The Manner of Arming Knights

arms & armour, Vol. 7 No.
1, 2010, 5–29
The Manner of Arming Knights for the

Tourney: A Re-Interpretation of an
Important Early 14th-Century Arming
Treatise
Published by Maney Publishing (c) The Trustees of the Armouries
Ralph Moffat
Curator of European Arms & Armour, Kelvingrove Art Gallery & Museum,
Glasgow Museums
The Manner of Arming Knights for the Tourney is contained on two vellum folios
of British Library Additional Manuscript 46919 (fols 86v–87r), which is described in
the catalogue as a ‘collection of treatises, poems, sermons, etc., in Anglo-Norman
French [. . .] Continental French [. . .], Latin, and Middle English, compiled by
Fr William Herebert [sic] of Hereford’ (figure 1). Fr Herbert (d. 1333/1337?) was a
‘Franciscan theologian’ and ‘probably a native of Herefordshire’.3 The philologist
Paul Meyer (1840–1917) was the first to publish a transcription of the treatise in 1884
and prudently observed that it was Latin with a French gloss in the manner of John
of Garland’s Dictionarius of about 1220 and the wordbooks of Adam of Petit Pont
and Alexander Nequam.4 The importance of this observation will become clear as
the text in investigated.
The Manner has been described by Professor Sydney Anglo in his comprehensive
work The Martial Arts of Renaissance Europe as an ‘obscure mini-treatise’ that ‘man-
ages to pack in a remarkable amount of confusion’. Furthermore, he states that
the text is worth dwelling on because it typifies the ambiguities and uncertainties facing
anybody who attempted to provide a systematic treatment of material for which the
terminology remained unsettled and which, in any case, he did not fully comprehend.5
In this article I hope to demonstrate that a re-interpretation of this important treatise

is necessary and that by comparing the seemingly undecipherable vocabulary with
contemporary, or near-contemporary, sources such as wills and inventories it might
be shown that this short work is not as confused and obscure as it first appears.
Moreover, I hope to demonstrate that type-specific armour for war and for the
different forms of tournament — the tourney and the joust — was already, by the
early 14th century, a well-established phenomenon. In order to do this I will work
through the treatise line by line.
© The Trustees of the Armouries 2010 DOI 10.1179/174161210X12652009773375

6 RALPH MOFFAT
Fol. 86v Fol. 86v

[3rd line from the bottom] The Manner of Arming Knights | for the
Modus armandi milites | ad torneamentum Tourney
[title indented and in red, in line with lines 2 First light a fire and roll out the carpet and
and 3] strip to the shirt. Brush back the hair. On the
Primo fit igîs et extenditu tapetű & spoliatus feet [place] boots
ad camisiâ Pectine pat capillos In pede calciat’ Fol. 87r
Fol. 87r of leather. Arm the shins with greaves (in
de quyr Induit ocreas Gall’ mustylers î tibiis French mustylers) of steel or cuir bouilli. Thence
de ascer ou de quyr boily Deinde quysouns quysouns on the thighs and genicularia (in
in femorib3 & genicularia gall’ genu lers Deiñ French genulers). Thence aketon and thence a
aketoun & deiñ câisia de chartres & coyfe de shirt of Chartres and a coif of Chartres, and a
chartres & peluî î qa d3 ēē cerueylere defendens basin in which there ought to be a cerveylere to
capd ne 9tiguetu peluis cű defend the head lest the basin come in contact
5 capite deinde loricâ quyree cote armere in qa with
fu’it siga milit’ & gayne payns ou gayns de 5 the head. Thence hauberk, cuirass, coat ar-
baleyne sa espeye i. gladi’ & flagellű & galeam mour upon which will be the knights’ blazon,
i. heaume Ad bellű aketoun plates de alemayne and
ou autres cű p’ceb3 aketôn vt supa & bone gor- 6 gaignepains or gauntlets of baleen, his esp-
gieres gladi’ haches a pik & cultell’ scutű raro eye that is sword, and flail, and helm that is
10 ptatu ad bellű q3 impediret plus quam heaume.
pmoueret1 For War: aketon, German plates or others
Ad hastiludia aketoun hauberc gambisoun with the pièce, aketon above this, and a good
qd fit de pâno serico & 9slib3 si st p’côsum gorget, a sword, an axe with a point, and dag-
nuelers ke su’t plates de ascer scűt bacyn &2 ger. The shield is rarely
galea 10 carried in battle as it impedes more than it
aids.
For the Joust: aketon, hauberk, gambeson
which is made of silken cloth or some such
similar that is as precious. There shall be noth-
ing but plates of steel,
13 shield, basin, and helm.
figure 1 The Manner of Arming Knights for the Tourney.

London, British Library, Additional MS, 46919, fols 86v–87r
First light a fire and roll out the carpet and strip to the shirt.
Brush back the hair
As Anglo has pointed out this arming scene is a familiar one from medieval literature
and later arming treatises. Note also the term used for shirt ‘camisia’. This will be of
relevance to one of the purported pieces of armour. Anglo translates the phrase to
brush the hair and attaches no significance to this. It has been pointed out to me
by those involved in putting on armour the importance of keeping hair out of the
way thus the translation ‘brush back’ or ‘brush up’ the hair (‘Pectine p[ar]at capillos’)
seems to make more sense.
On the feet [place] boots of leather

The author of the treatise has spared the knight from having to make a choice from
the bewildering range of foot armour available to him in the early 14th century.
THE MANNER OF ARMING KNIGHTS FOR THE TOURNEY 7
He could have opted for the ‘estivalles de plates’ or ‘stivelez de plates’ mentioned in
documents of 1309 and 1322.6 In the latter year also appear, in Latin, the ‘sotular de
plates’7 and ‘duo paria sotularum de plates’ were stolen in 1289.8 Claude Blair, in his
influential European Armour, suggests that this kind of armour was of a ‘coat-
of-plates construction’ highlighting those found in the mass graves from the battle
of Wisby (1361) in Gotland.9 In 1303 Edward Prince of Wales ordered the purchase
of ‘sabaters’ and in 1307 ‘soullers du guerre’ were bought for Gilbert de Clare.10 This
could be seen as a fork in the road for the English and French terms for this form
of foot protection. Our knight could even have gone for the elaborate pair of ‘botes
plumetez de ferro’ — feathered with iron — which appear in an English inventory of
1322.11
Arm the shins with greaves (in French mustylers) of steel or cuir
boulli
The author and Fr Herbert would have known from the Vulgate that the giant
Goliath had ‘greaves of bronze upon his legs’ (‘ocreas aereas habebat in cruribus’)
(I Kings, 17.6). Ocreas is commonly used in wills and inventories for greave by
the second half of the 14th century. Blair has pointed out that closed greaves were
also available to the likes of Connétable Raoul de Nesle, whose armour was
inventoried in 1302.12 The author of the treatise tells us, however, that in French the
ocreas are called ‘mustylers’. Frédérique Lachaud in a very detailed article suggests
that the ‘term came from the Old French mustel, meaning calf of the leg’.13 Gode-
froy’s Dictionnaire gives ‘gras de la jambe, portion de la jamb’ for ‘mustel’.14 The
editors of the Dictionary of Medieval Latin from British Sources suggest (incorrectly
in my opinion) that it is ‘armour for joints spec[ifically] knee-caps’ and provide
references to iron ones ‘mustelerias ferreas’ bought in Bordeaux for Edward I in 1253
as well as examples from 1277, 1290, and c. 1312. They appear for military use in
a Nottinghamshire will of 1257 and a loan of armour from 1282.15 They were also
included in the inventory of effects of Edward I’s hatchet man Sir John Fitz
Marmaduke in 1311.16 In the same manuscript as our treatise appear two versions
of the ‘tretys de la Passion’ by the ‘Franciscan preacher and Anglo-Norman writer’
Nicholas Bozon (fl. c. 1320). In these Christ appears as a lover-knight in an allegori-
cal romance. He is armed by a lady in her chamber with ‘mult estrange armure’.
The different elements of the armour are made of flesh, bone, and blood. She puts
on ‘quissotz e mustilers’ made of the pelvis.17 In the context of the tourney they
appear among the pieces of armour permitted to be worn by those partaking in
tourneys in the Statuta armorum of 1292.18 They also occur with cuisses (‘j par de
mustiler cu[m] quissot’’) in a list of payments made for armour for Edward III
in 1330/31.19 It is of note that the copier of the 15th-century Royal Armouries
Tournament MS does not appear to be familiar with this word rendering it as
‘coustelers’.20
Once again there was a variety of protection available for this part of the body.
In France the trumeliere appears in a variety of sources.21 In England the schynbald,
8 RALPH MOFFAT
defined by Blair as a ‘simple shin-guard’,22 appears amongst the armour of the losers
at Boroughbridge in 1322.23 An inventory of the Tower of 1324 records ‘.ij. peire
de skinebaux .j. peire de sabatons’.24 A gilt pair decorated with pierced mullets are
listed in an inventory of the goods of Roger Mortimer delivered to his son in 1332.25
The seven-year-old prince Edward of Woodstock was provided with ‘ij p[er]e de
skynebauz de plate’ and ‘j pere de poleyns’ in 1337.26 A ‘par de shinebaux’ appear in
a sergeant-at-arm’s will of 1389 and four ‘chenebawdes’ worth twelve pence were
amongst the confiscated goods of Richard Earl of Arundel in 1397.27 By 1423 the
compilers of a comptus roll of the armour of Archbishop Henry Bowet of York were
compelled to explain that ‘uno pare de schynbaldes’ were ‘otherwise fore-plates for
the shins’ (‘al’ vamplates, pro tebiis’).28
Thence quysouns on the thighs and genicularia (knee-pieces)

(in French genulers)
Before continuing with the discussion of armour an important linguistic point should
be made. Textual evidence of this kind has been subjected to much criticism from
scholars. The ‘antiquary’ and ‘first curator of the Tower of London armouries’
Viscount Dillon (1844–1932) described an inventory of 1397 as being ‘in French with
the occasional insertion of English when the scribe’s knowledge of the Gallic tongue
was at fault’.29 The Master of the Armouries Sir James Mann (1897–1962) has
described the ‘particulars which they [wills from York] give of the component parts
of fourteenth-century armour are thinly disguised in Latin or badly inserted in the
vernacular’.30 A more sympathetic view has emerged with what has been described
as the development of a ‘business Latin of the fourteenth century’ which served as a
‘mere syntactical framework, in which a vocabulary largely of French and English
terms, more or less latinized, was used’.31 Also it is important to point out that
rather than being a poor Latinist the multilingual author of the treatise has changed
language in the same sentence in what linguists call ‘code-switching’. Indeed, it has
been pointed out that at this period the ‘text type [. . .] where a mixing of two or
more languages is the norm [is that of ] accounts and inventories’.32
The author does not mention whether the cuisses and knee pieces are to be made
of steel or cuir boulli. Although there are references to ‘genuler’ and ‘genicularia’ the
term poleyn was certainly in currency by the early 14th century.
Thence aketon and thence a shirt of Chartres and a coif of Chartres

