WHEN, in the fifth century, the Visigoths passed over the Pyrenees and laid the foundations of a new nation, they found a people armed for war, as they were clothed in peace, after the Roman fashion. The legionary’s equipment must have been tolerably familiar to the fair-haired invaders, and it is likely that they had already adopted it in many of its details. That they did so on their establishment in Spain, at all events, is proved by the descriptions contained in the Etymologies of St. Isidore, which, however, make no mention of the lorica or breastplate, and ocreas or greaves worn by the soldiers of the empire. Reference is made instead by the saintly chronicler to coats of fence, made of chain-mail, or of thick quilted stuff woven in Silesia.

There was at one time a very general belief that chain armour was introduced into Europe from the East. This view is successfully combated by Hewitt—Ancient Armour and Weapons in Europe—who proves that this important article of military apparel was worn by the Germans, Normans, and Anglo-Saxons at a very remote period. Varro, indeed, ascribes its invention to the Gauls. The Anglo-Saxon epic, “Beowulf” (eighth century) contains many allusions to the “ringed byrnie,” while in the Volsunga Saga we read that “Sigurd’s sides so swelled with rage that the rings of his byrnie were burst asunder.” It is evident from this passage that what was meant was mail-armour; i.e., composed of interlinked rings, not merely the quilted tunic on which were sown metal discs, such as was, however, undoubtedly worn also at that time and for many centuries after. Both kinds of defensive armour may have been brought to Spain by the Visigoths, or again adopted by them subsequent to their settlement in the country.

I have been unable to discover on effigies or in illuminated manuscripts any specimens of Visigothic armour. There is good reason to believe that it was far from being of a rude description. The methods of tempering steel which had made the blades of Toledo and Bilbilis renowned throughout the Roman world could hardly have been forgotten; and Baron Davillier has shown that a craft closely allied to the armourer’s—the goldsmith’s—received liberal encouragement from the successors of Ataulfo. The Saracens, according to their own historians, were amazed at the splendour and richness of the treasure accumulated in the cities of Spain. Tharik Ben Zeyad, when he took Toledo in 712, found amongst a profusion of crowns, jewellery, and plate, “gilded armour, daggers, and swords richly mounted, bows, lances, and various arms, offensive and defensive.” The spoils, as enumerated by another writer, included one thousand swords for the use of the kings, and one hundred and seventy crowns of pure gold.

This testimony is confirmed by the priceless relics of Visigothic dominion, preserved in the Cluny Museum, and, thanks to the liberality of Queen Isabel II., in the Royal Armoury at Madrid (see plate 1). The circumstances of their discovery, as related by Don Pedro de Madrazo, and set forth by Conde de Valencia de San Juan, are of almost romantic interest.

“On the night of August 25th, 1858, a man and a woman were journeying on two small donkeys along the road from Toledo to Guadamar. On approaching the Guarrazar fountain, they observed by the light of the moon, that the rain which had fallen during a great storm the previous day, had washed the earth down towards the issue of the fountain, and left bare what looked like tombs. Out of curiosity, or necessity, the woman got off her donkey, and approached them, and in a square hole, made of stones and lime, ill-concealed with two flat stones, between which the moonlight penetrated, she saw with wonder that something strange was glistening. On her exclaiming, the man also dismounted, and, putting his hand into the hole, he touched an object like a collar made of hearts. He took it out, and after that, other things of different shapes, then a cross, then a crown, and then a larger one ... washing them with the water from the adjoining fountain, gold and precious stones revealed themselves to their astonished eyes. They afterwards declared that they thought they were dreaming. They took away the treasure they had found with all secrecy; said nothing in the town, and the following night, with the same secrecy, and provided with a small lantern and the necessary tools, they returned to examine the marvellous hiding-place, whence they took all that remained.

“Within a few days pieces of valuable gold and silver work of an unknown period began to be seen in the Toledo silversmiths’ shops, and a goldsmith and dealer in stones and gems in the town, who had his house and workshop in a beautiful garden by the Tagus, near the Sword Factory, and who was distinguished among his fellows by his taste for archÆology, had the patience to acquire one by one, and to match together the different pieces under observation; after many combinations and rectifications, leaving out some pieces, and, with consummate art, supplying others that were missing, he at last formed, or rather restored, several crowns, among them one very large and valuable, which, by the hangings, was found to be the crown of King Recesvinto (649-672).

