Helena P. Schrader's Blog, page 60

The Occitan Resistance

The Albigensian Crusade, which I talked about in my last post, resulted in a bitter and prolonged conflict, because the people of the Languedoc did not submit docilely to the rule of the King of France or the Pope. For half a century, the Occitan lords and towns fought bitterly for their independence.

Nor were the lords of the Languedoc without allies. The King of Aragon, Pedro II, offered his protection to them in 1212, in exchange for them paying homage to him as their overlord. Thinking the King of Spain would be more tolerant of their independent lifestyle – or simply appalled by the atrocities and success of Simon de Montfort – the bulk of the lords of the Languedoc submitted. However, King Pedro proved no match for Simon de Montfort on the battlefield; he was defeated and killed at the Battle of Muret in September 1213. In a second attempt to gain support from a powerful foreign ruler, Raymond VII, the son of Joanna Plantagenet, the sister of Richard I (the Lionheart) and John I of England, forged an alliance in 1241 with his uncle King Henry III, but the army of Louis IX of France defeated the English at Taillebourg a year later.In short, the bulk of the fighting fell to the intractable people of the Languedoc. Simon de Montfort, the most successful and ruthless of the French invaders, was forced to fight a total of 43 battles or sieges in just 9 years. This was a clear indication of how little he was accepted in the territories given him by the Pope (the Viscountship of Béziers and Carcassonne and the County of Toulouse). He was killed during a second siege of Toulouse in 1218 – allegedly by a stone flung from a mangonel (medieval mechanical stone thrower) manned by women. His son Amaury tried to continue the war, receiving support from Prince Louis of France (later Louis VIII), but Amaury lacked his father’s military skills or his luck. In 1220, Guy de Montfort, Amaury’s younger brother, was killed in yet another siege, and by 1224, Amaury de Montfort had had enough. He surrendered the lands and titles for which he, his father, and his brothers had fought so bitterly for 15 years and returned to France. For a moment it looked as if the lords of the Languedoc had won.But the Cathar heresy had not been eradicated, and this provided an excuse for a new crusade. In 1226, Louis VIII took the cross and again brought an army of northern barons and mercenaries into the Languedoc. Within 3 years, the resistance of the southern lords had been broken, and the counts of Toulouse and Foix signed treaties with the French, now led by Louis IX, after his father’s death in 1226.This time, the Inquisition came with the invaders and established the University of Toulouse to conduct “inquiries” into the Cathar heresy. The systematic methods of the Inquisition made it increasingly difficult for Cathars, particularly the so-called Perfects, the priests (and priestesses) of the Cathars, to survive in the towns and villages of the Languedoc. They retreated more and more to the few strongholds still defended by lords sympathetic to the heresy, notably the mountain fortress of Montsegur. In 1232, the Cathar “Bishop,” Guilhabert de Castres, declared Montsegur the “seat and head” of the Cathar Church. The castle was under the protection of the lords of Pereille and Mirepoix.The last armed uprising against the French was led by Raymond-Roger de Trencavel, the son of the last Viscount.  His father had died in his own dungeon at Carcassonne after surrendering to Simon de Montfort in 1209. In 1240, the younger Trencavel made an attempt to recapture his birthright by force. He was supported by many young men from disinherited families, the so-called faydits. It was some of these desperate men who, on May 28, 1242, murdered 2 inquisitors and some of their servants in Avignonet. It had been the murder of the Papal Legate, Pierre of Castlenau, in 1208 that provoked the first “Albigensian Crusade,” of 1209. The murder of 2 inquisitors in 1242 was the final straw that onvinced the French King it was necessary to destroy the Cathar stronghold of Montsegur.In 1243, the siege of Montsegur began. By March of the next year, the garrison had suffered a number of casualties, and an outpost had already fallen to the besiegers. The defenders sought and obtained a truce. On March 16, the forces of the King of France took control of Montsegur. 220 men and women, some “Perfects” and some defenders who converted to the Cathar faith now that they could no longer bear arms in its defense, refused to abjure their heresy and were burned at the stake.