Little need be said about the aketon. Its name derives from the Arabic for cotton:
al-kotyn and was padded with ‘cadace’: cotton wool. The regulations of the linen-
armourers of London of 1322 specify that they ought to be covered with sendal
or silk cloth and ought to be stuffed with new cotton cloth, ‘cadaz’, and old sendal
(‘[. . .] couertz de sendal ou de drap de seye & soient estoffez de noueille teille de
Cotoun & de Cadaz e de veils sendal’).33 They were clearly considered something
worth keeping as their appearance in inventories and wills attests. For example in
1309 the Prévôt of the collegiate church of Saint-Barthèlemi de Béthune bequeathed

his ‘aketon which had been imported from Rome’ (‘suum auquetonum quod aspor-
tavit de Roma’).34 They also appear amongst the equipment plundered from the
defeated at Boroughbridge in 1322.35 In 1325 Sir Fulk de Pembridge left an ‘Aqeto[u]n
blank’ to one son and an ‘Aqeto[u]n blanc oue vn lyon rouge fourche la Cowe’ (white
with a red lion with forked tail) to another.36 John Wygan in 1360 gifted a ‘doublet
called “akedon”’.37 Roger Beauchamp in 1368 gave to his brother Thomas his father’s
aketon (‘lego Thome fratri meo accon [recte acton] patris sui’)38 and John Dundrawe
in 1380 left his cousin his best aketon (‘meum optimum akton’).39 Although it could
be worn as protection in its own right, those who could afford to used it as a founda-
tion garment. The young nephew of the count of Artois, in 1315, paid twenty sous
for an ‘auqeton de blanc cendal pour vestir plates’ and another twenty-eight sous for
an ‘auqueton fort à vestir de fer’.40
Camisia de Chartres
Is this a shirt of mail? The antiquary, ‘linguist’, and ‘learned amateur’ Albert Way
(1805–74) suggested that
the ‘Camisia de Chartres’, [is] possibly a shirt of mail made at Chartres, and of which
we have not found mention in any other document, with the exception of the chemise
de Chartres, among the armour in which two knights engaged in a judicial combat in
Britanny [sic] were to be equipped.41
This refers to a duel that was organised in 1309 between the viscount of Rohan and
the lord of Beaumanoir where it is stated that: ‘Firstly [. . .] and dress his body in the
following manner: he shall have a chemise de Chartres and breeches of Brielle suffi-
ciently garnished’ (‘Premierement [. . .] & atorné son cors en la manere que s’enseut:
Il aura chemise de chartres & bragues de breoul garnis souffisaument’).42 ‘Breoul’ is
the older form of Brielle in the Netherlands which begs the question: is the camisia a
shirt made from cloth from Chartres? In the context of the Manner, as it is paired
with the coif, it appears that the author considers these two items to be made of
Chartres cloth. Itemised in the inventory of the moveable goods of Count Robert of
Flanders of 1322 are: ‘deus vieses chemises de Chartres et une de buletiel’.43
‘Buletiel’ is described as ‘bolting-cloth’ in the Anglo-Norman Dictionary and the
Dictionary of Medieval Latin from British Sources provides the same information for
‘buletellus’ stating that it is from the Old French. In another challenge for a duel of
1386, among the horse furnishings appear ‘linges [sheets/cloths] de beluteaux’44 and
among the items of the 1309 challenge are ‘le cheval couvert de coureture [sic] de
belutiau & de telles & de cendreux’.45 Edward III had ‘one hauberk stuffed with cloth
of Rheims, Paris, and bolting-cloth, and cotton’ (‘j. loric[am] stuffať cum tela de
Reyns Paris & bultelt & cotoun’).46 It is clear that certain materials were named after
the town of their manufacture. For example in 1387 the fifteen-year-old Charles,
son of the duke of Orleans, had a little doublet made of three ells of cloth of Rheims
sent to Lombardy and a little pourpoint of three ells of fine cloth of Rheims sent to
Germany as a pattern for pairs of plates.47
10 RALPH MOFFAT
Despite these references it becomes clear that there is more to the camisia de
Chartres than just the cloth it is made from. Among the payments made for equip-
ment for the young nephew of the count of Artois in 1315 is one for ‘seven and a half
ells of twill of which were made three shirts of Chartres and a corset’ (‘pour XII aunes
et demie de toile, dont on fist III quemises de Chartres et I corset’).48
Juliet Barker’s interpretation of the garment is as follows:
The knight in the Modus Armandi armorial [sic] treatise of the early fourteenth century
wore a camisia de Chartres over the top of his aketon, but beneath his hauberk and
cuirass, and Roger Mortimer had an ‘aketon cum una camisia de chartres’ stored at
Wigmore Abbey in 1322. The exact nature of this elusive garment remains a mystery.
Du Cange quotes an undated treatise which states that knights fighting duels should wear
the chemise de Chartres between their armours. This, combined with the evidence of
Guillaume de Tudèle that Chartres was renowned as a centre for producing helms and
gambesons, suggests that the camisia de Chartres was also a quilted fabric defence for the
body.49
The Du Cange reference is to the judicial duel of 1309 referred to above in which the
garment is to be worn next to the skin. The evidence of Guillaume de Tudèle is a
footnote provided by Meyer in his transcription of the Manner. In this he refers the
reader to his edition of the Occitan Chanson de la croisade contre les Albigeois by
William of Tudela (in Occitan, Guilhem de Tudela; in French, Guillaume de Tudèle;
fl. 1199–1214). These two lines of the chanson refer to ‘gonois’, helms, and gambesons
made not only at Chartres, but also at Blaye and Roaix.50 This seems rather flimsy
evidence to place Chartres as a centre for the production of either mail51 or ‘quilted
fabric defences’. The assumption that the garment is of mail also affects Anglo’s
interpretation as he states:
the camisia de Chartres et coyfe de Chartres — [were] both, presumably, in the mail for
which Chartres was famous, though why a mail coif should have been donned before the
rest of the head defences was probably no more apparent to the author than it is to the
modern reader.52
I suggest that the camsia de Chartres was neither of mail nor a padded garment
but an item of clothing that offered our medieval knight the sort of defence that no
earthly protection could provide. It was, in fact, a garment in the shape of, and that
had come into contact with, the sancta camisia of Chartres cathedral. Victor Gay, in
his Glossaire archéologique, has pointed out that in a civilian and military context
the garment was shaped like a dalmatic or tabard53 and it was probably of fine
linen.54 Dawn Marie Hayes informs us that
according to tradition, King Charles the Bald gave to Chartres in the ninth century the
sancta camisia, which was considered to be the shirt worn by Mary during the Nativity.
It was a very special relic because it was the only one that came into contact with Christ’s
and Mary’s bodies.55
Included amongst the Miracles of Notre-Dame de Chartres compiled by Canon Jehan

le Marchant between 1252 and 1262 are those of the ‘knight who was saved from
death because he wore shirts of Chartres’ (‘Dou chevalier qui fu sauvé de mort a vie
ce qu’il avoit vestue des chemises de Chartres’) and another of ‘when the city of
Chartres was saved from its enemies by the holy shirt’ (‘Comment la cité de Chartres
fut delivree de ses anemis par la seinte chemise de Chartres’).56 The knight of the
miracle-tale was protected as if he were wearing two hauberks (‘S’il eüt deus haubers
vestus’).57 In the latter story the holy chemise is flown over the walls of Chartres
as it is attacked by the Vikings but it is not penetrated by the ‘quarreaus’, ‘saëtes |
Et d’ars turquois et d’arbelestes’. The inhabitants, inspired by the miracle, arm them-
selves and follow their bishop Gousseaumes, ‘qui portoit le seinte chemise, | Por
deffense et por garantise’.58 It appears, although unfortunately not in an arming
scene, in the aforementioned poem of Nicholas Bozon. Christ grants his symbolic
lover ‘Ma chemis de chartres et ma mort amer, | E ceo vous sauvera du diable encom-
brer’. It is interesting that the scribes who copied his work often mis-transcribed this
term.59 The item appears in the 13th-century Roman du renart where Pride is armed
(‘Orguel arma | De ces armes’) thus:
Premiers li viesti l’auqueton
Ki estoit, en lin de coton,
De desdaing de despit farsis,
Li auketons fu moult jolis.
Après li viesti la chemis
De Chartres ki ert à devise
Biele si come de vanterie.
Apriés l’aubiert ki fu d’envie60
It would be pleasing to consider the ‘aketon covered with tawny taffeta cloth, with a
shirt of Chartres’ (‘j. aketon’ cooperto de panno de taffeta taneto, cum una camisia
de chartres’)61 as a gift of protection to Mortimer from a royal Frenchwoman with
whom he had been very intimate.
Coif of Chartres
The term ‘coif’ alone does not necessarily indicate that the item is of mail. The
exotic-sounding Turkish coif appears in documents of 1220 and 1289 (‘j. coifiam
Turkeisiam’, ‘unam coyfam de Torkeys’).62 Sometimes it is specifically stated if the
item is of mail such as the ‘coyfe de mayle’ or ‘coifes loricarum’.63 Amongst the linen
armour (‘lineis armaturis’) of Falk de Breauté in 1224 appear the purpose-specific
‘coifam et tunicam armandum’.64
A basin [bascinet] in which there ought to be a cerveylere to defend

the head lest the basin come in contact with the head
Anglo states that
12 RALPH MOFFAT
figure 2 Bascinet, possibly German, c. 1350.

