Jessica Gordon
9/19/2000

Medieval Chivalry

Virtually every source that deals with the concept of Medieval chivalry begins with the disclaimer that the term cannot be clearly defined. This said, I now attempt to trace its meaning and disrobe it of mystery.

First, A Matter of Words

Chivalry stems from the French chevalier, meaning knight, and more typically, a mounted soldier. In its earliest meaning, chivalry was simply the plural of chevalier (Keen 2). Similarly, the Latin word for knight, miles, began its existence as the name for a professional soldier. Later, it joined chevalier in denoting a knight as a mounted soldier (Keen 27). Time developed both words further, and soon chivalry was used to refer to knights as an order apart from the rest of society. Following this development, knights soon became an entire social class, part of a Tripartite ordering of society. This pyramidal societal structure was made up first of the clergy, who met society's spiritual needs, and furthermore set the standard for the other two classes. Warriors, or knights, made up the second class, and their duties were to, with their swords, uphold justice, protect the weak, and defend the Church. The lowest class, the laborers, provided for the physical needs of all the people. In their role of good and just protectors, knights began to adhere to chivalry as a noble code of values governing how they should live, fight and love (Keen 2).

Knightly Qualifications

Not every peasant or farmer could become a knight in Medieval times. The very requirement of being a "mounted soldier" demanded that a knight first have the means to acquire such an animal and the background to learn to ride one. Thus, a knight must be both wealthy and aristocratic. Beyond having ample means and good lineage, a knight must also be able-bodied, of sufficient age, without known reproach, and of pure motives. That is, desiring to serve others through knighthood rather than to gain bounty and glory for himself (Keen 26).

The Code and Knightly Values

What exactly did the chivalric code imply? It was a "moral, religious and social code of knightly conduct," calling for "courage, honor and service" above all (Strayer 301). The code included actual calls to action as well as moral standards. Knights were to defend the faith of Christ against unbelievers, defend their Lords, and protect and defend women, widows and orphans (Keen 28). They were charged also to be clean of body and soul, follow God's commandments, go to Mass daily and fast on Fridays (Keen 7). As part of the upkeep of their bodies, knights were also expected to 'exercise.' For the knights, exercise manifested itself in the forms of attending tournaments and seeking adventures (Keen 25). "Armed combat was a central element in Medieval chivalry, the very test of a knight's fitness and worth" (Jillings 255). During Arthurian times especially, the measure of a knight's martial expertise was an essential part of his chivalry.

Besides following the code's physical dictates, the knights were also expected to adhere to its strict moral mandates. In following the noble principles of chivalry, a knight had to strive to live according to certain values. He must possess qualities of "prowess, loyalty, generosity, courtliness, and franchise, that is, the free and frank bearing that is visible testimony to the combination of good birth and virtue" (Keen 2). A knight is a man "courteous and nobly spoken, well clad, one who holds open his house within the limit of his means. Loyalty and truth, hardiness, largesse and humility will be the principal qualities of character to be expected of him" (Keen 10). He must dedicate himself wholly to the service of others with wisdom, charity, courage and honor, eschewing pride (Keen 26).

3 Types of Chivalry

In its development, chivalry went through three stages, or three types. The first of these was Christian chivalry. The church had never countenanced violence, but began finding it necessary to do so in light of its need for defense. As a consequence, it began to impress moral and religious values upon its fighting class, the knights, so that it could feel justified in using violence. Knights who subscribed to this religious chivalry believed that they were God's vassals, fighting in His will, for His cause. Despite this religious motivation, however, chivalry remained secular. Although it drew many of its precepts from the Christian religion, knights never considered themselves under the rule of or beholden to the clergy (Lacy 87). The second type was feudal chivalry, sometimes called courtly chivalry, fighting for one's lord or King. Not only was this type of chivalry noble, it was necessary. The lords needed the knights to protect and defend them against their enemies and to conquer new lands. The knights needed the lords because they were their source of income, and because through the battles they fought for them they were able to acquire booty and riches (Lacy 87). The final type of chivalry is courtly love, the adoration of the lady. This concentrated adoration, the "unswerving service to an ideal or to a person, gives meaning and value to chivalry" (Lacy 88). Thus, the ladylove becomes the sole motivation for any battle or conquest, her love and admiration the greatest reward.

Expansion of Chivalric Ideals: Love, Learning and Courtliness

With the advent of courtly love, a new aspect was admitted to the code of chivalry. Before, it seemed as if knights had to be focused entirely on their fighting, their cause. However, soon it became noble and good to have a lady love for whom to battle. Geoffrey de Charny first writes about fighting for the glory of a woman's love in his treatises about the ritual of becoming a knight (Keen 29). An ideal knight was now a "courtly-mannered knight who was motivated by both heroism and love in a state of harmonious symbiosis" (Scaglione 7). It is this balance that becomes the subject for many of the tales of Chretien de Troyes. Yvain thinks only of his cause and fails his lady, therefore causing himself pain and suffering. Erec thinks only of his lady and fails in upholding his cause, and must therefore prove himself anew. In the end, they both learn to balance their loves with their outward duties of fighting and seeking adventure and are rewarded with great happiness.

