{"collection":"philosophy-ethics","full_text_available":true,"graph_url":"https://unchartedknowledge.5gfusion.net/v2/api/page/wikisource_The_Mediaeval_Mind_Chapter_22/graph","html_url":"https://unchartedknowledge.5gfusion.net/v2/page/wikisource_The_Mediaeval_Mind_Chapter_22","id":"wikisource_The_Mediaeval_Mind_Chapter_22","license":"Public Domain / CC-BY-SA (see source)","rights_basis":"wikisource_site_inclusion_policy","source":"wikisource","source_url":"https://en.wikisource.org/wiki/The_Mediaeval_Mind/Chapter_22","summary":null,"tags":["Headers_applying_DefaultSort_key","Subpages"],"text":"CHAPTER XXII\n\nFEUDALISM AND KNIGHTHOOD\n\nFeudal and Christian Origin of Knightly Virtue; the Order of the Temple; Godfrey of Bouillon; St. Louis; Froissart's Chronicles\n\nThe world is evil! the clergy corrupt, the laity depraved!\nnone denounces them! Awake! arise! be mindful! Such\nceaseless cry rises more shrilly in times of reform and\nprogress. It was the cry of the preacher in the twelfth and\nthirteenth centuries, when preaching was reviving with the\ngeneral advance of life.\n\nSatire and pious invective struck at all classes: kings,\ncounts and knights, merchants, tradesmen, artisans, even\nvillain-serfs, came under its lash. And properly, since every class is touched with universal human vices, besides those which are more peculiar to its special way of life.\nAll men fall below the standards of the time; and each class fails with respect to its own ideals. The special shortcomings are most apparent with those classes whose ideals\nare most definitely formulated.\n\nAmong the laity the gap between the ideal and the\nactual may best be observed in the warrior class whose\nideals accorded with the feudal situation and tended to\nexpress themselves in chivalry. Not that knights and ladies\nwere better or worse than other mediaeval men and women.\nBut literature contains clearer statements of their ideals.\nThe knightly virtues range before us as distinctly as the\nmonastic; and harsh is the contrast between the character\nthey outline and the feudal actuality of cruelty and greed\nand lust. Feudalism itself presents everywhere a state of\ncontrast between its principles of mutual fidelity and\nprotection, and its actuality of oppression, revolt, and\nprivate war.\n\nThe feudal system was a sprawling conglomerate fact.\nThe actual usages of chivalry (the term is loose and must\nbe allowed gradually to define itself) were one expression of\nit, and varied with the period and country. But chivalry\nhad its home also in the imagination, and its most interesting\nmedia are legend and romantic fiction. Still, much that\nwas romantic in it sprang from the aggregate of law,\ncustom, and sentiment, which held feudal society together.\nChivalry was the fine flower of honour growing from this\nsoil, embosomed in an abundant leafage of imagination.\n\nThe feudal system was founded on relations and\nsentiments arising from a state of turbulence where every\nman needed the protection of a lord: it could not fail to\nfoster sentiments of fealty. The fief itself, the feudal unit\nof land held on condition of homage and service, symbolized\nthe principle of mutual troth between lord and vassal. The\nland was part of mother earth; the troth, the elemental\npersonal tie, existed from of yore. In this instance it came\nfrom the German forests. But the feudal system of land\ntenure also stretched its roots back into the rural institutions\nof the disintegrating Roman Empire. In the fifth century,\nfor example, when what was left of the imperial rule could\nno longer enforce order, and provincial governments were\ndecaying with the decay of the central power from which they drew their life, men had to look about them for\nprotection. It became customary for men to hand over land\nand liberty to some near lord, and enter into a relationship\nakin to serfage in return for protection. Thus the Gallo-Roman population were becoming accustomed to personal dependence even while the Merovingians were establishing their kingdom.\n\nOn their side the Franks and other Teutons had inherited\nthe institution of the comitatus, which bound the young\nwarrior to his chief. They were familiar with exacting\nmodes of personal retainership, which merged the follower's\nfreedom in his lord's will. If during the reigns of Pepin\nand his prodigious son the development of local dominion\nand dependence was held in some abeyance, on the death of\nCharlemagne it would proceed apace. All the factors which\ntend to make institutions out of abuses and the infractions\nof earlier custom, sprang at once into activity in the renewed\nconfusion. Everything served to increase the lesser man's\nneed of defence, weld his dependence on his lord, and\naugment the latter's power. Moreover, long before\nCharlemagne's time, not only for protection in this life, but for the\nsake of their souls, men had been granting their lands to\nmonasteries and receiving back the use thereof\u2014such\nusufruct being known as a beneficium. This custom lent the\nforce of its example and manifest utility to the relations\nbetween lay lords and tenants. And finally one notes the\nfrequent grant to monasteries and individuals of immunity\nfrom governmental visitation, a grant preventing the king's\nofficers from entering lands in order to exercise the king's\njustice, or exact fines and requisitions.\n\nFrom out of such conditions the feudal system gradually\ntook form. Its central feature was the tenure of a fief by a\nvassal from his lord on condition of rendering faithful\nmilitary and other not ignoble service. As the tenth century\npassed, fiefs tended to become hereditary. So long as the\nvassal fulfilled his duty to his lord, the rights of the lord\nover the land were nominal; more substantial was the\nmutual obligation\u2014on the part of the lord to protect his vassal against the violence of others, and on the vassal's part\nto make good the homage pledged by him when he knelt\nand placed his hands within his lord's hands and vowed\nhimself his lord's man for the fief he held. His duty was to\naid his lord against enemies, yield him counsel and assistance in the judgment of causes, and pay money to ransom\nhim from captivity, knight his eldest son, or portion his\ndaughter. The ramifications of these feudal tenures and\nobligations extended, with all manner of complications, from\nking and duke down to such as held the meagre fief that\nbarely kept man and war-horse from degrading labour. All\nthese made up the feudal class whose members might expect\nto become knights on reaching manhood.\n\nNeither this system of land tenure, nor the sentiments\nand relations sustaining it, drew their origin from Christianity.\nBut the Church was mighty in its influence over the secular\nrelationships of those who came under its spiritual guidance.\nFeudal troth was to become Christianized. The old regard\nfor war-chief and war-comrade was to be broadened through\nthe Faith's solicitude for all believers; then it was raised\nabove the human sphere to fealty toward God and His\nChurch; and thereupon it was gentled through Christian\nmeekness and mercy.\n\nThis Christianized spirit of fealty, broadening to\ncourtesy and pity, was to take visible form in a universal\nOrder into which members of the feudal class were admitted\nwhen their valour had been proved, and into which brave\ndeeds might bring even a low-born man. Gradually, as the\nOrder's regula, a code of knighthood's honour was developed,\nvalid in its fundamentals throughout western Christendom;\nbut varying details and changing fancies from time to time\nintruded, just as subsequent phases of monastic development\nwere grafted on the common Benedictine rule.\n\nInvesting a young warrior with the arms of manhood\nhas always in fighting communities been the normal\nceremony of the youth's coming of age and his recognition\nas a member of the clan. The binding on of the young\nTeuton's sword in the assembly of his people was an\nhistorical antecedent of the making of a knight. In all the\nlands of western Europe\u2014France, Germany, Anglo-Saxon England, Lombard Italy, and Visigothic Spain\u2014this\nceremony appears to have remained a simple one through\nthe ninth and tenth centuries. As for the eleventh, one\nmay note the following passages: William of Malmesbury\n(d. 1142 cir.) speaks of William of Normandy receiving the\ninsignia of knighthood (militiae insignia) from the King\nof France as soon as his years permitted. Henry of\nHuntington (d. 1155) says that this same William the\nConqueror, in the nineteenth year of his reign, invested his\nyounger son Henry with the arms of manhood (virilibus induit armis); while another chronicler says that Prince\nHenry: \"sumpsit arma in Pentecostem\"\u2014a festival at which\nit was customary to make knights. And again, Ordericus\nVitalis says of the armour-bearer of Duke William that after\nfive years' service he was by that same duke regularly\ninvested with his arms and made a knight (decenter est armis adornatus et miles effectus).\n\nThese short references do not indicate the nature of\nthe ceremony. But one notes the use of the Latin words\nmiles and militia as meaning knight and knighthood. Like\nso many other classical words, miles took various meanings\nin the Middle Ages. But it came commonly to signify\nknight, chevalier, or ritter. And whatever other meanings\nmilitia and militare retained or acquired, they signified\nknighthood and the performance of its duties. Frequently\nthey suggested the relationship of vassal to a lord: and in\nthis sense miles meant one who held a fief under the\nobligation to do knightly service in return.