[Sean Manning]

Maybe another good thing to do would be to look at medieval law in action? However dangerous life in different parts of medieval Europe was, the courts were usually a popular and fashionable way of settling disputes, and (as the recent thread on Swordforum shows) street fights and illegal duels often had leqal consequences. Peasants tended to know their way around the manour court, just like they knew their way around wrestling and using cheap weapons.

I like the idea of a detailed study of one or two cities!

[Greg Mele]

[Michael Eging]

As comparators Paris and Florence or any of the Northern Italian cities would have been very different in terms of their experiences, so I am not sure the absolute value. I need to think about that a little more. Northern Italy was such a hotbed of military action, and when we ask what the lower classes would have experienced, well - when the organized armies disintegrated in this area, pillaging and violence abounded. Also, a major challenge here is the level of record keeping particularly since records were susceptible to fire, war, etc. And the laws on the books were meaningless when your ruling noble may have been on the run from an invading army from France or HRE or from the Pope or other Northern Italian enemy.

If you look at the circles of people around the masters in this region, many of those men were directly involved in conflict. Fiore notes that he trained men to survive and some of the men he taught fought throughout their careers.

Germany was in many ways turbulent through much of this period as well.

Bill, when I said that the art of fencing that we study in the fetbuchs came out of this period, I meant it (where appropriate). These men used the arts to survive and adapted the what they learned for use in their day. Sure based on what they were taught from earlier tradition and experience, but a product of their turbulent times nonetheless. And so when we look at their records, I think adding in the earlier influences is fair, but just as Picasso was not Raphael...

Anyway, I'll keep reading this thread as it develops...

[Jean Thibodeau]

Practical training for the very real risks of the period and tested in real battle or duels as being realistic and effective: The risks may not have been daily or even yearly for some, but real all the same depending on all sorts of variables.

Turbulent times does not mean turbulent all the time for everyone ? Some islands of stability have to exist for society to function at least in between the periods of crisis !? Farming, industry, commerce usually continues except for the most extreme forms of anarchy or devastating genocidal invasions: Humans are resilient and the default is weighted towards cooporation and mutual help I believe.

So my middle ground " theory " is that it was a dangerous time where fighting skills where valuable for most, essential for some but the danger wasn't constant and unrelenting but rather episodic and sporadic but still very real.

[Greg Mele]

[Michael Eging]

Jean: I think that is the point I am trying to make as well. These skills were intended to be used - violence tested over and over. Whether in a back alley brawl, in a judicial combat, a duel, or on the battlefield. Of course, not an everyday occurrence for everyone, but in many regions a regular occurrence. And in the lower classes, it was a scramble for your life in some of these regions.

As to the point of the centers, without record keeping as we do now, and with the destruction of 500 plus years, I am not sure how accurate the record keeping. And that is assuming if someone disappeared from violence there was anyone who cared to make a record at all. That is why it is hard for me to get the exercise. But am willing to see what unfolds!

[Benjamin H. Abbott]

As I understand it, the best scholarly estimates of medieval murder rates put them as rather high. The rate in parts of 14th-century Germany climbed to 100 per 100,000. (1 per 100,000 would be common rate in modern Germany.) They really were violent back then. Fights could break out over trivial offenses. I remember seeing this in the 14th-century London coroner's rolls. In one case, a man struck another man in the head with pollaxe because of a splash at a urinal.

On the other hand, honor absolutely mattered. Indeed, the military elite claimed to value standing and valor above life and success. Historical warriors wanted to perform great deeds. Simply overwhelming or murdering an opponents wouldn't win renown. While you can find countless examples, Garcilaso de la Vega's account of Florida drove home to me how medieval and Renaissance conceptions of honor had direct military effects.

In one case, a group of fifty or more Amerindians had the chance to ambush and obliterate seven Spaniards. Instead, seven of the Amerindians separated to engage the invaders. They won with relative ease, shooting up six of the Spaniards and bashing the last with their bows used as clubs. However, they let him survive to tell the tale, which he did. In it he commended the Amerindians for their honor.

As in other conflicts, the Spaniards and Amerindians would sometimes conduct battlefield duels. In one, a mounted Spaniard agreed to fight an Amerindian archer. The archer badly wounded the horseman with this first arrow, at which point the other Spaniards violated the terms of the contest and charged the Amerindian. (De la Vega condemned the Spaniards for this.)

