Еще околотурнирное. Германия, 12-13 века.
The Medieval Tournament as Spectacle. Tourneys, Jousts and Pas d'Armes, 1100-1600. 2020
We now know a great deal about the origins and workings of the twelfth-century tourney in the Francophone countries, in no small part thanks to the existence of a unique text, the Histoire de Guillaume le Maréchal, which narrates the life of the Anglo-Norman nobleman William Marshal, earl of Pembroke (1146/1147-1219), who spent much of his life as a professional tourneyer. For the period up to the mid-thirteenth century there is no comparable source for the German-speaking lands, and so the first essay, by Alan V. Murray, attempts to provide a picture of how tourneys were organised and practised by drawing on the evidence of key literary texts written in Middle High German. In particular it stresses the tension between the tourney and its requirements for discipline, and the desire for fame which encouraged the practice of jousting in connection with tourneys.
...
It is now generally accepted that the earliest form, the tourney, originated in the late eleventh and early twelfth centuries in northern France, Normandy and the mostly Francophone parts of the southern Low Countries. It took several decades before the new form of knightly game appeared in the German-speaking countries. The French influence on German tournament practice can be seen in the vocabulary applied to the two main forms found in the period discussed. These were the tourney (turnei, turney < OFr tornoi), with its associated verb turnieren, denoting a mass combat between two opposing teams, and the joust (tjoste, ziost < OFr jouste) and its associated verbs tjostieren and stechen, denoting an individual combat.
For the earliest period of tournaments - roughly up to the mid-thirteenth century - most of our knowledge derives from the few texts that give detailed descriptions of actual events. Foremost among these are Histoire de Guillaume le Maréchal, an Old French rhymed history of the life of the Anglo-Norman nobleman William Marshal (d. 1219), earl of Pembroke, and the Chronicon Hanoniense by Gislebert of Mons, chancellor of the county of Hainaut.
...
The earliest mention of a tournament in a German-speaking country occurs in the Gesta Friderici of the chronicler Otto, bishop of Freising (d. 1158), in the context of fighting in Franconia in 1127 during a territorial dispute between Frederick II of Hohenstaufen, duke of Swabia (d. 1147) and his brother Conrad (d. 1152), on the one hand, and Emperor Lothar III (d. 1137) on the other. Lothar had unsuccessfully besieged Nuremberg, which was held by the two Hohenstaufen brothers, and withdrew to Würzburg. Frederick and Conrad pursued him there with their forces, and during the ensuing siege they held a ‘tyrocinium, which is now popularly called a turnoimentum’.
...
The tourney was the original form of the tournament, in which two opposing forces, each consisting of as many as several hundred knights, fought on horseback over a large area in the course of a day. It originated as a consequence of changes in warfare occurring at the end of the eleventh century. The main fighting forces employed by almost all Western powers at this time were mounted knights equipped with helmets, shields and coats of mail and using spears and swords as their main weapons. The main tactic of a force of knights was the charge, but at the point of impact with their opponents they held their spears near the mid-point of the shaft, wielding them overarm in a stabbing motion. In the Bayeux Tapestry, dating from around 1080, the majority of the Norman knights depicted are shown using the weapon in this manner. Around the year 1100, however, knights developed a new technique: the spear was tucked under the right arm and aimed at an enemy’s torso as the charge hit home.
...
The perfect charge occurred when a group of knights advanced in a very close formation several lines deep, gradually increasing speed to a gallop so that the impact of the entire group was delivered simultaneously. A charge performed well had a good chance of breaking through or dispersing an enemy formation and could thus secure a great initial advantage in any combat. However, it was also important that a unit which suffered such a shock could manage to regroup quickly, an eventuality which knights also needed to practise in order to be fully battle-ready. The tourney mimicked battle tactics, the only significant difference being that participants were not supposed to kill or injure their opponents. It was thus an activity in which two important military skills could be practised in peacetime: maintaining close and orderly formation while delivering a charge, as well as reforming after formations had broken up or retreated away from the enemy.