\n\nBut how did this word miles (which in classical Latin\nmeant a soldier and sometimes specifically a foot-soldier as\ncontrasted with an eques) come to mean a knight? It was\nfirst applied to the warriors of the various Teutonic peoples,\nwho for the most part fought on foot. But the wars with\nthe Saracens in the eighth century appear to have made\nclear the need of a large and efficient corps of horse. From\nthe time of Charles Martel the warrior class began to fight regularly on horseback; and thus, apparently, the term\nmiles began to signify primarily one of these tried and well-armed riders. Such were the very ones who would\nregularly be invested with their arms on reaching manhood.\nMany of them had inherited the sentiments of fealty to a\nchief, and probably were vassals of some lord from whom\nthey had received lands to be held on military tenure.\nThey were not all noble (an utterly loose term with\nreference to these early confused centuries) nor were they\nnecessarily free (another inappropriate term with respect to\nthese incipiently mediaeval social conditions). But their\nmainly military duties would naturally develop into a\nretainer's relationship of fealty.\n\nThe ninth century passes into the tenth, the tenth into\nthe eleventh, the eleventh into the twelfth. Classes and\norders of society become more distinct. The old warrior\ngroups have become lords and vassals, and compose the\nfeudal class whose members upon maturity are formally girt\nwith the arms of manhood, and thereupon become knights.\nThe ceremony of their investiture has been gradually made\nmore impressive; it has also been imbued with religious\nsentiment and elaborated with religious rite. It now\nconstitutes the initiation to a universally recognized fighting\nOrder which has its knightly code of honour, if not its\nknightly duties. In a word, along with the clearer\ndetermination of its membership, and the elaboration of the\nceremonies of entry or \"adoubement,\" knighthood has\nbecome a distinct conception and has attained existence as an Order. And an Order it remains, into which one is\nadmitted, but into which no one is born, though he be\nhereditary king or duke or count. Moreover, although the\ncandidates normally would be of the feudal class, the Order\nis not closed against knightly merit in whomsoever found.\nOf course there was no written regula or charter, except of\ncertain special Orders. Yet there was no uncertainty as to\nwho was or was not a knight.\n\nA knight could be \"made\" or \"dubbed\" at any time,\nfor example, on the field of battle or before the fight. But\ncertain festivals of the Church, Christmas, Easter, and\nPentecost, came to be regarded as peculiarly appropriate for\nthe ceremony. Any knight, but no unknighted person\nhowever high his rank, could \"dub\" another knight. This appears to have been the universal rule, and yet it suffered infringements. For example, at a late period a king might claim the right to confirm the bestowal of knighthood, which\nin fact commonly was bestowed by a great lord or sovereign\nprince. On its negative side, the general rule may be said\nto have been infringed when Church dignitaries, no longer\ncontent with blessing the arms of the young warrior, usurped\nthe secular privilege of investing him with them and dubbing\nhim a knight.\n\nThe ceremony itself probably originated in the girding\non of the sword. As these warriors in time changed to\nmounted riders with elaborate arms and armour, it became\nmore of an affair to invest them fully with their equipment.\nThere would be the putting on of helm and coat of mail,\nand there would be the binding on of spurs; and at some\ntime it became customary for the youth to prepare himself\nby a bath. But girding on the sword was still the important\npoint, although perhaps the somewhat enigmatical blow,\ngiven by him who conferred the dignity, and not to be\nreturned (non repercutiendus), became the finish to the\nceremony. That blow existed (we find it in the Chansons de geste) in the twelfth century as a thwack with the fist on\nthe young man's bare neck; then in course of years it\nrefined itself into a gentle sword-tap on the mailed shoulder.\n\nAt an early period the Church sought to sanctify the\nceremony through religious rites; for it could not remain\nunconcerned with the consecration of the warriors of\nChristendom, whose services were needed and whose souls\nwere to be saved. What time so apt for inculcating\nobedience and other Christian virtues as this solemn hour\nwhen the young warrior's nature was stirred with the pride\nand hopes of knighthood? And the young knight needed\nthe Church's blessing. Heathen peoples sought in every\nenterprise the protection of their gods, usually obtained\nthrough priestly magic. And when converted to the faith\nof Christ, should they not call on Him who was mightier\nthan Odin? Should not His power be invoked to shield the\nChristian knight? Will not the sword which the priest has\nblessed and has laid upon Christ's miracle-working altar,\nmore surely guard the wearer's life? Better still if there be\nblessed relics in its hilt. The dying Roland speaks to his\ngreat sword:\n\n\"O Durendel cum ies bele et seintisme!\"\n\n\"O Durendel how art thou fair and holy! In thy hilt\nwhat store of relics: tooth of St. Peter, blood of St. Basil,\nhairs of my lord St. Denis, cloth worn by the Holy Mary.\"\nThese relics made the \"holiness\" of that sword, not in the\nway of sentiment, but through their magic power. And we\nshall not be thinking in mediaeval categories if we lose sight\nof the magic-religious effect of the priest's blessing on the\nnovice's sword: it is a protection for the future knight.\n\nDoubtless the religious features of the \"adoubement\"\nrevert to various epochs. The ancient watch-nights\npreceding Easter and Pentecost, followed at daybreak by the\nbaptism of white-robed catechumens, may have been the\noriginal of the novice's night vigil over his arms laid by the altar. His bath had become a symbol of purification from\nsin. He heard Mass in the early morning, and then came\nthe blessing of the sword, the benedictio ensis, of which the\noldest extant formula is found in a Roman manuscript of\nthe early eleventh century: \"Exaudi, quaeso, Domine, preces\nnostras, et hunc ensem quo hic famulus N. se circumcingi\ndesiderat, majestatis tuae dextera benedicere dignare.\"\n\nThrough the Middle Ages the fashions of feudalism did\nnot remain unchanged; likewise its quintessential spirit.\nchivalry, was modified, and one may say, between the ninth\nand the fourteenth centuries, passed from barbarism to\npreciosity. Nevertheless the main ideals of chivalry endured,\nspringing as they did from the fundamental and but\nslowly-changing conditions of feudal society. Since that society\nwas constantly at war, the first virtue of the knight was\nvalour. Next, since life and property hung on mutual aid\nand troth, and a larger safety was ensured if one lord could\nrely upon his neighbour's word, the virtues of truth-speaking\nand troth-keeping took their places in the chivalric ideal.\nAnother useful quality, and means of winning men, was\ngenerosity (largesse.) When coin is scarce, and stipulations\nfor fixed pay unusual, he who serves looks for liberality,\nwhich, in accordance with feudal conditions, made the third\nof the chief knightly virtues.\n\nValour, troth, largesse, had no necessary connection with Christianity. It was otherwise with certain of the\nremaining qualities of a knight. According to Christian\nteaching, pride was the deadliest of sins. So haughtiness,\nboasting, and vain-glory were to be held vices by the\nChristian knight. He should show a humble demeanour,\nsave toward the mortal enemies of God; and far from\nboasting, he should rather depreciate himself and his\nexploits, though never lowering the standard of his purpose\nto achieve. Humility entered knighthood's ideal from\nChristianity; and so perhaps did courtesy, its kin, a virtue\nwhich was not among the earliest to enter knighthood's ideal,\nand yet reached universal recognition.\n\nChristianity also meant active charity, beneficence, and\nlove of neighbour. These are virtues hard to import into a\nstate of war. Fighting means harm-doing to an enemy;\nand only indirectly makes for some one's good. Let there\nbe some vindication of good in the fighting of a Christian\nknight: he shall be quick to right the wrong, succour\ndistress, and quickest to bear help where no reward can\ncome. Since knighthood's ideals took form in crusading\ntimes, the slaughter of the Paynim became the supreme act\nof knightly warfare.\n\nIf such elements of the knightly ideal were of Christian\norigin, others still were even more closely part of mediaeval\nChristianity. First of these was faith, orthodox faith,\nheresy-uprooting, infidel-destroying, fides in the full Church\nsense. Without faith's sacramental credentials\u2014baptism,\nparticipation in the mass\u2014no one could be a knight: and\nheresy degrades the recreant even before the scullion's\ncleaver hacks off his spurs.\n\nFrom faith knighthood advances to obedience to the\nChurch, a vow expressly made by every knight on taking\nthe Cross, and also incorporated in the Constitutions of the\ncrusading Orders of Templars and Hospitallers. But does\nthe knight pass on from obedience to chastity? This virtue\nmight or might not enter knighthood's ideal. It scarcely\ncould exist with courtly or chivalric love; a and, in fact, knights commonly were either lovers or married men\u2014or\nboth. Yet even in the Arthurian literature there is the\nmonkish Galahad, and many a sinful knight becomes a\nhermit in the end; and among real and living knights, the\nTemplars and Hospitallers were vowed to celibacy. In\nthese crusading orders the orbits of knighthood and\nmonasticism cross; and it will not be altogether a digression\nto review the foundation and constitution of one of them.