The Albigesnian Crusade

Because the Cathars denied the power of Catholic sacraments and priests, refused to pay tithes or other church taxes, and preached against the corruption of the Catholic Church, the Cathars posed a threat to the power of the Pope and the Catholic Church. The fact that the local secular lords tolerated the heretics in their territories was a further provocation to Rome – and this provided an excuse for the Kings of France to impose their sovereignty over a region that was effectively independent of the Crown at the start of the 11th century.  In 1208, Pope Innocent III called for a “crusade” against the Cathars, or Albigensians. The Pope offered to the knights, noblemen, and mercenaries who took part in this crusade the same forgiveness of sins and cancellation of debts that he offered crusaders against the Saracens in the Holy Land. The following year, in 1209, a crusading army descended on the Languedoc and massacred the inhabitants of the city of Béziers. Allegedly some 20,000 people were put to the sword, including those seeking refuge in the cathedral and the Catholic priests with them.  The most intransigent of the local barons, Raymond-Roger de Trencavel, Viscount of Béziers and Carcassonne, was forced to capitulate. After a long siege of his the fortress-city of Carcassonne, he surrendered his own person to save the lives of the city’s residents and defenders. His lands were given to one of the leaders of the crusade, Simon de Montfort. Raymond-Roger was confined to his own dungeon, where he died three months later. Although the crusaders returned home, Simon de Montfort remained in the Languedoc to try to subdue his unruly vassals, and a long, drawn-out war ensued, characterized by merciless sieges, atrocities, and assassinations.  Meanwhile, a brilliant Cistercian scholar, Dominic Guzman, challenged the Cathars on their own ground, debating with the Cathar preachers and, like them, living a life of humility and poverty. He founded a new preaching order, the Dominicans, whose goal was to fight the heresy by reason and example.  But converting people one by one was a slow process. Neither the Popes in Rome nor the Kings of France were content to wait for the Dominicans to succeed. A second Albigensian Crusade was launched in 1226. In the course of half a century, a combination of armed force and the judicial intimidation by the newly formed Inquisition slowly eradicated the heresy and broke the opposition of the local nobility.

First Review of "A Widow's Crusade"

The first review of A Widow's Crusade was published on amazon, so I wanted to share it here:

5.0 out of 5 stars A very well written and enjoyable story about a lonely widow and her love for an ageing crusader, May 21, 2013 By 
K Mitchell - See all my reviews

This review is from: A Widow's Crusade (Tales from the Languedoc) (Kindle Edition) I've been waiting for the author to put out another story about the Crusades every since I read the English Templar and she doesn't disappoint with this one. She has a wonderful grasp of life in this period so the story really comes to life and the characters are well developed. I did find that the description of Abelard's father's rebellion against Count (then King) Richard got a little convoluted and there was no groundwork for calling the fever he got from over exerting himself in the rain scarlett fever but those are minor issues in an otherwise well written book. The photos of the castles that are included at the end really brings home the enduring legacy of the Templars and the Crusades for those of us who have never been to France or the middle east to see them.

I'm looking forward to reading all the books in the Tales of Chivalry series as they're published. I just wish the author's first two books in the earlier Knights Templar Trilogy were available as ebooks.

 

The Cathar Heresy

In the 11th century AD a theology spread across Europe that challenged the dogma of the Catholic Church. The roots of the theology stretched back to the dualism of some early Christian scholars, but this heresy had unique features and thrived on the corrupt state of the Church in the 11th century (Barber, 2000). The so-called Cathar heresy was particularly strong in northern Italy, in Flanders, and across southwestern France in the area where the langue d’oc was spoken.

Because the nobility of the Languedoc tolerated the heresy, it flourished there and was often referred to as the “Albigensian” heresy after the city of Albi, which was long a stronghold of the heretics (Barber, 2000) (Roux-Perino, 2006).It is hard nowadays to reconstruct Cathar theology, because we have to rely primarily upon the records of the Inquisition. Meticulous as these records tried to be, they nevertheless recorded the beliefs of people of widely differing levels of education, and many statements made before the Inquisition were contradictory.

