{"word_count": 2674, "character_count": 17609}
By Olivier Dupuis and François Siedel (transcription and translation)Source: gallica.bnf.fr / BnF Français 25527 fol. 38vContextCivil fencing with the use of the buckler is attested by documentswritten as early as the thirteenth century, in England, as well as by literaryworks in the German language. It is different to fencing with the large shield,worn and used by knights and their servants, and above all the buckler isusually handled at that time with little other protection. Traces of such apractice remained rare before the middle of the fourteenth century outside ofEngland, where archives are both well preserved and well-studied.[1]For the Kingdom of France, we can observe large amounts of small illustrationsin the margins of manuscripts from the beginning of the fourteenth century wheremen, hybrids or monkeys are fighting using a buckler in one hand. Theillustration above is one of the many remaining examples that deserve a generalstudy. Such buckler could be compact and light enough to be worn in the beltwith the sword, as illustrated in a comic way in the second illustration takenfrom a bas-de-page of the Smithfield Decretals, painted in England around 1340.The following extract from the French novel, Restor de Paon, writtenbefore 1338, confirms this possibility: "He took a buckler of strong steelwhich hanged at his sword, and drew the sword."[2]One must also mention that the oldest known fencing treatiseproduced in Europe, focuses uniquely on the combination of sword and bucklerand dated from the first half of the fourteenth century. It is written in Latincombined with vernacular German words.[3]This type of sword fencing with no other protection than this little shield wasstill in its infancy and was one of the most important forms in the fifteenthand sixteenth centuries in Europe, and in particular in France.[4]The case in question comesduring a particular period in the history of the city of Laon, seat of theimportant bishopric of Picardy, located about 140km northeast of Paris. Themunicipal status of the city, granted in the twelfth century by the King ofFrance, was abolished in 1322 following complaints from the cathedral chapter.However, it was not until nine years later, in March 1331, that an ordinance ofthe King of France established the office of Royal Provost of Laon, who had incharge everything in the city with the exception of possessions and personnelattached to the chapter and the bishopric.[5]Historiography accredits a certain Jean de Milon as the very first provost in1331, but as our text indicates clearly Jean Crenes as provost in the eyes ofthe Parliament of Paris, it is therefore necessary to consider an ambiguity onthe tenant of the office, at least the first months after the establishment ofthis institution.[6]Source: The British Library, Royal MS 10 E IV, fol. 60r&#62;TextdescriptionThe original is preserved on paper in the FrenchNational Archives in Paris, in the archives of the Laon Cathedral Chapter. Thisletter was produced by the Royal Provost of Laon, Jean Crenes, for ColardTribourdaine, whose precise function at that time is unknown. In 1336 ajudgment of the Parliament of Paris seems to indicate that Colard Tribourdainewas some time earlier commissioner of the provost of Laon, perhaps he wasalready in 1331, but nothing is less certain, especially since the presence ofthis letter in the archives of the chapter could suggest that ColardTribourdaine was in the service of the chapter and that he changed functionsafterwards.[7]This text essentially reproduces a copy of the letter in Latin sent by theParis Parliament to the said provost, accompanied with instructions of his own,in French, to diligently apply the instructions. This letter from the Parliamentis certainly in response to an initial letter which unfortunately has not beenfound.In summary, a certain Ponceletus of Miromonte, servantof a member of the chapter, was taking lessons in buckler play. The word usedin the text, clipeo (l. 7), seems to indicate these small round shieldsas opposed to the large shields of knights and soldiers. These classes weregiven by an Englishman residing in Laon, Jaquermard, who was to have severalstudents, from what can be understood from the text, and grant a particularlyadvantageous rate to Ponceletus in particular. It seems that he was badly paidfor it because an