Intervene in Syria?

I have been following Joshua Landis at Syria Comment since before the Civil War broke out in Syria, and I found him to be a sensible guide. Here is what he says now.

How the combat worked at the Red Knight's Deed

Some of you will be interested in this.

Almost all the weapons, pole axes and spears apart, were steel weapons, rebated in some cases.

There were two types of combat: unarmored and armored.

In unarmored combat, the fighters wore armor on heads necks hands and lower arms and generally some type of gambeson or pourpoint on the body. The vast majority of the pieces were in medieval style, though there were some modern fencing masks.

In unarmored combat, a distinct touch to any part of the body was sufficient to end the pass. The first combatant to win three passes won the whole combat. As one might expect, thrusting predominated as a tactic, and hands were a favorite target.

In armored combat, there were three different kinds of fighting. There was what was called "outrance" where the first combatant to strike a good blow against a gap in the armor won the combat. Good blows had to be delivered to a lightly armored area or a gap between plates. Plate armor was proof against a thrust or a blow of the sword. Grappling and throwing one's opponent was allowed in this style and in no others.

Second, there was what was called "plaisance" where each fighter was allowed to throw 12 blows against his opponent with no breaks in the action. Victory was judged by the Herald/marshal, and the Duke, Duchess and ladies.

Third, there was an unnamed type of combat in which the first combatant to strike three good blows against his opponent won the match. There was a break after each could blow.

In most situations combatants judged the effect of blows on themselves, but final judgment rested with the presiding authorities. For instance, if two fighters grappled and fell to the ground, as presiding judge whether one of the two had had sufficient control to claim victory.

Red letter day

Starbucks in North Bay.

Deed of the red knight

As many readers know, I have been participating in the Society for Creative Anachronism for decades. One of the things I have done in that time is designed and run medieval – style tournaments. So my scholarly work on formal combats ( deeds of arms) has been paralleled with attempts to re-create, for fun and for interest, various kinds of formal combats. The distinction between running an SCA event that has some pretensions to a medieval atmosphere and running, either in SCA context or elsewhere, something closely modeled on an actual medieval event may be a little bit fuzzy, but let it suffice to say that I've tried to get closer to medieval exemplars as time goes along.   Christian Cameron, novelist and reenactor, has similar ambitions and this past weekend I was privileged to take part and indeed help design an effort at re-creating late 14th century formal combat. Christian wanted to experience a close reenactment to help him understand and write about such an event in one of his upcoming novels, part of a Red Knight series. He also wanted to invite some of the most interesting reenactors he knew to a special party. Did he ever succeed! Christian happens know some very creative people, and also has access to a lakefront property of great beauty in Prince Edward County, Ontario. So this past weekend, some serious but fun-loving folk showed up with pavilions, armor, and civilian costume of the highest level. He asked Cole Cioran and I, who ran a Roland-inspired deed at the Pennsic war about 10 years ago, to come up with a usable and satisfying set of rules and competitions that would appeal to Western martial arts aficionados, historic reenactors, and serious SCA people. We were also given the task and the authority to manage the fighting aspect. Cole was the chief Herald and the marshal of the lists, while I played "the Duke," a presiding noble who with his Duchess Judith, (in real life the owner of the site and a most gracious patron) acted as the final authority as to what took place in the lists. Duchess Judith and I also, with the jury of ladies, gave awards and honorable mentions to the fighters who were the most impressive. These were satisfying roles to play, especially considering the quality of the competitors and their general good attitude and desire to re-create a chivalric deed of arms. Duchess Judith, whom as far as I know has no experience with such events, turned out to be an enthusiastic and sensible contributor to the action. Besides the combat in the lists, there was also archery and a rather marvelous feast prepared on the spot in a rather wonderful outdoor kitchen which is a permanent part of the site. As we ate we were entertained by the Schola Magdalena, who performed 14th century choral music at the highest level of skill and beauty. But the greatest pleasure was simply being there overlooking Lake Ontario and chatting and drinking with like-minded happy people. And there were no disasters, thank heaven. Even though I was there as an experienced hand, in one sense I was a complete novice. I had never before seen that much combat with steel weapons, nor such a large group of people using actual armor for actual protection. SCA style combat has its virtues, but here it was steel (mostly) swords against (almost entirely) mail and plate. Impressive. I may have more to say about it in a bit


Image: Cole at work.