“With the same secrecy that the discoverers of the treasure had observed, Navarro (for this was the name of the dealer in stones and gems) proceeded with the difficult task of restoring to their original shape those inestimable insignia of Visigothic Royalty. He took them to France, and they were already in a case in the Cluny Museum when Spain heard of the discovery and extraction of the crowns of Guarrazar.

“But the treasure, taken in 1858 from Guarrazar to Guadamar was not exhausted. About May, 1861, a villager of Guadamar, Domingo de la Cruz, who had found in the same Guarrazar cemetery, but in a different hole to the one already explored, other crowns and objects used for worship, presented himself at Aranjuez, where Queen Isabel was at the time. This man, after many ambiguous and roundabout proposals, having ascertained that no harm would come to him from the revelation he was about to make, and, above all, stimulated by the promises which, relying on the generosity of the Queen, the Intendant Don Antonio Flores cleverly let fall in the conversation, said he was the possessor of these treasures. The crafty rustic had them with him, but at the moment he did not say so, and only showed them when Flores, having obtained the consent of her Majesty, formally offered him, in the Queen’s name, a life-pension [4,000 reals a year], which from that day was religiously paid to him.”

The Armoury and the Cluny Museum probably contain only a half of the treasure of Guarrazar. As we have seen, much of it was broken up and melted down by the goldsmiths of Toledo. It is said that it comprised a beautiful golden dove, which came into the possession of a jeweller, who had so many qualms of conscience concerning it, that he at last took the drastic course of throwing it into the Tagus. That rapid stream must have received a good deal of Visigothic treasure since it first flowed under the arches of Toledo.

The crowns preserved at Madrid and the Cluny are not the official insignia of royalty, but offerings at the shrine. This is proved by the inscriptions on them, and by the fringe of pendants, which could not possibly have dangled over the royal countenance. The crown of King Suintila (numbered N1 in the catalogue), who reigned from 621 to 631, is formed by two semi-circles of double gold plate, joined by hinges, the resulting hoop being 0.220 in diameter, and 0.060 in height. The inside plate is plain. The outer hoop is encircled by three bands in relief, two being set with pearls and sapphires, and the middle and wider one designed with openwork rosettes, enriched with settings of the same stones. In its original state the crown had, hanging from its lower edge, a cross and twenty-two letters, making up the inscription, SVINTHILANVS REX OFFERET. All and each of the letters were actual jewels set in a vitreous substance, like enamel sockets, attached to which are brilliants, pearls, and pear-shaped sapphires hanging from each other in the order mentioned. Though only twelve letters were remaining, the dedication was skilfully reconstructed by SeÑores Madrazo and Amador de los Rio. The crown is suspended by four chains from an ornament composed of two golden lilies separated by a piece of rock crystal cut in facets. Each chain consists of four links, shaped like the leaf of the pear-tree. Hanging from one of these chains is a cross of beautiful workmanship, composed of pieces from two other crosses, belonging in all probability to two different crowns.

The exhibits N4 and N6 are floral ornaments similar to that from which the crown of Suintila is suspended. The votive crown of the Abbot Theodosius (N2) is of less elaborate workmanship and design; seven of its eight pendants of gold, pearls, and sapphires remain. Close to it (N3) is the Byzantine cross which, the letters stamped upon it in reverse order tell us, was offered by Bishop Lucetius. It has, likewise, seven pendants of gold and pear-shaped sapphires. The various articles in this collection do not differ appreciably in style and material, it is perhaps unnecessary to observe, from those of similar origin in the Cluny Museum. All exhibit the traces of Byzantine influence.

To the Visigothic era is also ascribed (Conde de Valencia thinks with good reason) a very ancient horse’s bit (F123—plate 9), found on a battlefield in Andalusia, and said to have been used by Witiza, the ill-fated Roderick’s predecessor. The mouthpiece does not differ greatly from the modern pattern, but in place of rings it has four oblong pieces pierced with holes for the reins and halter. These apertures form dragons’ heads and crosses, alternating with cruciform monograms. The bit is of unusual thickness, and the roughness of the work, together with the silver incrustation, complete its resemblance to other relics classified as Gothic or Scandinavian.

