Project Outline
Research Question: I am studying the judicial duel in medieval Europe, because I want to find out how they were performed and the reasons why they were conducted, in order to understand what a judicial duel looked like in Western Europe during the Middle Ages.
Working Thesis: “What was the significance of the judicial duel as it existed in Western Europe during the Middle Ages, and what did a typical duel look like?”
Organization Guide: Because the topic of the judicial duel in western Europe is extremely broad with numerous individual cultural nuances, laws, and events, the best way to organize the information I am trying to present is chronologically. I want visitors to explore how different parts of western Europe viewed the judicial duel at different points during the Middle ages, with examples scattered throughout. I also want to add a map that shows where each of the duels I’m referencing occurred.
Introductory Paragraph – “What was the judicial duel, and why did it occur?”
This paragraph would act as an introduction to the exhibit and would feature on the home page. Beneath it, a timeline of the judicial duel would act as an interactive tool that visitors could use to view important events.
The judicial duel, or “trial by combat” as it is more commonly known, was a legally codified practice within the many kingdoms of western Europe during the Middle Ages where two individuals would fight in a prearranged time and place in order to resolve a civil or criminal dispute. Unlike honor duels, which were private affairs fought over perceived insults and slights (https://www.britannica.com/topic/duel), a trial by combat was quite literally a trial in the legal sense- judicially sanctioned by the court systems as a legitimate means of resolving legal issues. While this practice might seem odd to us from a modern standpoint, the idea of forcing the accused to undergo an “ordeal” to prove their innocence is a concept that was heavily ingrained in the religious societies of Medieval Europe. As there was no surefire method of detecting perjury in the Middle Ages, it was believed that the only recourse in cases where the crime was serious and the truth needed to be ascertained was to place the matter into God’s hands. Many different ordeals existed during this period, such as the trial by water, the trial by fire, and the bleeding ordeal, which along with the trial by combat served to determine the innocence of the accused in the absence of credible witnesses (https://pages.uoregon.edu/dluebke/Witches442/442Week03–Ordeal&Torture.html). In the case of the judicial duel, it was held that regardless of the differences in skill and ability of the two combatants, God would intervene in order to ensure that the righteous party would prevail (https://brewminate.com/trial-by-combat-judicial-duels-in-the-middle-ages/).
While judicial duels occurred all throughout medieval Europe during this time period, they were most common in England, France, and particularly the Holy Roman Empire. Each locale had its own rules, traditions, and practices regarding which crimes were worthy of a duel, the legal proceedings of the trial, how the fight would be arranged, and the weapons and equipment used to equip the fighters.
Body Paragraphs – Timeline of Judicial Dueling
- Originated in Western Europe as an ancient Germanic custom, chronicled by both Caesar and Tacitus in their works (https://www.britannica.com/topic/duel). Roman law set no precedent for ordeals, practice only became widespread after the fall of the Roman Empire.
- (501 AD) The Lex Burgundionum written in 501 A.D. by King Gundobad of Burgundy and his son, Sigismund, was the first system of law to legally encode the trial by combat as a valid means of resolving cases where no conclusive verdict can be ascertained by other means. (https://www-jstor-org.mutex.gmu.edu/stable/j.ctt3fhn4j.6?seq=38 p. 52)
- (620 AD) A notable early example of a judicial duel during this time period is a duel that took place in Lombardy sometime in the 620s A.D. between the courtiers Adalulf and Pillon. Gundeberga, Queen of the Lombards, had at one point rebuffed Adalulf’s advances towards her. In response, Adalulf lied to King Arioald, informing him that his wife intended to murder him and marry another man. Gundeberga was placed under house arrest while the King presided over the case. It was eventually decided that the matter should be resolved by a judicial duel. Gundeberga’s cousin, Pillon, offered to serve as champion for his cousin. In the ensuing battle, Pillion won and Adalulf was killed. (https://archive.org/details/histoiredesfranc02greg/page/210/mode/2up and https://archive.org/stream/histoiredesfranc02greg/histoiredesfranc02greg_djvu.txt p. 211)
- (979 AD) Emperor Otto II of the Holy Roman Empire expressly prescribed the use of the judicial duel for resolving legal matters. In one instance, Gero, Graf von Alsleben, was accused by a Saxon Knight, Waldo, of a serious crime in 979. While the details of the crime and the legal proceedings are not mentioned by the chronicler, Bishop Thietmar of Merseburg, it is noted that the Emperor prescribed a trial by combat to discern the truth of the matter. In the course of the fight, Waldo stunned Gero with a blow to the head. Reveling in his victory, Waldo stepped out of the arena and disarmed, only to drop dead of his wounds. While Gero had technically won the combat, Otto II decreed that Gero was still guilty and had him executed by beheading. This was a very unpopular move on the Emperor’s part. (https://archive.org/details/thietmarimersebu00thieuoft/page/52/mode/2up)
- (1127 AD) The book The Murder of Charles the Good by Galbert of Bruges (https://archive.org/details/dli.ernet.214520) tells the story of the duel between Guy of Steenvoorde and Herman the Iron. Guy of Steenvoorde was accused of aiding one of the murderers of Charles the Good, Count of Flanders. Herman the Iron, a loyal servant of the murdered Charles, offered to fight Guy of Steenvoorde in a judicial duel. After a brutal fight, the wounded Herman grabbed Guy of Steenvoorde and “and threw him from him, breaking open all the lower parts of his body by this grabbing throw so that the prostrate Guy grew weak and cried out that he was defeated and was going to die.” (https://www.medievalists.net/2015/11/the-duel-between-guy-of-steenvoorde-and-iron-herman/). Having lost the duel, Guy was hanged.