Boucicaut the younger, another medieval nut case

Boucicaut the younger, as readers of my book Deeds of Arms know, was one of the most prominent fighters of formal combats in the late 14th century. He was, for instance, one of the three French champions at St. Inglevert. His performance as a bold champion raised his profile to the point that he was made a marshal of France, a high command position, by the age of 25. Some people thought him a great hero, obviously, and in his later life there was an entire book written to show that he was an exceptional figure. But I've always thought that he was a military disaster for France, since he was one of the commanders in two of the greatest defeats France suffered on either side of the year 1400, the battle of Nicopolis and the battle of Agincourt. Seems that the people associated with the Chronicle of the Good Duke shared my doubts, back in 1429. See this passage from the account of the crusade to North Africa, just after St. Inglevert.

...it happened that Boucicaut took his turn at the watch, which was always ordered between the Army and the Saracens. Boucicaut was a chivalrous man who went to seek a skirmish where he was, through some interpreter asking whether there was any Saracen who wished to combat him on foot or horse. They replied no. Then Messire Boucicaut asked that if they wished to perform arms 10 against 10 or 20 against 20 he and his company would be ready. So the Saracens responded no, not if the Kings their Lords did not want them to. When Boucicaut saw their refusal he said to them that he would fight in a secure field, 20 Christians versus 40 of their Saracens. As long as this conference lasted it was ordained that they should not make war on each other. And scarcely were these Christian and Saracen negotiators together this astounded the Duke of Bourbon, the Lord of Couci, the count of Eu, the souldich of Estrau, and the other barons, for the whole Army ran to this assembly so that the Lord of Couci, the Count of Eu and others, who saw the Army taking leave of its senses, said to the Duke of Bourbon, “Monseigneur, the people run like beasts over there with Bouicaut and they are not able to keep guard and it seems to us that if you do not order some to retreat, things will turn out badly for us.” Then replied the Duke of Bourbon: “I can’t then send a better message, I’ll go there myself.” So he asked for a mule he always had...

So the Duke mounted his mule left his tent and went off with the people of his household. It was not long before more than 300 gentlemen were following him. The Saracens saw that the Duke of Bourbon whom they recognized by his coat of arms, came to join Messire Boucicaut with many men at arms, and began to retreat towards their tents, and Boucicaut and those with him to chase them. And Boucicaut who saw the Duke of Bourbon coming, gave himself over to pride and chased the Saracens more boldly and the Duke of Bourbon with his company went after to bring about a retreat. When Boucicaut was at the tents, the Moorish Kings and their Saracens put themselves in formation for battle outside their lodgings, and Boucicaut put himself in battle formation with his, awaiting the Duke of Bourbon and those who came with him. And the Duke of Bourbon caught up with those whom he wished to make retreat, and he very violently spoke to Boucicaut, concerning his great follies.

In some of the accounts of deeds of arms I've read there is lurking behind the heroic account a group of people who think that a given deed was presumptuous and foolish. Here the critics come out in the open. It would be interesting to know what "chivalrous" meant to the author and his audience.

Ta-Nehisi Coates writes "How I met your your mother"

An excerpt from the Atlantic:

But mostly I am thinking of you. I want to tell you that I have fallen for Paris. I think you know. I think you know because I am stupid and I am cliché. A serious man should should fall for some village in Moldova, for brandies made from magic apples, or ham taken from a rare and endangered hogs. A serious man should claim to have discovered Nashville, should live in Austin before it is Austin, then leave with tales of the edgy old days. I have been told that serious men are buying homes in Detroit. But I love chicken fingers. And I have never been to Foxwoods or Vegas. And I love New York against my better wishes. And I love Paris with that same familiar feeling--aching, everywhere and thin.