\n\nThe Order of the Temple was founded in the year 1118\nby Hugh of Payns (Champagne) and other French knights;\nwho placed their hands within those of the Patriarch of\nJerusalem, and vowed to devote themselves to the protection\nof pilgrims in the Holy Land. Probably they also bestowed\ntheir lands for the support of the nascent Order. Ten\nyears afterwards Hugh passed through France and England,\nwinning new recruits and appearing at the Council of\nTroyes. With the authority of that Council and of Pope\nHonorius II. the Regula pauperum commilitonum Christi Templique Salomonici was promulgated. St. Bernard, to whom\nit is ascribed, was in large part its inspiration and its author.\nIt still exists in some seventy-two chapters; but one cannot\ndistinguish between those belonging to the original document\nof 1128 and those added somewhat later.\n\nThis regula with its amendments and additions was\ntranslated from Latin into Old French (par excellence the\ntongue of the Crusades), and became apparently the earliest\nform of the Regle dou Temple, upon which was grafted a\nmass of ordinances (retrais et establissemens). Apparently\nthe whole of the extant Latin regula was prior to everything\ncontained in the French regle; and accordingly we shall\nsimply regard the Latin as containing the earliest regulations\nof the Temple, and the French as exhibiting the modifications\nof tone and interest which came in the course of\nyears.\n\nThe hand of St. Bernard ensured the dominance of the\nmonastic temper in the original regula; and Hugo, the first Master of the Temple, could not have been the Saint's close\nfriend without sharing his enthusiasms. So the prologue\nopens with a true monastic note:\n\n\"Our word is directed primarily to all who despise their own\nwills, and with purity of mind desire to serve under the supreme\nand veritable King; and with minds intent choose the noble\nwarfare of obedience, and persevere therein. We therefore exhort\nyou who until now have embraced secular knighthood (miliciam secularem) where Christ was not the cause, and whom God in His\nmercy has chosen out of the mass of perdition for the defence of\nthe holy Church, to hasten to associate yourselves perpetually.\"\n\nThis phraseology would suit the constitution of a sheer\nmonastic order. And the first chapter exhorts these venerabiles fratres who renounce their own wills and serve the King (Christ)\nwith horses and arms, zealously to observe all the religious\nservices regularly prescribed for monks. The regula\ncontains the usual monastic commands. For example, obedience\nto the Master of the Order is enjoined sine mora as if\nGod were commanding, which recalls the language of St.\nBenedict. Clothes are regulated, and diet; habitual silence\nis recommended; the brethren are not to go alone, nor at\ntheir own will, but as directed by the Master, so as to\nimitate Him who said, I came not to do mine own will, but\nHis who sent me. Again, chests with locks are forbidden\nthe brothers, except under special permission; nor may any\nbrother, without like permission, receive letters from parents\nor friends; and then they should be read in the Master's\npresence. Let the brethren shun idle speech, and above all\nlet no brother talk with another of military exploits, \"follies\nrather,\" achieved by him while \"in the world,\" or of his\ndoings with miserable women. Let no brother hunt with\nhawks; such mundane delectations do not befit the religious,\nwho should be rather hearing God's precepts, and at prayer,\nor confessing their sins with tears. Yet the lion may always\nbe hunted; for he goes seeking whom he may devour.\n\nThe religio professed by the Templars is called, in the\nLatin rule, religio militaris, which the French translates \"religion de chevalerie,\" not incorrectly, but with somewhat\ndifferent flavour.\n\n\"This new genus religionis, as we believe, by divine providence\nbegan with you in the Holy Land, a religio in which you mingle\nchivalry (milicia). Thus this armed religion may advance\nthrough chivalry, and smite the enemy without incurring sin.\nRightfully then we decree that you shall be called knights of the\nTemple (milites Templi) and may hold houses, lands and men,\nand possess serfs and justly rule them.\"\n\nThe pomp of the last sentence seems to remove from\nthe tone of the earlier chapters, and suggests a later date.\nAnother, possibly late, chapter (66) permits the knights to\nreceive tithes, since they have abandoned their riches for\nspontaneae paupertati. Still another accords to married\nmen a qualified admission to the brotherhood, but they may\nnot wear the white robe and mantle (55). The next\nforbids the admission of sorores; and the last chapter of all\n(72) warns against the sight of women, and forbids the\nbrethren to kiss one, be she widow, virgin, mother, sister or\nfriend.\n\nThus the Latin regula formulates an order of\nmonasticism with only the modifications imperatively\ndemanded by the exigencies of holy warfare. The French\nregle elaborates the military organization and enhances the\nchivalric element. This begins to appear in the portions\nwhich are a translation (usually quite close) of the Latin\nrule. But even that translation makes changes, for example,\nomitting the period of probation required in the Latin text,\nbefore admitting a brother to the Order. A striking\nchange was made by the later French ordinances in the\ninterrogations and proceedings for admission. The Latin\nformula begins in Cistercian phrase:\n\n\"Vis abrenunciare seculo?\n\n\"Volo.\n\n\"Vis profiteri obedientiam secundum canonicam institutionem et secundum preceptum domini papae?\n\n\"Volo.\n\n\"Vis assumere tibi conversationem (the monastic mode and change of life) fratrum nostrorum?\n\n\"Volo.\"\n\nAnd so forth.\n\nThe substance of these and other questions was retained\nin the far longer French formula, which exacted specific\npromises of compliance with all the Order's ordinances.\nBut far removed from the original are such questions as the\nfollowing: \"Biau dous amis\" (the ordinary phrase of the\nchivalric romance) have you, or has any one for you, made\nany promise to any one in return for his aid in procuring\nyour admission, which would be simony? \"Estes vos\nchevalier et fis de chevalier?\"\n\nIs the candidate a knight, and son of knight and lady, and\nare his \"peres \u2026 de lignage de chevaliers\"? This means\nchivalry and gentle blood; and if the candidate answers in\nthe negative, he cannot be admitted as a knight of the\nTemple, although he may be as \"sergent,\" or in some other\ncharacter. Most noble and courtly is the phrasing of these\nstatutes. Their frequent \"Beaus seignors freres\" is the\naddress proper for knights rather than monks.\n\nUsually wherever the translation of the Latin regula\nends, the Regle dou Temple passes on to provisions meeting\nthe requirements of a military, rather than a monastic order.\nWe enter upon such in the chapters governing the powers\nand privileges of the (Grand) Master, of the Seneschal, of\nthe Marshal, of the \"Comandeor de la terre de Jerusalem.\"\nMany sections have to do with military discipline, with the\nordering of the knights and their followers on the march and\nin the battle; they forbid the knights to joust or leave the\nsquadron without orders. Horses, armour, and accoutrements are regulated, and, in short, full provision is made for\neverything conducing to make the army efficient in war.\nThere is also a long list of faults and crimes for which a\nknight may be disciplined or expelled; the latter shall be his punishment if he flee before the Saracens and forsake\nhis standard in battle.\n\nThe history of the Templars, significantly epitomized in\nthe amendments to their regula, shows the necessary as well\nas inevitable secularization of a military monastic order; an\norder which for the purposes of this chapter may be placed\namong the chief historical examples of chivalry. For in\nthis chapter we are not straying through the pleasant mazes\nof romantic literature, but are keeping close to history, with\nthe intention of drawing from it illustrations of chivalry's\nideals. We shall not, however, enter further upon the story\nof the Order of the Temple, with its valorous and rapacious\nachievements and most tragic end; but will rather look to\nthe careers of historic individuals for the illumination of our\ntheme.\n\nReaching form and consciousness in the eleventh and\ntwelfth centuries, chivalry became part of the crusading ardour\nof those times. All true knights were or might be\nCrusaders; and of a truth there was no purer incarnation\nof the crusading spirit than Godfrey of Bouillon, that figure\nof veritable if somewhat slender historicity, upon whom in\ntime chronicler and trouv\u00e8re alike were to fasten as the\ntrue hero of the enterprise that won Jerusalem. And so he\nwas. Not that Godfrey was commander of the host. He\nwas not even its most energetic or most capable leader.\nBoemund of Tarentum and Raymond of Toulouse were his\nsuperiors in power and military energy. But neither\nBoemund, nor Tancred, nor Raymond, nor any other of those\nprinces of Christendom, was what Godfrey appears to us, the\ntype and symbol of the perfect, single-hearted, crusading\nknight, fighting solely for the Faith, with Christian devotion\nand humility, and, like them all, with more than Christian\nwrath. The First Crusade (1096-1099) was stamped with\nhatred and slaughter: on the dreadful march, at the more\ndreadful siege and final sack of Antioch, and finally when\nthe holy sepulchre's defilement was washed out in Saracen\nblood. And there was no slaughterer more eager than\nGodfrey.\n\nThe cruelty and religious fervour of the Crusade are rendered in the words of Raymond of Agiles, one of the\nclergy in the train of Count Raymond of Toulouse, and an\neye-witness of the capture of Jerusalem. After days of\ndespairing struggle to effect a breach, success came as by\nthe mercy of God:\n\n\"Among the first to enter was Tancred and the Duke of\nLothringia (Godfrey), who on that day shed quantities of blood\nalmost beyond belief. After them, the host mounted the walls, and\nnow the Saracens suffered. Yet although the city was all but in\nthe hands of the Franks, the Saracens resisted the party of Count\nRaymond as if they were never going to be taken. But when our\nmen had mastered the walls of the city and the towers, then\nwonderful things were to be seen. Numbers of the Saracens were\nbeheaded\u2014which was the easiest for them; others were shot with\narrows, or forced to jump from the towers; others were slowly\ntortured and were burned in flames. In the streets and open\nplaces of the town were seen piles of heads and hands and feet.