During the three centuries that followed the dreadful days of the Guadalete, the Spaniard must needs have looked well to his armour and his weapons: “In native swords and native ranks, the only hope of courage dwelt.” The sword industry of Toledo had passed under the control of the invaders, and we read that Abd-ur-Rahman II. (822-852) regulated and reformed it. One of the numerous friendly passages between Moor and Christian was marked by a gift of Toledan blades from Al Hakim II. to Sancho, Count of Navarre (865). Meanwhile, among the fastnesses of Asturias and the Pyrenees, the hard-pressed Spaniards were forging for themselves arms and armour against which the sword of the doughty Roland was shivered, and which successfully withstood the swift strong lance-thrusts of Saracen chivalry. Cut off though they were from the rest of the Christian world, the early defenders of Spanish liberty do not seem to have arrayed themselves for war in a fashion very different from that of their contemporaries. In the cathedral of Oviedo is preserved the Libro GoticÓ,[A] a curiously illuminated codex, where we see “armigers” carrying circular and kite-shaped shields, and wearing, in one case, what seems to be a hauberk of mail. The sepulchre of the three daughters of Ramiro I. of Aragon, dating from the last years of the eleventh century, is sculptured with the forms of three knights, two mounted and about to engage in combat, while the third, Samson-like, is forcing open the jaws of a monstrous beast. The cavaliers wear close-fitting caps, seemingly fluted, and very much like the chapelles-de-fer of a later age; long surcoats reaching below the knee, and decorated with ornamental borders at the neck, cuff, and openings; one is armed with a spear, the other with spear, sword, and kite-shaped shield with bosses; and both wear greaves or leg-armour of plate or leather. The horses are not provided with any defensive armour; the custom of “barding” chargers not being introduced till a much later date.

There is an extremely interesting manuscript in the British Museum called the Comentario Apocaliptica, said to have been executed between 1089 and 1109. It is frequently referred to by Hewitt, and throws much light on the armour of the period. We have reason to be grateful for the absurd practice persisted in by ancient illuminators and painters of depicting persons, supposed to have lived in Greek and Roman times, in the costume of their own day. One of the illuminations shows four knights mounted. They wear long coats of mail, reaching below the knees, with sleeves, which, in two cases, reach only to the elbows. In one case the coat of mail is shown as composed of blue scales, with red studs, and here we seem to have an instance of jazerine armour (from the Italian ghiazerino). It seems clear that the designer did not mean to represent chain-mail in this way, for when the body of the garment is obviously of mail he has taken care to distinguish a different pattern on the chausses or leg armour. Still in this class of illustration it is always a moot point what kind of armour the artist actually did mean to represent. Possibly a shirt of chain-mail was sometimes worn, with stockings of leather set with scales of metal, as more flexible and allowing greater freedom to the limbs. The shirts of mail are edged with wide borders, which may or may not represent the under tunic or gambeson showing beneath.

On fol. 194, we have the full-length picture of a warrior armed cap-À-pie. He wears a long hauberk of mail, chausses or leg-armour of the same material, and a conical helmet, with a “nasal” or nose-protector, exactly the same as that worn by William the Conqueror and his knights. Hewitt calls attention to the knop, or button, surmounting the helmet, as a peculiarity. The knight is armed with sword and spears, and, like the four others just mentioned, carries a circular target. This is a noteworthy detail, as kite-shaped shields were almost universally in vogue at this epoch, over the rest of Europe. That they were to some extent in use in Spain also, is attested by the specimen (O59) in the Armoury.

This is a kite-shaped war shield, probably of cedar wood. On both sides it is covered with parchment, and has strong straps of skin, lined with red velvet, for the grasp of the holder, and part of the strap by which it hung from his neck. Inside it seems to have been painted black; the outer side is slightly convex, and was adorned with stripes and other designs in colour and gilding on a red ground. This description of decoration was common in the twelfth century, but had no heraldic signification, the science of blazonry not being at that time well understood. Nothing definite is known as to the original owner of this shield, but it is not unlikely that it belonged to Don Gonzalo Salvadores, surnamed “Four Hands,” or to Don NuÑez AlvÁrez, both of whom were buried at the spot where it was found. Ramon Berenguer IV., Count of Barcelona (1131-1162) is represented on an engraved seal, reproduced in M. Auguste Demmin’s work on armour, carrying a kite-shaped shield. He wears the conical helmet with nasal and hauberk of mail, with camail or hood of mail, such as was generally worn, and the absence of which is worthy of remark in the warriors of the Apocaliptica. Thus early we are able to distinguish certain differences between the knightly harnesses of Aragon and Leon.

