Medieval Hunting

by Richard Almond

  The wolf was widespread in mainland Europe, and to a lesser extent in Britain, during the later Middle Ages.53 Fébus confirms this in the beginning of his chapter on the nature of the wolf, saying ‘Lou est assez commune beste, si ne me convient ja dire de sa faisson, quar pou de genz sont qui bien n’en aient veu’.54 Medieval man had an ambivalent attitude towards the wolf; peasants feared and hated the beast as it was a public danger to stock and human life whereas hunters appreciated its natural abilities. The wolf’s strength, speed, strong scent and self-confidence made it an interesting and challenging quarry.55 The wolf was also a dangerous and cunning beast to hunt. Wolf hunting was complex, required thought and proper preparation, and according to John Cummins, it also presented ‘an economic insouciance beyond the possibilities of the average yeoman’.56 Thus the considerable outlay necessary for successful wolf hunting in itself made the sport an aristocratic preserve. Included in The Boke of Huntyng as a beast of venery,57 the wolf must have qualified on its sporting potential alone as its flesh is totally inedible.

  Gaston Fébus rated the wolf highly, giving it far more folio space in his book than the hare, but then he admired the strength and fighting qualities of quarry in preference to their social values. The Master of Game places the wolf between the wild boar and fox in chapter order, as does Fébus, but Edward omits the later chapters on hunting and trapping the wolf, probably for reasons of snobbery. The large amount of space allocated to the wolf in both Les livres du roy Modus et de la royne Ratio and Livre de chasse indicates its high status as a quarry species hunted by the nobility in France.58

  In Germany the attitude towards wolves appears more practical than sporting. Wolves were regarded as vermin with no legal restrictions on their hunting and trapping. This was probably a response to the threat posed by their large numbers in rural Germany. They are briefly mentioned in some German sources, but as Dalby comments ‘these animals were not normally chased by noble sportsmen, in Mediaeval Germany’.59 Wolves appear occasionally in manuscript illustrations, such as in the February bas de page of the Calendar of MS Egerton 1146, in which a wolf is being pulled down by hounds, the hunter galloping up to despatch the beast with his drawn sword.60

  In England, the Norman kings enjoyed wolf hunting on horseback with hounds and wolf hunting tenures were common, probably surviving for some time beyond the wolf. For example, in 1370 Thomas Engaine held lands in Pitchley on condition that he provide dogs (wolfhounds) to be used in the hunting and destruction of wolves and foxes; in 1427 Robert Plumpton held wolf-hunt land in Nottingham ‘for the winding of a horn’ and wolf chasing in Sherwood Forest.61 Edward I organised a largely successful campaign to exterminate wolves, employing a certain Peter Corbet to take and destroy all the wolves in Gloucestershire, Worcestershire, Herefordshire, Shropshire and Staffordshire.62 Records confirm the presence of wolves at Marske, west of Richmond in the North Riding of Yorkshire, until 1369. John of Gaunt, Duke of Lancaster, was for a time Lord of the Swale Marches in Yorkshire, and he hunted a vast chase stretching from Wensleydale to Stanemoor (sic) which abounded with wolves and great herds of red deer. Traditionally, John of Gaunt is credited with personally slaying the last wild wolf in England, near Leeds.63 The final documentary evidence in England mentioning wolves dates from 1394 to 1396, and records that the monks of Whitby were paid 10s 9d ‘for tawing 14 wolfskins’, indicating the survival of wolf packs on the North Yorkshire Moors. It is likely that wolves were hunted to near extinction in England by the end of the fourteenth century with odd pockets of breeding pairs holding out in the remoter areas of the northern hills and forests. In Scotland they survived until the early seventeenth century; the last positive record is of an enormous bounty of £6 13s 4d paid for a wolf slain in Sutherland in 1621. In Ireland there were wolves until the early eighteenth century, the last ones being killed in County Cork between 1709 and 1710.64 In the seventeenth century they must have still posed a considerable threat to stock and humans, as the Irish Council offered cash bounties on wolves: £6 for a bitch, £5 for a dog and 40s for a cub.65

  Overall, hunting this fierce and cunning beast par force not only tested the hunter’s own abilities and courage to the full, important aspects for the true venator, but was also a public indication of superior economic and social standing. Undoubtedly, wolf hunting, like bear hunting, was a more restricted aristocratic sport than stag, boar or hare hunting, only appealing to fanatical aficionados of venery.