These actions were not easy to execute. A knight had to ride while holding a shield on his left arm and a lance or sword in the right. The left hand also had to hold the reins, meaning that much of the control of the horse had to be done using the spurs. This was difficult enough, but it became more so because of the nature of knightly combat. The right hand was used to hold the lance fast or cut with the sword, while the shield arm had to parry such blows from opponents. Males from noble and knightly families normally learned to ride from an early age, but it is doubtful whether the multiple skills required in the tourney (as in war) were all learned at once, and in this connection it is worth looking in more detail at another form of military exercise, the bûhurt (with the associated verb bûhurdieren), which was known in Germany from the mid-twelfth century, although it may have been older than the tourney. Authorities are agreed that it involved riding in formation in the same manner as the tourney, but that it was far less warlike in character. The Germanist Harry Jackson has undertaken the most exhaustive study of the form, which has revealed the key characteristics that distinguished it from the tourney. The bûhurt was associated with joyful events such as weddings and knighting ceremonies, but was separate from any tourneys or jousts that were held on the same occasions. Participants always rode in formation, but without helms or body armour. They always carried shields and one of the actions involved was using these to push back against opponents. In some cases, lances were also employed, but usually with blunted tips. Jackson states convincingly that ‘one function of the buhurt was to provide training and exercise in such riding and to accustom men and horses to close physical contact’. One could go further. Riding in formation was one step up from how most young men would have learned to ride, but in the tourney it was also necessary to do this while wielding a shield and lance, which required strength, dexterity and co-ordination. The bûhurt was a way of practising these basic requirements without the additional complication of hand-to-hand fighting, and the absence of swords, helmets and body armour meant that participants were obliged to concentrate on control of their mounts and maintaining formation. So just as the tourney was practice for war, so the bûhurt was practice for the tourney.
...
The tourney at Friesach occurred on the occasion of a peace conference involving Leopold VI, duke of Austria (1198-1230), Bernhard II, duke of Carinthia (1202-56), and Heinrich IV of Andechs, margrave of Istria (d. 1228), which had been arranged in May on St Philip’s Day. Unfortunately Ulrich does not specify the year, but the wealth of detail given by him indicates that it refers to real events that occurred during the period 1220-24.
...
Before the tourney could commence, the participants were divided up into two sides of roughly equal strength (a process described by the verb teilen). The basic building blocks were the retinues of the princes and lords present, which would naturally be of varying sizes. The process can be illustrated by the division carried out for the Monday tourney at Friesach as described by Ulrich von Liechtenstein (Table 1), which is an important case in point because most of the retinue leaders can be identified as historical personages:
The fact that each side in this case had exactly the same number of knights is perhaps suspicious, especially since it is unclear whether the number for each retinue includes its leader (who was present on the field), but the division shows the principle of fairness, and the totals give a reasonably realistic idea of the usual orders of magnitude. Each of the two sides was thus made up of a number of companies (scharen, rotten), each with its own commander (rotmaister), although the smaller retinues must have been combined with larger ones in order to avoid the possibility of any of them being overwhelmed by greater enemy companies. Thus Diepold of Vohburg, who had an unviable retinue of only twelve, seems to have been given some of Leopold of Austria’s knights to make up a larger company. On the day of the tourney it was usual for participants to attend mass, which is perhaps ironic given the Church’s opposition to tournaments, but shows how little its prohibitions took effect. The companies then paraded to the designated ground and formed up, sometimes accompanied by music.
Friesach was notable for the large number of companies assembled. At Katzelsdorf, by contrast, there were only four companies in total, formed from a greater number of smaller retinues of vassals. Each of the companies making up each side could manoeuvre independently; they might charge straight away against their opponents, or they could hold back in order to strike at the most favourable moment. However, knights did not always stay in formations; sometimes individuals rode out ahead of their companies in the hope of challenging others from their opponents. Thus, the second tourney in Willehalm von Orlens begins with both Willehalm and Diebald von Gahgunie each charging out against each other and breaking lances; only then do the assembled companies clash. At the tourney to celebrate his wedding Erec goes forth in order to carry out the ‘first joust’ (daz er die êrsten tjost næme); immediately two knights from the opposing side ride out against him. He unhorses both of them, and in total breaks twelve lances ‘between the companies’ (enzwischen den scharn). This practice, regularly described as jousting even though it occurred during a tourney, offered an opportunity to gain renown as any such deeds done would be more obvious in the open than in the close combat that often followed the initial charge. However, it was often discouraged by commanders, as the temptation to seek personal glory could disrupt the ordered formations. Thus at Friesach, Ulrich describes how Hadamar von Kuenring shouted to his men as they were approached by the company of Wulfing von Stubenberg:
‘Now form up close together!
