ISSN 2421-2679 18 History of the Chivalric Tournament: A New Approach Sydney Anglo mock combats. When dealing with some specifc aspect of their work (such as the Orders of Knighthood, armorial bearings, or the tournament itself) they evidently felt a compulsion not only ome sixty years ago, Ruth Harvey – in her to set it within an historical framework but more study, Moriz von Craûn and the Chivalric especially to establish how it began. Tis appetite World – boldly declared that the tournament for discovering antecedents – rather akin to the S“has always been reckoned the most typical and zeal of modern genealogists – was voracious and absolute manifestation of the chivalric outlook” uncritical. In 1555, for example, Jean Le Feron’s (Harvey 1961: 112). Tis statement, though book on the institution of the heralds scarcely in a work sometimes deemed authoritative, ever reached anything more modern than the raises several major problems. Te very word age of Charlemaigne because the author was ‘tournament’ comprised many diferent types of an archetypal seeker afer origins. For the men activity throughout its history. How long is ‘always’? largely responsible for organizing tournaments it And it is hard to know what the ‘chivalric outlook’ was a major preoccupation to establish who had might have been, or how the ‘tournament’ was its ‘invented’ them. Could it have been the ancient typical and absolute manifestation. Yet writers on Greeks, the Trojans or the Romans? Perhaps chivalry, from the seventeenth century onwards – Uther Pendragon or his son King Arthur deserved with the notable exception of Kenelm Digby – have the honour? Or an Angevin baron Geofrey de countenanced notions of this kind. For Richard Preuilly, active in the mid-eleventh century, who Barber “the tournament may be fairly described as was sometimes thrust forward as the inventor. But the central ritual of chivalry” (1980: 155); for Larry eventually it was the German king Henry the Fowler Benson it was “the most characteristic expression of (c. 876-936) who won the most support, and this chivalric ideals” (1980: 1); and for Maurice Keen its was thanks to the printing press. Henry’s claims popularity and the way it brought knights together were advanced by Georg Rüxner whose popular from far and wide made it a “powerful force Turnierbuch was frst published in 1530. Rüxner towards generalising both the standards and the went further by including a plausible account of rituals of European chivalry” (1984: 82). Certainly 36 major German ‘national’ tournaments between it is in studies of chivalry that we most frequently 939 and 1487 which were accepted as genuine and encounter embryonic histories of the ‘tournament’ cited by many later writers. Unfortunately, more and of the various modes of mock combat than half of these tournaments were fabrications associated with it. Tis is because it is much easier but, as the sports historian Joachim Rühl has to write a brief generalized survey of almost any observed, Rüxner must have subject, however complex it may be, than to pursue all its ramifcations, incongruities and complexities earned a fortune by entering the antecedents of families in a book1. of noble descent who were only too proud to see their Even before the advent of the printing press, and famous ancestors, along with hitherto unknown progenitors, listed in his book (1990: 166). long aferwards, heralds and other interested parties were busy gathering information about An interesting alternative view of the origins of the ISSN 2421-2679 tournament was later suggested by the historian such a well-known volume as Fleckenstein’s Das 19 Claude Fauchet who maintained that, from about ritterliche Turnier im Mittelalter (1985) is simply a the beginning of the eleventh century, romances miscellany. It is ofen cited and it has been described came into vogue and inspired knights to defend by one otherwise-reliable scholar as “the book on the weak and oppressed; and it was, he argued, the European tournament”. But it is difcult to see in imitation of those ancients, that knights in the how this can be the case when it is wholly confned courts of contemporary princes more willingly to the Middle Ages and – of its 20 chapters – 16 made profession of valour and virtuous strength. relate to Germany. Similarly, the fashionable and But, because the knights were not always engaged very weighty exhibition catalogues which purport in wars, the great kings and lords sometimes to ofer a solution to the problem of diversity do published abroad “des assemblees d’armes: appellez no such thing. Any readers who work their way Tournois” (1606: 9v). On this view the inspiration through these handsome compilations might be Approach A New Tournament: Chivalric the of History was deemed to be both romantic and military: forgiven for thinking that tournaments were an but the ne plus ultra of romanticism came with exclusively German phenomenon. Indeed, the Charles Mills in his History of Chivalry (1825) only