Glasgow Museums Accession no. E.1939.65.aj
the problem here is twofold: first that, as far as I have been able to ascertain, nobody else
used the word pelvis for bascinet; second, that all other uses of the cervelière suggest that
it was itself a metal cap.65
To resolve the first problem, the author is trying to be very literal and use a Latin
term to describe the bascinet (see figure 2). In the aforementioned Dictionarius of
John of Garland, amongst the entries for kitchen utensils is: ‘pelves: bacins’.66
The author does use the term ‘bacyn’ later in the work but we must bear in mind
the code-switching that the author is prone to. The second problem of the word
‘cervelière’ can also be resolved. Blair has pointed out, with reference to the document
of 1309 concerning judicial duels, that this object was not always the metal skullcap
made familiar by such images as the visceral Pierpont Morgan Bible.67 In 1303 Prince
Edward of Caernarfon in preparation for war against the Scots paid 12d ‘for four
cervelières for two chapel-de-fers and a bascinet with visor and a helm for the prince
made of sidon and silk straps and for making the same’ (‘p[ro] iiij cereuellar’ pro ij
capell’ ferr’ & vno bacinetto cu[m] visera & vno casside P[ri]nc’ f[ac]tis de sindone
& s[er]ico laqueis & f[ac]tura’ ear[un]de[m]’).68 Further evidence for this being some
kind of lining is to be found in the payments made at Rouen in 1376 for 959 old
bascinets to be re-polished and have their cervelières replaced as they had been eaten
by rats and other vermin (‘neuf cens cinquante nuef bacinés [. . .] lesquieux il faut
reglacier; et en y a de telz qui ont les [. . .] cervelieres mengees de ras et d’autre
vermine’).69 A French document of 1302 mentions payment ‘for ten ells of vermilion
sendal bought to equip four bascinets, that being to equip the cervelières [. . .] of the
said bascinets’ (‘Pour X aunes de cendal vermeil achaté pour garnir IIII bacinés, cest
assavoir pour garnir les cervelieres [. . .] des dis bacinés’).70 That the word does not
mean ‘covering’ is clear as the bascinets were covered with white hare skin (‘[. . .]
piaux de lievre blanches à couvrir ces bacinés’).71 The regulations of the Parisian
‘armuriers, coustepointiers et heaumiers’ of 1364 are clear:
That none may equip a new bascinet [. . .] lest it be with new sendal, or new cloth, or
buckram, and that the cervelières are doubled below the opening where the cervelières
should be nailed or sewn, and the languets of the said cervelières (if the bascinet is
equipped with sendal) should de covered with sendal and pointed behind.72
Later in the same regulations it is stated that ‘none may equip a bascinet for the
tourney lest it be varnished inside and out and equipped with two pairs of com-
pletely new cervelières, and covered with well-tanned white leather’ (‘[. . .] que nul ne
puisse garnir bassinet pour le tournois, qu’il ne soit vernicé dedans et dehors et garni
de deux paires de cermailles toutes neufves, et couverts de bon cuir blanc courroyé’).73
Thus, in the context of the 14th century and with such overwhelming evidence, there
is no problem with reading ‘cerueylere’ as bascinet lining.
Thence hauberk, cuirass, coat armour upon which will be the

knights’ blazon
Sir James Mann has pointed out that ‘lorica is the usual term for a mail shirt’ with
regard to wills and inventories.74 I would take this even further and propose it is the
habitual term specifically for hauberk — at least by the date of our treatise. Evidence
for this is the use of word lorica along with variants of its diminutive successor the
haubergeon (see figure 3) in the same document. For example, in a French will of
1270 there are bequeathed ‘unam lauricam, duos hauberjones’.75 In an English appeal
for robbery of around 1314 the perpetrators had taken ‘both an iron hauberk worth
ten pounds. And an iron haubergeon worth a hundred shillings’ (‘Et unam loricam
ferream precii decem librorum. Et unam Haubergoun ferream precii centum solido-
rum’).76 Even from the early 13th century there are increasing references to both the
lorica and the ‘haubergellum’.77 That lorica is not synonymous with breastplate is
clear from references to both these items in the same document. Indeed it appears to
have been an increasingly difficult task to find suitable Latin words to keep up with
the subtleties of the changing vocabulary of armour. The chronicler John Strecche
(fl. 1407–25) mentions amongst the ‘arma bellica’ ‘novo loricas, [. . .] thoraces’.78 Sir
Thomas Berkeley left his nephew ‘xxti loricas, xx pectoralia’79 and the compilers of
Archbishop Bowet’s comptus roll of 1424 denote ‘uno pectorali alias brestplate’.80 In
1386 the cargo of a wreck in Cornwall included one ‘lorica’ and one ‘brustplate’.81
The vicar of Gainford in 1412 left to his chamberlain ‘unam loricam optimam, unum
brestplate’82 and there is reference to ‘loricis brestplates et basinettys’ in 1414.83
The close relationship between the Latin word lorica and English and French mail/
maille is evident from documents. Amongst the equipment of the aforementioned
Archbishop of York in 1424 is a ‘barrel with its appurtenances for cleaning hauberks
and other mail armour’ (‘j. barelle cum suis pertinentiis, ad purgandas loricas et alia
14 RALPH MOFFAT
figure 3 Haubergeon (mail shirt), 14th century, with 15th-century modifications.

Glasgow Museums Accession no. E.1939.65.e.14
arma de mayle’).84 Edward I appointed a certain Gibelino as ‘loricario regis’.85 It has

been pointed out that with the first appearance of mail-makers in Cologne in about
1135 to 1175 they are referred to as ‘loricatores’.86
There are tantalising references to hauberks specifically designed for the tourney.
Blair87 followed by Barker88 and Gravett,89 have all drawn attention to the two
published references to the ‘haubert à tournoier’, one from the inventory of the
Connétable Raoul de Nesle of 1302 and the other from the Sire de Joinville’s narrative
of his crusading exploits of 1250. This merits re-reading in context for his description
of its protective abilities.
The Saracens on horseback who were across the river shot darts at us, because we did
not want to go to them. My men dressed me in a tourneying hauberk so that that darts
that came into our vessel would not wound me.
(Li Sarrazin qui estoient à cheval sus la rive traioient à nous de pylés, pour ce que nous
ne vouliens aler à aus. Ma gent m’orent vestu un haubert à tournoier, pour que li pylet
qui chéoient en nostre vessel ne me bleçassent).90
A third reference can be added to these two. In an extremely badly damaged roll of
the contents of the Tower which has been dated to 1324 is the following: ‘[. . .]o’e de
grosse mai[lle?] [. . .] j. auentaille feble & roillez .j. haub[er]geon de mesm p[u]r
t[ur]noy’.91 There are also mentioned ‘.ij. healmes p[ur] le t[or]noi vieux & de petite
[value?]’. Thus it is not too foolhardy to regard this haubergeon as being as similarly
broken and rusted as the aventail but designed for use in the tourney. The ‘grosse
mai[lle?]’ is of importance in the context of this argument. It has been postulated that
what differentiates the hauberk (or haubergeon) for tourneying is its heavier nature
due to thicker wire-section of each ring. Lachaud has shown that both light hauberks
and other mail armour and those of ‘grosse’ mail were being ordered in early-
thirteenth-century England.92 Edward of Woodstock had ordered ‘liu[er]ez au filz
Esmon Rose vn legier haub[er]geoun’.93 Albert Way, citing the Seigneur du Cange’s
published transcription of the 1316 inventory of the armour of Louis X, draws atten-
tion to ‘uns pans et uns bras de roondes mailles de haute cloüeure. Item uns pans
et uns bras d’acier plus fors de mailles rondes de haute cloüeure’.94 He further points
out that a ‘haubergeon, described as “de alto clowour” [is] a term of rare occurrence’
in an English will of 1378.95 Here is not just documentary evidence for mail of
different shaped wire-section but also of the means and quality of the riveting.
Cuirass
Blair states that
it was a defence for the trunk, worn under the surcoat but over the hauberk; it was
invariably made of leather; it was sufficiently rigid for the guard-chains for the helm and
sword to be attached to it, a fact that suggests that it was made, not of ordinary leather,
but of cuir-bouilli.96
Blair’s suggestion is confirmed by the aforementioned Parisian armourers’ regulations

of 1364. ‘None may cover a cuirass for the tourney’, they stipulate, ‘lest it be firstly
forged (if it is not of cuir-bouilli), and gamboised inside with cotton or with flax
as is thus wanted’ (‘[. . .] que nul ne puisse couvrir cuiriée pour le tournois que elle
ne soit premierement forgée, se elle n’est de cuir boulu, et gamboisiée dedans de
cotton ou d’estouppe qui ainsi le vouldra’).97 The item is mentioned in an early-
13th-century Picard romance. The hero, after donning his ‘hauberc’ puts on his
‘Cauces de fier [mail chausses], cuirie et cote | A armer’.98 Amongst the provisions for
a tourney provided for John of Brittany (see below) were ‘quirreis’ in 1285 and the
Christ-knight of Bozon’s poem has, unsurprisingly, a ‘qwyree fu qwir’.99
Coat armour upon which will be the knights’ blazon

In the 14th century coat armours seem to have been de rigeur for both the tourney
and the joust. Raoul de Nesle had ‘une cote à armes pour tournoier des armes de
Neele’100 and whilst Roger Mortimer had ‘une cote p[u]r les joustes de rouge velvet
oue une frette d argent ove papillons des armes de Mortem’’.101
Gaignepains
Gay suggests that this is perhaps nothing but an ‘alteration de canpin’ which
‘désignait une peau de mouton chamoisée servant à faire des bourses et surtout des
16 RALPH MOFFAT
gants’.102 This is followed by Jean-Pierre Reverseau in his study of a French arming

treatise of 1446.103 Blair suggests that it is ‘a small gauntlet for the right hand [. . .],
probably of leather’.104 Charles Buttin (1856–1931) draws attention to the fact that
Jacques Bretex does not speak of the item as a novelty (‘n’en parle pas comme d’une
nouveauté’) in his poem Les Tournois de Chauvenci of 1285.105 The item is mentioned
in the first recension of Guillaume Deguileville’s Pelerinage de vie humaine composed
between 1330 and 1332.106 In the Middle English version — which follows the French
very faithfully — the pilgrim of the title is armed by the lady Grace Dieu. We are not
told exactly what this item is but are subjected to an abysmal pun: ‘cleped of summe
gaynpayn, for bi it is wunne | þe bred bi þe wiche is fulfilled þe herte of [man]’:107
((D’aucuns) Gäaignepains est nommee

Quar par li est gaignie le pain
Par qui rempli est cuer humain)108
The poet goes on to give examples of King David who ‘was glooued and armed with
gaynpaynes’ (I Samuel 21. 1–9) and Saint Bernard who had ‘gaynpaynes with whiche
he | hadde armed hise hondes’ when tempted to bed by a nude woman.109 This whole
passage does not feature in the second recension of 1355 nor any of the later versions.
Unlike the gauntlets of baleen, the gaignepain can be associated with the tourney.
Edward I’s nephew John of Brittany (1266–1334) and his favourite were provided
with the following:
[. . .] for locating four horses from London to Warwick, Winchester, and Reading to
carry his arms to the same tourney and for leather bought to make new saddle leathers,
an iron bascinet bought for the said John, for sacks and trussing cloths and
woollen blankets to wrap them, gaingnepains, cuirasses, located for this John and his
favourite.110
Sir Fulk de Pembridge in 1325 bequeathed to his son and namesake: ‘a pair of
spaudlers [shoulder defences], a cuirass, a pair of gaingepains, a pair of couters, and
a helm for the tourney’ (‘vn peyre de espaudlers vn quirre vn peire de Waynepayns
vn peyre de Coters e vn healme pur torney’) and to his son Robert ‘a gilt helm, a
pair of spaudlers, cuisses, and greaves, a pair of gloves of plate, a pair of gaignepains’
(‘vn healme orre vn peire de espaudlers quisseux e greues vn peire de gauns de plate
vn peire de Waynepayns’).111 Amongst the armour of Sir John Fitz Marmaduke in
1311 were ‘j par de Waynpayns’ and ‘j par’ de Geynepayns’ were bought for Edward
III in 1330/31.112 A 1388 inventory of the castle at Lille refers to ‘one pair of gauntlets
of which one is a gaignepain’ (‘1 pere de wantelés, dont l’un à wagnepain’).113 It may
be of some significance that they consistently appear in pairs in the earlier period
whilst in the French treatise of 1446 they are only for ‘la main droite’.114 In the later
period they become associated with jousting. Duke Louis of Orleans (1372–1407)
purchased in the 1390s ‘III mains d’acier, II gaignepain’.115 The ‘steel hands’ are man-
ifers a piece of jousting-specific armour.116 In 1410 a servant of the duke of Burgundy
gilded ‘ij paer gaignepains en de rondellen de plattern’.117 The plate rondels may be
the equivalent of the vamplate for the lance. Gaignepains appear under the ‘harnoys
de jouste’ in the French treatise of 1446 and the ‘Abilement for the Just of Pees’ of
the later 15th century.118
Gauntlets of baleen
It has been pointed out that these are constructed not of whalebone but of baleen
— a horn-like substance from the mouths of whales used as a sieve for krill. Also
they appear more in a war context than for tourneys or jousts.119
His espeye that is sword, and flail, and helm that is heaume
The author has remembered that this is a glossary at this point. Out goes the ‘in
French’ (Gallice) and in comes the more traditional Latin form id est. Reading it as
a glossary thus challenges Anglo’s interpretation. Rather than having too many ‘items
of head gear’120 our knight has a linen coif, lined bascinet, and helm (see figure 4).
For war: aketon, German plates or others with the pièce

