| Author |
Message |
Randall Moffett
|
 Posted: Sun 04 Dec, 2011 6:01 am Post subject: |
 |
|
Jean,
Laws get passed all the time for preventative reasons, not sure where you got this concept but it is incorrect. Now reactionary laws are often more visible but I think your legal framework for the medieval period and its laws are off base some.
This has been discussed in academic circles many times and in the end there is 0 to no evidence of drunkenness on his expedition in the contemporary account.
| Quote: | | Rather, he knew that the excesses of alcohol would impair his troops, so he acted against the risk at hand by decreeing that his troops should abstain from imbibing. |
What you are describing is a preventive over reactionary laws. If there had been a drunken brawl like in the Weardale campaign and the king makes such a rule to counter it, then it is a reactionary move to a specific incident. Them not having a specific incident but him knowing the possible result here is prevention of something that likely would happen.
Not sure what you are arguing really as your own definition of what happened is it was a preventative law.
RPM
|
|
  |
 |
|
Jean-Carle Hudon
|
| Posted: Sun 04 Dec, 2011 7:25 am Post subject: prevention of what ? |
|
|
Randall,
I have to disagree. You can't prevent what you don't know exists. Laws against drunk driving exist because people still get drunk and go behind the wheel. Laws about food inspection came about because of tainted food . Building codes come into play because of fire hazards, inadequate plumbing, unsafe quarters, and so on. So, the concept is quite correct alltough it is clear that you believe the contrary. That is your privilege.
Now, about drunkenness not being documented as an indication that drunkenness was not a problem needing to be addressed by Henry, I think that to be wishfull thinking. The problem is documented by the very fact that Henry feels a need to counter it.
It is not surprising that people did not come forward to say to the king: '' Oh by the way, really tied one on last night, sorry about that Your Highness.'' Henry had already indicated that he would not tolerate such a situation, and if memory serves, he was thought not to be someone to be trifled with.
Bon coeur et bon bras
|
|
|
|
|
|
E. Storesund
|
| Posted: Sun 04 Dec, 2011 7:40 am Post subject: |
|
|
There's apparently a latin text describing a band of Danish crusaders visiting Bergen in Norway, which housed a hanseatic kontor at one point. Being a centre for trade, the hanseatic league brought in lots of reasonably priced wine which is noted by several sources to have been the cause of several problems in the town.
The text about the crusaders accounts that some of them went out feasting with the locals, mind you it also notes "more despicable acts are found there than anywhere else in the world" due to drunkeness. During their stay in this medieval Mos Eisley they end up in a fight, apparently over one of the Danes romancing with a local woman, a rather bad mood arose and half the town took to their weapons to lynch them, but were eventually stopped.
The hanseatic league eventually even earned themselves the sole right to serve wine in the town, probably a cause of frustration for many.
King Sverrir condemned cheap hanseatic wine for being the cause of much drunkeness and moral decay. There is also a story that one of his men decided, after way too much drink, to dive out the window of the royal estate and into the bay for a late night swim. Problem was he jumped out the wrong, dry side of the manor and killed himself. In general, honorable men are advised to moderate their drinking.
Magnús lagabøtir's Bergen town law of 1276 states several things about public drunkenness, though not specific to royalty or martial contexts. For instance it was illegal to misguide drunk people, by telling them to go in the opposite direction than they were headed. And if one were to find a person too drunk remember his or her way home, people could get assigned to house them until they were sober enough to remember.
|
|
|
|
|
Paul Hansen
|
| Posted: Sun 04 Dec, 2011 12:49 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Colt Reeves wrote: | I always find these sort of discussions a little funny, particularly the part about nobody drinking water because water is instant death or something. Look at all the third world countries today who have people drinking what we would consider unsafe water. Somehow they're surviving, and even running into population problems.
Now I can't argue with any sort of historical record stating people drank watered down alcoholic beverages for these reasons, but I'm a little untrusting of any arguments that say they must have because they couldn't have survived otherwise. (I don't see any in this thread, but I've seen it elsewhere and since it's the only thing I have to contribute...) |
I think we have to distinguish between water in densely populated areas, such as cities (and army camps), and the water in small villages.
