How and to What Extent Did War and Violence Contribute to the Definition of Chivalry as Both an Historical and Social Phenomenon?

Literature of the Middle Ages can not be discussed without acknowledging the undeniable importance of chivalry. Chivalry in relation to the middle ages is defined as “the code of conduct adhered to by Medieval knights with gallant knightly values including honor, bravery, courteousness and honesty.” This key characteristic is essential in defining an ideal knight as well as his expectations. A knight must live by a chivalric code in which he becomes indebted to the people, his fellow knights, and most importantly, his lord. No other knight displayed more of a devotion to upholding the code then Lanval of Marie de France’s lai “Lanval.” Lanval demonstrates his chivalric nature in essential every action from maintaining comitatus amongst the

In two stories there is a code that knights follow. Chivalry is the code that they follow. The code says that a knight should be a brave warrior, a good christian, and selflessly fighting for justice. The knights are supposed to fight for their king and queen. In the stories Sir Gawain and the Green Knight and from Morte d’Arthur they show the idea about chivalry.

In the Medieval Period, knights dedicated their lives to following the code of chivalry. In Sir Thomas Malory’s Le Morte d’Arthur, a number of characters performed chivalrous acts to achieve the status of an ideal knight. Their characteristics of respect for women and courtesy for all, helpfulness to the weak, honor, and skill in battle made the characters King Arthur, King Pellinore, and Sir Gryfflette examples of a what knights strove to be like in Medieval society. Because of the examples ofchivalry, Le Morte d’Arthur showed what a knight desired to be, so he could improve theworld in which he lived.

Knights are one of the most mistaken figures of the medieval era due to fairytales and over exaggerated fiction novels. When medieval knights roamed the earth, it was known that they were only human and, like humans, had faults. These knights did not always live up to the standards designated by society. However, in The Canterbury Tales, the knight is revealed as a character that would now be considered a knight in shining armor, a perfect role model in how he acts and what he does. Modern day people see them as chivalrous figures instead of their actual role as mounted cavalry soldiers. As time passes, the idea of what a knight is changes from a simple cavalry soldier to a specific type of behavior.

     An act of chivalry is described as the qualifications or character of the ideal knight. Knights were expected to uphold this code of conduct. In the English literature Le Morte d?Arthur, French for ?The Death of Arthur?, by Sir Thomas Malory, the characters display acts of chivalry from beginning to end. Though the code of chivalry contains many qualities or acts, nevertheless bravery, loyalty, and courtly love are demonstrated more throughout this literature.

In Geoffrey Chaucer’s poem, The Knight’s Tale, the author encapsulates chivalrous characteristics in his telling of a battle for love. In its fundamental form, chivalry idealizes a knight’s conduct, both on and off the battlefield (Gregory-Abbott). Chaucer employs this “heroic code [of] bravery, loyalty, and service to one's lord” to illustrate the idillic knight throughout the narrative (Rossignol). Chaucer’s poem, The Knight’s Tale, exhibits the ideals of chivalry in the form of two knights, desperately in love with the same woman, and a wise Duke who embodies the voice of reason. Each knight upholds honor through compassion, troths, and heroism on the battlefield, despite their afflictions with each other.

The origin of the word chivalry is from the French term “chevalrie”, literally used to describe the characteristics of armed knights on horseback.1 It did not originally include the moral aspects which it had become later known for. Into the later times in the Middle Ages, chivalry began to be a more concrete code of conduct which was followed by the high class and knights.1

Each different aspect of the code of chivalry held a separate role in society. Whether it be religious or barbaric, chivalry tended to hold a moral guideline among those who followed it. This moral guideline held them true to their duties to man, God, and women (Sex, Society, and Medieval Women). All of which are reflected in the three themes of Chivalry: Warrior chivalry, religious chivalry, and courtly love chivalry (Sex, Society, and Medieval Women). These three hold their individual roles, all stimulating a different part of the mind and creating a code held by all areas of life in those who hold it. The underlying question posed in this intense pledge is whether those who took the oath lived it out accordingly. To live out Chivalry is