injury occurred while Jaquermard was allegedly poorly protected,but the text is unclear regarding this fact. Jaquemard also allegedly neglectedthe advice or care of surgeons (sirrugicorum). Incidentally, we can note the use of several Latin terms related tofencing, also used in the aforementioned fencing treatise: ludum (l. 9),scolas/scolaris/scolaribus (l. 7-8), custodiam (l. 10). Finally,Jaquermard died a few days later from the wound caused by Ponceletus, hispupil. The latter was therefore put in the chapter prison. This accident,however, made Ponceletus fall under the jurisdiction of high justice, andtherefore of the king's justice. This motivated Nicolas Raoul the Younger,lieutenant of the provost to seize Ponceletus. However, the chapter most likelycontested this before the Parliament of Paris, that the murderer was a servantof a member of the chapter, and that he fell within the exceptions provided forin the ordinance of 1331, leaving the right of high justice to the bishop ofLaon. By the letter transmitted to the provost, who is the subject of thestudied document, the Parliament of Paris confirms well the error and asks thatPonceletus be put back in the hands of the bishop's justice.This text is certainly not of great historicalsignificance, but mentions of the practice of fencing at the beginning of thefourteenth century are so rare that it deserves to be brought to the attentionof an informed public. It is also noteworthy that the teaching concerned notonly the entourage of a member of the chapter, but also other pupils, makingthis secular practice, dissociated from military training, part of everydaylife in the North of France. The presence of an English teacher, finally, wasnot insignificant. It echoes the numerous mentions of fencing with the bucklerfound in the archives of this country, and could be the witness of a culturalinfluence in the field of this practice in the North of France and Normandy,but this possibility needs further research.Editionand TranslationThetext proved to be difficult to transcribe, and no less difficult to translate.It is offered here slightly rough, particularly the translation, because of thelack of sufficient expertise in the legal formulas of the time.Thecontractions, which are numerous, have all been developed and marked initalics, the line numbers are indicated in the transcription between twovertical bars. The reverse side of the letter indicating the addressee'saddress is heavily stained and extremely difficult to exploit without beingable to really bring anything to the substance of the case, therefore it isnecessary to mention its existence even without giving an overview of it.  Jehans Crenes preuos de Laon a nostre  amé Colart Tribourdaine, salut. Nous auons veuez les lettres  dou roy nostre sire contenant ceste |2|  fourme.  Philippus dei gratia  Francie rex baillio Viromanduensi ceterisque  justiciariis nostris aut eorum loca tenentibus salutem.  Sua nobis. Decanus et capitulum ecclesie |3|  Laudunensis graui conquestione monstrarunt quod licet  ipsi per priuilegium regium omnimodam  juridictionem habeant in omnes familiares suos |4|  et seruitores quoscumque in villa et terminis  quondam communie Laudunensis, Oriundum  in dicta villa Laudunensi dumtaxat exceptis. Indeque  sint |5| et fuerint in possessione pacifica quocienscumque  se casus obtulit, a tanto tempore quod competit ad bonam  saizinam acquirendam |6| ipsique dictam  continuando possessionem&#160;; tenerent in sua possessione  Ponceletum de Miromonte famulum cuiusdem  canonici dicte ecclesie. |7| Pro eo qui  ipse scolaris Jaquemardi anglici Laudunensem residenciam  facientis ac scolas de clipeo conitis exercentis  et tenentis medietatem |8| salario quod a  suis scolaribus accipere consueuit ipsum Jaquemardum  vulnerauerat plagam modicam faciendo eidem ut  dicitur |9| non motus ira vel odio, sed solummodo  dictum ludum prout consueuerat exercendo&#160;; quiquidem  Jaquemardus, non solum dicto vulnere medi-|10|-ante,  sed per custodiam minus ydoneam nolens consilio sirrugicorum  uti ut dicitur post paucos dies a tempore dicte  vulnerate |11| dicitur decessisse&#160;; de quo  Ponceleto dicti canonici sunt et erant parati  exhibere iusticiam cuilibet conquerenti de ipso.  