The breweries were obviously located in the cities, and it makes sense that the majority of the beer was also consumed there as the risk of serious illness due to bad water quality was significant.
On the other hand, fresh well water or water from a mountain stream is perfectly fine for drinking.
A large army camp would cause it's own hygiene problems, so it would be advisable to take your own wine or beer with you to avoid these problems...
| Iagoba Ferreira wrote: | | Even if the transcription is correct [original: Also ij galones of wyne] |
I would read that as II (two) gallons...
|
|
|
|
|
|
William P
|
| Posted: Sun 04 Dec, 2011 5:24 pm Post subject: |
|
|
may i also introduce arguably the soldiers most famous for their drinking while on duty,.
the varangians were known, and became notorious for their drinking, after all one of their nicknames is the emperors winebags.
now im not sure just HOW drnk they ever got, and im not too sure how much information their even is, i assume maybe anna comnena might have something written down, but i assume they probably caused abit of m,ayhem now and again.
another example was during the dutch rebellion, spanish trench digging crews were apparently known for frequently getting drunk and taking fatal risks.
|
|
 |
|
Randall Moffett
|
| Posted: Sun 04 Dec, 2011 6:12 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Jean,
I think your terminology is not right for what you are saying. Nor do I think you are right that Henry was dealing with an active problem when he made those laws so it is not reactionary.
A reactionary law is something following an event. We see this usually tied to high or very visible casualties.
A preventative law is based on possible issues that will arise if certain effects whether current or past come to pass.
Here is a legal website with its definition.
http://definitions.uslegal.com/p/preventive-law/
So as I said before, unless you have evidence for the contrary Henry is using preventative, not reactionary rules and regulations. I think it dangerous and incorrect to assume drunkenness was simple an issue if we do not have evidence to support this. The fact most chroniclers mention this infrequently and as a reason for discontent seems to be strong indication this was not something that was an every day event.
Now for the clergy getting drunk this is often used by people who are accusing certain ecclesiastical communities so it likely is a bit exaggerated if not flat out slander. As always the authors bias is critical. That said we do find some interesting legal accounts including such events.
RPM
|
|
|
|
|
|
Jean-Carle Hudon
|
| Posted: Sun 04 Dec, 2011 7:50 pm Post subject: thanks for the lesson in law ? |
|
|
Randall,
I was admitted to the Bar back in 78. I have been counsel for the Quebec equivalent of your OSHA. I have been a federally appointed adjudicator at the appeal level. I know the difference between prevention and repression, or what you call reactionary. This said, I stand by my former entries as Henry's so-called preventive measures could only make sense if he expected to encounter a problem if he did not take such measures, otherwise he would either be an idiot, a teatotaller, or a practitioner of the dark arts. As for the writtings of François Villon, you can't just brush them aside as attempts to blacken the reputation of priests. I do believe the Reformation is significant enough to illustrate that there were behavioural problems with the clergy back then.
So as I said, the fact that a King feels the need to enact an ordonnance against drunkennesss when he is setting out on a campaign clearly indicates that he expects such behaviour to happen unless he clearly sets out the repressive measures which will be taken against those at fault. This is only preventive inasmuch as you accept the premisse that the risk of drunkenness is a very real threat on the horizon.
Bon coeur et bon bras
|
|
|
|
|
|
E. Storesund
|
| Posted: Mon 05 Dec, 2011 5:24 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Eric W. Norenberg wrote: | One thing to consider about the Viking berserkers (and other "frenzy" types): they weren't drinking the same beer you and I buy at the QuickyMart. Modern beers and ales are flavored generously with hops, which are actually a mild sedative. The stuff the "Danes" drank (when it wasn't mead) was likely given its yummy bitterness with bog myrtle, mugwort, wormwood, or any number of local herbs. Some of which had stimulant and/or hallucinogenic effects, intensified by the brewing process. Today ales flavored primarily with stuff other than hops are generally called "gruits":
http://www.gruitale.com/intro_en.htm
These guys weren't just drunk, they were jacked up on what was essentially a Dark Age "Four Loko."