What I am telling you is that you do not need to know to love, and it is right that you feel it all in any moment. And it is right that you see it through--that you are amazed, then curious, then belligerent, then heartbroken, then numb. You have the right to all of it. You must want to own all of it. We will try to ward you away. We will try to explain to you that we have already walked that path. We will try to tell you that we have made your mistakes. We will claim that we are trying to spare you. But you will see our greed and self-service hiding behind our words. You will see us ward you away with one hand, while the other still shakes at the memories. Here is the thing--you have the right to every end of your exploration and no motherfucker anywhere can tell you otherwise.

Canada as bad example

Australia is in the midst of an election where climate change is one of the biggest issues. Climate change is hitting Australia hard now. Guess what country embodies the fears of many political observers?

One of Connor’s biggest fears is that the country emerges from all this political upheaval looking something like Canada has under the anti-environmental government of Conservative PM Stephen Harper.

“I look at Canada as a similar country, and it is my nightmare,” Connor said. “Australia can easily become an international pariah, we are very good at derailing international negotiations as an effective middle power and vicious defender of self interest. Some of the Coalition have been to Canada and seen how they get away with walking away from Kyoto and exploiting the tar sands.

“The transition away from fossil fuels is a very hard one culturally, socially and economically for Australia to make,” Connor continued. “We are on the knife edge of walking backwards or moving forwards in sensible way.”

Canada, nightmare.

My new e-book, Formal Combats in the 14th Century

My first e-book is now available through Amazon and soon through Barnes & Noble. It is called Formal Combats in the Fourteenth Century and consists of three chapters adapted from public presentations I gave over the last 10 or 12 years. If you have already read the book Deeds of Arms you may not need this book, though I think there is enough original material in it that you may want it anyway.

http://www.amazon.com/Formal-Combats-Fourteenth-Century-ebook/dp/B00ENVKYE4/ref=sr_1_5?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1377005126&sr=1-5&keywords=Formal+combats

For the American edition.

This is a good introduction to my thinking about formal combats and has some good stories too.

Bad times in Big Egypt -- Arabist.net

Short and not at all sweet: August 14 in Egypt in numbers Ursula Lindsey

Dead (according to Ministry of Health, and still counting): 525

Wounded: 3,500

Churches, monasteries, Christians schools and libraries attacked (Source) : 56

Days that Mohamed ElBaradei lasted as a civilian figure-head of the army-run "second revolution" before resigning in protest: 28

Other resignations: 0

Justifications presented by Egypt's non-Islamist media and political parties for the gratuitous murder of hundreds of their fellow citizens, and commendations of the security forces for their "steadfastness" and "restraint": too many to count

A longer analysis that feels right:

It only gets worse from here

Issandr El Amrani

You could ask a thousand questions about the violence that has shaken Egypt ... But the question that really bothers me is whether this escalation is planned to create a situation that will inevitably trigger more violence – that this is the desired goal.

The fundamental flaw of the July 3 coup, and the reason those demonstrators that came out on June 30 against the Morsi administration were wrong to welcome it, is that it was based on an illusion. That illusion, at least among the liberal camp which is getting so much flak these days, was that even a partial return of the old army-led order could offer a chance to reboot the transition that took such a wrong turn after the fall of Hosni Mubarak on February 11, 2011. This camp believed that gradual reform, even of a much less ambitious nature than they desired in 2011, would be more likely to come by accommodating the old order than by allowing what they perceived as an arrangement between the military and the Islamists to continue. Better to focus on fixing the country, notably its economy, and preventing Morsi from sinking it altogether, and take the risk that part of the old order could come back.

In this vision, a gradual transformation of the country could take place while preserving political stability through the armed forces.

...

Unfortunately, among the broad liberal camp in Egypt, those who entertained such hopes are in a minority. Even among the National Salvation Front, as its obscene statement praising the police today showed, most appear to have relished the opportunity to crush the Muslim Brothers and appeared to believe that other Islamists could simply choose to be crushed alongside it, kowtow to the new order, or be pushed back into quietism. It appears that much of the business and traditional elite – represented politically by the Free Egyptians and the Wafd Party among others – falls into that category. They are joined by the security establishment, or deep state if you prefer.

