and, therefore the enemies of the crusaders (for foppery prevailed even in religious wars) shot rather at the horses than at the men. The fashion I am speaking of crossed the Pyrenees, for in the pictorial representation of a tournament at Grenada, between Moorish and Christian knights, the former are drawn with the broad shovel shoes of their country, while the latter have long pointed shoes, like the cavaliers of the North.

Such were the various descriptions of mail armour from the earliest aera of chivalry to the thirteenth century. They were worn at different times in different countries, and often in the same country at the same time by different individuals: but at length so excellent an improvement was made in chain mail, that military fashion could have no longer any pretence for variety. The different descriptions of mail armour show the skill of the iron-smiths among our ancestors, and that they were capable of inventing the next and last great change. But as it was made at a time when the Asiatic mode of warfare was known in Europe, and as the improvement I am about to mention was the general mode of the Saracenian soldiers, it is as probable that it was borrowed, as that it was invented. The rings of mail were now no longer sewn on the dress, but they were interlaced, each ring having four others inserted into it, and consequently the rings formed a garment of themselves. The best coats of mail were made of double rings.[104] The admirable convenience of this twisted or reticulated mail secured its general reception. A knight was no longer enc.u.mbered by his armour in travelling. His squire might be the bearer of his mail, for it was both flexible and compact, or it could be rolled upon the hinder part of a saddle.

[Sidenote: Mail and plate.]

[Sidenote: Plate harness.]

Before, however, this last great improvement in mail-armour took place, changes were made in that general description of harness which foretold its final fall, although it might be partially and for a time supported by any particular invention of merit. Plates of solid steel or iron were fixed on the breast or other parts of the body, where painful experience had a.s.sured the wearer of the insufficiency of his metal rings. The new fashion of reticulated mail added nothing to the strength of defence, and, therefore, ingenuity and prudence were ever at work to make defensive armour equal to offensive. New plates continually were added, and many of them received their t.i.tles from the parts of the body which they were intended to defend: the pectoral protected the breast, the cuisses were for the thighs, the bra.s.sarts for the arms, the ailettes for the shoulders, while the gorget defended the throat, and a scaly gauntlet gloved the hand. The cuira.s.s was the t.i.tle for the defence of the breast and the back. This mixed harness gained ground till the knight had nearly a double covering of mail and plate. The plate was then found a perfect defence, and the mail was gradually thrown aside; and thus, finally, the warrior was entirely clad in steel plates. This harness was exceedingly oppressive to the limbs, and therefore we find the circ.u.mstance so frequently mentioned in old writers, that when a knight alighted at his hostel or inn, he not only doffed his armour, but went into a bath. No wonder that it was necessary to keep changes of dress to present to the cavaliers who arrived. Plate-armour must have been as destructive of clothes as the old chain mail, and describing his knight, Chaucer says,

"Of fustian he wered a gipon Alle besmotred with his habergeon.

For he was of late y come fro his viage, And wente for to don his pilgrimage."

The plate harness was in one respect far more inconvenient than the armour it superseded. The coat of chain mail could be put on or slipped off with instantaneous celerity; but the dressing of a plate-armed knight was no simple matter.

"From the tents The armourers, accomplishing the knights, With busy hammers closing rivets up, Give dreadful note of preparation."

Besides this deprivation of rest before a battle, the knight, in order to prevent surprise, was obliged to wear his heavy harness almost constantly.