\nOne rode about everywhere amid the corpses of men and horses.\nBut these were small matters! Let us go to Solomon's temple,\nwhere they were wont to chant their rites and solemnities. What\nhad been done there? If we speak the truth we exceed belief:\nlet this suffice. In the temple and porch of Solomon one rode in\nblood up to the knees and even to the horses' bridles by the just\nand marvellous Judgment of God, in order that the same place\nwhich so long had endured their blasphemies against Him should\nreceive their blood.\"\n\nSo the Crusaders wrought; and what joy did they feel!\nRaymond continues:\n\n\"When the city was taken it was worth the whole long labour\nto witness the devotion of the pilgrims to the sepulchre of the\nLord, how they clapped their hands, exulted, and sang a new song\nunto the Lord. For their hearts presented to God, victor and\ntriumphant, vows of praise which they were unable to explain. A\nnew day, new joy and exultation, new and perpetual gladness, the\nconsummation of toil and devotion drew forth from all new words,\nnew songs. This day, I say, glorious in every age to come, turned\nall our griefs and toils into joy and exultation.\"\n\nSo new songs of gladness burst from the hearts of the\nsoldiers of the Cross. In a few days the princes made an\nelection, and offered the kingdom to Count Raymond: he declined. Then Godfrey was made king; though he would\nnot be crowned, nor would he ever wear a crown where his\nLord had worn a crown of thorns. As a servant of Christ\nand of His Church he fought and ruled some short months\ntill his death. His fame has grown because his heart was\npure, and because, among the knights, he represented most\nperfectly the religious impulse of this crusade which fought\nits way through blood, until it poured out its new song of\njoy over the blood-drenched city. He errs who thinks to\nfind the source and power of the First Crusade elsewhere\nthan in the flaming zeal of feudal Christianity. There was\ndoubtless much divergence of motive, secular and religious;\nbut over-mastering and unifying all was the passion to wrest\nthe sepulchre of Christ from paynim defilement, and thus\nwin salvation for the Crusader. Greed went with the host,\nbut it did not inspire the enterprise.\n\nDoubtless the stories of returning knights awakened a\nspirit of romantic adventure, which stirred in later crusading\ngenerations. It was not so in the eleventh century when\nthe First Crusade was gathering. The romantic imagination\nwas then scarcely quickened; adventure was still\ninarticulate, and the literature of adventure for the venture's\nsake was yet to be created. So the First Crusade, with its\nmotive of religious zeal, is in some degree distinguishable\nfrom those which followed when knighthood was in different\nflower. If not the Crusades themselves, at least the\nChansons of the trouv\u00e8res who sang of them, follow a change\ncorresponding with the changing taste of chivalry: they\nbegin with serious matters, and are occupied with the great\nenterprise; then they become adventurous in theme,\nromantic, till at last even romantic love is infelicitously\ngrafted upon the religious rage that won Jerusalem.\n\nThis process of change may be traced in the growth of\nthe legends of the First Crusade and Godfrey of Bouillon.\nSomething was added to his career even by the Latin\nChronicles of fifty years later. But his most venturesome\ndevelopment is to be found in those French Chansons de geste which have been made into the \"Cycle\" of the First\nCrusade. Two of these, the Chansons of Antioche and\nJerusalem, were originally composed by a contemporary, if not a participant in the expedition. They were refashioned\nperhaps seventy-five or a hundred years later, in the reign\nof Philip Augustus, by another trouv\u00e8re, who still kept their\nold tone and substance. They remained poetic narratives of\nthe holy war. In them the knights are fierce and bloody,\ncruel and sometimes greedy; but their whole emprise makes\nonward to the end in view, the winning of the holy\ncity. These poems are epic and not romantic: they may\neven be called historical. The character of Godfrey is\ndeveloped with legendary or epic propriety, through a\nheightening of his historic qualities. He equals or excels\nthe other barons in fierce valour, and yet a touch of courtesy\ntempers his wrath. In Christian meekness and in modesty\nhe surpasses all, and he refuses the throne of Jerusalem\nuntil he has been commanded from on high. At that he\naccepts the kingdom as a sacred charge in defence of which\nhe is to die.\n\nIt is otherwise with a number of other chansons\ncomposed in the latter part of the twelfth and through\nthe thirteenth century. Some of them (the Chanson des ch\u00e9tifs, for example) had probably to do with the First\nCrusade. Others, like the various poems which tell of the\nChevalier au Cygne, were inaptly forced into connection with\nthe family of Godfrey. They have become adventurous,\nand are studded with irrelevant marvels, rather than assisted\nto their denouements by serious supernatural intervention.\nMonsters appear, and incongruous romantic episodes;\nGodfrey's ancestor has become the Swan-knight, and he\nhimself duplicates the exploits previously ascribed to that\nhalf-fairy person. Knightly manners, from brutal have\nbecome courteous. Women throng these poems, and the\nromantic love of women enters, although not in the finished\nguise in which it plays so dominant a r\u00f4le in the Arthurian\nCycle. Such themes, unknown to the earlier crusading\nchansons, would have fitted ill with a martial theme driving\non through war and carnage (not through \"adventures\")\nto the holy end in view.\n\nThe Crusades open with the form of Godfrey of Bouillon.\nA century and a half elapses and they deaden to a close\nbeneath the futile radiance of a saintlike and perfect\nknightly personality. St Louis of France is as clear a\nfigure as any in the Middle Ages. From all sides his life is\nknown. We see him as a painstaking sovereign meting out\neven justice, and maintaining his royal rights against feudal\nturbulence and also against ecclesiastical encroachment.\nDuring his reign the monarchy of France continues to\nadvance in power and repute. And yet there was no jot of\nworldly wisdom, and scant consideration of a realm sorely\nneeding its ruler, in the Quixotic religious devotion which\ndrew him twice across the sea on crusades unparalleled\nin their foolishness. For the world was growing wiser\npolitically; and what was glorious feudal enthusiasm in the\nyear 1099, was deliberate disregard of experience in the\nyears 1248 and 1270.\n\nYet who would have had St. Louis wiser in his\ngeneration? The loss to France was mankind's gain, from\nthe example of saintly king and perfect knight, kept bright\nin the narratives of men equal to the task. Louis was\nhappy in his biographers. Two among them knew him\nintimately and in ways affording special opportunities to\nobserve the sides of his character congenial to their respective\ntempers. One was his confessor for twenty years, the\nDominican Geoffrey of Beaulieu; the other was the Sire\nde Joinville. Geoffrey's Vita records Louis' devotions;\nJoinville's Histoire notes the king's piety; but the qualities\nwhich it illuminates are those of a French gentleman and\nknight and grand seigneur, like Joinville himself.\n\nThe book of the Dominican is not picturesque. It\nopens with an edifying comparison between King Josiah\nand King Louis. Then it praises the king's mother, Queen\nBlanche of pious memory. As for Louis, the confessor has\nbeen unable to discover that he ever committed a mortal\nsin: he sought faithful and wise counsellors; he was careful\nand gracious in speech, never using an oath or any\nscurrilous expression. In earlier years, when under the necessity of taking oath, he would say, \"In nomine mei\";\nbut afterwards, hearing that some religious man had objected\nto this, he restricted his asseverations to the \"est, est\" and\n\"non, non\" of the Gospel.\n\nFrom the time he first crossed the sea, he wore no\nscarlet raiment, but clothed himself in sober garments.\nAnd as such were of less value to give to the poor than\nthose which he had formerly worn, he added sixty pounds a\nyear to his almsgiving; for he did not wish the poor to\nsuffer because of his humble dress. Geoffrey gives the long\ntale of his charities to the poor and to the mendicant\nOrders. On the Sabbaths it was the king's secret custom\nto wash the feet of three beggars, dry them, and kiss them\nhumbly. He commanded in his will that no stately\nmonument should be erected over his grave. He treated his\nconfessors with great respect, and, while confessing, if\nperchance a window was to be closed or opened, he quickly\nrose and shut or opened it, and would not hear of his\nconfessor doing it. In Advent season and Lent he\nabstained from marital intercourse. Some years before his\ndeath, if he had had his will, he would have resigned his\nkingdom to his son, and entered the Order of the\nFranciscans or Dominicans. He brought up his children most\nreligiously, and wished some of them to take the vows.