What Knights Did #1

In “A Knight’s Own Book of Chivalry,” Geoffroi Charny depicts the joust, tournaments, and war as the main definable events that knights partook in.1 Furthermore, with success in these duties, a knight would reveal his bravery, strength, and determination, which would in turn, depict his honor. Coinciding with these duties was the duty for knights to live and act conforming to the will of God.2 Additionally, a knight’s overall duty was to protect and defend the honor of al ladies, to eventually win the love of one lady.3

Since Charny was experienced and characterized knighthood through the joust, tourneys, and war, it is obvious that he would consider the questions that he felt are most important and debatable on these topics. Moreover, with a reputation of one of the most brave and chivalrous of all knights4 and as a member of the Order of the Star, it is understood that Charny had a high level of experience as a knight and thus, would have the expertise and knowledge to ask these questions revolving around the life of knights.

Anna Comnena's article reveals Charny's desire to "return to the basics, to emphasize the core values of his profession"5 where a knight's bravery had overpowered his ego to the extent that he sat in the emperor's throne and talked in a barbaric style.6

Because jousting and tournaments were important and occurred often in Charny’s time, many people (not only the knights) would likely encounter situations where these questions would need to be considered and debated upon. For example, princes, squires, judges, and even common folk may have witnessed an event where the solution to the outcome is debatable and an outside opinion is needed to come to a less biased final decision or agreement.

Many of the questions concerning war are practical of Charny to ask since war was a significant aspect of Medieval life, and affected many members of society. These questions mirror the public international “Laws of War” of today’s society, which regulate engaging in war and wartime conduct. Charny’s questions open thought and discussion about war in of the early times where such regulations would not have been established.

¹ Geoffroi de Charny, A Knight’s Own Book of Chivalry, (Pennsylvania: University of Pennsylvania Press, 2005), 24.

² Ibid., 35.

³ Ibid., 52-3.

⁴ Peter Ainsworth, “The Book of Chivalry of Geoffroi de Charny: Book Review,” Medium Aevum 69 (2000): 323. EBSCOhost, http://web.ebscohost.com.

5 Geoffroi de Charny, 22.

5 James Harvey Robinson, ed., Readings in European History: Vol. I: (Boston: Ginn and co., 1904), pp. 320-321.

Bibliography

Ainsworth, Peter. “The Book of Chivalry of Geoffroi de Charny: Book Review,” Medium Aevum 69 (2000): 323. EBSCOhost, http://web.ebscohost.com.

Charny, Geoffroi de. A Knight’s Own Book of Chivalry. Pennsylvania: University of Pennsylvania Press, 2005.

Robinson, James Harvey, ed. Readings in European History: Vol. I. Boston: Ginn and co., 1904.

My interview on Chivalry Today

Some years back, I too had the privilege of being interviewed by the intelligent Scott Farrell.  We covered a lot of ground and I was able to sum up what I thought I knew at the time.  Here is the interview.

Markward the ministerialis, another kind of knight

Today in our class we were talking about terminology, and I made the point that some of the terms associated with military service in the middle ages migrated upwards.  A word started by designating a person or a position that was fairly humble, and eventually the name or term came to mean something pretty important.  The chevalier was somebody on horseback originally, and eventually chevalier indicated a nobleman who supposedly had many courtly virtues.  Originally the knight in English usage was a servant boy, but after centuries of linguistic struggle the knight had evolved into something very like the noble chevalier.  The squire carried around someone else’s shield, until one day he was promoted to respectable land owner and justice of the peace.

And after class   I thought of another example of this, the use in Germany and perhaps other parts of the mediaeval empire of the term “ministerialis, ” another word meaning servant or henchmen, to mean...something like chevalier.  There was another German term, derived from local roots and not from Latin, that also meant chevalier.  It was the word Ritter, which like the French word originally meant “rider.” Usually, however, the Ritter claimed noble blood and independence, while the ministerialis came from a family which had a long association with a much more important one.  Some people consider them to be unfree, though I have to wonder about the label, given the career of the most famous ministerialis, Markward of Anweiler, whose picture heads up this post.  He was the trusted right hand man of the German Emperor Henry VI and a dangerous enemy of Pope Innocent III.  He was almost as good as a king, and inconvenient enough to be called “another Saladin.” Some servant!

For a little more about Markward, see an old post of mine. 

Richard Kaeuper: Chivalry Today and yesterday

Just  to get your mouth set, there's an interview with Richard Kaeuper, a leading scholar on chivalry.