This is the second section and it implies that there is not an overall title to the treatise.
The Manner of Arming Knights for the Tourney is, in fact, the title of the first
section. ‘Alemayne’ refers to the German-speaking lands whose towns such as
Nuremberg and Cologne were already established as centres of excellence for the
manufacture of steel.121
figure 4 Part of a helm, early-14th century. Found at Carluke, it is the only surviving
substantial piece of medieval plate armour ever found in Scotland.
Glasgow Museums Accession no. LA.1961.19a
18 RALPH MOFFAT
Plates
Blair states that this is a ‘cloth or leather garment lined with metal plates [. . .] it was
known variously as pair of plates, [. . .] cote à plates or simply plates’.122 Charles
Buttin has pointed out that these could have had up to seven pieces of steel. In 1327
the count of Savoy paid for the ‘repair of a pair of plates covered with camlet [. . .]
in which pair of plates were seven pieces of steel’ (‘pro reparacione unius paris
plactarum copertarum zamelloto [. . .] in quo pari plactarum refecte fuerunt pecie
septem de aczaro’).123 Blair has also stated, due to the increasing references to them,
that ‘by the early fourteenth century they were clearly in general use’.124
Or others [plates] with the pièce

Meyer found this last word illegible.125 Whether it is read as ‘p[ie]ceb[us]’ or
‘p[re]ceb[us]’ both these amount in translation from Latin to ‘piece’. It may be
somewhat optimistic to interpret this as a piece of armour that, as François Buttin
has shown, does not appear until Froissart’s chronicles of the 1380s.126 A couple of
early 15th-century references to the pièce indicate that there was a link between the
object and its provenance in the German-speaking lands. In 1411 Duke Charles of
Orleans ordered payment for providing ‘Messire Thuom de Romestein’, knight of
Bohemia, ‘une piece Dalmaigne lx sous tournois’.127 The following year Charles’s
brother the 16-year-old count of Vertus ordered from ‘larmeurier de mons[eigneur]
de bourg[ong]ne [. . .] vne piece dalmaigne’.128
Above this the aketon [recte gambeson?] and a good gorget

At this point there is admittedly some confusion on the part of the author or the
scribe. Anglo’s assessment that ‘we should not expect too much in the way of clarity’
due to a clerical interpretation of ‘secular subjects’ seems somewhat harsh.129
The aketon has already been described as being worn beneath the plates. Gambeson
may be meant here. Blair has pointed out that there is some flexibility in the terminol-
ogy130 but it is clear that the two were different. For example William Earl of Ross,
in 1302, was provided with an aketon made from a gambeson (‘pur j gambessoun
achate dunt fu fet un aketun pur le cunte’)131 and in the 1266 inventory of the count
of Nevers is a ‘little gambeson without sleeves’ (‘i petit ganbaison sanz manches’).132
Sir John Fitz Marmaduke’s ‘Joynters pro j gaimbeson de argento’ may have served
to attach sleeves.133 The aforementioned regulations of the London linen-armourers
of 1322 refer to both the ‘Aketoun e Gambezoun’.134
The good gorget may have been of mail either of single or double thickness or
of plate. For example there is the ‘j. gorger’ dup’’ and ‘j. gorger dupplici’ in the
Mortimer inventory.135 In his will of 1295 Theobald de Verdon left to his sons
‘2 Gorgeria[rum] de duplici ferro’ and ‘1. Georgeraim de duplici ferro’.136 The
Tower inventory of 1324 has ‘.j. gorg[er]o double’.137 In Conwy castle in 1341 were
‘iij double gorgers de nule value’.138 In the inventory of effects of Robert, count of
Flanders, are ‘une gorgiere double, pour capiel de Montauban. [. . .], deus gorgieres
franchoises de demi clawre’.139 In 1302 can be found ‘une gorgiere de plattes’ and
‘ii gorgeretes de plates’.140
For the joust

Before continuing with the discussion of armour there should be some attention paid
to a fuller understanding of the word hastiludia. Juliet Vale has warned that ‘it would
be rash to assume that joustes, the most common term in (far less numerous)
references in French, was always synonymous with hastiludia — the most common
term in Latin sources’,141 although she later concedes that an English chronicler’s
description of Henry of Lancaster’s team ‘ad hastyludyandum sub foro guerre’142
against Sir William Douglas and his Scots in 1341 ‘appears to be an exact translation
of joustes de guerre’.143 Barker anglicises the word to ‘hastilude(s)’.144 This word is
used with increasing frequency throughout her work — one reviewer even referring
to it as a ‘history of hastiludes’.145 It is of significance that the earliest reference to
the word in the OED dates to 1586. Anglo translates the term literally as ‘mounted
lance play’.146 Some of this verbal confusion may relate to a series of documents
relating to the nascent Order of the Garter published in 1846.147 In them is a cited a
patent roll of 1345 ‘De licencia Justas apud Lincolnam’.148 This grants permission to
a group to ‘teneant hastiludia sive justas, et quod [. . .] Henricus de Lancastria Comes
Derbiæ qui in actibus militaribus delectatur fiat Capitaneus eorundem’.149
That hastiludia was a catch-all term for different forms of combat in the early
14th century in some sources is certain. A decree of 1305 refers to the ‘magistris &
scolaribus universitatis Cantebr’ quod torneamenta aliqua, aventuræ, justæ, seu
hujusmodi hastiludia non fierent in villâ Cantebrigiæ’.150
One of the earliest appearances of the vernacular ‘jouster de guerre’ comes from
a letter written in 1340 by the constable of English-occupied Roxburgh castle in
Scotland. One of the author’s worst enemies ‘Johan Ker est mort par iouster de
guerre de vne coupe qe vn de mes vadletz liu ferst permy le corps et permy son
haketon’ et hauberioun’.151 This could be interpreted as being used in the context
of skirmishing warfare as could the Scottish statutes of the march ‘in tym of were’ of
1373 that stipulate the half portion of the ransom due to whoever ‘strikis doun ane
man of[f] hors bak in þe chais’ or ‘strikis him doun throu justing of wer’.152 All
this implies that there is a degree of plasticity to the term in the fourteenth century.
A French equivalent to this may be found in the payments to ‘Colin l’Armeurier,
bourgoiz d’Evreux [. . .] pour faire fourbir II paire de plates, un heaume à jouster de
fer de glaive’ for Charles the Bad of Navarre in 1370.153
It might be accepted that the word ‘hastiludia’ encompasses more than just the
combats themselves — perhaps as the Latin equivalent of ‘feste des joustes’ found in
both the French of England and of France. There are household payments for Richard
II’s ‘feste de joustes’ at Smithfield in 1390.154 Froissart noted that Sir Simon Burley
found many great lords at Brussels as well as a ‘grant fussion de chevaliers de
Haynnau et de Braibant; car là avoit une grosse feste de joustes’.155 Payment records
20 RALPH MOFFAT
from the duchy of Burgundy describe ‘comme le roy vouloit faire le 1er may [1389],
une feste de jouste à St Denis’ and when ‘Le duc de Bourgogne assistant aux joustes
que le roy fit faire à St-Denys, au mois de may 1389’ as well as ‘la feste des joustez
tenues à Pariz ou mois d’aoust [13]89’.156 These events would be commemorated in
the royal furnishings with ‘une chamber, ciel et dossier seulement, [. . .] laquelle
chamber est de la devise des jouxtes de Saint-Denis’.157 Another French chronicler
would describe Marshal Boucicault’s extravaganza at Saint Inglevert in 1390 as a
‘hastiludia’158 whilst the tapestry depicting the event would be inventoried as ‘ung
grant tappiz de joustes de Saint-Ildevert’.159 However, when examining source
material such as the Duchy of Lancaster accounts, it soon becomes evident that there
is much less ambiguity in this vocabulary as employed by professional armourers.