Another addition to the chivalric code was learning. Knights already underwent strict physical training in the arts of combat, but now they were also encouraged to challenge their intelligence. To this end, treatises on chivalry, written specifically for the instruction of knighthood, began to be written. "A noble knight's militia is enhanced, not hindered, by learning, and that, conversely, letters and the arts are given purpose by the virtues of the good ruler" (Scaglione 80). From this point on, learning and chivalry became intertwined, so that a knight would not think of one without the other immediately following.

Another burgeoning aspect of chivalry that deserves mention is that of the increasingly court-centered behavior of the knights. Knowing how to properly behave in court became very important, knowing the right things to say, and the right ways to behave toward certain people. Being able to "survive" at court may have begun the corruption of chivalry. One axiom of courtly chivalry was, "Use restraint and be considerate of others by lying at the proper time, for to speak the truth all the time is counterproductive" (Scaglione 60). Chretien used Yvain, the hero of one of his tales, to illustrate the importance of carefully balancing life at court and life away from it. "Yvain worked inside and outside the Arthurian Court to achieve a purposefulness that would satisfy the image of the whole man" (Scaglione 6).

Did chivalry really exist?

Critics love to argue this point. Some say that chivalry was only a lofty literary ideal that no one ever obtained, and indeed no one ever even tried to obtain. According to them, it was but a thin, glossy veneer to make a knight's ghastly behavior shine falsely. However, there is plenty of evidence which suggests that the code of chivalry did exist, and that many knights did strive to honor and attain the high ideals of that code. Among the best defense for chivalry's existence and practice comes from the treatises written by knights on the various instructions for becoming a knight. One treatise, written by Geoffrey de Charny, is in poem form and tells the story of one man leading another, who happens to be his captor, through the ritual of becoming a knight. Such a treatise almost assuredly proves that countless men did go through rituals similar to the one described in the poem in order to become knights. Furthermore, another author of a treatise, Roman Lull, writes the story of Arnold of Ardres, a young man who was knighted in the 12th Century. Ardres was a good-looking man, nobly born and wealthy, with great prowess in every martial exercise, who after being dubbed a knight generously gave away his gold, and later fell madly in love and vowed to do anything to save his lady when she was kidnapped (Keen 26). Arnold of Ardres exhibits all of the chivalric qualities that a knight was supposed to have, and his story is written down simply and truly as evidence of the real tradition of chivalry.

Also, although it may not prove that knights sought to live up to the ideals of chivalry, there is definite proof of jousting, a typically knightly activity. Besides being talked of in literature, which is not always a reliable source, jousting is depicted iconographically in tapestries and paintings (Keene 26).

If it can be established that chivalry existed in some way as a code, then it is harder still to know if knights truly tried to live their lives by its mandates. However, it seems that practically, if it did exist at all, it was at least a goal for which to be striven. "Although chivalry was an ideal--indeed, an ideal that may have been only infrequently attained, and perhaps never in actual warfare--it abounded in practical axioms, including the prohibition against a healthy and armed knight attacking another who is unarmed, injured, or afoot" (Lacy 87). It provided day-to-day guidance for situations that a knight might encounter as well as lofty ideals. A knight might well have followed at least its more practical strictures. Most people today live by an ideal, one usually much higher than they realistically hope to achieve in everyday living. However, everyone does have a set of ideals toward which they strive, not punishing themselves if they fall short, but rather always pushing themselves to reach. And such were the knights of yore. "Poets set the ideal of chivalric virtue against harsh reality, the dream of the gentleman who has tempered his nobility with humility, and who strives to fulfill his worldly duties and to serve God at the same time" (Scaglione 78). Of course, literary chivalry was no doubt an "idealization of the life and manners of the knight in his castle and court," but that does not make it any less plausible that knights did try to live in the way prescribed by the code (Strayer 301). In every bit of fancy, there is a strand of truth. Literature of the Medieval period is characterized by its fancifulness and incredibility, but surely the authors took a real code of chivalry as a model for the perfection showcased by the amazing mythical knights jousting their way across the pages of their tales.

Even if no one ever truly reached the highest ideals of chivalry, they did greatly influence "the ways of life and ways of thinking, feeling, speaking, writing and reading for several centuries" (Scaglione 6). The idea of chivalry gave us fantastical literary works, among the greatest and most enduring of which is the legend of Arthur, Gwenevere, Lancelot, Camelot and the knights of the Round Table. Even today, five worlds away from that distant past, people are many times still held to attempting to reach those ideals set down so many years hence in the code of chivalry. For these reasons, and no others, it is worthy to study chivalry and believe that it once existed as a code for living.

 

Works Cited

 

Jillings, Lewis. "Ordeal by Combat and the Rejection of Chivalry in Diu Crone." Speculum: A Journal of Medieval Studies. 27 (1976): 344-356.

Keen, Maurice. Chivalry. New Haven and London: Yale UP. 1984. Chapters 1 & 2.

Lacy, Norris J. et al., eds. The New Arthurian Encyclopedia. New York: Garland Publishing, Inc. 1991.

Scaglione, Aldo. Knights At Court. Berkeley: University of California Press. 1991.

Strayer, Joseph R. Dictionary of the Middle Ages. Vol. 3. New York: Charles Scribner's Sons. 1983.