Such armour as is shown in the illuminated codex referred to, was no doubt worn by the redoubtable Cid, Ruy Diez de Bivar, whose stormy career extended from 1029 to 1099. The Poema del Cid, which relates his great achievements, was written unfortunately at least one hundred and eight years after his death, and therefore we cannot place absolute reliance upon the few details it contains as to his equipment. The following passages are of special interest to the student of arms and armour:

“Riven mail” in the original is loriga, a word obviously derived from the Latin lorica; but Mr. Ormsby, whose translation I give, is undoubtedly right in his rendering of the word, as cuirasses, or breastplates, were not worn in Spain for one hundred and fifty years after the date of the poem. Here is another passage of some technical interest:

[The Cid beholds approaching the army of the Count of Barcelona, and encourages his own followers.]

I am inclined to think that the linen-breeks, so scornfully alluded to, were the trousers or shalwars worn by Moorish auxiliaries of the Count. The word “leggings” in the original is “huesos” (French houseaux), which seems to mean the same things. But they are described as being worn on the chausses or stockings of mail, and may not impossibly have been greaves or defences of plate after the Roman pattern. These would seem to be an anachronism at the end of the eleventh century; but Don V. Carderera y Solano (Iconografia EspaÑola) says that there are in Spain several bas-reliefs of the twelfth century, which represent knights wearing pieces similar to the Roman ocreas. It is, on the whole, more likely that the huesos that protected the stout legs of the Cid were of the jazerine pattern—of leather faced with metal discs and strips.

The Armoury at Madrid was, till lately, believed to contain many relics of the great national hero, among them the Colada, a sword which the Conde de Valencia is satisfied belongs properly to the thirteenth century. The sword blade numbered G180 may, however, be ascribed, in the opinion of the same authority, to the eleventh century. It is double-edged, and ends in a round point. Down the greater part of its length runs a groove, on the sides of which are engraved and inlaid with gold certain letters and hieroglyphics, the meaning of which no one has so far deciphered. This blade was included in the treasury of Ferdinand and Isabel at Segovia, and corresponds closely enough with the description in the inventory of that collection of “a sword called Tizona, which belonged to the Cid.” There is, therefore, a strong probability that the weapon before us is actually that with which Ruy Diez de Bivar carved out a kingdom for himself in fair Valencia.

During the twelfth century the conical helmet with nasal began to fall into disuse, though it was worn in Germany as late as 1195. About the last quarter of the century the flat-topped, cylindrical heaulme, or helm, was generally adopted. It was nearly always cast in one piece, had two horizontal clefts for the vision, and was strengthened by bands crossing each other over the face.

The ruined monastery of Benevivere, in the Province of Palencia, contains the tomb and effigy, reproduced in the Iconografia EspaÑola, of Don Diego Martinez de Villamayor, sometime Chamberlain to Alfonso III. of Castile, who died in the odour of sanctity in the year 1176. The knight is clothed in a long and ample white tunic; over this is thrown a voluminous red mantle. Thus we cannot very well judge whether or not he wears armour; but as he is girt with a broad baldric, ornamented with studs, and clasps a cross-hilted sword, we may not unreasonably infer that he is in knightly gear, and that his spurs are buckled round leg-armour, which appears to be of plate.