Do you see how that company is coming
towards us with their lances?
They want to prevent us from jousting,
so be thankful for that.
Let us not charge for too long,
but get stuck into them.
That will harm them and help us!’
The purpose of such instructions was to be sure of delivering a disciplined and shattering charge against an opposing unit, and Ulrich’s description of the start of the tourney at Katzelsdorf emphasises the importance of keeping close together, just as would be done in war:
The prince of Austria’s retinue
Formed up chivalrously
And the company of the lord of Maißau
joined them there.
Those in the company that was to begin the tourney
Trotted alongside each other
and kept together well,
as one should do when facing enemies.
If a company could maintain a tight formation and build up a greater momentum than the opposing unit, the force of the collision (puneiz) might be so great that the opponents could be driven back in disorder or even broken through. At Friesach Hartnit von Ort and his men successively drove through three opposing companies. If both sides held firm, the effect of their clash might be that each company immediately fell back and tried to reform and turn around for a fresh charge. This was not an easy manoeuvre to pull off, as they might be attacked by a fresh enemy squadron before good order could be restored. In the majority of cases, however, it was likely that both formations broke up into a close combat mêlée (mâlie) fought with swords. The impact of the charge was such that many lances were broken; all of the texts mention how the splintered shafts (trunzûne) went flying all around. A lance which remained intact would be difficult to wield in the throng, and would best be discarded unless the knight intended to fall back and regroup immediately. Ulrich von Liechtenstein gives a good description of what occurred after two companies collided:
There was a great crash of lances,
and many a mighty thrust
with shields here and there
which caused swollen knees.
Many a brave man received
wounds and bruises from lances,
and suffered pain and injury
from grappling.
They pressed this way, they pressed that way,
and tried to turn about;
many had lost their helms;
while others tried to seize reins
in the great throng of knights.
Many a sword rang out on a helm
of those being attacked
and many shields were broken apart
from the mighty blows.
Tourneying was a dangerous business, and much more so than jousting. The force of the initial impact would throw many knights from their horses, with the risk of trauma injuries, and once on the ground they were in danger of being trampled by the horses of friend and foe alike. In one of his many descriptions of hard-fought mêlées Rudolf von Ems describes how ‘many a knight was felled, and trampled and struck’ while many more are taken captive. The main thing that distinguished the tourney from warfare was that opponents were not supposed to be killed or wounded, but captured. So while the charge practised riding in the formations required in battle, the opportunities for material gain were to be found in the mêlée fighting that followed it.
There were various methods of capturing opponents. Most commonly knights would strike an opponent with sword blows until he surrendered. The shield was often hacked into pieces. Metal helms and coats of mail offered better protection, but one should not underestimate the psychological effects of repeated blows raining down on the head and body. Swords were used to deliver grim, fearsome strikes, which could be compared to hammer blows producing sparks from an anvil.
In some cases there was a demarcated safe area (hamît or vride) on each side where knights could ride to recover or re-equip themselves. At Friesach Wolfger von Gars broke twenty lances and Dietmar von Liechtenstein broke twenty-five. They must have had plentiful replacements available on the day as well as squires visible and ready to hand them over when required. During the tourney at Kanvoleis, Gahmuret rides back to such an area to find a fresh horse and uses the opportunity to take off his helm. By the 1180s the conical helmet with nose guard (as shown on the Bayeux Tapestry) was giving way to other types of helm which completely enclosed the head, with horizontal slits for the eyes and small holes for ventilation.
...
The tourney originated as a form of training and exercising knightly retinues in the tactics that were most effective in warfare. However, in the way that it was practised there was much that ran counter to the demands of group discipline. The prospect of winning ransoms or capturing valuable warhorses was a major incentive for participants, but as far as the vernacular descriptions indicate, knights preferred to secure such gains as individuals or in small groups. Even those who disdained material gain might seek to enhance their reputations as knights on the tourney field, but their deeds could be best witnessed by fellow participants and spectators if they engaged in single combats, which explains the practice of jousting ‘between the companies’. The increasing use of heraldry, which identified its unique bearer rather than the team, is another indication of the focus on individual achievement. This shows that there was always an inherent tension in the tourney between a common need for discipline and an individual desire for honour or gain, and it was undoubtedly this contradiction that gave rise to the development of new forms in the course of the thirteenth century, such as the Arthurian-themed Round Tables and the pas d’armes, which showcased the prowess of individuals through jousting and offered a greater level of entertainment for spectators. There was more than one way of winning at tournaments.