Nicholaus |12| Radulphus iuuenis locum tenens prepositi  Laudunensis ad carcerem dictorum conquerentium  accedens dictum Ponceletum a dicto carcere  extraxit |13| et ipsum penes se detinet&#160; eumdem ipsis deliberare  renuntiationes minus iuste&#160;  in dictorum conquerentium graue  dispendium, ac contra tenorem |14| dictorum  suorum priuilegium et possessionem superius  allegatam temere veniendo. Idcirco tibi committimus  et mandamus quatenus si visis |15| dictis  priuilegiis et auditis partibus si premissa veritate  nitantur dictum Radulphum aut prepositum dicti  loci ad reddendum et restituendum&#160;&#160; |16| eisdem decano et  capitulo dictum Ponceletum compellas vt de ipso  exhibere valeant iusticie complementum. Si vero  inter partes super |17| hec oriatur  oppositio seu debatum, dicta oppositione  ad manum nostram posita, tamquam superiores  et exequtione&#160; dicti  Ponceleti quacunque |18| fuerit, aut existere  debuerit in suspenso posita dicta oppositione  pendente adiornes partes ad instantem&#160;&#160; vicesimam diem nativitatis |19|  domini coram dilectis et fidelibus gentibus  nostris&#160; presens parlamentum  nostrum tenente non obstante quod dictum  nostrum sedeat parlamentum |20| super dicta  oppositione processurum ut fuerit rationis  curiam nostram certificans competentem ad diem de  adiornamento predicto et alijs |21| que feceris  in premissis. In quibus tibi ab omnibus nostris  subditis pereri volumus et mandamus. Datum  parisius in parlamento nostro. XXIII |22|  die decembris anno domini millo CCC trecesimoprimo.  Si vouz mandons et commettons que  vous les dictes lettres |23| ci dessus transcriptes  pour nous, et en ce lieu de nouz enterinez, accomplissiez et mettés  a&#160;&#160; exeqution deue de point  |24| en point selont leur teneur, en la fourme et maniere  que li roys nous le mande. Et tant en faites que |25|  pour vous ni ait deffaut, mandons et commendons a tous a cui il  appartient, requerons autres que a vous |26|  ce faisant obeissance et entendent diligences. Donné  souz nostre scel, le samedi prochain apres icel. L'an  mille CCC |27| trente et un.     Jehans Crenes, provost of Laon to our loved Colart Tribourdaine,   salute. We have seen the letters from the King our sire containing this form:   "Philip by the Grace of   God King of France to the Bailiff of Vermandois, and to all our other justice   officials or their lieutenants, salute.   The decanus and the chapter   of the church of Laon have shown us by their great investigation that they   are allowed to have -thanks to a royal privilege- global jurisdiction over   all their familiars and their servants whoever they are within the domain and   the limits of the former commune of Laon, insofar as they are considered as   such those who originate from the said domain of Laon.   Thereafter,  they are and were in peaceful possession of the abovementioned jurisdiction at any such time from then on that a case presented itself that pertained to the acquisition of good seisin, and they continuously remained in said possession of said jurisdiction.[8]   They hold in their   possession Ponceletus of Miromonte the servant of a canon of the said church.   Ponceletus, himself a pupil of the English Jaquemard, the latter taking up   residence in Laon and taking care of collective buckler schools and receiving   for salary the half he used to receive from his pupils. The said Ponceletus   had inflicted on Jaquemard himself a slight wound while sparing, as it is   said, not from a movement of anger or hatred but only the playing the said   game, as he had been accustomed to do so; it is said that Jaquemard died a   few days after having been wounded by Ponceletus, not only because of the   said wound which opened up[9],   but also due to an incorrect guard[10],   the latter refusing to listen to the decision of the surgeons, as it is said;   the said canons were ready to render justice to any plaintiff about   Ponceletus himself.   Nicolas Raoul the Young,   lieutenant of the provost of Laon going to the prison of the said plaintiffs   took the said Ponceletus out of the said prison, and in his hands, prevents   him less equitably from deciding on the renunciations of the heavy burden of   the said plaintiffs, and by opposing without reflection the content of their   said privileges alleged above.   