Nevertheless, it is safe to say that the fundamental belief of the Cathars was that the material world was the work of the devil – i.e., that Earth was hell. Souls on Earth were “fallen angels” or the creations of the fallen angels. These souls were condemned to rebirth in this earthly hell – unless they were purified by a rite administered by a Cathar priest, one of the so-called “Good Men” or “Good Women” (Barber, 2000).
 In short, Cathars believed in reincarnation, but not as a process of individual purification nor as a journey toward spiritual perfection – rather, as a hopeless cycle of damnation. Furthermore, the Cathars rejected the notion that good deeds could in themselves win a soul's release from material hell. Only the Cathar sacrament, the consolamentum, administered by a “pure” Cathar, could secure this grace (Barber, 2000).
The Cathars furthermore denied that Christ had, in fact, become flesh, been crucified, and been resurrected. Rather, they claimed, Christ remained a spiritual being, who only appeared to have taken human form and appeared to have died. Logically, the Cathars rejected the Catholic mass, because they did not believe in the transubstantiation of the Eucharist. They accepted the Gospels, however, and the heart of the consolamentum was the Lord’s Prayer, with particular emphasis on the need to “forgive those who trespass against us” in order for a soul to receive forgiveness from God (Barber, 2000).
The Cathar “Good Men” and “Good Women” were believers who had taken the consolamentum and could administer it to others. They were required, if they wished to go to Heaven rather than be reborn on Earth, to abstain completely from sexual intercourse, to eat neither flesh nor fish, eggs nor cheese, and to refrain from all violence (Barber, 2000).
Most Cathars, however, were not so devout – nor so intellectual. The records of the Inquisition suggest that most Cathars had only vague beliefs, many contradictory, and certainly few people were willing to give up the pleasures of the flesh before the very last possible moment. Believers generally sought to take the consolamentum just before death, when it was no longer a hardship to abstain from sex, flesh, or violence.
The appeal of Catharism stemmed from the fact that to the poor and downtrodden of the 11th and 12th centuries the world was indeed a hellish place. Thus the Cathar explanation of man’s condition seemed more reasonable than traditional Catholic doctrine. The Church preached, in effect, that a benevolent and all-powerful God allowed for widespread starvation, sickness, natural catastrophes, and unending wars. The Cathar critique of the abuses of the Catholic Church was likewise highly popular, because the critique was largely justified – and also justified non-payment of tithes and other church taxes.
As the Church, the Inquisition, and Crusaders increasingly hounded the Languedoc to exterminate the heresy, adherence to the Cathar faith became an act of patriotic defiance as much as a matter of religious belief. Certainly among the nobility, resistance to the northern Crusaders and reluctance to support the Inquisition had less to do with theological sympathy for the dogma of the Cathars than with the desire to retain feudal independence from France and preserve a lifestyle and a culture that was unique and traditional.  The three novels of my "Tales from the Languedoc" series all deal with the Cathar heresy, the Albigensian Crusade, and the Occitan Resistance to a greater or lesser extent.

