French Chivalry Painter, Sidney Published by Johns Hopkins University Press Painter, Sidney. French Chivalry: Chivalric Ideas and Practices in Mediaeval France. Johns Hopkins University Press, 1961. Project MUSE. doi:10.1353/book.72155. https://muse.jhu.edu/. For additional information about this book https://muse.jhu.edu/book/72155 [ Access provided at 24 Sep 2021 17:04 GMT with no institutional affiliation ] This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License. HOPKINS OPEN PUBLISHING ENCORE EDITIONS Sidney Painter French Chivalry Chivalric Ideas and Practices in Mediaeval France Open access edition supported by the National Endowment for the Humanities / Andrew W. Mellon Foundation Humanities Open Book Program. © 2019 Johns Hopkins University Press Published 2019 Johns Hopkins University Press 2715 North Charles Street Baltimore, Maryland 21218-4363 www.press.jhu.edu The text of this book is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License: https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/. CC BY-NC-ND ISBN-13: 978-1-4214-3318-9 (open access) ISBN-10: 1-4214-3318-4 (open access) ISBN-13: 978-1-4214-3316-5 (pbk. : alk. paper) ISBN-10: 1-4214-3316-8 (pbk. : alk. paper) ISBN-13: 978-1-4214-3317-2 (electronic) ISBN-10: 1-4214-3317-6 (electronic) This page supersedes the copyright page included in the original publication of this work. FRENCH CHIVALRY Chivalric Ideas and Practices in Mediaeval France LONDON: HUMPHREY MILFORD OXFORD UNIVERSITY PRESS PARIS: LIBRAIRIE E. DROZ FRENCH CHIVALRY Chivalric Ideas and Practices in Mediaeval France By SIDNEY PAINTER ' BALTIMORE THE JOHNS HOPKINS PRESS COPYRIGHT 1940, THE JOHNS HOPKINS PRESS PRINTED IN THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA BY J, H. FURST COMPANY, BALTIMORE, MARYLAND To N. F. P. PREFACE HAD not my colleagues persuaded me that the term essay is no longer used in the sense of an exploration into a wide and complicated field, I would have entitled this book An essay on chivalric ideas and practices in mediae­ val France. Chivalry has long interested me as a subject for both social history and the history of ideas. I have attempted to deal with it from these two points of view. The nature of the subject and the material used has made it impracticable to follow the established method­ ology of historical scholarship. The foot-notes are for the most part simply references to enable the reader to find the sources of direct and indirect quotations. They are intended to provide illustrations rather than proofs. Thus when I state that a certain idea was frequently found in troubadour poetry, I furnish an illustration of its use, but make no attempt to cite all the places where I have found it. The first chapter entitled The nobles of France is not an integral part of the book. It is intended to provide for the reader who is not familiar with mediaeval history the background required for understanding the chapters on chivalry. The mediaeval historian would do well to start with the second chapter. In general the foot-notes indicate my obligations to fellow scholars, but in three cases the recognition is most inadequate. The first chapter owes much to M. Marc Bloch's highly important work Les caracteres originaux de l'histoire rurale franraise which contains an invalu- vii viii PREFACE able account of the economic history of the feudal class. M. Leon Gautier's book La chevalerie is mentioned in my notes, but I fail to state that a fair part of the material I have used was found through looking up references given by him. I am under peculiarly heavy obligations to Mr. Raymond L. Kilgour whose Decline of chivalry as shown in the French literature of the late Middle Ages was of great service to me. Mr. Kilgour's summary of the literature of the fourteenth and fifteenth century was an invaluable guide through a vast mass of material. Finally I wish to express my gratitude to the Johns Hopkins Historical Seminar for the time and energy it devoted to several of my chapters and to my friends who read all or part of the manuscript and assisted me through their criticisms. Professor Leo Spitzer of the Johns Hopkins University read the fourth chapter and Professors K. R. Greenfieldand F. C. Lane of the same University read the entire manuscript as did Professors Grace Frank of Bryn Mawr College and John La Monte of the University of Cincinnati. These scholars are in no way responsible for my errors of commission or omission, but both types would have been far more numerous without their aid. SIDNEY p AINTER The Johns Hopkins University CONTENTS CHAPTER PAGE I. The Nobles of France I II. Feudal Chivalry 28 III. Religious Chivalry 65 IV. Courtly Love 95 V. Criticisms and Compromises 1 49 Index 1 73 IX I THE NOBLES OF FRANCE CmvALRY as we use the term denotes the ideals and practices considered