Можно добавить, что базовые англоязычные работы по тактике, упоминаемые в книге, были написаны еще в 1980-е или начале 1990-х. К примеру - William Henry Jackson. Lance and Shield in the buhurt // German narrative literature of the twelfth and thirteenth centuries. 1994.
P.S. Ну и в очередной раз.
During the eleventh century in Western Europe, knights developed a specific fighting technique - the charge with the couched lance. This led to the development of a new war saddle by the end of the twelfth century. ... The saddle used by knights up to the first half of the twelfth century was not very different from that represented in the famous Bayeux Tapestry, dated to around 1080. Its general shape consisted of a basic seat between two low saddle-bows. ... During the twelfth century, however, the war saddle underwent a notable evolution, and by the end of the century its shape had been transformed into a type used until the sixteenth century, and known as the high-bow saddle. We do not know exactly when and where this saddle with high pommel and cantle was developed. It may have been during the 1180s, but it was certainly established by the last decade of the twelfth century and was used by all Western European knighthood.
И еще.
One of the most impressive and specific types of saddle created for the tournament was the one generally called the ‘high saddle’ (Hohenzeug in German), for it raised the rider between 15 and 30 centimetres above the horse’s back. ... The seat itself is very high, and positions the rider, using the ‘standing style’, with his bottom pressed against the cantle, and his knees at the level of the horse’s back. ... Riding with straight legs, he stood rather more than he sat. This elevated position is perfectly described by King Duarte of Portugal in his treatise written in 1438:
This style is based on riding firm on the stirrups with the legs extended and not being seated on the saddle, but having the body balance helped by the saddle-bows, the pommel and the cantle. Those who used this riding style have learned it in the old time.
...
As a result the legs were placed less forward than we see in the thirteenth century, more under the rider’s body. The cantle kept him from falling sideways. To fight in this position the knight had to be an excellent and skilful rider and be trained from childhood to manipulate both the lance and sword on this rather uncomfortable seat. Therefore such specific equipment was the mark of an elite who could afford to spend hours training on horseback to be perfectly at ease in using this new technological advancement. Moreover, the introduction of this new type of saddle around 1360 was contemporaneous with a change in civilian and military dress.
...
Contemporary evidence proves nonetheless that saddles like the one from the Royal Armouries, or at least their simpler models, were indeed used in tournaments. A nice example is given by an illumination from the Tross’sche Fragment (1430-40), representing a knight receiving the prize at a tournament (Figure 9). Behind him his horse is equipped with a low saddle decorated with bone bands and with leather saddle flaps on the sides. Near the horse, his squire carries the knight’s banner and his tournament weapons: a targe, a lance with a coronel head and a mace. This equipment indicates that he took part in a tourney using lances and maces. It means that during the same period, high saddles and low saddles were used in similar tourneys, and probably in jousts as well. The use of flat saddles in tournaments would have increased the difficulty and the danger of the combat. These saddles were ridden in the elevated position described by Don Duarte, as we see in Van der Weyden’s St George already cited.
...
Another type of low saddle was developed at the end of the fifteenth century, perhaps as an evolution of the Hungarian low saddles previously discussed. These low saddles, developed in the Holy Roman Empire during the time of Maximilian I, are little different from their predecessors and were used in a very Germanic form of tournament, the Rennen. Equivalent to the joust of war, the latter was traditionally run in war armour, but by the time of Maximilian it had become a game as sophisticated as the joust of peace (Gestech), with very specialised weapons and armour. More violent than the Gestech, the main purpose of the Rennen was to unhorse an opponent and to aim at some specific points of the armour with a head-blow scoring the most. Lances had a single blunt-pointed head and were not designed to break like those in the Gestech. Difficulty was increased by using these saddles without a cantle, making it a challenge for the rider to stay on his horse after a blow.