  Although it is perhaps obvious that for the single reason of food procurement alone hunting must have been a universal necessity and pastime for medieval man, both the English and continental sources unequivocally testify that certain forms of venery were reserved for, and restricted to, the ruling élites. The hunting manuals and treatises specify not only quarry species but also methodology, vocabulary, ritual and procedure. However, this information is not restricted to the hunting books; it is also commonly encountered in the romantic and imaginative literature of the period. The hunting passages in Sir Gawain and the Green Knight and The Parlement of the Thre Ages are cases in point. Both these late fourteenth-century Middle English poems contain detailed descriptions of how animals were hunted and properly broken-up, set within a rural or romantic context.66 As has been indicated already, this type of literature was written for a courtly audience and an understanding of hunting language and methods was integral to its production and presentation. A.C. Spearing comments on this élitism of procedure and vocabulary ‘There is a proper way of doing everything, even cutting up the dead beast, and knowledge of this way is a prerogative of the aristocracy and their skilled servants.’67

  Nobles were ‘lerned’ in the language and techniques of hunting as a result of their education and Spearing likens this upper-class learnedness to the most sacred rites of Catholicism, referring to the élitist vocabulary as the ‘liturgy’ of the aristocratic ‘sacrament’,68 so highlighting its quasi-sacred importance within court society. To be conversant with hunting jargon was not only a social necessity, it also defined a person as belonging to the ruling classes.

  In addition, pictorial images were almost invariably of animals and birds being hunted in particular ways, the accepted aristocratic ways. The great majority of illustrations contain two of the vital elements of aristocratic hunting, horses and hounds. Dalby remarks on this definitive European practice ‘The classic form of the mediaeval hunt was the open stag chase, i.e. the pursuit of a stag with horses and hounds’.69 There are numerous references in English, French and German sources to this traditional method of hunting the stag, and to a lesser degree, the hare. The fallow deer, roebuck, boar, wolf, bear and fox, were also hunted by nobles in this manner. So, as with literature, members of the audience were presented with upper-class imagery with which they could identify, reinforcing the idea of exclusiveness which appears increasingly necessary to the ruling élites in the later Middle Ages.

  The classic method of hunting on horseback with a pack of hounds was known as par force de chiens, or ‘by strength of hounds’. Gaston Fébus describes ‘a force’ hunting in great detail, devoting two of his lengthier chapters to this method of stag and hare hunting ‘Si devise comment le bon veneur doit chassier et prendre le cerf a foursse’, and ‘Ci devise comment le bon veneur doit chassier et prendre le lievre a foursse’.70 Roy Modus uses the term ‘a forche’ in the same manner.71 Two fourteenth-century German allegorical works, Hadamar’s Jagd and the anonymous Die Jagd der Minne provide details of this method of the chase and its terminology.72

  At this point it is necessary to provide a short description of a day’s par force hunting in order to understand the context and significance of literary and illustrative sources, and some of the vocabulary of aristocratic hunting. The rare full and many partial descriptions of the chase which survive from the Middle Ages have enabled modern scholars to present a comprehensive and detailed reconstruction of this method of hunting. Similar sequences, using slightly differing terminology owing to distinct l
inguistic sources, can be found in two recent works, The Stag of Love and The Lexicon of the Mediaeval German Hunt.73

