Talk:Jousting

message: And does not conform to any standard of accuracy. It will need to be completely revised to more reflect historical reality. For starters, what it's ostensibly about is TILTING, not "jousting." What are the sources for three passes and the if-they're-both-dismounted-they-set-to-with-swords? What the heck is a rondel? A rondel dagger? See Barber and Barker for starters, also Muhlberger, and Anglo's various works. It is articles like this that cause college professors (i.e., me) to mock and denigrate Wikipedia and give lousy grades to students who cite it.
Ken Mondschein 04:57, 26 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: dear college professor, this article is in an early stage of development, and doesn't cite a single source. It is absolutely undisputed that Wikipedia has a large number of articles like it; you should not "denigrate" Wikipedia for that, you should rather denigrate students who do not distinguish between cited and uncited claims. Wikipedia is the perfect place to develop that critical attitude. I am adding , agreeing that this article needs a lot of work. dab (ᛏ) 10:35, 1 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: As a topic of interest to me (I know basically nothing about it), I would like to both educate myself and provide some help to wikipedia about Jousting. Since this article is in need of heavy revision, I am willing to undertake that. I must ask, first, what portions of it are incorrect - do historical inaccuracies abound, or is the writing and organization simply...bad? I suppose, a more clear question would be: is the article factually incorrect? I'll begin work on this today. -- Xiliquiern 15:08, 8 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: This article is awful

message: I propose Jousting and Tournament (medieval) be merged. WAS 4.250 18:03, 22 August 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: I would disagree. Medieval tournaments were much more than jousting. There can be two articles. Stbalbach 18:11, 22 August 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Merge articles

message: It looks like this article was significantly expanded since it was listed on Requests for expansion in August of 2004. Although it isn't clear whether all the above possibilities for expansion were followed up on, I think that it is unlikely that anyone will notice it so far down on the requests page (actually, on a secondary page). I am removing the listing. Please re-list it under the current date, if you feel it is appropriate. --DavidConrad 01:50, 25 September 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Delisting Expansion

message: This article is image-heavy and probably needs to have images removed.  Here is a possible improvement from Wikimedia Commons: Durova 05:12, 15 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Images 

message: What was the sport called when two teams of knights met at a tournament and fought in a melee, or is that only a Victorian fantasy? --Philip Baird Shearer 10:01, 1 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: It was called "Tournament". Jousting is a later "civil" (chivalric) introduction, tournament was initially just a giant free-for-all "mock" battle that had no boundaries and could over-run villages which would be destroyed in the action (knights were more likely to die in tournament than battle). -- Stbalbach 13:43, 1 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Teams

message: The top of the page is getting a little crowded.  How many links warrant a disambiguation?
:Done. Easy enough. Really if there are any links at the top it could be disambiguated. -- Stbalbach 14:24, 25 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Ah.  Thank you.--Vercalos 21:34, 25 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Disambiguation? 

message: The whole section regarding the English type of joust is rubbish. Most (if not all) jousts had the most common intention of breaking a lance. Just further evidence that this aticle needs a complete re-write.
:That particular fact(that the article needs a re-write) has been established.--Vercalos 07:41, 6 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  English joust 

message: I suggest these be trimmed a bit.  Usually 2 to 3 are enough.  Extra info rather than all the groups out there.Peter Rehse 09:59, 19 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: External Links

message: Just a general question I suppose.  Why does this article on jousting fall under the Martial Arts project!?!
That makes no sense!
Anyone, feel free to explain the connection to me.
—Preceding unsigned comment added by 5thperiodmun (talk • contribs) 
Why is jousting NOT a martial art? Just because it is equestrian and not Asian - does this disqualify it?! It is a very pure "combat sport" just like many so- called martial arts and probably closer to ist's martial roots than something like judo! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 144.131.199.240 (talk • contribs) 
Jousting is part of what is now being referenced as "Western Martial Arts" as opposed to "Eastern Martial Arts" which is what most people think of when simply using the words "Martial Arts." I haven't read into the martial arts guidelines, but at the very least there should be a distinction between the two within that. Sethholmes (talk) 13:31, 5 April 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Martial Arts Project 