Finding the Languedoc

Finding the Languedoc of the troubadours is not really difficult, but it is easy to be misled by modern labels. The Languedoc of the Middle Ages was much broader than the modern French Department, Languedoc-Roussillon. The cradle of chivalry was essentially the territories held by the largely autonomous lords in the South of France. The borders of such lands changed with the tides of war and marriages, but essentially was composed of the Duchy of Aquitaine, the Counties of Toulouse, Provence and Foix, and the Visounties of Montpellier, Beziers, Carcassonne and Albi.
A visit to this region shatters misconceptions about the Middle Ages being dark, cold, colorless, primitive and brutal. This is a sun-soaked corner of the earth, enriched by sufficient rain to be perpetually fertile. The scents of the Languedoc are lavender and rosemary, and the colors are the yellow of sunflowers, the green of plane and cypress trees, the blue-turquoise of the Mediterranean and the off-white of limestone -- all things that were no less abundant in the age of chivalry than now.
Because that limestone was used to build both the churches and the castles of the age, the buildings of the region are not grey or even red, but off-white and correspondingly cheerful. The medieval monuments, furthermore, demonstrate just how developed the artistic traditions of the region already were  a thousand years ago. The quality of the sculpture and painting, not to mention the symmetry, harmony and lightness of the architecture testify to the very high culture that reigned. One should never forget that here the Romans had built great cities with fountains fed by magnificent aqueducts and connected by broad, straight roads; they built coliseums, temples, bridges, barracks and luxury villas. The transition from Roman grandeur to Christian splendor was seamless. Ideology, religion, forms of government and the symbols changed, but the fundamental ability to live well remained.
To find the cradle of chivalry, therefore, one needs only go Southeastern France -- to Provence and what is now called "Languedoc-Roussillon" and look for the remnants of the Age of Chivalry. Leave the Cote d' Azure to the hoards of "wannabe" tourists gawking at the nouveau riche, and head inland instead to the great Romanesque Abbey of Senanque - set like a jewel among the fields of blooming lavender.  It is unquestionably one of the most beautiful and harmonious places on earth. Visit the stunningly elaborate palace of the Popes in Avignon -- and you will never again think life in the Middle Ages was drab, primitive and without luxury. Go to St. Gilles, the seat of the Counts of Toulouse, and to the symmetrical and efficient medieval harbor of Aigues Mortes, from which St. Louis sailed with 2,000 knights to re-capture Jerusalem for Christianity.
My secret tip, however, is Moustiers-Ste.-Marie. Here in a gorge in the Haute Provence a monastery was founded in the 5th century. At the mouth of the gorge, nestled in front of the sheer cliffs behind, is a small village with a crooked church (it bends in the middle), and over the gorge stretches a heavy, iron chain with a star hanging from it. According to legend, the star has hung from this chain in the 13th century by a knight called Blacas.  Blacas, so the legend says, had gone on crusade to the Holy Land and been taken captive by the Saracen.  When he was eventually freed, he came to Moustiers-Ste-Marie and hung the star on the chain -- a remarkable feat of engineering for the time! -- as a symbol of his gratitude.
But no one knows anymore which crusade it was or how long "Blacas" spent in captivity. No one knows why he chose a star rather than a cross or some other symbol. Did it represent the "Star of Bethlehem"? Had he been taken captive in Bethlehem or been held prisoner there? Had he rotted in a dark dungeon with only a single window from which he had seen, night after night, a star that came to represent freedom or salvation to him? And why hang his star at Moustiers-Ste-Marie? Had he made a vow to the Virgin Mary here? Did he come from the region? No one knows anymore, any more than we know who paid his ransom, and who was praying for him to come home.
Moustiers-Ste-Marie is just one of many places in the Languedoc that contains the seeds of a novel waiting to be written.

The Cradle of Chivalry - The Languedoc

In the mild Mediterranean climate of southern France, a culture took root that differed sharply from the centralized feudalism of France and England. Here the cities were ruled by committees of burghers (consulates), and vassals took their allegiance to their feudal lords less seriously than in the north. Jews enjoyed positions of prestige and power, and abundant trade brought artistic influences from beyond the Pyrenees and beyond the sea – from Outremer.
It was here, in the part of France that spoke a dialect known as the langue d’oc, that the concept of romantic love is first recorded. Utterly different from lust and carnal desire, but not lacking passion, this was secular, human love between men and women that had the power to inspire men to great deeds. Here the concept of chivalry was born.
The defining characteristic of chivalry was the civilization of the warrior: the harnessing of manly courage, strength, and violence in the service of the Church, Society, and Love. Critical to the evolution of the cult of chivalry – although not the sole source of it – was the culture and literature of the Languedoc, the land of the troubadours.Yet the influence of chivalry soon spread far beyond the Languedoc, taking root as far away as Champagne, Poitiers, the Holy Roman Empire, and England. At the same time, chivalry moved out from literature and into the classroom. Texts were written (usually by monks!) for growing boys to read, so that they would know how to behave as men. Chivalry had become the ideal of the European ruling class.  Too many modern writers (and film makers) seem to forget (if they ever knew) that the Languedoc was not only warm and sunny but highly civilized as well. The "Middle Ages" is associated in the mind of too many people today with "cold and dark and primitive."  Remembering the source of chivalry might help counter that misperception. So next week I'll talk a little more about where to go to find the cradle of chivalry. Meanwhile, I'll add some photos to this site.