  Hunters rose early to quest, probably having gone out the evening before to locate and move a warrantable stag, preferably a hart of ten or more tines. Hunt officials called lymerers, each accompanied by his scenting hound, the lymer, on a leash, looked for signs which revealed the quarry’s size, age and value. Along the way, each huntsman placed branches to help him locate the path back to the quarry on the hunt’s return and also to indicate that a defined area had been reconnoitred. The hunt officials then joined the assemblée, a formal gathering at a pre-arranged point, where the lord or Master of Game assessed the huntsmen’s reports and examined samples of droppings, termed fewmets,74 which indicated the quality and age of the beasts to be hunted. After feasting and good fellowship at the hunt breakfast, a horn was blown, signalling that the hunt was about to begin. The pack of hounds moved off, encouraged by cries from the hunters, and was put on to the scent of the selected beast. Once he was moved out of covert, the hart could be expected to double back, or ruse, and then take a wide leap off in a new direction to confuse the hounds. This was awkward and it was therefore important to drive the hart out of its familiar thickets and hiding places into open country over which it could move at speed, providing a quality chase. If in its flight the beast left part of the pack behind, the perfect chase became termed forloyne, meaning the quarry or hounds, or both, had out-distanced the hunters. This was signalled to the field by a horn note.75

  After a long chase, the beast would become hard-pressed and exhausted, sweat heavily and emit a stronger scent, exciting and encouraging the hounds. The stag would often plunge into water, both to cool itself and to try and lose its scent. This act, known as foillyng, was regarded as a sign that the beast was ready to be taken by the hounds in the water, on the bank, or after a short chase. Finally, at the end of its strength, the hart would turn at bay to the hounds. The Master, one of the huntsmen or a noble, would move in behind the beast and disable it by severing the hough-sinew in a hind leg. The stag was then despatched by piercing the spinal cord between the antlers and neck with a sword or hunting knife.76 Alternatively, a sword was thrust through the heart from behind the shoulder. Either move was very dangerous to a dismounted hunter and required great skill and much practise. Less commonly a bow or crossbow was used to finish off the beast held at bay. A highly skilled and courageous hunter could despatch the quarry from horseback, using a sword or crossbow. The sources make it clear that the death was as quick as was practicable, given the dangerous character and strength of the larger beasts hunted. Was there ‘blood lust’, a common accusation aimed at modern hunters and shooters? For some participants no doubt there was, but this was probably satisfied at the kill, the climax of vigorous and exciting action. From this point events slowed down, and ancient ritual and procedure took over the gentle hunter’s consideration.

  Once the beast was despatched, the hounds were given brief leave to leap upon the carcass, bite the flesh and lap the blood, urged on by the hunters. This was part of the hounds’ training, particularly the younger intake, encouraging them to recognise the quarry, be keen and to work hard the next time.

  Two important formalised ceremonies now followed. Firstly, the ritual of breaking-up the beast took place, this procedure following a well-established sequence detailed in the hunting books and other literary sources such as Tristan, Sir Gawain and the Green Knight and The Parlement of the Thre Ages. In Tristan, a version of the legendary romance of Tristram and Yseult written by Gottfried von Strassburg in about 1210, the elaborate French method of unmaking the hart is introduced to the naive Cornish gentry by the young but courtly and sophisticated foreign hero. Von Strassburg relates how after the hart is killed, Tristan is shocked when the Huntsman-in-Chief lays out the beast on the grass ‘on all fours like a boar’ and proposes ‘to split it clean down from the head and then into four, so that none of the quarters is much bigger than another. That is the custom of this country’.77

  Tristan explains that in his own country the hart is excoriated, and he is asked to demonstrate this unknown manner of breaking-up. With help, he turns the hart on its back. He makes an incision under the muzzle and from here slits it down the belly. Then he returns to the fore-quarters, flaying (skinning) first the right then the left. Next, he flays the two hind-quarters. Then he peels the hide from the flanks and everywhere from the holds, working his way down from the head. Then he spreads the hide on the ground. He detaches the two fore-quarters from the breast, leaving it entire or whole. These he lays to one side. Then he severs the breast from the chine (the backbone) and from the flanks, making sure to leave three ribs on either side. The two hind-quarters are removed as one piece. He leaves the two steaks at the top of the loins as belonging to the haunch. Then he severs the ribs on both sides and removes them from the chine and the paunch as far as the great gut. Finally, he lays the breast, sides, fore- and hind-quarters, in a neat pile, completing the break-up. This was all done ‘according to the rules of the chase’.