Reality gives us an odd mix of honor and dishonor. Historical warrior would risk themselves for glory and yet also shame themselves to preserve life. The limits varied from culture to culture, conflict to conflict, and person to person.

[Mike West]

What information did you use to learn about de la Vega? I found this website: http://vaca.com/inca-1.html , which looks to be a translation of his writings.

I also found this book on amazon(dot)com: The Discovery and Conquest of Terra Florida by Don F. de Soto and Six Hundred Spaniards, His Followers: With notes and an introduction, and a translation ... the expedition by Luis Hernandez de Biedma , which looks to be a different account.

Any other books, or websites?

[J F. McBrayer]

[Benjamin H. Abbott]

You can also find de la Vega's work in the original Spanish here. It's kind of like reading Silver. Ah, good old 16th- and 17th-century texts. Painful, but sometimes worth the trouble.

[Jean-Carle Hudon]

legal vs illegal dueling, dueling vs brawling....
when two guys have a bit much to drink, wink at each other's girl friends and are stopped from fighting right there and then by the bouncer, but agree to meet in an alley two weeks later: is that a brawl or a duel ? Add a couple of rapiers and a cloak or two, plus seconds to help the wounded man away and all will agree it is a duel, certainly not legal in contemporary standards but nevertheless not infrequent.
Also, though I am not familiar in detail with medieval law ( different 'Coutumes' would apply to different territories, something regulated in Paris might not be in Brittany or Gascogne, and centralized law only reaaly comes after the Revolution and Napoleon), but I couldn't help but notice when I was in Virginia, eastern shore, where they have a courthouse which brags the oldest continuous records in the now United States of America, that the local virginia laws had rules and regulations applying to duels in the eighteenth century. As I was on vacation and my wife didin't take to the idea on spending a sunny day far from the beach, I just looked through a few pages dealing with the matter, but it is clear to me that there were written legal rules overseeing duels in the colony, and not just interpretations emanating from the common law of England. I think one must then conclude that duels were common enough for the colonial legislature to take time and put down written rules on the subject.
Also as laws usually come after the fact, duels must have been going on since the beginning of the colony. Maybe our Jamestown experts could enlighten us on reports, or lack of reports, regarding duels. Get a bunch of guys away from home in nasty living conditions and stuff happens, scores need to be settled, and not many will await the King's writ to act.
Are brawls common today ? Do we have evidence of that , laws still exist....well, some night spots still get closed down by the police because of too much associated violence, they go before the Liquor regulatory authorities and have the licence lifted. This happens when two street gangs go after the same territory. I know of situations where similar contests have been decided by single combat between two ''champions''. Can we get more medieval than that ?
In conclusion, I don't think one can turn to the existence of laws to argue that activities didn't go on to any significant extent.
It is usually the contrary, laws are enacted to prohibit or regulate activities that are , in fact, taking place. Now, why some societies choose to regulate (smoking cigarettes for example) instead of prohibiting (crack cocaine for example) is interesting and says a lot about that particular society at that particular time, but it does not lay a foundation to claim that the activity is inexistant nor infrequent.
The town on the eastern shore is Eastville, very nice people in the office and very helpfull. It really is something to handle the deeds of transfer of property of their slaves listed, with their value... and then the details pertaining to dueling... really another world.
JCH

[Mike West]

[Ken Berry]

Adding on to the post about records pertaining to dueling in Eastern Virginia. I used to be a Police Officer in Northern, Ky. when we were sworn in the oath that Ky uses makes repeated references to dueling. That is after the "support, uphold, and defend the Constitution of the Commonwealth and enforce the laws, etc, etc" you know the standard stuff, there were repeated phrases that were along the lines of "hereby affirm that I have not participated in a duel, nor seconded in a duel, nor assisted anyone to second in a duel" and it went on from there with many more references to dueling and having never participated in one and never participating in one in the future.

It has been a while since I swore that oath, and I left L.E. as a profession 10 years ago so my memory as to the specifics are fuzzy, so please don't quote me word for word. But I thought it interesting then and figured it might be an interesting tidbit of info to add to this thread

Ken