Over the last week there was much talk of divisions between this segment and those symbolically important liberal members of the government, such as ElBaradei, over whether or not to negotiate with the Brothers or break their sit-ins. The camp that eventually won does not just believe that the Brothers are not worth negotiating with. They want to encourage it in its provocative sectarian discourse, its supporters desire for violence, and the push as much as the Islamist camp as possible into being outlaws.

...

Their thinking is cynical in the extreme, not unlike Bashar al-Assad's push towards militarizing the political conflict he faced in 2011. They are willing to live with the violence, impact on the economy, and other downsides if it strengthens their own power and legitimacy.

...

In their strategy against the July 3 coup, the Brothers and their allies have relied on an implicit threat of violence or social breakdown (and the riling of their camp through sectarian discourse pitting the coup as a war on Islam, conveniently absolving themselves for their responsibility for a disastrous year) , combined with the notion of democratic legitimacy, i.e. that they were after all elected and that, even if popular, it was still a coup. On the latter argument, they may have gained some ground over time both at home and abroad. But on the former, they got things very, very wrong: their opponents will welcome their camp's rhetorical and actual violence, and use it to whitewash their own.

Another amazing but unknown -- to me -- piece of Canadian monumenal architecture

The Brooks Aqueduct in Alberta. Saw it this morning on a spot on an Alberta TV station. Its size is quite understated by this still photo.

What was the point of the Combat of the Thirty (1351)?

At this year's Pennsic war, as for several preceding this one, there was a reenactment of the combat of the  thirty, which took place in Brittany in the year 1351 during the first phase of the Hundred Years War.As every time before, the sides were not even. Despite a big discrepancy in numbers, the sides are not evened up. The combatants chose to stay with the signs they had chosen or had been recruited into earlier.I think this is rather odd, given that the whole point of the original combat of the 30 was to see who was better if sides were kept even and no outsider was allowed to intervene. To remind the SCA community of what contemporaries thought was essential to the event, I am reproducing here from my book The Combat of the Thirty, three contemporary and near contemporary descriptions of how the combat was arranged.  

Jean le Bel's account

How thirty French fought against thirty English and Germans by certain agreements in Brittany, and the English and the Germans were defeated.

In this same season, there took place in Brittany a most marvelous deed of arms which should never be forgotten

Messire Robert de Beaumont, a valiant knight of a great family in Brittany, was castellan of Castle Josselin, where he had a great many men-at-arms and squires of his lineage.  And it so happened one day that he came  near the  castle of Ploermel, whose castellan was a German mercenary called Brandebourch, who had with him a great many German, Breton, and  English mercenaries, and he was of the party of the Countess.

When Messire Robert saw that none of the garrison was coming out, he went to the gate and called out this Brandebourch, under a guarantee of safety, and asked him whether he had any companion, or perhaps two or three, who wished to joust with steel lances against three, for the love of their ladies.  Brandebourch replied and said to him, that their lady loves would hardly wish that they should get themselves killed in a single joust, for this kind of venture was over too soon, and in it one got more of a reputation for presumption and folly than for honor and worth.

"But I will tell you what we will do.  If you like, you will choose twenty or thirty of your companions  from your garrison, and I will choose as many from ours  and we will go to a field where no one will be able to disturb or prevent us, and command on pain of the noose to all of our companions on either side, and all those who watch us, that none should give the combatants reinforcement or help."

"By my faith," replied Messire Robert, "I agree to thirty against thirty, and I swear it thus by my faith."

"I, too," said Brandebourch, "swear it, for he who carries himself well there will gain more honor than in a joust."   And so this affair was agreed and an appointment was made for the following Wednesday, four days hence.

During that time, each party chose their own thirty, just as they wished, and each of the sixty procured such armor for himself as he was able.

