Manly jousting at Smithfield

Manly jousting at Smithfield In England one of the most popular places to hold a tournament in the medieval period was at Smithfield, London. In this paper I will focus on one of the most famed tournaments of the medieval period held at Smithfield in 1467 by Edward IV. It seems that many modern scholars are not fully aware of the level of tournament activity in Edward IV’s reign, or that the king competed in them. In particular there has not been a single study on the revival of chivalry at Edward’s court, or a focus explicitly on tournaments, even though they were at the heart of the Yorkist court. On 11 and 12 June 1467 a tournament was held by Edward IV at Smithfield intended to play a central function in the diplomatic relationship between England and the Low Countries. Including negotiations regarding a marriage treaty between Duke Charles the Bold and Margaret of York, sister of Edward IV. The Smithfield tournament was also a way then of emphasising the validity of Edward IV’s and the Yorkist rule. The first Yorkist king, Edward IV, took the throne in 1461. He won his crown by force of arms, displacing Henry VI, the third Lancastrian king of England. Edward’s reign is significant to a study of the medieval period as it brought a revival of those ideals and practices that have been characterised as being at the height of the medieval era such as: martial combat, knighthood, romanticism and heraldry. Edward IV’s kingship presented a complete contrast to his predecessor Henry VI, who showed little interest in competing or holding tournaments. In this paper I will argue that Edward IV used the Smithfield tournament as a means to exert his royal masculine status and that of England’s as part of a wider display of Anglo-Burgundian relations. For over a century, from the reign of Edward III and through to the reign of Edward IV that is for most of the fourteenth and fifteenth centuries Smithfield was the stage for royal tournaments and jousts. Richard II was known for the great tournaments he held at Smithfield in the 1380s and 1390s, and though he did not take part himself, he presided over them. Smithfield was not straight forwardly an urban site like the market squares of the Low Countries, but it was a place of recreation for town dwellers including sporting occasions, horse racing and fairs. In particular for Londoners, Smithfield provided the closest open space for large-scale events. The ground at Smithfield would be levelled, wooden stands erected and competitors marched through the city led by trumpeters, minstrels and noble ladies. Smithfield was referred to in medieval documents as both the ‘king’s field’ and the city’s ‘common ground’. The Smithfield site attempted to bridge the gap between the court and city as commoners crowded towards windows and even roofs of adjacent buildings when tournaments were held in an urban setting. In affect, what Richard II had created was a means of social interaction between those within his court and those commoners of the city. It was not until the reign of Edward IV in the 1460s that jousting became a regular court activity for the first time since the reign of Richard II. Edward held one of the greatest tournaments of the medieval age at Smithfield in 1467, which was only the third significant feat of arms in a period of twenty-five years in England. The tournament in the late fifteenth century and early sixteenth century was a competitive event with several groups and stages, but originally it had a more specific meaning. The original tournaments of the twelfth century brought hundreds or sometimes thousands of knights together in a mêlée that was not formalised, or even confined to the tournament field. Though the mêlée tournament was popular in the twelfth century, it had declined by the middle of the fourteenth century and was superseded by other forms of combat in the fifteenth century. By the fifteenth century the tournament had assumed a complex form, in which three distinct forms of combat were practiced: tilting at the barrier, the tourney and fighting on foot. To begin the joust was a mounted single combat, usually with lances; the goal in these early contests of the thirteenth century was to knock an opponent completely out of his saddle. At this point the joust was still an incredibly dangerous sport as there was as yet no tilt barrier to separate contestants. Therefore a significant feature of the fifteenth century joust was the introduction of the tilt barrier to separate the contestants in a practice known as tilting which was usually the first category of combat. The joust was fought between two individuals, the knights riding from opposite ends of the lists to encounter each other with lances. The joust became a yet more formalised competition as rules were introduced, as well as score cheques and prizes. Score cheques showed the scores of the knights who took part. It is important to emphasise that jousting was not a team sport per se as it was the individual performance of men that was recognised and which formed the basis for the prize giving. Those who gained the highest scores would be rewarded with a prize that might include a falcon, a gold clasp, or even a diamond ring. Another indirect prize that participants could gain was an increase in their standing at court. Next the ‘tourney’ descended from the mêlée style involving teams of knights, mounted on horseback with swords, staves and clubs, rather than couched lances, but as