- (1163 AD) Henry of Essex, the Baron of Rayleigh, was accused of treason by Robert of Monfort on account of his actions at the Battle of Coleshill. As one of King Henry II’s Constables, Henry of Essex was charged with carrying the King’s standard. During the course of the battle, Henry dropped the standard, which was considered a sign that the King had been killed. Had Henry II actually died, the English army would likely have routed, losing them the battle. As such, Robert of Montfort (who had claims upon Henry’s wife’s inheritance) accused Henry of Essex of treason. While King Henry II took no notice of the act at the time of the battle, attributing it to sudden terror as opposed to a willful act of treason, he believed that the accusation was so serious it needed to be decided by judicial duel. Robert of Montfort prevailed in the ensuing duel, and Henry of Essex was taken to a local monastery where his wounds were treated. Henry was allowed to remain there as a monk, having forfeited his lands and titles by taking monastic vows. (https://books.google.com/books?id=50WiGEW3HdsC&pg=PA6&source=gbs_selected_pages&cad=1#v=onepage&q&f=false)
- (1386 AD) The duel between Jean de Carrouges and Jacques le Gris is one of the most well-known cases of a judicial duel in Medieval Europe. The defendant, Jacques le Gris, was accused by Jean de Carrouges’s wife, Marguerite, of rape. As Jacques le Gris was well liked by the Comte de Alençon, both he and Jean’s liege lord, Marguerite’s accusation was dismissed. Seeking justice for his wife, Jean appealed directly to King Charles VI and brought the case before the court of sovereign appeals. After a lengthy trial, King Charles allowed Jean to challenge Jacques to a duel in order to decide the matter. Jean de Carrouges prevailed in the brutal fight that followed, proving Jacques’s guilt before the eyes of the court. (https://www.historyextra.com/period/medieval/medieval-trial-by-combat-real-history-behind-last-duel/ and https://brewminate.com/trial-by-combat-judicial-duels-in-the-middle-ages/)
Sources:
McIntosh, Matthew. “‘Trial by Combat’: Judicial Duels in the Middle Ages.” Brewminate: A Bold Blend of News and Ideas (blog), April 22, 2021. https://brewminate.com/trial-by-combat-judicial-duels-in-the-middle-ages/.
Bartlett, Robert. Trial by fire and water: The medieval judicial ordeal. Brattleboro, VT: Echo Point Books & Media, 2014.
Deacon, Jacob Henry. “When It Wasn’t a Game: SINGLE COMBAT DURING THE HUNDRED YEARS’ WAR.” Medieval Warfare 7, no. 3 (2017): 35–39.
Galbert, de Bruges, James Bruce Ross, and Medieval Academy of America. The Murder of Charles the Good. Toronto ; Buffalo : Published by University of Toronto Press in association with the Medieval Academy of America, 1982. http://archive.org/details/murderofcharlest00galb.
Jager, Eric. The last duel: A true story of crime, scandal, and trial by Combat. New York, NY: Crown, 2021.
Janin, Hunt. Medieval justice: Cases and laws in France, England and Germany, 500-1500. Jefferson, NC: Mcfarland, 2009.
Musson, Anthony, and Nigel Ramsay. Courts of chivalry and admiralty in late medieval Europe. Suffolk: Boydell & Brewer, 2018.
Sieveking, A. Forbes. “Duelling and Militarism.” Transactions of the Royal Historical Society 11 (December 1917): 165–84. https://doi.org/10.2307/3678440.
Weinert, Jörn. Die dresdner bilderhandschrift des sachsenspiegels: Studien zur Schreibsprache. Köln ; Weimar ; Wien: Böhlau Verlag, 2007.