The role of chivalry is a complicated concept for solitary heroes within Beowulf and Albrecht Dürer’s Knight, Death, and the Devil. In Beowulf, the concept of chivalry is explained through the eyes of the hero, Beowulf, which is the idea of performing chivalrous actions in the face of death for glory; however, Beowulf does not realize that his actions will not keep his people safe in the end. In Knight, Death and the Devil, the idea of chivalry is the motivation of the knight on religious grounds to be chivalrous in the face of death. The Knight gives the impression that he understood that his actions would ultimately be meaningless, and he appears resigned to the idea. The argument can be made that chivalry is unsustainable in both texts, given that while it inspires these heroes to pursue these tasks, the result is that they believe that mild sacrifices, such as their own life, must be made to ensure victory; however, these two texts differ with their heroes’ anticipated outcomes of their sacrifices, which turns out to be for nothing. Despite having different outcomes of operating within a system of chivalry, these two texts similarly critique the outcomes of chivalry as being unsustainable based on the demands it places on heroes to sacrifice themselves. To defend this claim, I will begin by similarly critiquing how chivalry is unsustainable within both texts. I will then express how both texts show the unsustainability results from the demands of sacrifice. I will then

Chivalry defined in the middle ages was a moral system which went beyond rules of combat and introduced the concept

In the days of knights, kings, and jousts, there existed the knightly code of chivalry. This code is seen throughout medieval texts and is described as,“a moral system which went beyond rules of combat and introduced the concept of Chivalrous conduct - qualities idealized by the Medieval knights such as bravery, courtesy, honor and great gallantry toward women...The Code of Chivalry was the honor code of the knight. The Code of Chivalry was an important part of the society and lives of people who lived during the Medieval times and was understood by all.”(Alchin). The respected knight not only followed these rules, but also lived to serve a king. In the two tales of Sir Gawain and the Green Knight and Morte D’Arthur, three of the chivalrous rules are clear to see. In these two tales, the three rules of the nights that are prevalent in the stories are, courage, honesty, and strength.

In Beowulf, Beowulf embodies chivalry in his quest for treasure and riches to sustain his kingdom. In Terry Gilliam’s Monty Python and the Holy Grail, the Black Knight embodies chivalry by manning his post at a bridge and protecting it. Despite their different motivations for being chivalrous, both Beowulf and the Black Knight demonstrate how chivalry is unsustainable due to its insatiable demands. To defend my thesis, I will be discussing how each text defines chivalry, how the characters in their respective text embody chivalry, what motivates each character to be chivalrous, and why both characters show how chivalry is unsustainable.

At this point in history the men who fought the wars were lead by their leaders with a code of chivalry. Chivalry can be explained as “the Anglo-Saxon code on steroids.” (McGee) Which is, explained further, a moral system for a good way to conduct fighting. The knights in Arthurian time went even further with that code to say that it was a way to conduct oneself not only in battle, but at all times. Knights, by being chivalrous, were kind to all people, fought well and true, kept faith and believed in the Christian God, and fought for their kings. Chivalry can be found across the Arthurian texts, The Song of Roland is one of the texts that has multiple examples of chivalry.

Chivalry is a concept that has baffled countless medieval historians throughout the years. Chivalry was supposedly a code that knights and nobles lived their lives by, however, like other social structures of the past historians have debated over the extent to which people lived according to chivalric principles. Sir Walter Scott believed that chivalry was meant as a code which knights could aspire, but not one that was carried out in reality. His description seems accurate. Chivalric principles could not be borne out in real life. Froissart painted a romantic image of The Hundred Years War and of the aristocracy at the time. Froissart is constantly full of praise for the chivalric lifestyle many of them are

Chivalry as a concept is something that has baffled many medieval historians over the years. Chivalry was supposing a code that knights and nobles were to live their lives by however like many social structures of the past historians have debated over what exactly chivalry was. According to Sir Walter Scott chivalry was meant to be a code which knights could aspire to not necessarily carry out. His description does seem to be accurate. Chivalric principles could not be carried out in real life. Froissart’s image of The Hundred Years War are romanticised in such a way that the historian must be careful not to take a lot of the text too seriously. Perhaps we should forgive Froissart for this, compared to modern standards his accuracy would fall short simply given the time he lived in. His accounts often came from supposed eyewitnesses that would of course have manipulated their accounts to suit themselves. Therefore when reading Froissart’s Chronicles and concluding whether or not his accounts are accurate one must take caution and remember the purpose of his writings and who he is working for when completing them.