If you’ve ever scrolled through a history forum and seen someone arguing about whether "chivalry" was actually a thing or just a medieval PR stunt, they usually bring up the Combat of the Thirty. It sounds like something straight out of a Ridley Scott movie. It wasn't a battle. Not really. It was more like a high-stakes, extremely violent sporting event that went horribly wrong for half the people involved.
Back in 1351, the Hundred Years' War was tearing France apart. But specifically, in Brittany, you had this nasty side-conflict called the War of the Breton Succession. It was a messy, localized civil war. On one side, you had the House of Blois (backed by the French). On the other, the House of Montfort (backed by the English).
The whole thing started because Jean de Beaumanoir, the captain of Josselin castle, was sick of the English-backed guys pillaging the local peasants. He challenged Robert Bemborough, the guy in charge of Ploërmel, to a fight. Not a duel between two men. A duel between sixty.
Why the Combat of the Thirty wasn't just a random brawl
Most people think medieval wars were just massive armies clashing in muddy fields. Honestly, a lot of it was just small groups of guys in expensive tin suits harassing each other. Beaumanoir and Bemborough basically decided to settle a local grudge by picking thirty of their best men each.
They met at a spot called the Chêne de Mi-Voie—the Halfway Oak. It’s midway between Josselin and Ploërmel.
Jean le Bel, a contemporary chronicler, and later Jean Froissart, wrote about this with a lot of flair, but the gritty reality was probably less poetic. This wasn't a fight for territory. It was a fight for "honor," which in the 14th century was basically the currency of the knightly class.
The lineup was a mix. On the French/Blois side, you had thirty Bretons. On the English/Montfort side, it was a bit of a melting pot: about twenty Englishmen, some Germans, and a few Bretons who had picked the other side. Imagine the tension. You're standing in a field, wearing sixty pounds of steel, looking at a guy you might have shared a drink with two years ago, knowing one of you probably isn't going home.
The actual fighting: Blood, sweat, and a weird halftime break
The fight didn't happen all at once. It was organized. It had rules. Think of it as a deadly version of a rugby match where everyone has an axe.
💡 You might also like: Brian Walshe Trial Date: What Really Happened with the Verdict
They fought on foot.
They started the morning with a massive clash. It was brutal. After a few hours of hacking away at each other’s armor, everyone was so exhausted they actually called a timeout. They sat down. They drank wine. They bandaged their wounds. This is the part that feels fake, but it’s well-documented. It highlights how weirdly ritualized warfare was for these guys.
Robert Bemborough, the English leader, didn't make it through the second half.
The story goes that Beaumanoir was badly wounded and dying of thirst. He asked for water. One of his men, Geoffroy du Bois, supposedly yelled at him, "Drink your blood, Beaumanoir, and your thirst will pass!"
Harsh. But it worked. Beaumanoir stayed in the fight.
How the tide turned (and the "cheat" that won it)
The French side eventually won, but it wasn't because of superior swordsmanship. It was because of a guy named Guillaume de Montauban.
Montauban noticed the English were holding a tight defensive line that couldn't be broken by men on foot. So, he hopped on his horse—which was technically against the "gentleman’s agreement" of fighting on foot—and charged straight into the English ranks. He knocked them over like bowling pins.
📖 Related: How Old is CHRR? What People Get Wrong About the Ohio State Research Giant
Once the English were on the ground and disorganized, the French moved in and finished it.
The tally? The English lost nine men, including Bemborough. The rest were taken prisoner. The French lost fewer, though sources vary on the exact number. Every single person on that field was either killed or wounded.
Why do we still talk about this 700 years later?
The Combat of the Thirty didn't actually change the course of the war. The War of the Breton Succession kept dragging on for another decade.
So why does it matter?
Because it’s the ultimate example of the "Chivalric Myth." At the time, it was held up as the peak of knightly virtue. It was sung about in ballads. It was used as a teaching tool for young squires. But if you look at the Montauban "horse move," you see that even in these "honorable" fights, people would do whatever it took to win.
It’s also a reminder that the Hundred Years' War wasn't just England vs. France. It was a series of local feuds. The men fighting at the Halfway Oak weren't fighting for a king in London or Paris. They were fighting for their own reputations and their own backyard.
Common Misconceptions
People often think this was a "fair fight." It wasn't. The moment Montauban used his horse, the "fairness" went out the window.
👉 See also: The Yogurt Shop Murders Location: What Actually Stands There Today
There's also a myth that this ended the local conflict. It didn't. The English were back to raiding the countryside within months. The only real difference was that several noble families now had massive ransom bills to pay to get their sons back.
The Legacy of the Halfway Oak
If you visit Brittany today, there's a granite obelisk marking the spot. It was put up in the 19th century, long after the oak tree died. It stands as a weirdly quiet monument to one of the loudest, most violent afternoons in medieval history.
Historians like Steven Muhlberger have done great work deconstructing the actual logistics of this fight. It wasn't just a chaotic mosh pit; it was a highly managed event that served as a microcosm of the social structures of the time.
What you can learn from this today
If you’re a history buff or just someone interested in the reality of the Middle Ages, the Combat of the Thirty offers a few practical takeaways:
- Look past the "official" story. Medieval chroniclers were the original influencers. They polished stories to make their patrons look good. The "Drink your blood" line might have been added later for dramatic effect.
- Context is everything. You can't understand this fight without understanding the "Chevauchée" (scorched earth) tactics the English were using, which pushed Beaumanoir to the breaking point.
- Technology vs. Tradition. The English longbowmen, who were the terror of the era, weren't a factor here because the fight was limited to "men-at-arms." It was a deliberate choice to fight an "old-fashioned" way.
To really get a feel for the era, look into the Chronicle of Froissart or the poem Le Combat des Trente. Just keep in mind they’re biased as hell.
The best next step is to look at the site on a map and see how Josselin and Ploërmel are situated. It makes the "Halfway Oak" location make a lot more sense. You can also research the "War of the Two Jeans"—the local name for the Breton Succession crisis—to see the bigger political mess that made thirty guys decide to kill each other in a field.