Page:MS V.b.104 121v.png

to be victorious? It maye be saide that the five well ronners sholde
have victorie for that they were the greatest nomber, againste
whome it was alleadged there were two of their fellowes vnhor:
sed thorough the virtue of the aduersarie, & therfore the
losse sholde light on that side, because there is no greater dish:
onnor in actsof armes then to fall from horsback. ffor al:
thought a man at armes hath all daye ronne faire & order:
lie yet yf in thende he fall, no prise or honnor shalbe allotted
vnto him. Therfore the reproch due vnto those two that
were vnhorsed doth blemish the commendacion that the
other five well doers on that side deserued. On the
contrarie it was alleadged, that forasmuch as five compa:
nions of those ij best doers had verie evell performed their
parts wth losse of manie launces. That therfore they
were in worst estate, then they, havinge but two fellowes
overthrowne. wherfore the aduersaries well doers beinge in
nomber but two & they five the honnor ought to be theirs
as a greater nomber of well doers. vppon wch consideracon
of wch arguments it semeth that thease in respecte of the
evell perfourmaunce of the five on the aduersaries parte
wolde have the glorie of the other two to be no honnor at
all. This doubt is to be decided cheiflie by men at armes
rather then by Ciuilians or Philosophers. Yet my opinion is
that the contrarie partie of those that were ouerthrown
ought to be victorious, for that to fall from horsback is in
the exercise of armes (as erst I saide) a most reprochfull
acte, wherin appeareth viletie of minde, & lack of skill in
ridinge and (death except) the greatest dishonnor that can
happen to a gentleman professinge armes. Notwthstanding
yf mine opinion shall not satisfie in this behalf? The
Iudge maye put downe a Iudgement more certeine.