Payment is made by Henry of Derby’s (later Henry IV) personal armourer John
Dounton to an ‘Egidio de Tor’y’,160 ‘p[r]o j helm empt’ de eo p[ro] Thoma de
Beauford p[ro] hastilud’ pac’ apud hertforde’. Despite the warning above as to this
interpretation the question must be asked: what else would Henry and his teenaged
half-brother be doing with this equipment at Hertford? The assertion seems all the
more difficult to accept on continuing through the list. When another London
armourer ‘St[ep]h[a]no atte Fryth’ is paid ‘p[ro] j mayndefer empt’ p[ro] Thoma
Beauford’ this is overwhelming evidence for interpreting ‘hastilud’ pac’ as ‘joust of
peace’ as this is a reference to a defence for the left hand — the manifer — exclu-
sively used for the joust of peace. That it was in use by the third or fourth decade of
the fourteenth century has been shown by Viscount Dillon’s oft-cited publication of
a transcription of ‘Lacompte Gerard de Tourney heaumer n[ost]re seign[eu]r le Roi’
Edward III from 1338 to 1342.161 Further evidence for this interpretation is the pay-
ment in the Duchy accounts to ‘lodewico fil’ Mag’r’ Egidij de Turry p[ro] ij ferr’ lanc’
p[ro] hastilud’ guerre & p[ro] vj Coronalx p[ro] hastilud’ pac’ empt’ p[ro] d’no’.
Lance-heads for the joust of war are, here, starkly juxtaposed with those for the joust
of peace: coronals. It is also revealed that certain articles could be constructed for
both purposes. The London armourer John Grove was paid for a newly furbished
pair of plates made both for peace and for war (‘Joh’i Grove p[ro] j par’ plates nou’
furbis’ fact’ tam p[ro] pac’ q’am p[ro] guerra’). References such as this might go some
way to explaining the appearance in wills of such equipment. For example, that of
Lord Bergavenny of 1408 mentions ‘my best . . . harness for the justs [sic] of peace
which belonged to war’.162 This is certainly a very garbled translation and it is
unfortunate that Sir N. H. Nicolas did not provide any apparatus in his publication
for his successors to locate the original documents. Again, Sir Bartholomew de Burgh-
ersh (1369) refers to ‘my whole suit of armour for the justs [sic]’.163 Sir Bartholomew
had been the recipient of a jousting saddle and shield from Prince Edward of
Woodstock: ‘a mons Barth’u de Burgherssh j seale p[u]r les Justes & j Escu p[u]r les
Justes’ for ‘les Justes q’ le Counte de la March’ fist crier ap[re]s la feste de Wyndesore
lan du regne n[ost]re seign[eu]r le Roi xxxij [1359]’.164
The Duchy accounts are not an isolated example of this rigid jousting terminology.
In preparation for a judicial duel in 1368 the Scots noble Sir James Douglas of Dalkeith
sent his servants to London to purchase ‘unu’ par’ de platis, unu’ haub’geone’, unu’
par’ cirotecaz afferis, unu’ helm’, unu’ par’ de bracers & alias armatur’ pro corpore
suo cruribus tibiis & pedibus suis’ along with ‘quasdom alias armatur’ pro eodem
duello necessar’’.165 Much of this armour reappears in his will of 1392; the vocabulary
is redolent of the sources above. He bequeathed ‘vnum par de platys pro hastiludio
de guerra cum basineto et lorica cirotecis ocreis ferreis et aliis armaturis pro
hastiludio de guerra compentibus’ to one son and ‘vnum par de platys pro duello et
Residuum vnis armature pro hastiludio de guerra’ to another.166 In Sir James’s
lifetime Archdeacon John Barbour composed (c. 1375) an epic vernacular poem on
the hero-king Robert I that included the line ‘Yar wes ilk day iustyn of wer’.167 We
have already seen the term enshrined in a legal Scots context in the statutes of the
march.
The multilingualism of the producers of these accounts is evident but vagueness
of terminology is not. Compare the following entries from a wardrobe account of
Roger, fourth earl of March dating from 1393 to 1394168: ‘in emendacione j celle pro
hastiludiis contra Natalem Domini proximum [. . .] cum j pilwe stuffato et la stuff
cooperato cum coreo rubro’
‘pur le amendement d’une selle pur les justes, j novel pilwe’169
Or compare the ‘ij veillis justing sadils’170 in the inventory of effects of the treason-
ous Henry le Scrope with the ‘Sellis & omni Apparatu pro Hastiludendo’ and ‘tam
de Armaturis quàm de Sellis, & aliis rebus pro Hastiludendo’ referred to in his will
— both of 1415.171 That jousting saddles were of a completely different construction
is evidenced by the fact that, in a case brought before the mayor and aldermen of the
city of London in 1350, the saddletree-makers (fusters)172 were accused of selling their
saddletrees (arsons) to the saddlers of London (‘les sellers de Loundres’) at too high
a price. Eleven different types of saddletree are mentioned including saddletrees for
coursers, destriers, tournaments, and jousts (‘arson p[u]r Coursoer [. . .] arson p[u]r
tournament [. . .] arson p[u]r destrers [. . .] arson p[u]r Justes’).173 On the Continent
also there is differentiation such as the ‘8 sielles de tournoy et de guerre, armoyés
des armes de Flandres’ inventoired at the Castle at Lille in 1388.174 All this is over-
whelming evidence that the word hastiludia can, by the date of the composition of
the treatise, be accepted as meaning joust in the vernacular.
Aketon, hauberk, gambeson which is made of silken cloth or some

such similar that is as precious
The author uses the term ‘hauberc’ instead of ‘lorica’ in this instance which serves to
reinforce the argument made above that this Latin word is specific to the English and
French. In a will of 1257 both a ‘loricam’ and ‘hauberc’ are referred to.175
The gambeson should be of silk or material that is equivalent in its

opulence
In the poem the Siege of Caerlaverock there is the description of many silk gambe-
sons.176 Red gambesons with silver chains and a silk-covered one (‘j. gaunbeson
22 RALPH MOFFAT
rubeum, cum tribus catenis argenteis [. . .] j gaunbeson coopertum de panno serico’)

appear in the aforementioned inventory of Sir John Fitz Marmaduke.177
There shall be nothing but plates of steel, shield, basin, and helm
Again the author code-switches back into French, ‘nuelers ke su’t [. . .]’ being an
excellent example of the language now often referred to as French of England. The
‘German plates’ have become ‘plates of steel’. The Latin word ‘scut’ could be read as
‘sicut’: ‘like’ if the mark above is interpreted as that of contraction. Alternatively it
could be read as ‘scutum’: ‘shield’ if read as a truncation mark. The last word is in
Latin — the helm.
The Manner is interesting in the items it does not mention.
Spaudlers
Lachaud has drawn attention to the ‘spaundlers’ mentioned in a royal account of 1215
and they also appear, in French, as ‘espaulieres’ in an early 13th-century romance.178
Blair reminds us that they were not necessarily of a hard substance at this period
drawing attention to the ‘espaulier de nigro Cend[all’]’ amongst the linen armour of
Falk de Breauté in 1224.179 They are clearly made of something more substantial
when listed with the rest of the arm defences in Roger Mortimer’s inventory: ‘deux
peire d espaulers ove bracers & vauntbracers’. Another ‘deux peire d espaulers’
appear sandwiched between mail sleeves (‘braz’) and ‘trois peire des quisseux de
quir boile’.180 The Tower inventory of 1324 included ‘.ij. peire despaudlers de petite
value’.181 What is most puzzling is that they are not mentioned in our treatise despite
the fact that they appear amongst the few pieces of armour allowed to be worn by
those attending tourneys in Edward I’s Statua armorum of 1292.
Ailettes
Blair has stated that ‘they seem, on occasions, to have been purely ornamental’ point-
ing out that the ones decorated with pearls were listed with ‘autres divers garnementz’
with the arms of Sir Piers Gaveston in 1313.182 The fact that the four ‘peire de alettes
des armes le Counte de Hereford’ are listed after the ‘cotes darmes’183 and that Sir
John Fitz Marmaduke had a gambeson with ‘alletys’ reinforces the argument for them
being ornamental.184 In his scathing sermons against touneying in the early fourteenth
century, John Bromyard complains of knights who ‘have a helm of gold worth
forty pounds, ailettes and other external insignia of the same style and even greater
price’ (‘q’ galea[m] habent deaurata3 precij .xl. libraru[m] & alas & alia i[n]signia
exteriora eiusde[m] forme & maioris precij’).185 In the Tower in 1324 were two coat
armours of green velvet with leopards embroidered with the king’s arms, one of the
same suit, one pair of ailettes of green velvet with silver leopards (‘ij. cotes armeres
de veluet v[ir]r[id]i od leop[ar]tz broudez des arm[es] le Roi .j. meisme la seute .j.
autre peire des aletz de veluet v[ir]i[d]i od leop[ar]tz dargent’).186 In 1303 Edward
of Caernarfon rewarded one of his valets with a coat armour in recognition for his
having jousted in Scottish parts (‘vnam tunicam de arm’ de cognit[i]one sua sibi
facienda p[ro] hastilud’ in partib[us] scot’’). Payment was made for gold and silver
thread, silk, sindon, card, and leather for ailettes and all things pertinent to them (‘filo
auri & arg’n’ s[er]ico sindone carda corio p[ro] alettis & aliis reb[us] p[er]tinent’ ad
eande[m]’).187 The fact that neither this treatise nor the Statuta armorum of 1292
mention ailettes is further proof that they were not considered as defensive armour.
There is also no mention of mail chausses, lances, or any protection for horses as
is found in the challenges for judicial duels of 1309 and 1386, although the treatise
only purports to name the manner of arming knights.
What the author of the Manner has presented us with is not a jumbled, unintelli-
gible list of words. Rather it is a succinct and ordered (with the exception of once
confusing the aketon with the gambeson) glossary that is written by a multilingual
author and is probably meant for a reader who shared the ability to move easily
between languages — even in the same sentence. Most importantly it has shown that
the equipment used for both the tourney and the joust was different to that used on
the battlefield by the early 14th century. The next step will be to try to discover the
nature of these differences.
Notes
1 13
There is no cross-bar on the descender of the ‘p’. Lachaud 1998: 357.
2 14
The ampersand is a superscript insertion with Godefroy 1881–1902.
15
caret mark. TNA, WARD 2/60/234/57, printed in Vincent 1998:
3
DNB. Unless otherwise stated all quotations 51. Leeds, Royal Armouries Library, MS I.875,
regarding biographical information are from this printed in Lachaud 1998: 364.
16
source. TNA, DURH3/1, fols 140v–141r, printed in Raine
4
Meyer 1884: 529. For the date of the Dictionarius 1835–29: I, 19.
17
see Hunt 1991: I, 191. The shorter version (BL, Additional MS, 46919,
5
Anglo 2000: 205–06. I wish to express my gratitude fols 90v–91r) has less of an arming scene. It is print-
to Professor Anglo for his kind comments on an ed with a translation in Jeffrey and Levy (1990:
earlier draft of this article. Many thanks are also 186–90). The longer version (fols 38r–40r) is printed
due to Mr Philip Lankester. (and translated, although wrongly attributed to
6
‘Elite d’armes 1309 [. . .] entre le ‘Viconte de Rohan Langtoft, see DNB under ‘Bozon’ and Jeffrey and
[. . .] & le Seignour de Biaumanoir [sic]’, Registres Levy (1990: 190) from BL, Cotton MS, A V, fols
de la Chancelerie, à la Chambre des Comptes 172r–174v as Appendix II of Chronicle of Pierre de
de Nantes, Arm. N, cassette C, no. 8, printed in Langtoft (Wright 1866–68: II, 426–37). Both of
Lobineau 1707: II, col. 1639. Lille, Archives dépar- these translations have their shortcomings. David
tementales du Nord, Fonds de la Chambre des Crouch in his Tournament (2005: 145 and n. 37
Comptes, B.278 (no 5475), printed in Dehaisnes on p. 229), cites the transcription of the shorter
1886: I, 246. version from BL, Additional MS, 46919 in Evans
7
Calendar of Inquisitions Miscellaneous (Chancery) 1982: 45–46.
18
Preserved in the Public Record Office, no ed., Luders 1810–28: I, 230, where the editor collates
8 vols (London: HMSO, 1916–2003), II, 134. the earliest MSS.
8 19
Sayles 1936–71: III (1939), no. 121, cited in Library of the Society of Antiquaries of London
Prestwich 1995: 208. MS, SAL/MS/54, m. 1, third paragraph. I am grate-
9
Blair 1958: 43. ful to Dr Bernard Nurse for kindly locating this
10
Bain 1881–1986: II, 356. TNA, E101/369/20, document.
20
printed in Lachaud 1998: 367. Leeds, Royal Armouries Library MS .0035(I.35),
11
TNA, E154/1/11A, printed in Way 1858: 361. fol. 10r.
12 21
Blair 1958: 43, citing Kelly 1905: 468 who in turn See Gay 1887–1928.
22
cites the original printed in Dehaisnes 1886. Blair 1958: 42.
24 RALPH MOFFAT
23 50
Calendar of Inquisitions Miscellaneous, II, 133– Meyer (1884: 530, n. 1) states ‘on faisait à Chartres
34. des heaumes et des gambaisons; voy. Guill. de
24
TNA, E 101/390/7. for the dating of this MS see Tudèle, v. 520–1’. (see also Meyer 1875–79: I, 24,
Vale 1982: 48 and n. 96 on p. 127. ll. 520–21).
25
‘Une peire d eskynebaudz dorrez poudrez des ‘[1209] Mot gonois i ars, mot elme e mot gambais
moletz p[er]cez’. TNA, E101/333/4 printed in | Que foron faitz a Chartres, a Blaia o a Roais’.
Palgrave 1836: III, 165. Blaia is Occitan for Blaye in the Gironde départe-
26
TNA, E 101/387/25, m. 7. ment of Aquitaine and Roais is Occitan for Roaix
27
Will of Walter Leycestr’, Westminster Abbey in the Vaucluse département of Provence.
51
Muniments 253558, cited in Mann 1961: 414, n. 1. Blair (1958: 108) states that ‘Chambli [sic] (Beau-
TNA, E163/6/13 printed in Salzman 1953: 46. vais) and Chartres seem to have been particularly
28
Way 1862: 164. famous for mail-making’.
29 52
Lee-Dillon 1847: 275–76. Anglo 2000: 205.
30 53
Mann 1942: 119. ‘Dans le constume civil et militaire, elle a la forme
31
Catto 2003: 36. Thanks to Dr Steve Boardman for d’une dalmatique ou mieux d’un tabart’. Gay,
bringing this article to the author’s attention. Glossaire, I, 361.
32 54
Wright, ‘Bills, Accounts, Inventories: Everyday Although pilgrims had believed it to be of linen,
Trilingual Activities in the Business World of Later when the reliquary was opened in the 18th century
Medieval England’, in Trotter 2000: 149. For it was found to be of ‘Saracen’ silk. See Burns 2006:
code-switching see Hunt 2000: 131–47. Thanks 365–97.
55
to Dr Mary Swan for introducing me to this Hayes 2003: 33.
56
important linguistic phenomenon. Marchant 1973: nos. XXI and XXVIII. I am grate-
33
London Metropolitan Archives, Letter-Book E, ful to Dr Jim Bugslay for his helpful discussion of
fol. 133r. There is also separate mention of this item.
57
‘blaunches Aketouns’ that do not have such fine Marchant 1973: l. 100.
58
coverings. Marchant 1973: ll. 69–70 and 85–86.
34 59
Dehaisnes 1886: I, 187. In the shorter version it is rendered ‘Ma chemise de
35
Calendar of Inquisitions Miscellaneous, II, 129–34. charres’. BL, Additional MS, 46919, fol. 40r, l. 8.
60
11 ‘haketons’ in total. Méon 1821: IV, ll. 249–58.
36 61
BL, Stowe Charter 622, ll. 15 and 20. Lachaud sug- Way 1858: 361. Lachaud passes over this item in
gests this may have belonged to Simon de Montfort ‘L’Homme armé’(1998: 54).
(d. 1265) (Contamine & Reverseau 2002: 59). I am 62
Curia Regis Rolls [. . .] preserved in the Public
extremely grateful to Dr Karen Watts for bringing Record Office, no ed., 16 vols (London: PRO,
this article to my attention. 1922–79), IX, 193. Select Cases in the Court of
37
Sharpe 1889–90: II, 25. King’s Bench, III, no. 121.
38 63
Ferguson 1893: 87. Lachaud 1998: 360, n. 88, citing TNA, E101/13/37.
39
Ferguson 1893: 136. Way 1858: 360.
40 64
Pas-de-Calais, Archives Départementales A 342, This is printed in Fowler & Hughes 1925: 59
printed in Richard 1887: 394. and cited in Blair 1958: 44, second unnumbered
41
Way 1858: 358. footnote. A more recent transcription is in Curia
42
Lobineau 1707: II, col. 1639. Regis Rolls, XI, 383.
43 65
Dehaisnes 1886: I, 247. Anglo 2000: 205.
44 66
‘Procez de duel de Beamanoir & de Tournemine Hunt 1991: II, 137. Regrettably the chapter on
1386’, printed in Lobineau, 1707: I, col. 676. ‘arma militaria’ promised by John of Garland does
45
Lobineau 1707: II, col. 1639. not exist in any of the surviving MSS. Hunt 1991:
46
Nicolas 1846: 45. I, 200, n. 16.
47 67
‘Item, pour la façcon de un petit doublet fait de 3 Blair 1958: 51.
68
aulnes de toile de Rains, . . . pour mons. de Thou- TNA, E 101/363/18. See also DML under ‘cerebel-
raine, pour envoyer en Lombardie pour faire unes laris’ where it is incorrectly transcribed as ‘cerverl-
plates pareilles audit doublet pour ledit Seigneur’. lar’. They also cite ‘cervelur’ ad ij bacinett’’ from
‘[. . .] pour trois aulnes de fine toille de Reins, . . . 1342: TNA, E 101/389/14.
69
pour faire un patron à un petit pourpoint, Documents relatifs au Clos des galées de Rouen,
pour mons. le Duc de Thouraine, pour envoier en Merlin-Chazelas 1977–88: II, 161.
70
Allemaigne, pour faire et forger unes plates d’acier Pas-de-Calais, Archives Départementales, A 179,
pour son corps’. Buttin 1910: 40, citing Douet 1874: printed in Richard 1887: 387.
71
290 and 152. Richard 1887: 387.
48 72
Richard 1887: 396. ‘[. . .] que nul ne puisse garnir bacinet neuf [. . .] se
49
Barker 1986: 167. ce n’est de cendail neuf ou de toille neufve ou de
bouguerant, et que les cermeillères [recte cerveliè- 107