in the jousts, the numbers of strokes delivered determined the number of scores. The ‘foot combat’ was usually the final contest of the tournament, which referred to single combat on foot with swords or spears over a barrier. By the fifteenth century with the distinct rules for the joust, tourney and foot combats within the tournament, different styles of armour were required for the various events. Jousting required specialised equipment and high saddles, as the aim was to break lances rather than to unhorse the knight. For example, participants were required to wear a protective helmet called a great ‘bascinet’ with extra plate defences for the lower face and throat, which was fixed to the breast and back plates. In the fifteenth century, the first item of plate armour to be specifically designed for the joust was the characteristic ‘frog-mouthed helm’, which appeared at the end of the fourteenth century and remained, with modifications, the most common form of head piece for the joust until the end of the sixteenth century. Proper vision could only be obtained when the rider was leaning forward in the correct position for couching his lance, thus when he straightened up at the moment of impact he was completely protected, but had limited vision to make an accurate hit. It is apparent that jousting demanded a unique set of skills and energies from the mounted knight. It was essential that a man was not only physically strong, but also mentally prepared to sit fearlessly in the saddle and to make accurate hits on his opponent’s body and head. One of the misconceptions that my research has corrected is that jousting was simply a case of charging down the tiltyard and knocking a man off his horse. Shortly before the Smithfield tournament Edward IV’s Constable, John Tiptoft, Earl of Worcester at Windsor on 29 May 1466, drew up a list of rules for the conducting and judging of tournaments. Tiptoft’s ordinances detailed the many ways ‘the price [sic] is won, how many ways the price shall be lost, how broken spears shall be allowed, how spears shall be disallowed and the prize to be given’. At least twelve manuscripts contain the rules for jousting across the tilt that were formulated by Tiptoft in 1466 with copies being from the fifteenth century, to the seventeenth century, thus it is possible to deduce that these rules set the general pattern for tournaments held in England for over a century. According to Tiptoft’s ordinances, a spear broken on the body counted 1 and a spear broken on the head counted 2, a spear broken coronel to coronel would count for 3 points. A mere “attaint” a touch on the body was less than a point. One point was lost when the lance was broken on the opponent’s saddle; striking the tilt lost 2 points and striking it twice cost 3 points. A King of Arms, who was the most senior officer of arms, tallied scores across the full day of competition on a scoring tablet termed a cheque. The scoring cheque itself was in the form of a rectangle with three horizontal lines: the middle lines showing the number of courses run, meaning the number of matches between the two knight. The attaints were hits on the opposing knight, but which did not shatter the lance. They were noted in the table by a dash that did not go all the way through the line, but was recorded just above it. The middle line inside the rectangle represented the number of spears broken and the bottom line recorded any faults. Only half a dozen actual cheques survive from the reign of Henry VIII, with many more surviving from the court of Elizabeth I. None of the original cheques used at tournaments survive from the reign of Edward IV, but Tiptoft’s rules dealt exclusively with jousting as it had evolved in the late fifteenth century, thus despite an absence of actual score cheques from this period we can assume that these cheques were in use before the first surviving ones Henry VII’s reign. It is in the encounter between Anthony Woodville and Antoine, the Bastard of Burgundy in 1467 at Smithfield that we find written directions to heralds for the first time. The increasingly elaborate rules that governed the various types of combat in the tournament meant that by the thirteenth century a special group of minstrels called ‘heralds’ developed into a professional office. At the tournament, itself heralds played an important role in announcing the contestants as they entered into the lists and kept score of the jousts. According to the account in Paston’s Grete Boke; heralds lined the lists ready to keep score of the combats: to be sett at ev’y othir poste a man’ of armes, and at ev’y corner a Kyng of Armes crownyd, and an Harauld or Pursevaunte within the seide feelde, for reporte makyng of actez doon within the same. It is evident from surviving score cheques that heralds were a combination of modern sports referees, journalists and commentators, judging and recording the play-by-play and providing detailed statistical data. Heralds also compiled guides for the holding and conducting of tournaments. Aside from heralds taking an interest in these collections it is apparent that they were of a wider interest to men of gentry status such as John Paston, who owned copied of heraldic materials in his Grete Boke. The Paston family of Norfolk emerged from historical obscurity at the start of the fifteenth century, to become a leading gentry family within just two generations. The Grete Boke has affinities with several types of literature in the fifteenth century