Places for the Imagination

My novels are character-centric with the main focus on character development and interaction. It is not surprising, therefore, that most of my novels are inspired by people.  My historical biographies and biographical fiction, obviously, were inspired by real historical personalities, whose stories fascinate me -- Leonidas of Sparta, Edward the Black Prince, General Friedrich Olbricht. Other stories were inspired more by the “footnotes” to history – an passing reference to an individual act of courage or compassion in the description of mainstream historical events, a short description of a donor or grave in a half-forgotten church, a local legend of dubious veracity that nevertheless captures the imagination…. Yet almost as important as people are places.  I firmly believe that my interest in history and historical fiction started at the age of four when my father took me to the Coliseum in Rome. While my mother and older sisters took the guided tour, my father (wisely) decided a four year old would be bored by so much information. So he took through the Coliseum alone and confined himself to the essentials. “This,” he told me, “is where the Romans fed the Christians to the Lions.” Now that was fascinating to a four year old. I spent the rest of the afternoon (or however long the official tour lasted) looking at the Coliseum and trying to imagine where they had kept the lions? where the Christians? Was there no way to escape? What if a lion got loose among the spectators? You see how rapidly this can become a novel? Of course, at four, no novel evolved, but the process of thinking about the places I visited as the site of historical events andthe stage set for personal drama had started. It was helpful that Rome was only the start of a tour that took us to Florence and Venice, then up the Rhine and finally to Denmark and England, where we had family. Two years later we were in Brazil, and my imagination was ignited by a visit to the decaying city of Manaus on the Amazon. That indeed inspired me to my first novel, a tale of an Indian boy following the Amazon to the sea. (Any resemblance to childhood books about travelling down the St. Lawrence Seaway and the Mississippi is pure coincidence, of course….) I was in second grade. At fifteen, the family returned to England. By now I loved to read as much as I loved to eat and breathe. I had not stopped writing since that book about the Amazon. Now, however, I was living in the midst of history. We lived in Portsmouth. Nelson’s flagship the Victory was within walking distance of our Victorian townhouse. The view out our front bay window was of the Solent, the Isle of Wight, the Royal Navy patrolling the grey, white-capped waves…. Although I never wrote a novel about the Royal Navy in the age of sail, I soon became fascinated with Britain in WWII. I visited the Imperial War Museum and touched the wings of Spitfires. I went to Tangmere, so close to Portsmouth, and gazed out across the peaceful, grass airfield, while hearing the gentle peace shattered by the jingle of a telephone, the call to “scramble,” the roar of Merlin engines and the distant thud of the falling bombs. It took almost two decades and various false starts, but when Chasing the Wind was published in 2007 it was praised by one of the few surviving RAF fighter aces of that war, Wing Commander Bob Doe, as “the best book” he had ever read about the Battle of Britain. Doe wrote in his shaky handwriting a letter I treasure to this day, in which he says I “got it smack on the way it was for us fighter pilots.” No amount of sales is a higher accolade for a historical novelist than for someone who lived through the time and events described in a piece of fiction to say the novel got it right. That is why, to this day, I consider Chasing the Wind (Kindle title: Where Eagles Never Flew ) my best novel.    But England is a treasure chest for inspiration, and my biographical novel of Edward Plantagenet (more commonly known as The Black Prince) has also taken shape and flight from visits to Berkhamsted (his childhood home), Restmorel, Kenilworth etc. etc. Edward, however, was not only heir to the crown of England and Prince of Wales, he was the most brilliant English commander in the Hundred Years War and Prince of Aquitaine. Through Edward I therefore came to know the South of France – or was it the other way around? In any case, there are few places in the world more inspiring to a historical novelist than Carcassonne, Narbonne, Albi, Moissac, Fontfroid, Najac….. And then there was Cyprus. In the weeks and months ahead, I will be selecting some of my favorite places, places with connections to my individual novels, and introducing them to you. I hope my descriptions will inspire you to visit these unique places – either in my books or in person.