exhibition (and its associated catalogue) when he assured his readers that all their “most which made a serious attempt at international delightful imaginings of chivalry are associated coverage was Lena Rangström’s Riddarlek och with the tournament” where they would see Tornerspell. Tournaments and the Dream of Chivalry (Stockholm, 1992) in which the essays in fancy’s mirror the gay and graceful knight displaying were necessarily brief. Tere have, of course, also on his plumed steed the nobleness of his bearing, and been some important monographs by scholars the lady of his afections smiling upon his gallant skill, while the admiring people in rude and hearty joy shout such as Martina Neumeyer, Évelyne van den Neste, their loud acclaims (1825: I, 259). and Noel Fallows – but they invariably deal with a particular period, area, or type of source; and they Te history of the chivalric tournament poses do not have the space to pursue the subject as it some seemingly inextricable problems. As moves away from the lists and towards the theatre. I have stated elsewhere, the metamorphosis Given the range, bulk and disparity of the sources “from violence to variety show”, although a pan- involved and the impossibility of organising them european phenomenon, did not proceed at the into a coherent narrative, it is not surprising that, same pace in all countries nor always in the same within the last century, there have been only three ways. In France it evolved into the Ballet du Cour; attempts to write what purport to be general in England into the court masque; and in Italy histories of the tournament. Te frst was Francis into the opera. Even more problematic is the fact Henry Cripps-Day’s Te Tournament in England that the sources available at diferent periods and and France (1918) which – though limited in diferent places are ofen so divergent in type geographically and despite ending with a cursory and quantity that we must ask whether it is even chapter on the sixteenth century – remains possible to put together a coherent general history useful for its solid annotation and appendices of of the tournament? Certainly these difculties documents and calendars. A year later Richard have been tacitly recognised by scholars who have, Coltman Clephan published Te Tournament. since the seventeenth century, largely proceeded Its Periods and Phases which is one of the most by writing essays on specifc aspects of the subject; disjointed works ever written on its subject but by researching local history; by concentrating on included German material which was not, at regional activities; by publishing and commenting the time, easily found in English sources. And on primary sources; and by delimiting the period fnally, seventy years further on, Richard Barber under scrutiny. In this way, the subject has and Juliet Barker published their Tournaments. been broken up into myriad fragments; and the Jousts, Chivalry and Pageants in the Middle Ages modern tendency has been to deal with such which tackles the intransigent subject by devoting historical complexities by organising conferences separate chapters to diferent geographical areas and then publishing the individual contributions and to some specifc topics such as the dangers as a collection. Much of this work is erudite and of tournaments, spiritual condemnation, and interesting, but it is generally very disparate. Even tournaments as social occasions. Te book ranges ISSN 2421-2679 20 widely but is uneven, sometimes inaccurate and history, if he had thought of it. Other manuscript – because it ventures only timidly beyond the collections comprise documents which have been ffeenth century – leaves unresolved too many copied, and re-copied, one from another and thus issues concerning the history of ideas. form clusters (or families) of miscellanea. Tese, again, constitute an ample class of record; and one of the best-known English examples is Lansdowne An Alternative Strategy MS 285 put together for Sir John Paston from around 1468 and scrupulously analysed, many Tese fragmented and partial studies bring me to years ago by G. A. Lester. Tis manuscript contains the principal question. Is it even feasible to write a many texts relating to the ofcers of arms, their general history of the tournament? Is there any way duties and their fees; to public ceremonial such to harmonize chronology, place, style, the tempo as knightly creations and coronations; to the of change, and all the other divergent components proclamation of jousts, along with specifc letters of the subject? Perhaps not. But it might still be of challenge, rules, regulations, and detailed possible to achieve a more satisfactory result narratives. For scholars, it is a wonderful thesaurus: than hitherto if we were to proceed by way of even though a good many of the items contained the changing types (and quantities) of evidence therein may be found both in earlier and later available, while relating these to surviving pictorial manuscripts.