Friday, May 27, 2011
First I ask: A lord has his whole army before a city and is besieging it, and that lord has many captains, and from other countries than his own. A man-at-arms who belongs to one of those captains leaves the army and goes to demand a stroke of the lance from one of the men-at-arms of the city, who sallies forth to deliver him. And having met him in combat, the companion from the city bears the one from the army out of the saddle with a stroke of the lance and takes the horse and leads it away into the city. And this was done in the morning. And that same day, when evening comes, another companion from the army, who belongs to a different captain than the first, goes to demand a stroke of the lance from those in the city. And the companion from the city who won the horse in the morning mounts the horse which he has won and goes out to deliver the companion from the army. So it happens that the companion from the army knocks the one from the city to the ground and takes the horse and leads it away to the army. Then he who lost the horse in the morning comes and demands it back as his own; and the one who won it in the evening says no. Many good arguments are put forward on one side or the other. How will it be judged by the law of arms?
Posted by Steve Muhlberger at 9:22 PM