message: I've added a tag to a new article I am working on about Medieval horses.  In the process, I noted that the information on horses here contains inaccuracies (like the rest of the article).  I hope to come back sometime and improve things.  If anyone else is keen to work on revising this article as per suggestions listed throughout this talk page, drop me a note on my talk page, and we can perhaps work together on it. Gwinva 20:16, 6 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Horses

message: Does anyone have a source to support the use of riding something other than a horse to train for the joust? I'm also removing that bit about being hit by the Quintain hitting a rider. As this is only possible if the horse decides to stop a fraction of a second after you've hit it.--Talroth 18:38, 14 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I saw that in a fiction  movie, maybe that the source for the claim... WAS 4.250 23:05, 14 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm not sure the source of this myth, and it isn't so much of a true myth as it is that people see it as happening all the time. It is possible but highly unlikely. If I can find it, I'll post the math showing how you need to really screw with the numbers to get hit by it, either an insanely long lance, or manage to hit the target with a massive force while going very slowly. Or simply hitting it and pulling your horse to a stop right beside it. This is one of those things right along with knights needing help to get into the saddle (as in from a crane), or not being able to get up once they fall down.--Talroth 01:07, 15 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I think this article's main contributors are fans of A Knight's Tale (even linked in the article!!), well-meaning re-enactors who add links to their own group, and readers of questionable historic fiction.  As many have moaned before me, this article consists of a lot of poorly written nonsense.  Just look at the reference list, for starters: no reputable historians at all, just enthusiasts peddling their own assumptions.  Probably best to rewrite it completely in a sandbox, then replace this, rather than trying to paste over the cracks.  It's been on my "to-do" list for ages, but I haven't had time to do more than patrol vandalism. Gwinva 07:22, 15 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Read  ww.nipissingu.ca/department/history/muhlberger/froissart/gauvain.htm The Chronicles of Froissart and Froissart's Chronicles. Froissart goes on and on and on in several places about entire tournaments giving detail after detail. The only one I found not boring was the one I added to the article about a joust actually stopping a war! It is as if during WWI, the germans and french had stopped fighting for a day or two to play a football game between soldiers trying to look gallent for the ladies. WAS 4.250 07:50, 15 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Try Ulrich von Liechtenstein's Service of Ladies.  Consists almost entirely of 'We went to Thistown, there we didst fight seven knights of great repute, afterwhich we didst repair to Thattown, where we unhorsed eight knights.'  All rhyming, of course. :) Gwinva 15:36, 15 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Training

message: Armor is normaly spelled without the "U" and nobody described what chain mail even is, and why are all of those words in (     ), they don't have to. Duuuh
--Joordaann 12:16, 5 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  The Armor 

message: what is this?? 
and i am looking at jousting for my history project  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.145.8.6 (talk) 19:30, 8 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm not sure what you're asking.  But contributions are always welcome on Wikipedia.  See Wikipedia:Introduction.  Gwinva 20:10, 8 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  hi 

message: "Joust is usually pronounced as 'jowst' in the United States. But the word derives from Latin and Old French and is more properly pronounced as 'joost.'"
I removed this for 4 reasons:
# It's plopped into the middle of a section about the medieval joust--not a very good place for modern pronunciation discussion.
# English pronunciation has little to nothing to do with its Old French or Latin derivations. "More properly pronounced" smacks of POV.
# The information is uncited.
# The Oxford English Dictionary lists the pronunciation as "( /ˈdʒaʊstɪŋ/ , formerly /ˈdʒuːstɪŋ/ , /ˈdʒʌstɪŋ/ )". The OED is not an American dictionary. Running From Zombies (talk) 11:22, 4 December 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Pronunciation of "Joust" 

message: It is my understanding that the horses used were trained to run in a lateral gait, that is right front, right rear, then left front left rear motion.  This is generally called an amble.  I do not know if this is accurate, but would be very interested in having the article include consideration of the gait of the horses and reasons therefore.
216.210.66.38 (talk) 21:12, 11 February 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  gaits 

message: In history and in the modern day, was it standard to pass on the opponent's left side? And was there a rule that only the right (outside) hand could be used to hold the lance? Fotoguzzi (talk) 07:51, 29 February 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  passing side 