such as the practical treatise on chivalrous combats, heraldic ceremonial records, military manuals and the mirrors for princes. In this paper, I will focus on the account it contains of the famous tournament between Antoine, the Bastard of Burgundy and Anthony Woodville in 1467 as an occasion that illustrated chivalry in action. Nowhere else is a tournament in England so fully treated, from the Challenge to the lists. Written by Thomas Whiting, Chester herald, on duty within the lists at the time of the combats provides a detailed insight into the elaborate rules and rituals that governed the medieval tournament. Anthony Woodville, Lord Scales was selected as the English champion who stood in for the king, who had chosen not to compete, but instead to preside over the fighting activity. Hence it was important that Woodville embodied the chivalrous ideal as he essentially represented the honour and masculinity of both Edward and England. Woodville was the eldest son of Richard Woodville, first Earl Rivers and his wife Jacquetta de Luxembourg. Woodville’s marriage to Elizabeth Scales, the heir of Thomas Scales, brought him the title Lord Scales following the death of Thomas in July 1460. Though it was the marriage of his sister Elizabeth Woodville to Edward that truly propelled him to high favour at the king’s court. Nevertheless, one could argue that Woodville’s knightly conduct, abilities as a jouster and literary interests had already brought him to the attention of Edward IV who shared his enthusiasm for the chivalric way of life. The person selected to be Woodville’s opponent in this Challenge was Antoine, the Bastard of Burgundy. He was publicly acknowledged as the natural son of Philip the Good, Duke of Burgundy and he too had a high reputation of chivalric exploits, he was known to be an expert jouster and had just returned back from crusade. The Challenge for this tournament, issued by Woodville’s sister Queen Elizabeth Woodville had happened two years previously on 17 April 1465. On his way back from mass, the ladies of the court surrounded Woodville. In his letter to the Bastard on 18 April 1465 Woodville relates the Challenge issued by the ladies: And as a I spake to hir ladyship on knee, the bonet from Myne hede, as me aughe (I wote not by what adventure not hou it happennyd) till the ladies of hir compaigne aryvid aboute me; and they of theire benyvolence, tied aboute my right thigh a Coler of goolde garnysshid with precious stone and was made of a letter the which, for to day trougth, whan I pecyvid was more nygh my harte than my knee and tied a noble Floure of Souvenaunce enamelled and in maner of emprise. The flower of the souvenance (forget-me-not) was likely chosen as a token flower to act as a reminder of the feats of arms that had been promised. Having obtained the king’s permission to bring the adventure of the flower of souvenance to a conclusion, the gallant Woodville forwarded the articles and the enamelled flower to the Bastard, accompanied by the letter just quoted. Woodville asked the Bastard to touch the letter with his knightly hand, in token of his accepting the Challenge. The involvement of the ladies within chivalry is significant here; it is they who are responsible for bestowing this Challenge on Woodville, whilst he gives the impression that he was not expecting it to happen. Within the convention of courtly love, Woodville willingly submits to the request of the ladies and allows them to take charge of the enterprise. The fiction is presented that the women instigated this contest, but it was clearly already decided that Woodville and the Bastard would fight, because of the diplomat circumstances discussed above. It was not until two years later that the tournament took place on the 11 and 12 June 1467 as the Bastard was fighting in a civil war between Louis XI of France and the Dukes of Burgundy and Brittany, which delayed his arrival. Finally, with the war concluded, the martial games could begin. At Smithfield, a public holiday was proclaimed and commoners unable to crowd into the enclosure climbed trees to obtain a glimpse of the pageantry and combats. In the same way that singing and chanting is a core cultural element of modern sports games, it is apparent that the same was true of medieval sports events. Yet Chester herald describes how on this occasion, Edward IV specifically ruled that no noise was to be heard from the crowd: ‘no maner of man of what estate degree or condicion he bee of, approche the listes, saufe such as be assigned, nor make any noise, murmur, or shoute, or any othir maner tokyn’ or signe whereby the seide right’ noble and worshupfull’ lordes and knyghtes which this day shall’ doo their’ armes within theise listes, or eithir of them, shall’ move, be troublid or comforted; uppon payne of emprisonement and fyne and raunsome at the Kynges will’. The popularity of this event across all levels of society was no doubt enhanced because it was such a major occasion that provided a rare opportunity for English men and women to see Burgundian knights and the sporting elite of the English court in action. The reason Edward ordered everyone to be silent was in order not to frighten the horses, which would have been disastrous, as in this tournament the two men jousted with sharp spears and without a tilt barrier. According to the account transcribed into Paston’s Grete Boke, on the first day, 11 June, Woodville and the Bastard charged against each other intent on making contact