\n\nHe confessed every Friday and also between times, if\nsomething occurred to him; and if he thought of anything\nin the night, he would send for his confessor and confess\nbefore matins. After confession he always took his\ndiscipline from his confessor, whom he furnished with a\nscourge of five little braided iron chains, attached to an\nivory handle. This he would afterwards put back into a\nlittle case, which he carried hanging to his belt, but out\nof sight. Such little cases he sometimes presented to\nhis children or friends in secret, that they might have a convenient instrument of discipline. He wore haircloth next\nhis flesh in the holy seasons, a habit distressing to his tender\nskin, until his confessor persuaded him to abandon this\nform of penance as ill comporting with his station. He\nreplaced it by increasing his charities. His fasts were\nregular and frequent, till he lessened them upon prudent\nadvice; for he was not strong. He would have liked to\nhear all the canonical hours chanted; and twice a day he\nheard Mass, and daily the Office for the Dead. Sometimes,\nsoon after midnight, he would rise to hear matins, and then\nwould take a quiet time for prayer by his bed. Likewise\nhe loved to hear sermons. On returning over the sea,\nwhen the ships suffered a long delay, he had preaching\nthree times a week, with the sermon specially adapted to\nthe sailors, a class of men who rarely hear the Word of God.\nHe prevailed on many of them to confess, and declared\nhimself ready at any time to put his hand to a rope, if\nnecessary, so that a sailor while confessing might not be\ncalled away by any exigency of the sea.\n\nWhile beyond the sea, this good king, hearing that a\nSaracen Sultan had collected the books of their philosophy\nat his own expense for his subjects' use, determined not\nto be outdone whenever he should return to Paris, a purpose\nwhich he amply carried out, diligently and generously\nsupplying money for copying and renewing the writings of\nthe Doctors. At enormous expense he obtained the\nSaviour's crown of thorns and a good part of the true cross,\nfrom the emperor at Constantinople, with many other\nprecious relics; all of which the king barefooted helped to\ncarry in holy procession when they were received by the\nclergy of Paris.\n\nThe king was very careful in the distribution of\necclesiastical patronage, always seeing to it that the\ncandidate was not already enjoying another benefice. His\nheart exulted when it came to him to bestow a benefice\nupon some especially holy man. He was most zealous in\nthe suppression of swearing and blasphemy, and with the\nadvice of the papal legate then in France issued an edict,\nproviding that the lips of those guilty of this sin should be\nseared with hot irons; and when certain ones murmured, he declared that he would willingly suffer his own lips to be\nbranded if that would purge his realm of this vice.\n\nSuch were the acts and qualities of Louis which\nimpressed his Dominican confessor. They were the\nqualities of a saint, and would have brought their possessor to\na monastery, had not his royal station held him in the\nworld. The Dominican could not know the knightly nature\nof his royal penitent, and still less reflect it in his Latin of\nthe confessional. For this there was needed the pen of a\ngreat gentleman, whose nature enabled him to picture his\nlord in a book of such high breeding that it were hard to find\nits fellow. This book is stately with the Sire de Joinville's\nconsciousness of his position and blood, and stately through\nthe respect he bore his lord\u2014a book with which no one\nwould take a liberty. Yet it is simple in thought and\nphrase, as written by one who lived through what he tells,\nand closely knew and dearly loved the king. From it one\nlearns that he who was a saint in his confessor's eyes was\nalso a monarch from his soul out to his royal manners and\noccasional royal insistence upon acts which others thought\nunwise. We also learn to know him as a knightly, hapless\nsoldier of the Cross, who would not waver from his word\nplighted even to an infidel.\n\nThat St. Louis was a veritable knight is the first thing\none learns from Joinville. The first part of my book, says\nthat gentleman, tells how the king conducted his life after\nthe way of God and the Church, and to the profit of his\nrealm; the second tells of his \"granz chevaleries et de ses\ngranz faiz d'armes.\" \"The first deed (faiz) whereby 'il mist\nson cors en avanture de mort' was at our arrival before\nDamietta, where his council was of the opinion, as I have\nunderstood, that he ought to remain in his ship until he saw\nwhat his knights (sa chevalerie) should do, who made a\nlanding. The reason why they so counselled him was that\nif he disembarked, and his people should be killed and he\nwith them, the whole affair was lost; while if he remained\nin his ship he could in his own person renew the attempt to\nconquer Egypt. And he would credit no one, but leaped\ninto the sea, all armed, his shield hanging from his neck, his\nlance in hand, and was one of the first upon the beach.\"\n\nThis is from Joinville's Introduction. He recommences formally:\n\n\"In the name of God the all powerful, I, John, Sire of Joinville,\nSeneschal of Champagne, cause to be written the life of our sainted\nking Louis, as I saw and heard of it for the space of six years\nwhile I was in his company on the pilgrimage beyond the sea, and\nsince we returned. And before I tell you his great deeds and\nprowess (chevalerie), I will recount what I saw and heard of his\nholy words and good precepts, so that they may be found one after\nthe other for the improvement of those who hear.\n\n\"This holy man loved God with all his heart, and imitated His\nworks: which was evident in this, that as God died for the love\nwhich He bore His people, so he (Louis) put his body in peril\nseveral times for the love which he bore his people. The great\nlove which he had for his people appeared in what he said to his\neldest son, Louis, when very sick at Fontainebleau: 'Fair son,' said\nhe, 'I beg thee to make thyself loved by the people of thy kingdom;\nfor indeed I should prefer that a Scot from Scotland came and\nruled the people of the kingdom well and faithfully, rather than\nthat thou shouldst rule them ill in the sight of all.'\"\n\nJoinville continues relating the virtues of the king, and recording his conversations with himself:\n\n\"He called me once and said, 'Seneschal, what is God?' And I said to him, 'Sire, it is a being so good that there can be no better.'\n\n\"'Now I ask you,' said he, 'which would you choose, to be a\nleper, or to have committed a mortal sin?' And I who never lied\nto him replied that I had rather have committed thirty than be a\nleper. Afterwards he called me apart and made me sit at his feet and\nsaid: 'Why did you say that to me yesterday?' And I told him\nthat I would say it again. And he: 'You speak like a thoughtless\ntrifler; for you should know there is no leprosy so ugly as to be in\nmortal sin, because the soul in mortal sin is like the devil. This is\nwhy there can be no leprosy so ugly. And then, of a truth, when\na man dies, he is cured of the leprosy of the body; but when the\nman who has committed a mortal sin dies, he does not know, nor\nis it certain, that he has so repented while living, that God has\npardoned him; this is why he should have great fear that this\nleprosy will last as long as God shall be in paradise. So I pray\nyou earnestly that you will train your heart, for the love of God and\nof me, to wish rather for leprosy or any other bodily evil, rather than\nthat mortal sin should come into your soul.' He asked me whether\nI washed the feet of the poor on Holy Tuesday. 'Sire,' said I,\n'quel malheur! I will not wash those villains' feet.' 'Truly that was ill said,' said he; 'for you should not hold in contempt what\nGod did for our instruction. So I pray you, for the love of\nGod first, and for the love of me, to accustom yourself to wash\nthem.'\"\n\nJoinville was some years younger than his king, who\nloved him well and wished to help him. The king also\nesteemed Master Robert de Sorbon for the high respect as\na preudom in which he was held, and had him eat at his\ntable. One day Master Robert was seated next to Joinville.\n\n\"'Seneschal,' said the king, smiling, 'tell me the reasons why a\nman of wisdom and valour (preudom, prud'homme) is accounted\nbetter than a fool.' Then began the argument between me and\nMaster Robert; and when we had disputed for a time, the king\nrendered his decision, saying: 'Master Robert, I should like to\nhave the name of preudom, so be it that I was one, and all the rest\nI would leave to you; for preudom is such a grand and good thing\nthat it fills the mouth just to pronounce it.'\"\n\nMaster Robert plays a not altogether happy part in\nanother scene, varicoloured and delightful:\n\n\"The holy king was at Corbeil one Pentecost, and twenty-four\nknights with him. The king went down after dinner into the\ncourtyard back of the chapel, and was talking at the entrance with\nthe Count of Brittany, the father of the present duke, whom God\npreserve. Master Robert de Sorbon came to seek me there, and\ntook me by the cloak, and led me to the king, and all the other\ngentlemen came after us. Then I asked Master Robert: 'Master\nRobert, what would you?' And he said to me: 'If the king\nshould sit down here, and you should seat yourself above him, I ask\nyou whether you would not be to blame?' And I said, Yes.\n\n\"And he said to me: 'Yet you lay yourself open to blame, since\nyou are more nobly clad than the king: for you wear squirrel's fur\nand cloth of green, which the king does not.'\n\n\"And I said to him: 'Master Robert, saving your grace, I do\nnothing worthy of blame when I wear squirrel's fur and cloth of\ngreen; for it is the clothing which my father and mother left me.\nBut you do what is to blame; for you are the son of a vilain and\nvilaine, and have abandoned the clothes of your father and your\nmother, and are clad in richer cloth than the king.' And then I\ntook the lappet of his surcoat and that of the king's, and said to\nhim: 'See whether I do not speak truly.' And the king set himself to defend Master Robert with all his might.