message: "joust" vs. "tilt" vs. "tilt barrier" vs. "list".
It turns out that "tilt" was used as a synonym of "joust" from about 1510.
It is also known that "tilt" meant "cloth covering" in the 15th century, and that a cloth barrier was sometimes used for jousts in the late 14th to early 15th century, and that this barrier became wooden palisades in the 15th.
I think it is a theory based on this that "tilt" originally referred to the barrier. I need to find out if this sense of the word is actually attested, but so far it seems not to be.
The problem is that the modern sense of "tilt" (to lean, etc.) develops only in the 16th century, so tilt in the meaning of "joust" cannot be derived from that sense; if anything, it's the other way round, but it is a difficult case, because there is also tyltan "to waddle", etc. in Old English, completely unrelated to teld > telt > tilt "tent; cloth cover".
The way it looks to me, there was tilt "cloth cover", which was used of the cloth barrier in the 15th century, and "to go to the tilt" meant to go jousting. The barrier was then made of wood, and people forgot that "tilt" had referred to the barrier, as "tilting" now just meant "jousting", and so "a tilt" was backformed to mean "a joust". This process happened during the 15th century and was complete by 1510. The barrier formerly known as "tilt" was now the "tilt barrier".
As for "list", the claim that this meant the list of names of combattants is entirely spurious. This sense of "list" only arises after the end of the era of jousting. 
Scott uses "list" in the sense of "fence delimiting the tournament field" (not the "tilt barrier"), but I do not know if this is an invention of Scott's, or if he is basing this on Middle English use. --dab (𒁳) 12:21, 9 April 2012 (UTC)
thread_title: Terminology

message: What about the field, the grounds, the arena, the soil, dimensions, composition of covering, enclosures, and space for spectators, that is all the physical details of an arena or a sports field? That is all the staging elements, as the surrounding space of the action.
This article is only on the action and the history, nothing on the theatrical or sporting environment.
--ROO BOOKAROO (talk) 01:18, 1 June 2013 (UTC)
thread_title: What's missing is information on the physical space for the jousting

message: Here is a question please be so kind to include an answer to if you happen to find it in a reliable source:
Iconography always shows the horses running on the right side of the barrier (the barrier is always to their left)
This means that, since it is held in the right hand, the lance has to cross above the horse's neck to meet the other knight's armor or shield.
The contrary (horses running on the left side of the barrier, i.e. barrier to their right) seems so much simpler (always assuming the lance is held in the right hand, of course).
So why was the more awkward convention used? Any idea?
Thanks
Contact Basemetal here 22:36, 9 January 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: That must be due to the fact, that the knights are trying to hit eachother's shields which is more difficult if you do it "left-handed". Riding on the right side of the barriere allows the knight to turn in his saddle to hit the other even when have they almost passed eachother. Doing it on the left side of the barrier possibly makes the risk of hitting the man and not the shield much higher. Toxophilus (talk) 09:51, 9 May 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Question ("right-hand jousting") 

message: Lists (jousting) redirects here. But what is/are Lists in the context of jousting? -- Kajdron (talk) 09:05, 8 March 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: The common definition of "the lists" is the area or enclosure in which the joust takes place. You can scroll up to the Terminology section where another user discusses it. 63.140.68.100 (talk) 09:24, 5 May 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Lists 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Jousting. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20131228080515/http://www.hrp.org.uk/NewsAndMedia/Pressresources/NewsAndMediaPressresourcesTOLTournamentattheTower to http://www.hrp.org.uk/NewsAndMedia/Pressresources/NewsAndMediaPressresourcesTOLTournamentattheTower
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 16:20, 1 December 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: That date range is not "over a month" in my book, so something seems to be wrong. 46.223.43.217 (talk) 05:57, 9 November 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  "From 10 July to 9 August 1434" "for over a month" 

message: will give you a day or so to add a source to this piece of content you added, after which it will be removed if it is still unsourced. Feel free to copy the relevant citation over from that linked page if so desired, thanks. Spiritual Transcendence (talk) 06:35, 2 May 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Note about unsourced content