before the king’s seat, but they completely missed each other and the perilous joust, fought with sharp spears and without a tilt was over. This made for a rather anti-climatic end to the jousts. Next it was the fight on horse with swords for the tourney and it was in this combat that an accident occurred, which confused both spectators and chroniclers. Woodville, spurring his horse into action, was seen to ride violently against the Bastard and crash into him, the shock of the collision bearing the Bastard down to the ground, where he lay with his horse on top of him. The Bastard was not seriously hurt, but his horse was badly injured and died soon after. The exact cause and effect of this collision is not clear. In Chester herald’s account, this incident is put down to Woodville taking advantage of being ready first: ‘not with stondyng the seide Lord Scales was sooner redy: wherefore he sought the Basterd ferthir to the grounde, and assailid hym wt a foyne aboute the nekke’. Setting off early down the tiltyard would have given Woodville an advantage against the Bastard’s steed, as Woodville would have come at him with a stronger charge. Moreover, Woodville would have been in a better position to strike at the Bastard with the extra time gained, which was not a chivalrous move. London dignitary Robert Fabyan also provides a full and rich report of the fighting activity that offers a different version of events. Woodville’s mount, says the London chronicler, had on ‘a pyke of iron, standynge upon the fore parte of the sadyll…wherewith the horse beynge blynde of the bastarde, was stryken into the nose thrylles’. Significantly English chronicler Fabyan is of the opinion that Woodville had tampered with his horse’s trapper and attached a steel spike in order to gain unfair advantage over the Bastard. It is evident that Fabyan was not the only one who suspected misconduct as Woodville rode at once to the king, dismounted and removed his horse’s trapper. This suggests that others in the crowd thought him guilty and thus he needed to prove his honourable manhood in a public display. Any suggestion of dishonourable behaviour in the joust reflected badly on Edward and the English court, both of whom Woodville represented. On the second day, 12 June in the foot combats, both Woodville and the Bastard performed feats of arms as though in warfare. The vivid description of both the combat with swords on horseback and axes on foot make it clear that these were not done for show, but were taken seriously as military exercises by both men. It is apparent from Chester Herald’s account in Paston’s Grete Boke that this contest was hard fought. According to this account, Woodville and the Bastard were able to strike each other with such force that they cut gashes into each other’s armour and it seemed inevitable that the fight would end in the death of one or both combatants: so they fought togidre; the Lord Scales with the hede of his axe afore, the toothier with the small end; and smote many grete combres and thik strokes; till at the laste that they fill towards a close, at which tyme the Lord Scales stroke hym in the side of the visern of his basenet. Then the Kyng pecyvyng the cruell assaile, cast his staff, and with high voice cried, whoo! Woodville and the Bastard had lost all control of themselves, fighting as though on the battlefield in a very real and aggressive display of miniature warfare. A fight of this nature ran the risk of appearing unmanly, hence Edward had to intervene to stop the fight and restore the masculine equilibrium. By deciding on a draw between the two men, Edward exercised his diplomacy, showing respect for his guest by honouring the Bastard’s reputation in the tiltyard. This episode also highlights another aspect of Edward’s role in the revival of chivalry as he did not simply watch over the jousts at Smithfield, but acted as the arbitrator of the combats. So, although Edward did not fight himself, this incident therefore emphasised Edward’s position at the apex of the chivalric hierarchy, as only he had the hegemonic status and authority to stop the fight. In closing it is apparent that as a cultural phenomenon, the tournament reached its height under the kingship of Edward IV. I would also argue that contrary to traditional interpretations that chivalry was in decline during this period, it is apparent that Edward’s reign marked a rebirth of chivalry principally through the return of tournaments held at sites such as Smithfield that remained popular. To determine the process governing men’s attainment of high status manhood I have highlighted several primary materials, which illustrate how these competitions were scored and judged and what these men had to accomplish in order to succeed. In particular this paper has drawn attention to Tiptoft’s rules for jousts, which have not been used by scholars in the past despite the fact that they were widely circulated and treated as an essential document by the tourneying society. The same can be also said of the herald’s accounts and tournament challenges, which provide details of specific jousts. Many of Edward’s jousting men have also not received adequate attention within the historiography; in fact, not one of the king’s companions is the subject of a dedicated biography, even Woodville. In raising the profile of manly jousters such as Woodville at Smithfield this paper has identified major gaps in the literature surrounding Edward IV and the men within the Yorkist court.