Of two gentlemen beinge Within the Listes to fighte for lyfe, the one ouerthroweth the other. He that was ouerthrowne saith I am Vanquished, & Wth those wordes giueth him that ouerthrew him a great wounde wherof he died. Wch of them oughte to haue the Victorie. ~ . ~ . ~ . ~ . ~
Ca. 6.
Twoe ffrenche gent beinge in Italie became ennemies and either of them callinge callinge [sic] the other traitor at last waged their battle. wheruppon the lorde of Padoa accordinge to agremt taken betwext them did graunte the ffeilde, and that he that coulde vanquishe his ennemie sholde possesse the armor & horse of him that sholde be vanquished who besides all that, shold also be reputed a traitor. Beinge thus entred into the lists the one chaunceth to overthrowe the horse of his ennemie, and theruppon incontinent dooth bestride him holding him doune to the grounde In the meane time beinge thus distressed he saith I am vanquished and speaking thease wordes all at once stryketh him that dooth bestride him who sodeinlie dieth. In this case, the Question is wch of them ought to be reputed victorious and wch victored? wherunto manie reasons maye on either part be alleadged. And first on the behalfe of the deade man who had not onlie overthrowne, but also at his deuotion distressed his ennemie, so longe, as wth his owne movthe he confessed him selfe victored. ffor wch reason he ought to be victorious, so that either by worde or expresse signe he did accept the saide confession, for then the combatt is ended and the man beinge in this sorte holden downe and distressed might not iustlie fighte anye more because he was alredie vanquished. And yf afterwardes traiterouslie he hapneth to kill his ennemie yet ought he not to be victorious