\"\n\n\"Afterwards Messire the king called to him Monseigneur\nPhilippe his son, the father of the present king, and the king\nThibaut (of Navarre), and laid his hand on the earth and said:\n'Sit close to me, so that they may not hear.'\n\n\"'Ah Sire,' say they, 'we dare not sit so close to you.'\n\n\"And he said to me, 'Seneschal, sit down here.' And so I\ndid, so close that our clothes touched. And he made them sit\ndown by me, and said to them: 'You have done ill, you who are\nmy sons, who have not obeyed at once all that I bade you: and\nsee to it that this does not happen with you again.' And they\npromised. And then he said to me, that he had called us in order\nto confess to me that he was in the wrong in defending Master\nRobert against me. 'But,' said he, 'I saw him so dumbfounded\nthat there was good need I should defend him. And do none of\nyou attach any importance to all I said defending Master Robert;\nfor, as the seneschal said to him, you ought to dress well and\nbecomingly, so that your wives may love you better, and your\npeople hold you in higher esteem. For the sage says that one\nshould appear in such clothes and arms that the wise of this world\nmay not say you have done too much, nor the young people say\nyou have done too little.'\"\n\nThe hopelessly worthy parvenu was quite outside this charmed\ncircle of blood and manners.\n\nAnother story of Joinville opens our eyes to Louis'\nviews on Jews and infidels. The king was telling him of a\ngrand argument between Jews and Christian clergy which\nwas to have been held at Cluny. And a certain\npoverty-stricken knight was there, who obtained leave to speak the\nfirst word; and he asked the head Jew whether he believed\nthat Mary was the mother of God and still a virgin. And\nthe Jew answered that he did not believe it at all. The\nknight replied that in that case the Jew had acted like a\nfool to enter her monastery, and should pay for it; and with\nthat he knocked him down with his staff, and all the other\nJews ran off. When the abbot reproached him for his\nfolly, he replied that the abbot's folly was greater in having\nthe argument at all. \"So I tell you,\" said the king on\nfinishing his story, \"that only a skilled clerk should dispute\nwith misbelievers; but a layman, when he hears any one\nspeak ill of the Christian law, should defend that law with\nnothing but his sword, which he should plunge into the\ndefamer's belly, to the hilt if possible.\"\n\nWell known is the hapless outcome of St. Louis'\nCrusades: the first one leading to defeat and captivity in\nEgypt, the second ending in the king's death by disease at\nTunis. Yet in what he sought to do in his Lord's cause, St.\nLouis was a true knight and soldier of the Cross. The\nspirit was willing; but the flesh accomplished little. Let us\ntake from Joinville's story of that first crusade a wonderfully\nillustrative chapter, giving the confused scenes occurring\nafter the capture of Damietta, when the French king and his\nfeudal host had advanced southerly through the Delta, along\nthe eastern branch of the Nile. Joinville was making a\nreconnaissance with his own knights, when they came\nsuddenly upon a large body of Saracens. The Christians\nwere hard pressed; here and there a knight falls in the\nmel\u00e9e, among them\n\n\"Monseigneur Hugues de Trichatel, the lord of Conflans, who\ncarried my banner. I and my knights spurred to deliver\nMonseigneur Raoul de Wanou, who was thrown to the ground.\nAs I was making my way back, the Turks struck at me with their\nlances; my horse fell on his knees under the blows, and I went\nover his head. I recovered myself as I might, shield on neck and\nsword in hand; and Monseigneur Erard de Siverey (whom God\nabsolve!), who was of my people, came to my aid, and said that we\nhad better retreat to a ruined house, and there wait for the king\nwho was approaching.\"\n\nOne notes the high-born courtesy with which the Sire\nde Joinville speaks of the gentlemen who had the honour of\nserving him. The fight goes on.\n\n\"Monseigneur Erard de Siverey was struck by a sword-blow in\nhis face, so that his nose hung down over his lips. And then I was\nminded of Monseigneur Saint Jacques, whom I thus invoked:\n'Beau Sire Saint Jacques help and succour me in this need.'\n\n\"When I had made my prayer, Monseigneur Erard de Siverey said to me: 'Sire, if you think that neither I nor my heirs would suffer reproof, I would go for aid to the Count of Anjou, whom I see over there in the fields.' And I said to him: 'Messire Erard, I think you would do yourself great honour, if you now went for aid to save our lives; for your own is in jeopardy.' And indeed I spoke truly, for he died of that wound. He asked the advice of all our knights who were there, and all approved as I had approved. And when he heard that, he requested me to let him have his horse, which I was holding by the bridle with the rest. And so I\ndid.\"\n\nThe knightliness of this scene is perfect, with its liege\nfealty and its carefulness as to the point of honour, its\ncarefulness also that the vassal knight shall fail in no duty to\nhis lord whereby the descent of his fief may be jeopardized.\nMonseigneur Erard (whom God absolve, we say with\nJoinville!) is very careful to have his lord's assent and the\napproval of his fellows, before he will leave his lord in peril,\nand undergo still greater risk to bring him succour.\n\nWell, the Count of Anjou brought such aid as created a\ndiversion, and the Saracens turned to the new foe. But\nnow the king arrives on the scene:\n\n\"There where I was on foot with my knights, wounded as\nalready said, comes the king with his whole array, and a great\nsound of trumpets and drums. And he halted on the road on the\ndyke. Never saw I one so bravely armed: for he showed above\nall his people from his shoulders up, a gilded casque upon his head\nand a German sword in his hand.\"\n\nThen the king's good knights charge into the battle,\nand fine feats of arms are done. The fighting is fierce and\ngeneral. At length the king is counselled to bear back\nalong the river, keeping close to it on his right hand, so as\nto reunite with the Duke of Burgundy who had been left to\nguard the camp. The knights are recalled from the mel\u00e9e,\nand with a great noise of trumpets and drums, and Saracen\nhorns, the army is set in motion.\n\n\"And now up comes the constable, Messire Imbert de\nBeaujeu, and tells the king that the Count of Artois, his brother,\nwas defending himself in a house in Mansourah, and needed aid.\nAnd the king said to him: 'Constable go before and I will follow\nyou.' And I said to the constable that I would be his knight, at\nwhich he thanked me greatly.\"\n\nAgain one feels the feudal chivalry. Now the affair\nbecomes rather distraught. They set out to succour the\nCount of Artois, but are checked, and it is rumoured that\nthe king is taken; and in fact six Saracens had rushed\nupon him and seized his horse by the bridle; but he had\nfreed himself with such great strokes that all his people took courage. Yet the host is driven back upon the river, and is\nin desperate straits. Joinville and his knights defend a\nbridge over a tributary, which helps to check the Saracen\nadvance, and affords an uncertain means of safety to\nthe French. But there is no cessation of the Saracen\nattack with bows and spears. The knights seemed full of\narrows. Joinville saved his life with an arrow-proof Saracen\nvest, \"so that I was wounded by their arrows only in five\nplaces\"! One of Joinville's own stout burgesses, bearing\nhis lord's banner on a lance, helped in the charges upon the\nenemy. In the mel\u00e9e up speaks the good Count of\nSoissons, whose cousin Joinville had married. \"He joked\nwith me and said: 'Seneschal, let us whoop after this\ncanaille; for by God's coif (his favourite oath) we shall be\ntalking, you and I, about this day in the chambers of the\nladies.'\"\n\nAt last, the arbalests were brought out from the camp,\nand the Saracens drew off\u2014fled, says the Sire de Joinville.\nAnd the king was there, and\n\n\"I took off his casque, and gave him my iron cap, so that he might\nget some air. And then comes brother Henry de Ronnay, Prevost\nof the Hospital, to the king when he had passed the river, and kisses\nhis mailed hand. And the king asked him whether he had news of\nthe Count of Artois, his brother; and he said that he had indeed\nnews of him, for he was sure that his brother the Count of Artois\nwas in Paradise. 'Ha! sire,' said the Prevost, 'be of good cheer;\nfor no such honour ever came to a king of France as is come to you.\nFor to fight your enemies you have crossed a river by swimming,\nhave discomfited your enemies and driven them from the field,\nand taken their engines and tents, where you will sleep this night.'\nAnd the king replied that God be adored for all that He gave; and\nthen the great tears fell from his eyes.\"\n\nOne need not follow on to the ill ending of the campaign,\nwhen king and knights all had to yield themselves prisoners,\nin most uncertain captivity. The Saracen Emirs conspired\nand slew their Sultan; the prisoners' lives hung on a thread;\nand when the terms were arranging for the delivery and\nransom of the king, his own scruples nearly proved fatal.\nFor the Emirs, after they had made their oath, wished the\nking to swear, and put his seal to a parchment,\n\n\"that if he the king did not hold to his agreements, might he\nbe as shamed as the Christian who denied God and His Mother,\nand was cut off from the company of the twelve Companions\n(apostles) and of all the saints, male and female. To this the king\nconsented. The last point of the oath was this: That if the king\ndid not keep his agreements, might he be as shamed as the Christian\nwho denied God and His law, and in contempt of God spat on the\nCross and trod on it. When the king heard that, he said, please\nGod, he would not make that oath.