If this assumption is warranted—and it is supported by the evidence of the bas-reliefs mentioned by Carderera—it would seem that the Spaniards had progressed more rapidly in the armourer’s craft than their contemporaries. Greaves, jambs, or leg-armour of plate, were unknown in Northern and Central Europe till the fourteenth century. Hewitt thinks they were of German origin because they are sometimes referred to in documents of that age as beinberga, from the German beinbergen. He admits that they might have been copied from the examples of classical times with which their wars in Italy would have familiarized the Teutons. “In the South of Europe the greaves were already become of a highly ornamental character, as we may see from the sculpture of Gulielmus de Balmis (1289), from a bas-relief in the Annunziata at Florence.” [The greaves are ornamented with floral devices and Écussons, and are strapped on to chausses of mail.] But in Spain we get a yet earlier example, even supposing the leg-armour on the Jaca and Benevivere effigies was not of this sort.

Don Bernaldo Guillen de Entenza was major-domo of Aragon, and one of the bravest knights in the train of King Jaime I. the Conqueror. He died a few days after the victory over the Moors at Enesa in 1237, and was buried at the Monastery of Puig, near Valencia. His sculptured figure reveals every detail of his apparel (see plate 2). He wears a hauberk of mail reaching to the middle of the thigh, and to the finger-tips, the fingers of the glove being separated; the face is framed in the hood of mail (camail), and the head protected by a round chapelle-de-fer, ornamented with studs, and a strengthening band. Over the hauberk is worn a sleeveless surcoat, embroidered at the breast and reaching below the knee; it is split up at the sides to allow greater freedom to the limbs. Both surcoat and hauberk are bordered with a fringe, except at the neck, where the surcoat seems to be edged with a setting of stones or studs. A baldric encircles the lower body, and supports a short, broad cross-hilted sword on the left hip, and a dagger or misere-corde on the right. The pommel of the dagger is carved into the resemblance of a grotesque human face.

The legs are protected by greaves of plate armour, with ornamental lengths up the middle. The knees appear to be furnished with genouillÈres or knee-caps of iron. The sollerets, pointed shoes, are of mail.

Here, then, in Aragon, in 1237, we find a knight armed with those defences which did not become common in Europe for another century. The circumstance, though it may not in itself appear to be of much importance, is interesting, as proving how quick was the Spaniard of that day to avail himself of the latest appliances and inventions of the age. Aragon, at least, seems to have kept pace with Italy, which is generally allowed to have set the fashion in military equipment. And we find that the armourer’s craft was sufficiently important at Barcelona to constitute a guild, which was existing in 1257.

In the citadel of Lerida there is a fine sepulchral monument showing us that valiant knight, Don Guillelmo Ramon de Moncada, Seneschal of Catalonia, armed cap-À-pie (see plate 3). He died about the middle of the thirteenth century. Like his brother-in-arms, at Puig, he wears the camail and hauberk. Over the forehead he wears a coronet, with shields and studs and gilt fleurs-de-lys. The surcoat, which shows the hauberk beneath, is tastefully embroidered with pearls, and is charged with eight Écussons, or shields, each supported by two doves. The garment must have been a beautiful work of art. The Seneschal wears jambs (leg-armour) and cuisses (thigh-armour) of plate, and what are unmistakably genouillÈres of the shell pattern. His shoes are likewise of plate. The armpits and elbows are protected by pieces new to us—the round plates, called palettes or rondels, elsewhere rarely found before the end of the century. Here again, and in the articulated fingers of the mail glove, we have evidence of the advanced condition of the armourer’s art in Spain. This is also demonstrated by a comparison of this effigy with one of identical date—that of a knight in Haseley Church, Oxfordshire (Hewitt, Vol. I., plate 46.) Here the armour is entirely of mail, neither jambs nor coudes (coudiÈres, elbow-plates) being shown. Nor are there any traces of the rich ornamentation seen on the Aragonese warriors’ surcoats and mantles.

These were the spacious days of Ferdinand of Castile and James of Aragon, when province after province, city after city, were wrested from the Moor, and the defeat of Roderick was wiped out on the very spot where he had endured it five hundred years before. Cordova, Valencia, Murcia, Seville, fell in turn before the Christian arms. The armourer-sergeants, wandering through the bazaars of the captured Moorish cities, and curiously examining the products of their dusky fellow-craftsmen, must doubtless have gleaned many new ideas and scraps of useful knowledge. Ibn-Said, born at Granada in 1214, has left it on record that in his time Murcia was renowned for its coats of mail, its cuirasses, and for every description of iron armour incrusted with gold; it was likewise celebrated for its saddles and harness richly gilt. In fact, continues the Moorish chronicler, for all articles of military equipment, such as bucklers, swords, quivers, arrows, and so forth, the workshops of Andalus surpassed those of any other country. He boasts the beautiful inlaid swords of Seville, which were not inferior to those of the Indies.[B] Cordova, the great centre of industry and refinement in the Peninsula, never achieved fame for its steel manufactures, but its oval leather shields (adargas) were known as early as the tenth century, and used all over Europe, but more particularly in Spain, in the fourteenth and fifteenth centuries.