Pilgrimage of the Lyfe of the Manhode: Translated
res] soient doubles jusques dessoubz le pertuis ou Anonymously into Prose from the First Recension
les cermeillières doivent estre clouées ou cousues, of Guillaume de Deguileville’s Poem Le Pèlerinage
et que les languettes desdites cermeillières, se le de la vie humaine. (Henry1985–88: I, ll. 2303–04).
bacinet est garni de cendail, soient couvertes de 108
De Deguileville, Le Pelerinage, ll. 4212–14.
109
cendail et arrière pointées’. Lespinasse 1886–97: Pilgrimage of the Lyfe, I, ll. 2307, 2315–16.
110
III, 321. ‘[. . .] locacione iiij equorum de London’ usque
73
Lespinasse 1886–97: 321–22. Warr’, Wynton’ et Rading’ pro suis armis cariandis
74
Mann 1942: 120, n. 1. ad torniamentum ibidem et pro corio empto ad
75 faciendas coreias pro sellis de novo factis, uno
Merlet & Moutier 1857–58: I, 664.
76 bacino ferreo empto pro dicto Johanne pro saccis
Maitland 1910–13: I, 113. Cited in DML under
‘lorica’. ad pannos trussandos et flachettis pro eisdem
77 cooperiendis guaynepayns quirreis locatis pro ipso
Lachaud 1998: 362, citing references from the
Johanne et familia sua’. TNA, C47/4/3, fol. 2r,
Calendar of Inquisitions Miscellaneous.

78
Taylor 1932: 16. It is of note that the glossarists of printed in Records of the Wardrobe and
the 13th century have ‘gambaysuns’ for ‘toraces’. Household, 1285–86, p. 5, no. 41.
111
Hunt 1991: II, 136. BL, Stowe Charter 622, ll. 16–17, 20–21. The
79
Jacob 1938–47: II, 123. medieval document does not contain any
80
Way 1863: 165. punctuation.
112
81
Arundell family of Lanherne and Trerice, Cornwall Wills and Inventories, I, 16. Library of the
MS, AR/15/2. Antiquaries of London MS, SAL/MS/541, m. 1,
82
Wills and Inventories Illustrative of the History third paragraph.
113
[. . .] of the Northern Counties, II, 55. Prost 1902–08: II, 373.
114
83
Putnam 1914: 501. Reverseau 1979: 195.
115
84
Way 1863: 165. ‘Original en parchemin certifié par l’écuyer du
85 duc d’Orléans. Publié par M. Aimé Champollion-
Byerly & Byerly 1977: 22, no. 214 and p. 167,
Figeac, 1845’ in Beaumont 1865: 1, n. 6.
no. 1693. 116
86 See Blair 1958: 157. Barker 1986: 170–71.
Terjanian 2005: 25, citing Dörner 1916: 1–60. 117
87 Lille, Receipt générale des finances, no 2395,
Blair 1958: 157.
88 printed in van Vinkeroy, 1885: 97, n. 4.
Barker 1986: 168. 118
89 Reverseau 1900: 191. New York, Pierpont Morgan
Gravett 1993: 69.
90 Library MS, M 775 printed in Lee-Dillon, 1900: 40.
Natalis de Wailly 1868: 111.
91 BL, Lansdowne MS, 285, fol. 3r.
TNA, E 101/390/7. For dating see Vale 1982: 127. 119
92 Moffat 2008: 207–15.
Lachaud in Strickland 1998: 354–55. 120
93
Anglo 2000: 206.
TNA, E 36/278. 121
94
See, for example, Terjanian 2005.
Way (1862: 160) citing Bibliothèque nationale 122
Blair 1958: 40.
de France, ms. français, 7855, printed by Charles 123
Buttin 1910: 35, citing an unpublished document of
du Fresne (sieur du Cange), Glossarium mediae et Angelo Angelucci curator of the Royal Armoury at
infimae latinitatis, 10 vols (Niort, 1883–87), under Turin.
‘armatura’ and Gay, Glossaire, under ‘harnois’, 124
Blair 1992: 10.
who cites du Cange. A modern edition of this very 125
Meyer 1884: 530, n. 2.
important document would be most welcome. 126
Buttin1965: 104.
95
Way (1858) ‘Discussion’, in Gunner 1858: 273. 127
Rouen, Bibliothèque municipale, MS Leber, 5684,
96
Blair 1958: 38. printed in Williams 1846: 151, n. 1.
97
Lespinasse 1886–97: II, 321–22. 128
BL, Additional Charter 2606.
98
Buffum 1928: ll. 2582 and 2585–86. 129
Anglo 2000: 206.
99
BL, Additional MS, 46919, fol. 90v, l. 30. 130
Blair 1958: 33.
100
Kelly 1905: 468. 131
Lachaud1998: 366.
101 132
Way 1858: 165. Paris, Archives nationales, carton J., 821, no. 1,
102
Gay 1887–1928: I, 752. printed in Chazaud (1871: 192). This is cited in
103
Reverseau 1979: 195–96. Blair 1958; 38, 52,185.
104 133
Blair 1958: 159. Wills and Inventories, I, 18. See also MED and
105
Buttin 1910: 61 citing Les Tournois de Chauvenci Lachaud 1998: 60 who use this source.
[. . .] décrits par Jacques Brétex (Delmotte 1835: 134
London Metropolitan Archives, Letter-Book E,
l. 3803). fol. 133r.
106 135
Guillaume de Deguileville, Le Pelerinage de vie Way 1858: 360–61.
136
humaine (Stürzinger 1893: vi (for dating), ll. 4212, BL, Additional MS 18446, fol. 5r, cited in Lachaud
4220, 4237, 4543). 1998: 40, 52. This MS is an 18th-century copy.
26 RALPH MOFFAT
137 165
TNA, E 101/390/7. Macpherson 1814–19: I, 916–17.
138 166
Owen, 1900–22: III, 676. Craig 1867–71: III, no. iv.
139 167
Dehaisnes 1886: I, 246. McDiarmid and J. Stevenson 1980–85: Book XIX,
140
Richard 1887: 387. Kelly 1905: 468. 524.
141 168
Vale 1982: 57. Paley Baildon 1911: 498 citing BL. Egerton Roll
142
Martin 1995: 38. 874–6. I am grateful to Prof. Wendy Childs for
143
Vale 1982: 58. pointing out that this account concerns the earl and
144
Barker 986: 1. not the king.
145 169
Review of Barker’s Tournament in England Ibid., pp. 505 and 512.
170
(Bouton 1990: 112). Kingsford 1920: 89.
146 171
Anglo 2000: 205. Rymer 1739–45: IX, 276.
147 172
Nicolas 1846: 104. According to the editor of the London Letter-Books
148
Nicolas 1846: 153, citing ‘Rot. Patent. 18 Edw. III, (Sharpe 1899–1912: C, 168) ‘the craft of the fuster
p. 1, m. 44’. appears to have been confined to the making of

