Main > The Round Table
Renaissance Chivalry?
Joshua Santana:
This is good and exactly what I was looking for, I thank all of you for your input and opinions.
--- Quote ---I think it might be worth examining what chivalry was really defined as during the high middle ages as well. We have the book A Knight's Own Book of Chivalry by Geoffroi de Charny, written in the 14th century. But for the most part, real medieval chivalric behavior seemed to extend from the nobility to other nobles, and ended there. Chivalry wasn't a courtesy much extended to the common man-at-arms or peasant soldier by his knightly counterpart on the battlefield.
So, are we talking about the Victorian notion of Chivalry or the more recently accepted 'medieval form of chivalry,' that it appears knights really followed? I'm not trying to say that what we think of as modern day Chivalry is purely the fantasy of Victorian historians (i hate that that rhymes), but I don't think real knightly chivalry of the 13th/14th/15th centuries was quite as poetic as 19th century historians have made it out to be.
My point is, I think it would be wise to have a good understanding of what Chivalry was to the people of Medieval Europe prior to the Renaissance and not paint the Victorian ideal of Chivalry onto a group of people it didn't really apply to before moving forward.
edit for further thoughts:
I think a huge aspect of what made the Chivalric code viable as it applies to battle in the Middle Ages was the fact that a large portion of combat was hand to hand. Extending courtesy to a fellow knight of an opposing army, in a practical sense, required you get close enough to him to recognize his heraldry as someone of standing and then capture him after subduing him. In the age of gunpowder, as the very nature of warfare itself changed, I would think this practice become more and more difficult. As killing becomes more indiscriminate I can see the practice of not killing your knightly counterparts practically more difficult and the battlefield itself more dangerous for you to even try. This could lead to what would ultimately be perceived as a loss of the Chivalric code in battle, so I can see where the notion comes from.
--- End quote ---
You have a good point here that is worth for consideration. My goal is to find out how was Chivalry viewed in the Renaissance and to answer the question of "Did they respect it? Did they view as a novelty or held it in mockery?" I am seeking the answers to these questions.
--- Quote ---Yes, chivalry didn't die then from an Caliver, and today it hasn't died from an assault rifle.
Chivalry extends far beyond one's role on the battlefield after all.
--- End quote ---
Huzzah Sir Nathan!
--- Quote ---Some good points made here so far. I'll briefly add also that as knighthood evolved away from being a combat class, and into a position of minor nobility, the meaning of Chivalry also evolved with it. As the Renaissance got started, this change had pretty much already occurred, and so Chivalry was being equated more with courtly (noble class) behavior.
--- End quote ---
You made a good point and I am investigating to what extent did the Code become integrated with courtly behavior. I am seeking to find out "Was Chivalry transitioning into a Social Etiquette Standard? Was it becoming an aspect of Courtliness? Or was it a Moral Code that was used in conjunction with Courtly Behavior?" That is one of the many questions I am seeking to answer.
To let all of you know, this research of mine might be turned into an essay (and I am sure it will be a long essay). My goal is to find evidence or respect or honoring of the Code of Chivalry (and I assume I will also find contempt for the Code) in Renaissance History, Military History and Literature. I will be exploring these sides of history and I will let you know what I find. I am confident that I will find something good worth sharing on this forum. (If it goes father, I might turn it into a book).
Sir William:
I think you've made your points, Joshua. I'd say that chivalry and courtly behavior went hand in hand...an etiquette standard for the nobility and of course, to be mocked by the commoners for being hogwash since it only applied to nobility. At the time.
Now, the knightly orders are meant to be viewed as upper echelon, limited membership and generally given out to luminaries who espouse this or that ideal.
Joshua Santana:
Research Update!
Here is something I found while listening to Cervantes' Don Quixote (translation by John Ormsby) and I quote this passage from the translator's preface:
--- Quote ---That this was the task Cervantes set himself, and that he had
ample provocation to urge him to it, will be sufficiently clear to
those who look into the evidence; as it will be also that it was not
chivalry itself that he attacked and swept away. Of all the
absurdities that, thanks to poetry, will be repeated to the end of
time, there is no greater one than saying that "Cervantes smiled
Spain's chivalry away." In the first place there was no chivalry for
him to smile away. Spain's chivalry had been dead for more than a
century. Its work was done when Granada fell, and as chivalry was
essentially republican in its nature, it could not live under the rule
that Ferdinand substituted for the free institutions of mediaeval
Spain. What he did smile away was not chivalry but a degrading mockery
of it.
The true nature of the "right arm" and the "bright array," before
which, according to the poet, "the world gave ground," and which
Cervantes' single laugh demolished, may be gathered from the words
of one of his own countrymen, Don Felix Pacheco, as reported by
Captain George Carleton, in his "Military Memoirs from 1672 to
1713." "Before the appearance in the world of that labour of
Cervantes," he said, "it was next to an impossibility for a man to
walk the streets with any delight or without danger. There were seen
so many cavaliers prancing and curvetting before the windows of
their mistresses, that a stranger would have imagined the whole nation
to have been nothing less than a race of knight-errants. But after the
world became a little acquainted with that notable history, the man
that was seen in that once celebrated drapery was pointed at as a
Don Quixote, and found himself the jest of high and low. And I
verily believe that to this, and this only, we owe that dampness and
poverty of spirit which has run through all our councils for a century
past, so little agreeable to those nobler actions of our famous
ancestors."
--- End quote ---
I find this of interest in that it dispels the myth of Don Quixote as a satire or a mockery of the Code of Chivalry. Further evidence is found in the first chapter of the book in which the Quixote reads only the Chivalric Romances of his day and nothing else. I couldn't find any reference to Ramon Lull, Geoffri de Charney nor Christine de Pizan who wrote books of Chivalry and Knighthood. I believe the author wanted to show the reader what happen when into many stories enter into the human mind. What I am getting from this is that idealism based on fiction holds no ground when facing reality whereas idealism based on experience and common sense has a solid foundation.
Sir Edward:
Very interesting. I had similar feelings on the matter, that the Don Quixote story has more to it than just being a mockery. You see some real high ideals of Chivalry within it. I felt that the portrayal of it being a "mad man" holding onto archaic ideals was more of a lamentation of the passing of the chivalric age, than a mockery.
Joshua Santana:
Sir Edward: That is why most people will say and I have read other sources that explain the moral points and lesson to be learned from Don Quixote. I think the sentiment you described is a product of the musical which became a movie called "Man of La Mancha" which has several parts of the story mixed and certain elements are present (including the theme of never giving up).
What is more curious is that the author of Quixote was a Soldier, a Poet, a Playwright, and a Dramatist who experienced many of life's up's and down's (including his many attempts to escape from a Turkish prison) yet he maintained a positive outlook on life, This is what I gathered from the John Ormsby Preface which mentions the life of Miguel de Cervantes Saveedra.
I will post further findings here and the essay is going well,I have been tackling early English Renaissance History which I know leads me to the Tudor Dynasty.
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version