I'll let you all know how the homebrewing turns out... |
It is a common myth that bog myrtle causes hallucinations or madness. I can confirm that not a word of this is true, after drinking pretty healthy doses of this myself over the years. Some of it seems to stem from a certain ethnobotanist (or something along those lines) who claimed to know about a place where people went mad from drinking bog myrtle ale, but usually this is simply an unsourced claim based on hearsay.
Neither have I had any problems with mugwort or wormwood (except for making the brew insanely bitter, when not used in moderation. The hallucinogenic effect of thujone has also been disputed). Patrick McGovern wrote an excellent and entertaining book called "Uncorking the Past", it features a chapter on celtic and germanic remains of drinking culture from prehistory and into the viking age., including analysis of remains of what presumably were fermented beverages. Bog myrtle and meadowsweet seems to have been popular ingredients, as with heather (if I remember correctly). In the Viking Age they imported wine and seemed to have mixed this with locally produced ale in some sort of cocktail. Most likely, even mead contained some volume of malt in most cases, it was all about getting enough sugar into it to get a good buzzing fermentation going(of course, drinkability must also have been a factor), and honey was expensive. The nature and availability of ingredients meant things would have tasted somewhat different than what our palates are used to. What would have passed as beer before the reinheitsgebot, wouldn't necessarily have tasted much like it to us. One of the factors here is the absence of modern yeast, which really matters a lot to flavor development. I imagine crisp, dry and sour ales were somewhat common.
There isn't really much proof from the pollen analysis of any extensive use of psychoactive or narcotic agents, though of course this cannot be completely ruled out - certain things simply wouldnt have come up in the analysis anyway. There are recipes from central europe in the middle ages that include poisonous herbs. But to say that this would have been the norm, and that the intoxicating effects were very different from your uncle's homebrew is more myth than reality I suspect.
|
|
|
|
|
Randall Moffett
|
| Posted: Mon 05 Dec, 2011 6:03 am Post subject: |
|
|
Jean,
I cannot see how you can still say it was an active problem considering there was 0 period evidence of this at the time of the issuance of the laws and regulations by Henry V for that.
I never said brush aside. I said be critical. Every person has a perspective and this dictates their accounts in many ways. Many of these accounts as I said earlier if you do some research you will find are built on discord between others, even rival ecclesiastical orders. And I did admit earlier that such things happened but we should be careful when removing them from context as common or every day. I spent the last decade reading nearly every royal account from Henry III to Henry VIII and the number of incidents is statistically low compared to other such activity. As the arbitrator between community and church in England this should be much more visible if it was taking place.
The reformation is an excellent example of the opposite in fact. Having just finished reading a section on early protestant leaders exaggeration and how it played a huge part in their writings and speeches. One common criticism is that no one can read among the clergy and that none of them have read the bible specifically. Since we know this group was one of the more literate classes of the time by the volumes they have written and their many positions in administration that required such skills we can more or less take this as a large scale exaggeration. Were there some members of the clergy who could not read or write, probably but were they all illiterate, not even close.
So yes I do think he is exaggerating the issue in the scale of many of his contemporaries and continued tradition into modern media largely to catch the sensational from the more mundane.
RPM
|
|
|
|
|
|
Brian Boyenger
Location: NC Joined: 08 Dec 2011
Posts: 3
|
| Posted: Fri 09 Dec, 2011 11:50 pm Post subject: Re: Drunk Knights |
|
|
| Christopher VaughnStrever wrote: | I was cooking the other day and had a couple too many beers and was feeling a bit tipsy. And as I was handling a knife I thought to myself, geez I need to be careful. I havent cut myself yet... and then two seconds later my daughters come in and screaming and playing and BAM! I cut myself, jeez gotta love the thought prior to the action....
And then I thought to myself... what if a knight was drunk and all the sudden war was instantly upon him. Are there any accounts of drunken knights fighting in war or even tourney?
This had to have happened some time or another or even a drunken brawl. Knowing that knights caused alot of disruptive violence... it does sound alot like a bunch of drunk guys with swords and pole axes,
IDK, but it was a decent thought while I was tipsy, thought I would at least share my curiosity |
While this is more from personal experience than historical precident.