149
It is fitting that Henry himself, towards the end arzouns, or saddle-bows [sic], and the fusters are
of his life, wrote in ‘le franceis’ of how much he nearly always mentioned in connection with the
enjoyed jousting adding the pious caveat that it saddlers, and seldom, if ever, in connection with
was not, in itself, sinful: ‘[. . .] com en jouster, [. . .] the joiners (junctores)’. The DML under ‘fustarius’
sanz pecché, sicom jeo espoire qe tout pleyn has: ‘[C.f. [. . .] AN, ME fuster], joiner, carpenter,
d’autres fount et poent bien faire’. Arnould 1940: esp. maker of saddletrees’ and cites Thomas
78. 1926–61.
150 173
‘Pat. 33 Edw. I. p. 2 m. 4. in Turr. Lond.’, printed Calendar of Plea and Memoranda Rolls, II, 240.
174
in Rymer 1816–69: I, 976. Prost 1902–8: II, 373.
151 175
TNA, SC 1/54/30, printed in King 2002: 268. Vincent 1998: 51–52.
176
Thanks to Dr King for sharing his thoughts on this Nicolas 1828.
177
passage. Wills and Inventories, I, 18.
152 178
Innes and Thomson 1814–75: I, 350–51. Lachaud 1998: 357, citing Hardy 1833–44: I, 229.
153
Izarn 1885: 389 and 391. Roman de la violette, l. 2583.
154 179
Calendar of the Patent Rolls [. . . of] Richard II, no See n. 62 above.
180
ed., 6 vols (London: HMSO, 1895–1909) (1388–92): Antient Kalendars, III, 165. Vale has surmised that
302. ‘Mortimer himself may have been an enthusiast,
155
Oeuvres, ed. Lettenhove, IX, 213. holding a Round Table at Bedford in 1328 and a
156
Prost 1902–08: II, 491, 498, and 509. tournament at Hereford’ the same year to celebrate
157
Guiffrey, 1887: 88 his daughters’ marriages. Vale 1982: 136, n. 36.
158 181
Moranvillé ND: 97–100. TNA, E 101/390/7.
159 182
Guiffrey 1887: 89 Blair 1958: 46, citing Rymer, 1816–69: II, 204.
160 183
TNA, DL28/1. Della Torre, an Italian, as TNA, DL27/14, printed in Turner 1846: 348.
184
interpreted by Blair in Blair and Delamer 1988: ‘j gaimbeson cum allecys’. Lower case ‘t’s and ‘c’s
122 are identical in the script used. Wills and Invento-
161
TNA, E 101/338/11, printed in Lee-Dillon 1890: ries, I, 18. The most recent discussion is Nickel
148–50. 2002: 197–211.
162 185
Nicolas 1862: 172. Bromyard 1484: II, under ‘Nobilitas’.
163 186
Nicolas 1862: 77. TNA, E 101/390/7.
164 187
TNA, E 36/278. TNA, E 101/363/18.
References
Anglo, S. 2000. Martial arts of Renaissance Europe. New Haven, Yale UP.
Arnould, E. J. ed. 1940. Le Livre de Seyntz Medicines: The Devotional Treatise of Henry of Lancaster. Oxford:
Blackwell.
Bain, J. ed. 1881–1986. Calendar of documents Relating to Scotland. 5 vols. Edinburgh: HM General Register
House.
Calendar of Inquisitions Miscellaneous (Chancery). 1916–2003. Preserved in the Public Record Office, no ed.,
8 vols. London: HMSO.
Barker, J. R. V. 1986. The tournament in England 1100–1400. Woodbridge: Boydell.
Beaumont, E. de. 1865. Notice sur les gens de guerre du comte de Saint-Paul qui sont enfouis a Coucy depuis
1411. Paris: Morel.
Blair, C. 1992. The date of the early alabaster knight at Hanbury, Staffordshire. Church Monuments, 7: 3–10.
Blair, C. 1958. European armour circa 1066 to circa 1700. London: Batsford.
Blair, C. & Delamer, I. 1988. The Dublin civic swords. Proceedings of the Royal Irish Academy, 88: 87–142.
Bromyard, J. 1484. Summa praedicantium. 2 vols. Basel: Amerbach.
Buffum, D. L. ed. 1928. Le Roman de la violette ou de Gerart de Nevers par Gerbert de Montreuil. Paris:
Champion.
Burns, E. J. 2006. Saracen silk and the Virgin’s chemise: Cultural crossings in cloth. Speculum, 81: 365–97.
Buttin, F. 1965. La Lance et l’arrêt de cuirasse. Archaeologia, 99: 77–178.
Buttin, C. 1910. Le Guet de Genève au XVe siècle et l’armement des ses gardes. Geneva: Kündig.
Byerly, B. F. & Byerly, C. R. eds. 1977. Records of the Wardrobe and Household, 1285–86. London: HMSO.
Catto, J. 2003. Written English: The making of the language 1370–1400. Past and Present, 179: 24–59.
Chazaud, M. 1871. Inventaire et comptes de la succession d’Eudes, comte de Nevers (Acre 1266). Bulletin de la
Société impériale des Antiquaires de France, 2: 164–206.
Contamine, P. & Reverseau, J.-P. eds. 2002 L’Homme armé en Europe XIVe siècle–XVIe siècle. Paris: Cahiers
d’études et de recherches du musée de l’Armée 3.
Craig, W. G. ed. 1867–71. Facsimiles of National manuscripts of Scotland. 3 vols. Southampton: OS.
Crouch, D. 2005. Tournament. London: Hambledon.
Dehaisnes, C. 1886. Documents et extraits divers concernant l’histoire de l’art dans la Flandre, l’Artois et le
Hainaut avant le XVe siècle. 2 vols. Lille: Danel.
Delmotte, P. ed. 1835. Les Tournois de Chauvenci [. . .] décrits par Jacques Brétex. Valenciennes: Prignet.
Dörner, R. 1916. Die Sarwörter- und des Schwertgegerant in Köln, von den ältesten Zeiten bis zum Jahre 1550.
Jahrbuch der Kölner Geschichtsverein, 3: 1–60.
Douet D’Arcq, L. 1874. Nouveau recueil de Comptes de l’Argenterie. Pairs: Renouard.
du Fresne, C. 1883–87. Glossarium mediae et infimae latinitatis. 10 vols. Niort.
Evans, M. 1982. An illustrated fragment of Peraldus’s Summa of Vice: Harleian MS 3244. Journal of the Warburg
& Courtauld Institutes, 45: 14–68.
Ferguson, R. S. ed. 1893. Testamenta Karleolensia: The series of wills from the præ-Reformation registers of the
Bishops of Carlisle, 1353–86. Kendal: Wilson.
Fowler, G. H. & Hughes, M. W. 1925. The disseinins by Falk de Breauté at Luton. Publications of the
Bedfordshire Historical Record Society, 9: 51–60.
Gay, V. 1887–1928. Glossaire archéologique du Moyen Âge et de la Renaissance. Paris: Société bibliographique.
Godefroy, F. ed. 1881–1902. Dictionnaire de l’ancienne langue française, et de tous ses dialects du IXe au XVe
siècle, 6 vols. Paris: Vieweg.
Gravett, C. 1993. Early tournament armour. Liviustkammaren Journal of the Royal Armoury [unnumbered]:
62–88.
Guiffrey, J. 1887. Inventaire des tapisseries du roi Charles VI vendues par les Anglais en 1422. Bibliothèque de
l’École des Chartes, 48: 59–110.
Gunner, W. H. 1858. The Will of Sir John de Foxle, of Apuldrefield, Kent, dated November 5, 1378.
Archaeological Journal, 15: 267–77.
Hardy, T. D. 1833–44. Turri Londinensi asservati. 2 vols. London: Eyre.
Hayes, D. M. 2003. Body and sacred place in medieval Europe, 1100–1389. New York: Routledge.
Henry, A. 1985–88. Pilgrimage of the Lyfe of the Manhode: Translated Anonymously into Prose from the First
Recension of Guillaume de Deguileville’s Poem Le Pèlerinage de la vie humaine. 2 vols. London: Oxford UP.
Hunt, T. 2000. Code-switching in medical texts. In: Multilingualism in Later Medieval Britain, ed. by D A
Trotter. Cambridge: Brewer.
Hunt, T. 1991. Teaching and learning Latin in thirteenth-century England. 3 vols. Woodbridge: Brewer.
Innes, C. & Thomson, T. eds. 1814–75. Acts of the Parliaments of Scotland. 10 vols. London: HMSO.
Izarn, E. 1885. Le Compte des recettes et dépenses du roi de Navarre en France et en Normandie, 1367–70. Paris:
Picard.
Jacob, E. F. ed. 1938–47. The Register of Henry Chichele: Archbishop of Canterbury, 1414–43. 4 vols. Oxford:
UP.
28 RALPH MOFFAT
Jeffrey, D. & Levy B. ed. 1990. Anglo-Norman lyric: An anthology. Toronto: Pontifical Institute of Mediaeval
Studies.
Kelly, F. M. 1905. A knight’s armour of the early XIV century being the Inventory of Raoul de Nesle. Burlington
Magazine, 457–69.
King, A. 2002. According to the custom used in French and Scottish Wars. Prisoners and Casualties on the
Scottish Marches in the Fourteenth Century. Journal of Medieval History, 28: 263–90.
Kingsford, C. L. 1920. Two Forfeitures in the Year of Agincourt. Archaeologia, 70: 71–100.
Lachaud, F. 1998 Armour and military dress in thirteenth- and early fourteenth-century England. In: Armies,
Chivalry and Warfare in Medieval Britain and France, ed. by M. Strickland. Stamford: Watkins.
Lee-Dillon, H. 1900. On a MS collection of Ordinances of chivalry belonging to Lord Hastings. Archaeologia,
57: 29–70.
Lespinasse, R. de 1886–97. Les Métiers et corporations de la ville de Paris XIVe–XVIIIe siècle. 3 vols. Paris:
Imprimerie nationale.
Lee-Dillon, H. 1862. An armourer’s bill, temp. Edward III. Antiquary, 20: 148–50.
Lee-Dillon, H. 1847. Inventory of the goods [. . .] of Thomas, Duke of Gloucester, [. . .] in his Castle of Pleshy,
Co. Essex, (1397). Archaeological Journal, 54: 275–308.
Lobineau, G. 1707. Histoire de Bretagne. 2 vols. Paris: Muguet.
Luders, A. ed. 1810–28. Statutes of the Realm. 9 vols. London: Record Commission.
Macpherson, D. ed. 1814–19. Rotuli Scotiae in Turri Londinensi. 2 vols. London: Eyre.
Maitland, F. W. 1910–13. The Eyre of Kent: 6 & 7 Edward II, AD 1313–14. 3 vols. London: Quaritch.
Mann, J. 1961. The nomenclature of armour’, Transactions of the Monumental Brass Society, 9: 414–28.
Mann, J. 1942. Two fourteenth-century gauntlets from Ripon Cathedral. Antiquaries Journal, 22: 113–22.
Marchant, J. 1973. Miracles de Notre-Dame de Chartres. In: Pierre Kuntsmann, ed. Bulletin de la Sociéte
Archéologique d’Eure-et-Loire, vol. 26, nos. 1, 2, and 3, nos. XXI and XXVIII.
Martin, G. H. ed. and trans. 1995. Knighton’s Chronicle 1337–96. Oxford: Clarendon.
McDiarmid, M. & Stevenson, J. 1980–85. Barbour’s Bruce. 3 vols. Edinburgh: Scottish Text Society.
Méon, M. D. M. ed. 1821. Le roman du renart. 4 vols. Paris: Treuttel.
Merlet & Moutier. eds. 1857–58. Cartulaire de l’Abbaye de N. D. des Vaux-de-Cernay. 3 vols. Paris.
Merlin-Chazelas, A. ed. 1977–88. Documents relatifs au Clos des galées de Rouen. 2 vols. Paris: Bibliothèque
nationale.
Meyer, P. 1884. Notice et extraits du MS. 8336 de la bibliothèque de Sir Thomas Phillipps à Cheltenham’.
Romania, 13: 497–541.
Meyer, P. ed. and trans. 1875–79. La Chanson de la croisade contre les Albigeois. 2 vols. Paris: Renouard.
Moffat, R. 2008. The use of baleen for arms, armour and armorial crests in medieval Britain. Antiquaries Journal,
88: 207–15.
Moranvillé, H. ND ed. Chronographia regum Francorum.
Natalis de Wailly, M. ed. 1868. Histoire de Saint Louis par Jean Sire de Joinville. Paris: Renouart.
Nickel, H. 2002. About Ailettes and Achselschilde. Waffen und Kostümkunde, 44: 197–211.
Nicolas, N. H. 1862. Testamenta vetusta. London.
Nicolas, N. H. 1846. Observations of the Institution of the Most Noble Order of the Garter. Archaeologia,
31: 1–163.
Nicolas, N. 1846. Expenses of the Great Wardrobe of Edward III. Archaeologia, 31: 5–106.
Nicolas, N. H. ed. 1828. Siege of Carlaverock [sic]. London: Nichols.
Owen, E. 1900–22. Catalogue of the manuscripts relating to Wales in the British Museum. 4 vols. London:
Honourable Society of Cymmrodorion.
Paley Baildon, W. 1911. A Wardrobe Account of 16–17 Richard II, 1393–4. Archaeologia, 62: 497–514.
Palgrave, F. ed. 1836. Antient Kalendars [sic] and Inventories of the Treasury of His Majesty’s Excequer. 3 vols.
London: Eyre.
Prestwich, M. 1995. Miles in armis strenuus: The Knight at War. Transactions of the Royal Historical Society,
5: 201–220.
Prost, B. ed. 1902–8. Inventaires mobilers et extraits des comptes des ducs de Bourgogne de la maison de Valois,
1363–1477. 2 vols. Paris: Leroux.
Putnam, B. H. 1914. Ancient Indictments in the Public Record Office. English Historical Review, 29: 479–505.
Raine, J. ed. 1835–29. Wills and inventories illustrative of the history [. . .] of the northern counties of England,
from the eleventh century downwards. 3 vols. London: Nichols.
Reverseau, J.-P. 1979. L’Habit de guerre des français en 1446: Le manuscrit anonyme fr. 1997 de la Bibliothèque
Nationale. Gazette des Beaux-Arts, 93: 179–98.
Reverseau, J.-P. 1900. L’Habit de guerre des français en 1446. New York, Pierpont Morgan Library.
Richard, J.-M. 1887. Une Petite-Nièce de Saint Louis. Paris: Champion.
Rymer, T. ed. 1816–69. Foedera, conventiones, litterae. 4 vols. London: Eyre.
Rymer, T. ed. 1739–45. Foedra, conventiones, literae [. . .]. 10 vols. The Hague: Neulme.
Salzman, L. F. 1953. The property of the Earl of Arundel, 1397. Sussex Archaeological Collections, 91: 32–52.
Sayles, G. O. ed. 1936–71. Select cases in the Court of King’s Bench. 7 vols. London: Quaritch.
Sharpe, R. 1899–1912. Calendar of Letter-Books preserved among the Archives of the Corporation of the City of
London at the Guildhall. 12 vols [lettered A-L]. London: Corporation of the City.
Sharpe, R. ed. 1889–90. Calendar of wills proved and enrolled in the Court of Hustings, London, 1258–1688,
2 vols. London: Corporation of the City.
Strickland, M. ed. 1998. Armies, chivalry and warfare in medieval Britain and France. Stamford: Watkins.
Stürzinger, J. J. ed. 1893. Guillaume de Deguileville, Le Pelerinage de vie humaine. London: Nichols.
Taylor, F. ed. 1932. The chronicle of John Strecche for the Reign of Henry V, 1414–1422. Manchester.
Terjanian, P. 2005. The armourers of Cologne: Organization and export markets of a foremost European
armour-making centre (1391–1660). Journal of the Armour Research Society, 1: 23–48.
Thomas, A. ed. 1926–61. Calendar of Plea and Memoranda Rolls preserved among the Archives of the Corpora-
tion of the City of London at the Guildhall. 6 vols. Cambridge: UP.
Trotter, D. A. 2000. Multilingualism in later medieval Britain. Cambridge: Brewer.
Turner, T.H. 1846. The will of Humphrey de Bohun, Earl of Hereford and Essex, with Extracts from the
Inventory of his Effects, 1319–1322. Archaeological Journal, 2: 339–49.
Vale, J. 1982. Edward III and chivalry: Chivalric society and its context 1270–1350. Woodbridge: Boydell.
Vincent, N. 1998. The earliest Nottinghamshire will (1257): Robert of Whichford counts his Debts. Transactions
of the Thornton Society of Nottinghamshire, 102: 43–56.
Vinkeroy, E. van. 1885. Costumes militaires belges du XIe au XVIIIe siècle. Braine-le-Comte: Zech.
Way, A. 1863. The armour and arms belonging to Henry Bowet, Archbishop of York, d. 1423, from the Roll
of his Executors’ Accounts’. Archaeological Journal, 19: 159–65.
Way, A. 1862. Armour [. . . of] Henry Bowet, Archbishop of York, [. . .] 1423. Archaeological Journal, 19:
159–65.
Way, A. 1858. Inventory and effects of Roger de Mortimer at Wigmore Castle and Abbey, Herefordshire.
Dated 15 Edward II, ad 1322. Archaeological Journal, 15: 354–62.
Williams, B. 1846. Rouen, Bibliothèque municipale, MS Leber, 5684, printed in Chronicque de la traïson et mort
de Richart deux roy dengleterre. London: English Historical Society.
Wright, L. 2000. Bills, accounts, inventories: Everyday trilingual activities in the business world of later medieval
England. In: Multilingualism in Later Medieval Britain, ed. by D. A. Trotter. Cambridge: Brewer.
Wright, T. ed. 1866–68. Chronicle of Pierre de Langtoft. London: Longmans.