When the day had come, the thirty companions of Brandebourch heard Mass and then armed themselves and left for the field where the battle was to take place.  And they dismounted and ordered all those who were there that none of them should be so bold as to intervene for any reason whatever.

Those thirty companions whom we will call "the English" waited a long time for those whom we will call "the French."

When the thirty French had come, they dismounted and commanded just as the English had done, that no one should give them help or aid.   Some say that four or five of the French remained on horseback at the entrance to the field, and that twenty-five dismounted, just as the English had; but I don't know for certain, for I wasn't there.   However it was, they spoke a little, all sixty of them, and then stepped back, each party to its own side, and made all their people retreat well back from field.

La Bataille de trente Anglois et de trente Bretons

[IV]

“ Brambro,” said Beaumanoir, “Know for certain

That all your boasts will avail you nothing.

Those who say the most in the end deceive themselves.

Now please, Brambro, let us do the smart thing.

Let us get together to fight, by appointment,

With sixty companions, or eighty or a hundred,

And then indeed we will see for truth and for a certainty,

Who will have wrong or right, without further ado.”

“My lord, “ this Brambro said, “I swear it to you!”

V

Will “Brambro,” says Beaumanoir, “for the sake of God the just,

You are a valiant man and a very shrewd warrior,

Come on that day without asking for delay

In a year one says many a word which one wishes to recall,

And one often makes great boasts over dinner.

Do not do to me what you did to Pierre Angier

That valiant, noble man, that gentle bachelor.

He chose a day for battle with you

At the town of Ambissat. And I have heard said

That he went to that place to acquit his oath

With twenty-six spurred knights

All accoutered in gold and steel.

And Brambro, you defaulted.  You did not dare to go.

This deed we are discussing, is a very great one.

You should not mock it! 

People will speak of it for a very long time!”

“Beaumanoir,” says Brambro, “For God’s sake let be!

For I will certainly be the first on the field.

With me will be thirty men, no more, no less,

Who will all be covered in good iron and steel.

I will not bring any villain, God give me aid!

The least of them will be a squire,

Bearing a coat of arms on his chest.”

But Brambro lies to conceal his plan,

So you do not imagine that he will bring

A bastard villain vagabond

Strong enough to carry, easily, a setier of beans

Over his neck, whose stomach was bigger

Than that of a courser.  Brambro, by his great fierceness,

Armed him this day.  Through him he thought

To avenge Dagworth, when he should have struck down

Such a villain deceiver.

I now will tell you of the noble Beaumanoir.

To Brambro he says, “I wish concerning this to go

To castle Josselin, to muster my men.”

“You go,” Brambro told him.  “I also wish to issue my orders

Through all the duchy.   I will assemble all

The noble English I can find.”

Thus was the battle vowed, that without cheating or fraud

They should fight it out in good faith

And on either side, all would be on horseback.

Pray then to the King of Glory, who knows and sees all,

That he will help those who have the right,

For this is the point at issue.

Androw of Wyntoun’s Account

The lord of Beaumanoir in battle

Manfully approached an English knight

That spoke of Frenchmen quite lightly

And would often say scornfully

“What, are not the English the doughtiest men

Though God may sleep in his den

Yet I think and I think it true

One Englishman is worth two French.”

Thus he often spoke until the day

This lord of Beaumanoir said to him

“You speak, sir, too freely

Men may perchance find near at hand

Men of such quality

As you may find in your country.”

The knight said, “Sir, by my faith

That I would like to  put to the test

Where we could fight with even sides.

And I would like to be one of them.”

Beaumanoir then was angered

And said to him, “You may find perchance

Your fill of fighting if you dare.”

“Yes, God willing,” said he, “I will be there.”

“Good sir,” says Beaumanoir, “perhaps

If you wish to put it to the test

I shall make the covenant.

You shall go home to England

And choose of the best men in your country

Until there be thirty-one

And I shall choose as many for myself

Of kin and friends here with me

And let us set here a certain place

To meet, and if God gives me grace

I will have victory with my retinue

If you shall be slain in the combat

Your ransom I will forgive you

I shall not ask for anything

And if you are taken to prison

Then shall you double your ransom to me.