\"\n\nThen the trouble began, and the Emirs tortured the\nvenerable patriarch of Jerusalem till he besought the king to\nswear. How the oath was arranged I do not know, says\nJoinville, but finally the Emirs professed themselves satisfied.\nAnd after that, when the ransom was paid, the Saracens by\na mistake accepted a sum ten thousand livres short, and\nLouis, in spite of the protest of his counsellors, refused to\npermit advantage to be taken and insisted on full payment.\nMany years afterwards, when Louis was dead and\ncanonized, a dream came to his faithful Joinville who was\nthen an old man.\n\n\"It seemed to me in my dream that I saw the king in front of\nmy chapel at Joinville; and he was, so he seemed to me, wonderfully happy and glad at heart; and I also was glad at heart, because\nI saw him in my chateau. And I said to him: 'Sire, when you\ngo hence, I will prepare lodging for you at my house in my village\nof Chevillon.' And he replied, smiling, and said to me: 'Sire de\nJoinville, by the troth I owe you, I do not wish so soon to go from\nhere.' When I awoke I bethought me; and it seemed to me that\nit would please God and the king that I should provide a lodging\nfor him in my chapel. So I have placed an altar in honour of God\nand of him there, where there shall be always chanting in his\nhonour. And I have established a fund in perpetuity to do this.\"\n\nGodfrey of Bouillon and St. Louis of France show\nknighthood as inspired by serious and religious motives.\nWe pass on a hundred years after St. Louis, to a famous\nChronicle concerning men whose knightly lives exhibit no such\nreligious, and possibly no such serious, purpose, so far at least\nas they are set forth by this delightful chronicler. His\nname of course is Sir John Froissart, and his chief work\ngoes under the name of The Chronicles of England, France, Spain, and the adjoining Countries. It covers the period from the reign of Edward II. to the coronation of Henry IV.\nof England. Have we not all known his book as one to\ndelight youth and age?\n\nLet us, however, open it seriously, and first of all notice\nthe Preface, with its initial sentence giving the note of the\nentire work: \"That the grans merveilles and the biau fait d'armes achieved in the great wars between England and\nFrance, and the neighbouring realms may be worthily\nrecorded, and known in the present and in the time to\ncome, I purpose to order and put the same in prose,\naccording to the true information which I have obtained\nfrom valiant knights, squires, and marshals at arms, who are\nand rightly should be the investigators and reporters of such\nmatters.\"\n\n\"Marvels\" and \"deeds of arms\"\u2014soon he will use\nthe equivalent phrase belles aventures. With delicious\ngarrulity, but never wavering from his point of view, the\ngood Sir John repeats and enlarges as he enters on his work\nin which \"to encourage all valorous hearts, and to show them\nhonourable examples\" he proposes to \"point out and speak\nof each adventure from the nativity of the noble King\nEdward (III.) of England, who so potently reigned, and who\nwas engaged in so many battles and perilous adventures and\nother feats of arms and great prowess, from the year of\ngrace 1326, when he was crowned in England.\"\n\nOf course Froissart says that the occasion of these wars\nwas King Edward's enterprise to recover his inheritance of\nFrance, which the twelve peers and barons of that realm\nhad awarded to Lord Philip of Valois, from whom it had\npassed on to his son, King Charles. This enterprise was\nthe woof whereon should hang an hundred years of knightly\nand romantic feats of arms, which incidentally wrought\ndesolation to the fair realm of France. Yet the full opening\nof these matters was not yet; and Froissart begins with the\nstory of the troubles brought on Queen Isabella and the nobles of England through the overbearing insolence of Sir\nHugh Spencer, the favourite of her husband Edward II.\n\nThe Queen left England secretly, to seek aid at Paris\nfrom her brother King Charles, that she might regain her\nrights against the upstart and her own weak estranged\nhusband. King Charles received her graciously, as a great\nlord should receive a great dame; and richly provided for\nher and her young son Edward. Then he took counsel of\nthe \"great lords and barons of his kingdom\"; and their\nadvice was that he should permit her to enlist assistance in\nhis realm, and yet himself appear ignorant of the matter.\nOf this, Sir Hugh hears, and his gold is busy with these\ncounsellors; so that the Court becomes a cold place for the\nself-exiled queen. On she fares in her distress, and, as\nadvised, seeks the aid of the great Earl of Hainault, then at\nValenciennes. But before the queen can reach that city, the\nearl's young brother, Sir John, Lord of Beaumont, rides\nto meet her, ardent to succour a great lady in distress,\n\"being at that time very young, and panting for glory like a\nknight-errant\" In the evening he reached the house of Sir\nEustace d'Ambreticourt, where the queen was lodged. She\nmade her lamentable complaint, at which Sir John was\naffected even to tears, and said, \"Lady, see here your knight,\nwho will not fail to die for you, though every one else\nshould desert you; therefore will I do everything in my\npower to conduct you and your son, and to restore you\nto your rank in England, by the grace of God, and the\nassistance of your friends in those parts; and I, and all\nthose whom I can influence, will risk our lives on the\nadventure for your sake.\"\n\nIs not this a chivalric beginning? And so the Chronicle\ngoes on. King Edward III. is crowned, marries the Lady\nPhilippa, daughter of the Earl of Hainault, and afterwards\nsends his defiance to Philip, King of France, for not yielding\nup to him his rightful inheritance, and this after the same\nKing Edward had, as Duke of Aquitaine, done homage to\nKing Philip for that great duchy.\n\nSo the challenge of King Edward, and of sundry other\nlords, was delivered to the King of France; and thereupon\nthe first bold raid is made by the knightliest figure of the first generation of the war, Sir Walter Manny, a young\nHainaulter who had remained in the train of Queen\nPhilippa. The war is carried on by incursions and deeds of\nderring-do, the larger armies of the kings of England and\nFrance circumspectly refraining from battle, which might\nhave checked the martial jollity of the affair. It is all\nbeautifully pointless and adventurous, and carried out in the\nspirit of a knighthood that loves fighting and seeks honour\nand adventure, while steadying itself with a hope of plunder\nand reward. There are likewise ladies to be succoured and\ndefended.\n\nOne of these was the lion-hearted Countess of Montfort,\nwho with her husband had become possessed of the\ndisputed dukedom of Brittany. The Earl of Montfort did\nhomage to the King of England; the rival claimant, Charles\nof Blois, sought the aid of France. He came with an army,\nand Montfort was taken and died in prison; the duchess\nwas left to carry on the war. She was at last shut up and\nbesieged in Hennebon on the coast; the burghers were\nfalling away, the knights discouraged; emissaries from Lord\nCharles were working among them. His ally, Lord Lewis\nof Spain, and Sir Herv\u00e9 de Leon were the leaders of the\nbesiegers. Sir Herv\u00e9 had an uncle, a bishop, Sir Guy de\nLeon, who was on the side of the Countess of Montfort.\nThe nephew won the uncle over in a conference without the\nwalls; and the latter assumed the task of persuading the\nLords of Brittany who were with the countess to abandon\nthe apparently hopeless struggle. Re-entering the town,\nthe bishop was eloquent against the countess's cause, and\npromised free pardon to the lords if they would give up the\ntown. Now listen to Froissart, how he tells the story:\n\n\"The countess had strong suspicions of what was going forward, and begged of the lords of Brittany, for the love of God, that they would not doubt but she should receive succours before three days were over. But the bishop spoke so eloquently, and made use of such good arguments, that these lords were in much suspense all that night. On the morrow he continued the subject, and succeeded so far as to gain them over, or very nearly so, to his opinion; insomuch that Sir Herv\u00e9 de Leon had advanced close to the town to take possession of it, with their free consent, when the countess looking out from a window of the castle toward the sea, cried out most joyfully, 'I see the succours I have so long expected\nand wished for coming.' She repeated this twice; and the town's\npeople ran to the ramparts and to the windows of the castle, and\nsaw a numerous fleet of great and small vessels, well trimmed,\nmaking all the sail they could toward Hennebon. They rightly\nimagined it must be the fleet from England, so long detained at\nsea by tempests and contrary winds.\n\n\"When the governor of Guingamp, Sir Yves de Tresiquidi,\nSir Galeran de Landreman, and the other knights, perceived this\nsuccour coming to them, they told the bishop that he might break\nup his conference, for they were not now inclined to follow his\nadvice. The bishop, Sir Guy de Leon, replied, 'My lords, then\nour company shall separate; for I will go to him who seems to me\nto have the clearest right.' Upon which he sent his defiance to\nthe lady, and to all her party, and left the town to inform Sir Herv\u00e9\nde Leon how matters stood. Sir Herv\u00e9 was much vexed at it, and\nimmediately ordered the largest machine that was with the army to\nbe placed as near the castle as possible, strictly commanding that\nit should never cease working day nor night. He then presented\nhis uncle to the Lord Lewis of Spain, and to the Lord Charles of\nBlois, who both received him most courteously. The countess, in\nthe meantime, prepared and hung with tapestry halls and chambers\nto lodge handsomely the lords and barons of England, whom she\nsaw coming, and sent out a noble company to meet them. When\nthey were landed, she went herself to give them welcome, respectfully thanking each knight and squire, and led them into the town\nand castle that they might have convenient lodging: on the morrow,\nshe gave them a magnificent entertainment. All that night, and\nthe following day, the large machine never ceased from casting\nstones into the town.