Info Favorites Register Log in
myArmoury.com Discussion Forums

Forum index Memberlist Usergroups Spotlight Topics Search
Forum Index > Off-topic Talk > assize of arms 1181 and 1252, (and the leidang) Reply to topic
This is a standard topic  
Author Message
William P




Location: Sydney, Australia
Joined: 11 Jul 2010

Posts: 1,436

PostPosted: Tue 06 Jun, 2017 8:40 am    Post subject: assize of arms 1181 and 1252, (and the leidang)         Reply with quote

oki i have a few questions, secondly, some help interperating the text of the 1181 assize

such as

1. Whoever possesses one knight's fee shall have a shirt of mail, a helmet, a shield, and a lance; and every knight shall have as many shirts of mail, helmets, shields, and lances as he possesses knight's fees in demesne.[note 1]

2. Moreover, every free layman who possesses chattels or rents to the value of 16m. shall have a shirt of mail, a helmet, a shield, and a lance; and every free layman possessing chattels or rents to the value of 10m. shall have a hauberk, an iron cap, and a lance.[note 2]

3. Item, all burgesses and the whole community of freemen shall have [each] a gambeson,[note 3] an iron cap, and a lance.

main questions relate to, the meaning of the various ranks etc mentioned (such, as what is 16m?)

and also perhaps how this might relate to sword ownership sinc ethe sword isnt mentioned in any of those catagories.

also very wierd that shields stop being mentioned and that horses arnt directly required


second half relates to, if anyone knows the contents of the 1252 assize, specifically who is to own what and how it differs from the 181 law if it does at all.


lastly, doesnt anyone know the contents of the leidang laws in relation to arms ownership, if i remember correctly its supposed to be similar to the assizes above?
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
Matthew Amt




Location: Laurel, MD, USA
Joined: 17 Sep 2003

Posts: 1,306

PostPosted: Tue 06 Jun, 2017 10:01 am    Post subject:         Reply with quote

Well, "16m" is 16 marks, a measure of the man's value or income.

I noticed shields aren't required for the lowest classes--I *suspect* it may be because the "lance" is a long, 2-handed spear or pike. Got nothing to back that up, though!

Matthew
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
Mart Shearer




Location: Jackson, MS, USA
Joined: 18 Aug 2012

Posts: 1,276

PostPosted: Tue 06 Jun, 2017 3:28 pm    Post subject:         Reply with quote

You probably should read through this previous thread.
http://myArmoury.com/talk/viewtopic.php?t=32114

Here's the 1242 Statute of Arms
Source: Close rolls of the reign of Henry III, Vol. 4, pp. 482-3
https://archive.org/details/closerollsofreig04grea

De forma pacis conservande. — Rex vicecomiti Wygorn', salutem. ….
Free men between the age of 15 and 60 should arm themselves as follows:
Those with a knight’s fee (xv. libratas terre) must have hauberk (loricam), iron hat (capellum ferreum), sword (gladium), knife (cultellum), and horse (equum).
Those with half a knight’s fee (x. libratas terre) must have haubergeon (haubergellum), iron hat (capellum ferreum), sword and knife (gladium et cultellum).
Those with 100 shillings worth of land must have pourpoint (purpointum), iron hat (capellum ferreum), sword (gladium), spear (lanceam), and knife (cultellum).
Those with land worth between 40 and 100 shillings must have sword (gladium), bow (arcum), arrows (sagittas), and knife (cultellum).
Those with land worth less than 40 shillings must have scythes (falces), guisarmes (gysarmas), knives (cultellos), and other small arms (et alia arma minuta).
Those with goods valued at 60 marks must have hauberk (loricam), hat (capellum), sword (gladium), knife (cultellum), and horse (equum).
Those with goods valued at 40 marks must have haubergeon (haubergellum), hat (capellum), sword (gladium), and knife (cultellum).
Those with goods valued at 20 marks must have pourpoint (purpointum), hat (capellum), sword (gladium), and knife (cultellum).
Those with goods valued at 10 marks must have sword, knife, bow, and arrows (gladium, cultellum, arcum et sagittas).
Those with goods valued between 40 shillings and 10 marks must have scythes (falces), knives (cultellos), guisarmes (gysarmas), and other small arms (et alia arma minuta).
Those who live in the woods that can come out must have bows and arrows (arcum et sagittas), or they can have bows and piles (arcus et pilettos).

ferrum ferro acuitur et homo exacuit faciem amici sui
View user's profile Send private message
Dan Howard




Location: Maitland, NSW, Australia
Joined: 08 Dec 2004

Spotlight topics: 2
Posts: 3,194

PostPosted: Tue 06 Jun, 2017 4:25 pm    Post subject:         Reply with quote

I thought that falces was a heavy general-purpose blade like a machete.
Author: Bronze Age Military Equipment, Pen and Sword Books
View user's profile Send private message
Mart Shearer




Location: Jackson, MS, USA
Joined: 18 Aug 2012

Posts: 1,276

PostPosted: Tue 06 Jun, 2017 4:36 pm    Post subject:         Reply with quote

Dan Howard wrote:
I thought that falces was a heavy general-purpose blade like a machete.


In Latin, it can be translated as both sickle and scythe. It might mean a generic farming tool.

ferrum ferro acuitur et homo exacuit faciem amici sui
View user's profile Send private message
Randall Moffett




Location: Northern Utah
Joined: 07 Jun 2006
Reading list: 5 books

Posts: 2,098

PostPosted: Fri 09 Jun, 2017 7:22 pm    Post subject:         Reply with quote

Yup.

They show up in supplies of wars for noncombat supplies a great deal. Just saw a few in Ed II's campaign in Scotland in the 1320s.

RPM
View user's profile Send private message
Stephen Curtin




Location: Cork, Ireland
Joined: 17 Nov 2007
Likes: 110 pages
Reading list: 18 books

Spotlight topics: 1
Posts: 1,154

PostPosted: Sat 10 Jun, 2017 5:47 am    Post subject:         Reply with quote

Thanks Mart for posting statutes of 1242.

I agree with Matthew, a two handed spear was probably what was intended in the assize of 1181.

Éirinn go Brách
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
Randall Moffett




Location: Northern Utah
Joined: 07 Jun 2006
Reading list: 5 books

Posts: 2,098

PostPosted: Sat 10 Jun, 2017 7:44 am    Post subject:         Reply with quote

It would make sense. That said it is the lowest group. It could just be they could not be expected to come with anymore. If it were 100 years later I'd say they'd have been further equipped at muster.

RPM
View user's profile Send private message


Display posts from previous:   
Forum Index > Off-topic Talk > assize of arms 1181 and 1252, (and the leidang)
Page 1 of 1 Reply to topic
All times are GMT - 8 Hours

View previous topic :: View next topic
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
You cannot attach files in this forum
You can download files in this forum






All contents © Copyright 2003-2018 myArmoury.com — All rights reserved
Discussion forums powered by phpBB © The phpBB Group
Switch to the Basic Low-bandwidth Version of the forum