So shall men see if French can deal

As fiercely with Englishmen.

I had no idea

The Saguenay River, Quebec:

I was reading about it, and decided to look it up...

Why the Middle Ages Are Important

This talk, prepared for a exhibit opening at North Bay's museum, was never delivered as written; I gave a much more informal presentation that involved talking about items and displays in the collection.  I just now stumbled across this script and I like it. 

May 24, 2008

@Discovery North Bay, opening of

"Once upon a time..."

I would like to thank @Discovery North Bay for the invitation to speak at today's opening.   Nipissing Universitywas founded by citizens of North Bayand the surrounding region because they believed their home region could make an original and worthwhile intellectual and cultural contribution to Canadian life.  When the university and the community meet here on occasions like this, we are fulfilling the dreams of those founders.

Why are the Middle Ages important?  I don't have to argue today that they are important because the exhibit itself is proof enough.  It was not created by professional academic medievalists, but by museum staff who work with the public all the time, and their judgment was that people in Ontariowant to know more about the Middle Ages.   If their own contacts with the public were not good enough, they could point to such recent films as the Lord of the Rings, or  the three different recent movie versions of Beowulf, or the wild success of the Da Vinci Code, book and movie both.  None of these modern cultural products show the Middle Ages as they really were.  They are all consciously or unconsciously legendary or mythological reworkings of medieval material.  Tolkien knew medieval literature better than almost anyone, and was a brilliant and original analyst of Beowulf, among other things, but when he wanted to talk to a contemporary public, he created a whole new world, similar to northern Europe in the Middle Ages but in many ways vastly different. And it's not just modern people who have reworked the Middle Ages to make a point.  The anonymous Beowulf poet didn't show his hero as a normal person in normal country in a normal time, but put him in a landscape full of monsters and superhuman challenges.  Thus when modern film directors mess around with Beowulf they've got good precedent.

But “Once upon a Time,”  even though its title  evokes the Middle Ages as a source of modern dreams, is not a mythological treatment.  Like scholarship in other forms, it tries to get behind the myths and legends and appreciate the people the Middle Ages in this case the later Middle Ages as the home of real people with real problems and real aspirations, who came up with solutions and created social institutions that are still alive in our own world.  “Medieval” is often used to  mean something like “unfathomable cruelty,”  a phrase I stole from Carl Pyrdum, a graduate student at Yale, but much that we are familiar with and value in the modern world originated in the Middle Ages.  The people who invented the phrases “dark ages” and “middle ages” meant to put down the postclassical era, and inspire people to build a better modern world to rival the great accomplishments of antiquity.  Yet we can hardly do without the heritage of the Middle Ages.  To take two examples relevant to Canada, both parliament and universities came out of the efforts of knights and warriors on one hand and clerics on another to improve their own society.   The original members of the House of Commons were knights, seeking effective and fair government, the original university students and teachers were members of the clergy, seeking to understand theology and law, universal and human order.  The Middle Ages created things so large that we hardly appreciate their medieval origins: in pre-medieval times there was no England, no France, no Poland, no Russia.  The Romans had fantastic public bathhouses but no mechanical clocks, yet by the end of the Middle Ages every important town in Europe had a public clock.  Think of Big Ben next to the British Houses of Parliament and not far from Westminster Abbey or the University of Londonand you think about our practical medieval heritage.

I hope you enjoy “Once Upon a Time…” which highlights some of the more striking and beautiful accomplishments of the Middle Ages.  But I hope you will take a moment, when looking at the artifacts and reconstructions, think about the people behind them:  the real medieval people who are the subject of the exhibition, and the real modern it's people who put it together for you.  You'll get a taste of the fascination of the Middle Ages today, but just a taste. I hope it will inspire you to look closer.  One thing about history is that no matter how good a given reconstruction is, there's always more.  Life is big and complicated and hard to describe.   “Once upon a time..." can be the end of your journey to the Middle Ages, but I rather hope there will be a beginning or perhaps a new beginning.