I would argue that soldiers and knights back then just like today would have been hard drinkers. Killing is not a natural thing and while the nobles such as nights would from birth be taught they are superior to the peasantry like your average archer/pikemen they would be fighting and would lessen any guilty feelings, I do think they would tend to take to drinking not so much for the courage aspect as to mitigate the after effects of killing as combat/killing gives a general euphoria that is not easily described so I doubt they would drink before a battle though i'm sure there would be some who would
I think the disruptive violence most likely would come from the same source our soldiers today get into they go to the bar get tanked(either for fun or to forget problems) and then start fights/generally raise hell and being combat is there occupation thats what they end up doing and I have seen some massive fights between platoons and even one between companies at the barracks
Exurge Domine Et Judica Causam Tuam. Psalm 73
|
|
|
|
|
Dan Howard
|
| Posted: Sat 10 Dec, 2011 3:15 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Randall Moffett wrote: | | Some good points. I do not think that most people realize how low the alcohol content was in much beer and ale, almost to the same level as the stuff sold as non-alcoholic beer. |
Definitely. It takes a serious drinking stint over an extended period of time to get intoxicated on ale. It shouldn't be thought of as beer. A better analogy would be "liquid bread".
|
|
|
|
|
|
Kel Rekuta
|
| Posted: Sat 10 Dec, 2011 6:16 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Dan Howard wrote: | | Randall Moffett wrote: | | Some good points. I do not think that most people realize how low the alcohol content was in much beer and ale, almost to the same level as the stuff sold as non-alcoholic beer. |
Definitely. It takes a serious drinking stint over an extended period of time to get intoxicated on ale. It shouldn't be thought of as beer. A better analogy would be "liquid bread". |
I have to quibble that only because it could be misread as a blanket statement. True, the majority of table ale we see in household accounts was ultra light on alcohol. The huge volumes, i.e. a couple gallons per lady in Henry VIII's court, were intended for the use of the lady and her companions/servants. Washing down some bread and cheese for lunch with a pint of two would have little affect on the working man, no more so that modern soft drinks might.
However, there doesn't seem to be a period where brewers were making only small ale. Stock or stale ales were premium products and taxed accordingly. That was the stuff of serious drinking when the next most potent beverage would be some form of wine fermented from fruit or honey. In a time when hops were in limited use, high alcohol potential was the only reliable solution to "keeping" ale. This is the product for celebratory inebriation and drunken gluttony. People haven't changed that much. Most folks of Western European stock like to catch an alcohol buzz periodically and our forebears left plenty evidence they were no exception. Richard Unger has a couple books on brewing in the Middle Ages, once specifically on the trade in Holland. Judith Bennett also did brewing researchers a great service with her work on women brewers although her intent seems to have been more to illustrate that whenever women are making a profit at something, men step in with more capital and squeeze them out. All three books are well worth reading to understand cereal based beverage production in the medieval period.
|
|
 |
|
|
E. Storesund
|
| Posted: Sat 10 Dec, 2011 10:09 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Kel Rekuta wrote: |
However, there doesn't seem to be a period where brewers were making only small ale. Stock or stale ales were premium products and taxed accordingly. That was the stuff of serious drinking when the next most potent beverage would be some form of wine fermented from fruit or honey. In a time when hops were in limited use, high alcohol potential was the only reliable solution to "keeping" ale. |
Bingo. One mustn't forget that when analysis proves several sugary ingredients present in the archaeological remains of fermented beverages, it must be assumed in most cases that this was partially in order to kick up the potency with the addition of adjunct sugars.
|
|
|
|
|
Randall Moffett
|
| Posted: Sat 10 Dec, 2011 2:01 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Kel,
Of course, and as I said, most not all for this reason. There clearly is higher levels of alcohol available, especially to those with money. The central issue was by and large much of the ale and beer etc. was lower in alcohol than modern ones so when reading of several gallons of ale being bought for a days use it does not mean the gent in question was passed out drunk at the threshold only he needed something safe and liquid to eat with his food. This was in essence my point, though the absence of hops in large use must have been a fairly big difference as well.
As well most towns had men who checked local alcohol to ensure it was not too watered down, though we often do see in peoples homes wine and strong drink being done in this fashion.
E.,
No one is saying 0 alcohol only on average less.