The Manner of Arming Knights

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

The Manner of Arming Knights

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

arms & armour, Vol. 7 No.

The Manner of Arming Knights for the

In this article I hope to demonstrate that a re-interpretation of this important treatise

© The Trustees of the Armouries 2010 DOI 10.1179/174161210X12652009773375

Fol. 86v Fol. 86v

figure 1 The Manner of Arming Knights for the Tourney.

On the feet [place] boots of leather

the shins’ (‘al’ vamplates, pro tebiis’).28

Thence quysouns on the thighs and genicularia (knee-pieces)

Thence aketon and thence a shirt of Chartres and a coif of Chartres

1309 the Prévôt of the collegiate church of Saint-Barthèlemi de Béthune bequeathed

Included amongst the Miracles of Notre-Dame de Chartres compiled by Canon Jehan

A basin [bascinet] in which there ought to be a cerveylere to defend

figure 2 Bascinet, possibly German, c. 1350.

Thence hauberk, cuirass, coat armour upon which will be the

figure 3 Haubergeon (mail shirt), 14th century, with 15th-century modifications.

arma de mayle’).84 Edward I appointed a certain Gibelino as ‘loricario regis’.85 It has

Blair’s suggestion is confirmed by the aforementioned Parisian armourers’ regulations

Coat armour upon which will be the knights’ blazon

gants’.102 This is followed by Jean-Pierre Reverseau in his study of a French arming

((D’aucuns) Gäaignepains est nommee

For war: aketon, German plates or others with the pièce

Or others [plates] with the pièce

Above this the aketon [recte gambeson?] and a good gorget

For the joust

is much less ambiguity in this vocabulary as employed by professional armourers.

Aketon, hauberk, gambeson which is made of silken cloth or some

The gambeson should be of silk or material that is equivalent in its

rubeum, cum tribus catenis argenteis [. . .] j gaunbeson coopertum de panno serico’)

The Manner is interesting in the items it does not mention.

bouguerant, et que les cermeillères [recte cerveliè- 107

Calendar of Inquisitions Miscellaneous.

p. 1, m. 44’. appears to have been confined to the making of

You might also like