Page:MS V.b.104 138v.png

Whether it be lawfull to alter the quarrell
within the lystes.

Ca. 17.

Twoe gentlemen fightinge for liffe in cause
of honnor, the one of them knowinge he maintained a
matter againste iustice & trouth, in fightinge did continuallie
geve grounde, as one that knewe him selfe worthie to be victored,
his ennemie seinge him offer so often to geve grounde & fle from
place to place wthin the lists, saide thus vnto hi. Turne thee
Traitor & defende thy selfe, theruppon the gent fleinge tur:
ned vnto his aduersarie & answered I will renounce our first
quarrell & mainteine that I am no traitor as thowe falslie
haste called me. And in thende the gent newlie iniuried &
called traitor was victorious. Neuertheles the gent victored
praied sentence in his favour, alleaginge that his ennemie
victorious coulde not chaunge the quarrell to his preiudice
& fight vppon a seconde. Because the first quarrell begon
ought be first performed, & therfore coulde not be iustlie vic:
toried by his ennemie, who abandoned the first quarrell.
wherunto the gent victorious replied sayenge, the first quarrell
was ended by his expresse renouncinge therof, & it oughte
suffize he had victorie in the laste, by the sufferannce of
God who allwaies fauoureth the righte. The other answered
that he ought not in a case of honnor be victored by his ennemie
who had renounced the quarrell, confessinge him self therby
to be periured & vniuste, & therfore in the second quarrell
may be repulsed as a recusante, & ought not after be admitted to
fight for honnor. The question is what sentence the Iudge
ought to geve in this case? wherunto I saye, that in right &
true iustice, they ought both to be pronounced victorious, the
first in respect of the first quarrell, the other in respecte
of the seconde. ffor the one in renounsinge his first quarell
ought be reputed vanquished, & in the second is notwthstanding