[773] Très Ancienne Cout. de Bretagne, chap. 99, 129-135 (Bourdot de Richebourg).
[774] Ancienne Cout. de Normandie, chap. 53, 68, 70, 71, 73, etc. (Bourdot de Richebourg).
[775] Fors et Cost. de Béarn, Rubr. de Batalha (Bourdot de Richebourg, IV. 1093).
[776] Mathieu de Coussy, chap. cxii.—Ol. de la Marche, ch. xxii. Such a case as this justifies the opinion quoted by Olivier de la Marche, “que le gaige de bataille fut trouvé par le diable pour gagner et avoir les âmes de tous les deux, tant du demandeur que du deffendeur” (Traité du Duel Judiciaire, p. 4, communicated to me by George Neilson, Esq.).
[777] D. Calmet, Hist. de Lorraine.
[778] Jehan Masselin, Journal des États de Tours, p. 320.
[779] Archives de Pau, apud Mazure et Hatoulet, Fors de Béarn, p. 130. There may have been something exceptional in this case, since the punishment was so much more severe than the legal fine of 16 sous quoted above (Fors de Morlaas, Rubr. IV.).
[780] D. Calmet, Hist. de Lorraine.
[781] Brantôme, Discours sur les Duels. An account of this duel, published at Sedan, in 1620, represents it as resulting even less honorably to Fendilles. He is there asserted to have formally submitted, and to have been contemptuously tossed out of the lists like a sack of corn, Des Guerres marching off triumphantly, escorted with trumpets.
[782] Fontanon, I. 665.