Some interesting relics of Saint Ferdinand are enshrined in the Royal Armoury. The remains of the cloak in which the saintly King was buried (N9) are thus described in the Catalogue (see plate 1). “Its texture is of silk and gold, made like an Oriental tapestry, checkered, the first of the squares being crimson and a dirty white, with gold castles, and the second with red lions rampant, like those of the Spanish arms, but turned to the left of the shield. The border is woven in horizontal bands, a wide one in the centre, composed of graceful floral designs, blue and red, on a gold ground; two narrow ones, yellow, on the outer edges of the former, and outside these other two bands of Arab lacework of gold on a crimson ground.”

The azicates (long-necked Moorish spurs) of St. Ferdinand (F189 and 160) are of easily-worked iron. What remains of the incrustation of gold is adorned with little silver castles, similar heraldic devices in gilt being distinguishable on the springs of the straps.

The Conde de Valencia de San Juan endeavours to prove—and, I think, with success—that the sword numbered G21, believed at one time to be the Cid’s famous blade “Colada,” is no other than the “Lobera” of St. Ferdinand. How the name “Lobera” came to be applied to a sword is unknown. The Conde hazards a conjecture that it was named after a gentleman called Guillen Lobera, who is referred to in the memoirs of Jaime I. of Aragon. The word was first used in this connection by the Saint himself, who, on his death-bed, bequeathed to the Infante Manuel for all his inheritance, “his Lobera sword, which was of great virtue, and by means of which God had greatly helped him.”

Not less interesting is the passage in the chronicle of Alfonso XI., referring to the famous battle of Salado: “Then the King sent word to Don Juan, son of the Infante Manuel (grandson of Ferdinand), by a gentleman, to ask why he and those in the front did not pass the river. And an esquire, called Garci Jofre Tenoryo, son of the Admiral killed by the Moors, who was a vassal of the King and in the front, said to Don Juan, that his Lobera sword, which he said had virtue, would do the most work that day.”

The blade (see plate 4) is smooth, double-edged, and round-pointed; on both sides for two-thirds of its length it is grooved, like most swords of that time. Inside both grooves are certain signs or letters, engraved and gilded, which the Conde de Valencia reads as the words—Si, si, No, non. This somewhat cryptic inscription, the learned antiquary explains as being part of the motto of St. Ferdinand, which may be roughly translated—“Let your yea be yea, and your nay be nay.” The hilt is of the sixteenth century, and was the work of Salvador de Avila, a swordmaker of Toledo, who died in 1539.

Next to this sword is another of the same era (G22), erroneously attributed to Roland, the famed Paladin of the eighth century. It is not impossible that this also was one of St. Ferdinand’s weapons. It is very long and broad, thin and flexible, double-edged, scallop-pointed, and grooved for two-thirds of its length. The groove is engraved with rings or circles, and ends in an elaborate cruciform device. The guard, of massive silver-gilt, has quillons drooping and curving inward, and bears the arms of Castile on one side and those of Leon on the other. The hilt is of wood, plated with silver; the pommel is of iron, and is plated with silver-gilt. The plates were once covered with filigree work. The scabbard is of wood, sheathed in silver-gilt plate, and covered with lace-work, essentially Morisco in character. Of the seventy-five stones originally set in this filigree, only the half remain, including a large amethyst and three engraved stones of the classical style and period (plate 5).

Shields had not changed much since the preceding century to judge from the specimen numbered D60. Like the twelfth century shield next to it, it is of wood covered with parchment, and has grips of skin. On the obverse may be traced the design of a hood, which has led Don Leocadio Salazar to conclude that the shield was the property of the Conde de Bureba, four hoods being on his coat of arms. The epitaph on that illustrious personage’s tomb declares that “he filled Spain with the fame of his name, as Themistocles did Athens.”