\n\n\"After the entertainment, Sir Walter Manny, who was captain\nof the English, inquired of the countess the state of the town and\nthe enemy's army. Upon looking out of the window, he said, he\nhad a great inclination to destroy that large machine which was\nplaced so near, and much annoyed them, if any would help him. Sir\nYves de Tresiquidi replied, that he would not fail him in this his\nfirst expedition; as did also the lord of Landreman. They went to\narm themselves, and then sallied quietly out of one of the gates,\ntaking with them three hundred archers, who shot so well, that those\nwho guarded the machine fled, and the men at arms, who followed\nthe archers, falling upon them, slew the greater part, and broke down\nand cut in pieces this large machine. They then dashed in among\nthe tents and huts, set fire to them, and killed and wounded many\nof their enemies before the army was in motion. After this they\nmade a handsome retreat. When the enemy were mounted and\narmed they galloped after them like madmen.\n\n\"Sir Walter Manny, seeing this, exclaimed, 'May I never be\nembraced by my mistress and dear friend, if I enter castle or\nfortress before I have unhorsed one of these gallopers.' He then\nturned round, and pointed his spear toward the enemy, as did\nthe two brothers of Lande-Halle, le Haze de Brabant, Sir Yves de\nTresiquidi, Sir Galeran de Landreman, and many others, and\nspitted the first coursers. Many legs were made to kick the air.\nSome of their own party were also unhorsed. The conflict became\nvery serious, for reinforcements were perpetually coming from the\ncamp; and the English were obliged to retreat towards the castle,\nwhich they did in good order until they came to the castle ditch;\nthere the knights made a stand, until all their men were safely\nreturned. Many brilliant actions, captures, and rescues might have\nbeen seen. Those of the town who had not been of the party to\ndestroy the large machine now issued forth, and, ranging themselves\nupon the banks of the ditch, made such good use of their bows,\nthat they forced the enemy to withdraw, killing many men and\nhorses. The chiefs of the army, perceiving they had the worst of\nit, and that they were losing men to no purpose, sounded a retreat,\nand made their men retire to the camp. As soon as they were\ngone, the townsmen re-entered, and went each to his quarters.\nThe Countess of Montfort came down from the castle to meet\nthem, and with a most cheerful countenance, kissed Sir Walter\nManny, and all his companions, one after the other like a noble\nand valiant dame.\"\n\nIn this manner the genial chronicler goes on through his\nlong delightful ramble. After a while the chief combatants\nclose. Cressy is fought and Poictiers. The Black Prince,\nthat extremest bit of knightly royalty, fills the page. The\nplace of Sir Walter Manny is taken by the larger figure of\nSir John Chandos, and, on the other side, the usually\nunfortunate but unconquerable Bertrand du Guesclin. Froissart\nis at his best when he tells of the great expedition of the\nBlack Prince to restore the cruel Don Pedro of Castille to\nthe throne from which he had been expelled by that\npicturesque bastard brother Henry, who had a poorer title\nbut a better right, by virtue of being fit to rule.\n\nThis whole expedition was\u2014as we see it in Froissart\u2014neither\npolitics nor war, but chivalry. What interest had\nEngland, or Edward III., or the Prince of Wales in Don\nPedro? None. He was a cruel tyrant, rightfully expelled.\nThe Prince of Wales would set him back upon his throne in\nthe interest of royal legitimacy, and because there offered a brilliant opportunity for fame and plunder: the Black Prince\nthought less of the latter than the Free Companies enlisted\nunder his banner, and less than his own rapacious knights.\n\nSo in three divisions, headed by the most famous\nknights and in a way generalled by Sir John Chandos, the\nhost passes through the kingdom of Navarre, and crosses the\nPyrenees. Then begin a series of exploits. Sir Thomas\nFelton and a company set out just to dare and beard the\nCastillian army, and after entrancing feats of knight-errantry,\nare all captured or slain. Much is the prince annoyed at this;\nbut bears on, gladdened with the thought, often expressed,\nthat the bastard Henry is a bold and hardy knight, and is\nadvancing to give battle.\n\nAnd true it was. One of Henry's counsellors explains\nto him how easy it is to hem in the Black Prince in the\ndefiles, and starve him into a disastrous retreat. Perish the\nthought! \"By the soul of my father,\" answers King\nHenry, \"I have such a desire to see this prince, and to try\nmy strength with him, that we will never part without a\nbattle.\"\n\nSo the unnecessary and resultless battle of Navaretta\ntook place. Don Pedro, the cruel rightful king, was knighted,\nwith others, by the Prince of Wales before the fight. The\ntried unflinching chivalry of England and Aquitaine conquered, although one division of King Henry's host had du\nGuesclin at its head. That knight was captured;\nsomehow his star had a way of sinking before the steadier fortune\nof Sir John Chandos, who was here du Guesclin's captor for a\nsecond time. King Henry, after valiant fighting, escaped.\nDon Pedro was re-set upon his throne; and played false\nwith the Black Prince and his army, in the matter of pay.\nThe whole expedition turned back across the Pyrenees.\nAnd not so long after, Henry bestirred himself, and the\ntardily freed du Guesclin hurried again to aid him. This\ntime there was no Black Prince and Sir John Chandos; and\nDon Pedro was conquered and slain, and Henry was at last\nfirm upon his throne.\n\nCould anything have been more chivalric, more objectless,\nand more absolutely lacking in result? It is a beautiful\nstory; every one should refresh his childhood's memory of it by reading Froissart's delightful pages. And then let him\nalso read at least the subsequent story of the death of Sir\nJohn Chandos in a knightly brush at arms; he, the really\nwise and great leader, perishes through his personal rash\nknighthood! It is a fine tale of the ending of an old and\nmighty knight, the very flower of chivalry, as he was called.\n\nSo matters fare on through these Chronicles. All is\ncharming and interesting and picturesque; charming also\nfor the knights: great fame is won and fat ransoms paid\nto recoup knightly fortunes. Now and then\u2014all too\nfrequently, alas! and the only pity of it all!\u2014some brave\nknight has the mishap to lose his life! That is to say, the\nonly pity of it from the point of view of good Sir John.\nBut we can see further horrors in this picture of chivalry's\nactualities: we see King Edward pillage, devastate, destroy\nFrance; we see the awful outcome of the general ruin in\nthe rising of the vile, unhappy peasants, the Jacquerie; then\nin the indiscriminate slaughter and pillaging by the Free\nCompanies, no longer well employed by royalties; and\nthen we see the cruel treachery of many an incident\nwrought out by such a flower of chivalry even as du\nGuesclin. Indeed all the horrors of ceaseless interminable\nwar are everywhere, and no more dreadful horror through\nthe whole story than the bloody sack of Limoges commanded\nby that perfect knight, the Black Prince, himself stricken\nwith disease, and carried in a litter through the breach of\nthe walls into the town, and there reposing, assuaging his\ncruel soul, while his men run hither and thither \"slaying\nmen, women and children according to their orders.\"\n\nBut when King Edward was old, and the Prince of\nWales dying with disease, the French and their partisans\ngathered heart, and pressed back the English party with\nsuccessful captures and reprisals. Du Guesclin was made\nConstable of France; and there remained no English leader\nwho was his match. From this second period onwards, the\nwars and slaughters and pillagings become more embittered,\nmore horrid and less relieved. The tone of everything\nis brutalized, and the good chronicler himself frequently\nanimadverts on the wanton destruction wrought, and the frightful ruin. All is not as in the opening of the story,\nwhich was so fascinating, so knightly and almost as purely\nadventurous as the Arthurian romances\u2014only that there\nwas less love of ladies and a disturbing dearth of forests\nperilous, and enchanted castles. It was then that the reader\nhad ever and anon to remind himself that Froissart is not\nromance or legend, but a contemporary chronicle; and that\nin spite of heightened colours and expanded (if not invented)\ndialogues, his narrative does not belong to the imaginative\nor fictitious side of chivalry, but to its actualities.\n\nFroissart's pictures of the depravity and devastation\ncaused by the wars of England and France, disclose the\nunhappy actuality in which chivalry might move and have\nits being. And the knights were part of the cruelty,\ntreachery, and lust. One may remark besides in Froissart\na certain shallowness, a certain emptying, of the spirit of\nchivalry. One phase of this lay in the expansion of form\nand ceremony, while life was departing;\u2014as, for example,\nin the hypertrophe of heraldry, and in the pageantry of the\nlater tournaments, where such care was taken to prevent\ninjury to the combatants. A subtler phase of chivalry's\nemptying lay in its preciosity and in the excessive growth\nof fantasy and utter romance\u2014of which enough will be said\nin the next chapter.","title":"The Mediaeval Mind/Chapter 22","tradition":"philosophy-ethics","translated_text":null,"word_count":13614}