  This is not the end of the lesson, however. The next stage is the fourchie, again unknown to the Cornish nobles. Tristan cuts a forked stick, a fourche, and then cuts out the liver, the numbles and pizzle. The three pieces are bound firmly to the fork and tied up with green bast (flax). The fourchie is then given to a groom to hold. Tristan then demonstrates the third stage, the preparation of the quarry, the ritual feeding and rewarding of the hounds.78

  This, and related texts, established Tristan as the original master of hunting lore and language79 and, not surprisingly, later medieval authors took their cue from him. In Tristan, Gottfried von Strassburg sets down procedural practice with which he, as a knight of the early thirteenth century, is familiar. It is clear that these practices were already well-established as part of French court culture and thus an important part of a noble’s education. The antecedents for these procedures are not known, the earliest extant medieval hunting text being the early thirteenth-century De arte bersandi, written in Germany and the only hunting treatise in Latin.80 The term excoriate, used by Tristan to mean skinning the hart, is one I have not found repeated elsewhere in hunting texts. It derives from the Middle English word excoriaten, from the Latin excoriare, meaning ‘to strip of its skin’.81 The terms breaking-up and break-up in the sense used by Tristan,82 clearly include both the skinning and butchering of the hart, and occur frequently in later hunting texts. Interestingly, the ritual butchering of the carcass is referred to as dightande by Robin Hood when he performs the task for the abbot/king in The Gest of Robin Hood, the fifteenth-century ballad.83

  The hunting texts instruct that there were three stages in the chore of dressing the deer, this total process being variously called breaking, unmaking or undoing the carcass: the deer was undone (cut open), fleaned (skinned) and then brittled (cut up). In Livre de chasse, Gaston Fébus is shown instructing the hunters in these procedures.84 Certain pieces of the carcass were presented to the guests and chief personages of the hunt. The haunches and head were removed and portions of the carcass reserved for various people and purposes. The Tretyse off Huntyng details that the hunter who slew the hart with a bow would have the skin, the person who broke up the carcass had the chyne, or chine, the parson had the right shoulder, poor men were given a quarter and the parker had the left shoulder.85 Gottfried von Strassburg’s instruction differs: having removed the head and horns from the neck and placed them with the breast, Tristan exclaims to the servants ‘Here, quick! Take this chine away! If any poor person should have a mind to it, make him a present of it or deal with it according to your own custom.’86 The chine basically comprised vertebrae with some flesh still attached and was definitely not a succulent piece of venison, so was an acceptable gift to the professional hunter or a deserving poor man.

  A piece of gristle called the corbyn bone was always removed and flung to the crows or ravens as an offering. The Boke of Saint Albans i
s specific on this latter point of procedure ‘The baly to the side from the corbyn bone/ That is corbyns fee: at the deeth he will be.’87

  The Tretyse off Huntyng gives two sets of precise instructions on the correct procedure for breaking-up the hart. These directions form a considerable part of a treatise of only 254 lines, demonstrating the importance placed on proper practice.

  The first refers to the procedure after hunting the hart without the help of a scenting hound or lymer:

  And quen he is dede þan oweth he to blowe also many reans as mony motez. & þen be we aboute to opyn hym & fley hym, & now behoueth þat we taken owte his bowellez & ber hym to þe water & washe hem. Now we be aboute to quarter þe beest; when his bowellez bene wasshen þan shall þe quyletez be cutted in þe hyde, & þan shall we take þe hede & ley hyt on þe quylettez. þan shall we blawene & take vp þe hede – also mony reans as mony motez. And þan shall a man know off what age the hert was. And for þe houndez ben fedde on þe huyde, so is yt clepyt ‘aquyrry’.88