Our last instance of a Spanish suit of armour of the thirteenth century illustrates a curious fashion in military attire that often has occupied the attention of experts. The statue of Don Berenguer de Puigvert, in the suppressed Monastery of Poblet, represents him clothed in a full and richly embroidered surcoat, confined at the waist by a baldric, beneath which he is wearing a complete suit of banded armour of a very elaborate pattern. On the forearm the mail seems to be composed of rings placed end to end vertically instead of horizontally. The gauntlets and leg-armour are composed of alternate horizontal bands, some showing a zig-zag pattern; the others, perhaps rings set vertically. Banded mail of various designs seems to have been fashionable all over Europe at the close of the thirteenth century. Hewitt enumerates four examples in English statuary. He expounds the various theories advanced to explain the nature of this armour, and finally confesses that the riddle is still unsolved. As Aragon seems in all improvements in armour to have kept well ahead of the rest of the world, we need not be surprised to find there an example of what was evidently a fashionable style in Europe generally.

The headpiece universally worn at this time was the heaulme or helm. About the middle of the century the aventail, or hinged opening for the face, was introduced, and accordingly we find St. Ferdinand (represented in the windows of Chartres Cathedral) wearing a casque with an aventail cleft with three vertical slits. The camail was still generally worn under the heaulme, which rested not only on the head but on the shoulders of the wearer, and was secured by a chain. It was too heavy to wear habitually, and was, therefore, carried at the saddle, or by the esquire, to be put on at the approach of an enemy. Steel caps also were often worn underneath; but much must obviously have depended on the degree of strength and foolhardiness possessed by the individual.

“From the collection of mediÆval ‘Proverbs,’” remarks the author we have so often quoted, Mr. Hewitt, “we learn that Spain was the favourite mart for the knightly charger. Denmark and Brittany had also a celebrity for their breeds of horses of a different character. The fiat of popular approval is given to the—

“Such was the nature of the high-bred dextrarius that, when two knights had dismounted, and were continuing the fight on foot, their horses, left to themselves, instantly commenced a conflict of their own of the most gallant and desperate character.” Bucephalus and Pegasus were inferior steeds in comparison.

NOTE

The representation of armour on tombs and sepulchral effigies was subject, during the Middle Ages, to regulations, which throw light on the rank and the circumstances of the death of the deceased. In Carderera’s Iconografia we find the following ordinances ascribed to the Emperor Charles V. They are probably merely a recapitulation of enactments which had been in force several centuries:—

“If any person during his life shall have accomplished any notable feat of arms, or gained honour in the lists, he shall be shown armed de pied-en-cap, helmet on his head, visor raised, and hands joined. His sword shall be at his side, and his spurs on. These shall be of gold if he shall have been an armed knight; otherwise he shall have none.

“If he shall have gained no honours in the lists, he shall have the visor lowered, and his helmet shall be placed beside him.

“If he shall not have distinguished himself in the tourney, but shall have died on the field of battle, contributing to the victory, he shall be represented armed de pied-en-cap, visor lowered, naked sword in his hand, the point upwards, and his shield in his left hand. If he shall have been of the vanquished, he shall be represented armed de pied-en-cap, his sword in its sheath, visor raised, his hands joined, and his spurs put on. If he shall have been made prisoner and died on the field or in captivity, he shall be represented as in the preceding article, but without spurs and with empty scabbard.

“All these personages may be represented in their surcoats, if they shall have taken part in a pitched battle, at which the Prince in whose pay they shall have been, shall have been present; otherwise, they shall not be thus represented, unless they be of the rank of King, Prince, Duke, Marquis, Count, or Baron.

“No man, howsoever noble, shall be represented in his surcoat unless he be the Lord and Proprietor of the Church or Chapel, or the successor (? descendant) of the Lord and Proprietor.

“If any person shall have followed the wars as a man-at-arms, he may be represented armed, but without surcoat and helmet.

“No one shall be represented with a fringe to his surcoat, unless he be of the rank of Baron.”

It should be said in conclusion, that these rules were not always strictly observed, and cannot be relied upon in the absence of corroborative testimony from other sources.