RPM
|
|
|
|
|
|
Ted Kokx
Location: Monroe, MI Joined: 29 Nov 2011
Posts: 19
|
| Posted: Sat 10 Dec, 2011 4:55 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
keep in mind achohol was drank much more back then as lot of the water was not fit to drink without boiling first.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Kel Rekuta
|
| Posted: Sun 11 Dec, 2011 10:18 am Post subject: |
|
|
Randall,
By no means was I correcting your post - just elaborating on it. Yours might have been misread by individuals accustomed to blindly accepting your customary authority on matters you bother to post responses to. No slight offered nor intended.
|
|
|
|
|
Randall Moffett
|
| Posted: Sun 11 Dec, 2011 6:43 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I am still looking through some notes for the article I mentioned before. I want to say it was from containers found in the low countries in what had been a cellar of sorts in the 1980s but cannot be sure. The numbers that come to mind are about almost 6% alcohol for wine and about a third of that for ale. Not sure off the top of my head but my guess is twice that for many wines on the market and perhaps the same for modern beer and ales.
I will keep looking though. I might hit Jstor if I cannot find it...
In the Assize of Bread and Ale of Southampton (Southampton Record Society) Anderson indicates some very interesting trends with alcohol and its regulation in Southampton. Unlike many towns which had fairly infrequent assizes done on their goods (bread, ale and such) Southampton had nearly monthly ones carried out. All this to ensure that the alcohol and such were not too watered down or in other ways violating current expectations.
These assizes were serious things. Here is an example from York I found while looking for one in Southampton (which appears not to be online sadly.)
http://books.google.com/books?id=V-lG_1Bi6kEC...mp;f=false
Some fairly hard punishments for a small loaf of bread or watery ale.
Kel,
No apology needed. I realized from your post I was not being clear and went back to correct it so it was not unclear. If my post seemed harsh it is my bad.
RPM
|
|
|
|
|
|
A. Elema
|
| Posted: Wed 14 Dec, 2011 3:01 pm Post subject: |
|
|
There's an interesting passage on this subject in Jean de Joinville's crusading memoir, the Life of Saint Louis.
| Quote: | | He [the king] tempered his wine with moderation, according as he saw that the wine could support it. In Cyprus he asked me why I was not putting water in my wine; I told him that the reason was that the doctors had told me I have a large head and a cold stomach, and for this reason I could not become drunk. And he told me that they spoke wrongly, for if I did not learn in my youth to temper my wine, and if I later wished to do it in my old age, the gouts and maladies of the stomach would seize me as never before and I would never have good health. But if I drank my wine straight up in my old age I would be drunk all the time; it is a very shameful thing for a valiant man to make himself drunk. |
It should perhaps be noted that Louis IX was considered particularly saintly in his habits at the time, and Joinville, by the time he wrote the memoir, was a crotchety old guy who punctuated his story with rants about how youth these days just don't behave like his own generation did, back in the war.
|
|
|
|
|
|
D. Phillip Caron
|
| Posted: Thu 05 Jan, 2012 3:29 pm Post subject: |
|
|
One of the aspects of reading Shakespeare is understanding how little people have changed in 400 years. Those people portrayed in his plays did not dream up there thought processes either. Romans probably played the same mind games.Today alcohol and soldier go hand in hand. It is all over the place in "soldier " movies no matter where they are made.
British General Wilson commented that the Napoleonic Russian Officer Corps lived on vodka. My money in on knights with alcohol. The rest of the army, on both sides, was most probably right there with them.
Can I prove it? Nope.
The first casualty of battle is bravado, the second is macho.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Gary Teuscher
|
| Posted: Fri 06 Jan, 2012 9:27 am Post subject: |
|
|
One thing I'm not sure if it has been mentioned - apparently Ale was drunk as a regular beverage, by young and old, I've seen some estimates of 2 gallons a day per household.
It would seem with this type of regular consumption, and a fairly weak ale to begin with, there would be a tolerance built up to where imbibing ale had little ill effects as far as getting one drunk.
Of course wine would be a different issue 
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
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 2003-2024 myArmoury.com — All rights reserved
Discussion forums powered by phpBB © The phpBB Group
Switch to the Basic Low-bandwidth Version of the forum
|
This is a standard topic