For this reason we give you   to execute and ask you that the said Raoul or the provost of the said place   hand over and restore Ponceletus to the canons themselves, since you have   seen, after the privileges have been declared and the parties heard, whether   they are based on the truth above all. Bring the said Ponceletus to justice   before the decanus and the chapter so that they may be able to show the   fulfilment of justice about Ponceletus himself.   If an opposition arises, or   if there will have been a debate for the execution of the said Ponceletus   whatever it may be between the parties concerning this affair, as the said   opposition has been entrusted to our hand, so to speak, superior, or if there   will have to be a pending debate, since the said opposition is uncertain, you   will adjourn the parties at the moment of the 20th day of the nativity of the   Lord, in the presence of our elected and faithful people. Our parliament,   since the said opposition retained but did not prevent the said parliament   from sitting above the said opposition, is about to go ahead furthermore if   as a matter of reason will be by certifying the people of the said   parliament. The latter will set the day for the aforementioned adjournment   and for other matters that you will have done in missives sent in advance,   missives in which we want and ask all our subordinates to obey you.   Given in Paris in our   Parliament on the 23rd day of December, the year of the Lord 1331."       We entrust you with the task   of endorsing the said letters transcribed above for us, and to carry out and   carry out our decisions from point to point according to their content, form   and manner as the King requires of us, and so that you are not lacking, we   ask that you be obedient and diligent.   Given under our seal on the   Saturday following this one, in the year 1331.   BibliographyManuscriptsArchives Nationales de France, L//734,document 23.Secondary sources and editionsActes du Parlement de Paris, ed.Henri Furgeot, 2e série, vol 1 (1328-1342) (Paris: Plon, 1920).Cinnato Franck, SuprenantAndré, Le Livre de l'art du combat, édition critique du Royal Armouries MS.I.33 (Paris: CNRS éditions, 2009).Dupuis Olivier.'Organization and Regulation of Fencing in the Realm of France in the Renaissance',in Acta Periodica Duellatorum, vol. 2 (2014), p.&#160;233-54. DOIhttp://dx.doi.org/10.1515/apd-2015-0019.Dupuis Olivier,'The roots of Fencing from the Twelfth to the Fourteenth Centuries in theFrench Language Area', in Acta Periodica Duellatorum, vol.&#160;3(2015), p.&#160;37–62. DOI http://dx.doi.org/10.1515/apd-2015-0002.Jean le Court ditBrisebare, Le Restor du Paon, éd.Richard J. Carey (Genève: Droz, 1966).Melleville Maximilien, Histoirede la ville de Laon et de ses institutions, 2 vols. (Laon, Paris: 1846).Ordonnances des roys deFrance de la troisième race, vol. 2 (Paris&#160;:1729).Ordonnances des roys de France de la troisième race,vol. 12 (Paris : imprimerie royale, 1777)[1] Olivier Dupuis, 'The roots of Fencing from the Twelfth to the Fourteenth Centuries in the French Language Area', in Acta Periodica Duellatorum, vol. 3 (2015), p. 37–62. DOI http://dx.doi.org/10.1515/apd-2015-0002.[2] ".I. boucler d'acier fort qui pendoit a s'espee / Prist et l'espee traist [...]". Jean le Court dit Brisebare, Le Restor du Paon, éd. Richard J. Carey (Genève: Droz, 1966), p.66, v.550-51.[3] Cinnato Franck, Suprenant André, Le Livre de l'art du combat, édition critique du Royal Armouries MS. I.33 (Paris: CNRS éditions, 2009).[4] Olivier Dupuis, 'Organization and Regulation of Fencing in the Realm of France in the Renaissance', in Acta Periodica Duellatorum, vol. 2 (2014), p.&#160;233-54. DOI http://dx.doi.org/10.1515/apd-2015-0019.[5] Melleville Maximilien, Histoire de la ville de Laon et de ses institutions, 2 vols. (Laon, Paris: 1846),vol. 1, pp.273-74. The ordinance is published in-extenso in Ordonnances des roys de France de la troisième race, vol. 2 (Paris&#160;: 1729), pp.77-80.[6] Melleville, Histoire de la ville de Laon, vol. 1, p. 283.[7] Actes du Parlement de Paris, ed. Henri Furgeot, 2e série, vol 1 (1328-1342) (Paris: Plon, 1920), p. 174.[8] This is a good example of an obscure Latin sentence that cannot be only roughly translated. The translation of this obscure Latin sentence has been improved by Ariella Elema.[9] Free interpretation for mediare, which means to divide in two.[10] The meaning is unclear here, does custodiam minus refer to a poor protection during the fight, or to the bad care Jaquemard took of himself after being injured?[cite]