suitable for a noble. The word itself is reminiscent of the milieu in which the ideas connected with it took shape-the aristocratic society of mediaeval France dominated by mounted warriors or chevaliers. As early as the eleventh century several sets of ideas appeared which represented different views of chivalric standards and behavior. During the next four hundred years these conceptions of the ideal nobleman were developed by and for the feudal class under the influenceof a changing environment, intellectual, politi­ cal, and economic. Hence it is necessary first of all to state very briefly the position of the noble class in the eleventh century and review the most important changes made in its status during the remainder of the Middle Ages. Inheritance and environment had combined to give the nobles of eleventh-century France the personal char­ acteristics of fierce, undisciplined, warrior chieftains. The Frankish aristocrats and the Saxon and Viking raiders had passed on to their descendants the pride, war­ likeness, scorn of peaceful pursuits, impatience with restraint, and extreme individualism which had marked the wild Teutonic barbarian. These qualities in the noble strain had been strengthened by the events of the I 2 FRENCH CHIVALRY ninth and tenth centuries. The modicum of political restraint which the Frankish kings had imposed on their aristocracy disappeared with the collapse of the Caro­ lingian monarchy. Although the development of the feudal hierarchy in the tenth century placed some limits on the independence of the lesser aristocrats, in general the growth of feudalism stabilized in a system of in­ stitutions the political results of royal weakness and noble usurpation. Moreover the continuous warfare that marked the period confirmed the bellicose tenden­ cies of the aristocracy. While royal princes and great lords fought for the rather academic honor of being called king of a realm devastated by Viking raids, each noble waged war on his neighbor whenever he saw fit. Arrogance, hatred of restraint, and love of battle were bred into the very bone of the eleventh-century French nobility. These feudal aristocrats who were so well endowed with the personal qualities appropriate to warriors were favored by contemporary tactical and economic con­ ditions to such an extent that they had a complete mon­ opoly of the military profession. The only type of soldier that was considered reasonably effective during the ninth, tenth, and eleventh centuries was the mounted warrior armed with helmet, hauberk, shield, sword, and lance. This equipment was so costly that it could be provided only by men of wealth, and its efficient use required rigid training from early youth and continuous practice throughout the soldier's active life. Hence the noble endowed with wealth and freedom from the neces­ sity of working for his living was the only effective soldier. The fundamental importance of this monopoly THE NOBLES OF FRANCE 3 of the profession of arms is shown by contemporary terminology. By the beginning of the eleventh century the various vague terms which had been used to desig­ nate the aristocrat had been supplanted by that of miles, soldier. The social and political nobleman had become completely identified with the fully armed warrior. With the exception of nobly-born members of the clergy, an adult male who was not a miles was not a noble. The miles or knight was the master of eleventh­ century France. His absolute power over the mass of the population was sanctioned by both tradition and force. For over two centuries the governmental authority wielded by the Frankish kings as successors to Imperial Rome had been dispersed among the knightly members of the feudal hierarchy. Time had sanctifiedthe usurpa­ tions of royal power that formed the basis for seignorial jurisdiction. As long as the nobles held their monopoly of the military profession, rebellion against their au­ thority was futile. The short-bow was the best weapon possessed by the lower classes, but its shafts were of little effect against knightly armor. Even if a peasant could find the means to procure the equipment of a knight, he would lack the training required to use it effectively. Until the non-noble class obtained wealth, leisure, or a cheap, easily used, and effectiveweapon, the position of the feudal aristocracy was perfectly secure. The knights were supplied with their livelihood by the non-noble laymen, the serfs or villains, who lived on their estates. Whatever surplus the laboring class produced above the barest needs of subsistence went to their knightly lords. But as commerce was practically non-existent and little money was in circulation, this 4 FRENCH CHIVALRY surplus was not in a negotiable form. The serfs culti­ vated the knight's demesnes and paid him rents in services and kind.