The Incarnation of Chivalry

Every now and then, throughout the age of chivalry, men emerged, who adhered so exceptionally to the code of chivalry that they were viewed by their contemporaries viewed as veritable "incarnations of chivalry." Such a man was William Marshal. In the late 12th and early 13th century, he rose from being the younger son of a rebellious English baron to Regent of England for Henry III. At the age of seven, he was condemned to hang by his own father, who had turned him over to his liege lord, King Stephen, as a hostage for his own good behavior -- and then brazenly broke his word.  He had other sons, William's father told the man he betrayed, and the means to make new ones, he added.  Fortunately for William -- and historians --  King Stephen was more civilized than his father and refused to kill the innocent child. But William learned a lesson: the rest of his life he would be unwaveringly loyal to not only his liege but to honor itself. William served Eleanor of Acquitaine and four Plantagenet kings. He knighted the heir to the English throne, and dared defy Richard the Lionheart to his face. He crusaded with the Templars, courted a princess, and eventually married one of the greatest heiress of England. His life was the stuff of legends, yet it is history, and for that reason it is good material for historians and novelists alike.   Below are reviews of two very different books, one non-fiction and one fiction, which take the life of William Marshal as their theme. 
William Marshal: Flower of Chivalry   by George DubyGeorges Duby uses the 13th century biography of William Marshal, commissioned by his eldest son immediately after his death and written within the lifetime of many of his companions, as a device to present an analysis of chivalry and knighthood in the late 12th and early 13th centuries.  In this book that opens with the last months of Marshal's life and describes how he prepares for death, Duby, a leading French historian and professor of medieval history, provides the reader with a wealth of information in very compact form. The book is particularly valuable for descriptions of melees, the rough-and-tumble pseudo-battles fought over rough terrain by hundreds of knights, which preceded the tame tournaments of later centuries. Likewise, Duby provides useful insight into life of “bachelor” knights of the period – the large, unruly pack of younger sons, who had no land, no income, and no wives. He shows how they had to live by their wits, their skills and by forming associations with other knights, relatives and sponsors. However, the figure of Marshal himself is all too often lost in Duby’s commentary. Although his source is a rare authentic record written in the vernacular, which when quoted is vibrant and evocative, Duby quotes it far too seldom.  It is thus Duby’s voice, not Marshal's or his biographer's, that dominates this work. Duby is teaching his reader about the 12th/13th century, using Marshal’s life as “Exhibit A.” This is Duby’s version of events, his interpretation of 12th century society, and to scholars familiar with the material, his arguments may not always sound convincing. More important to me, however, was simply that William Marshal, the supposed subject, comes too short in this book. To be sure, enough of William Marshal’s personality is revealed to be tantalizing, but the book left me unsatisfied. I felt particularly cheated by the way Duby rushes over Marshal’s most exceptional achievements (that of retaining the favor of three successive, bitterly hostile and very different kings: Henry II, Richard I and John). Duby may be right that these events are “so well recorded in history” they need no explanation, but the book is sold as a biography of Marshal, and readers have a right expect that his entire life will be described. Duby's book left me feeling I would have enjoyed the original medieval “song” (at least in translation) more – and interested in finding a full-length biography of Marshal.  Champion by Christian BallingThis in contrast was a fun read. I enjoyed it, and I liked the characters. As a historian, I appreciated the fact that not only were no known historical facts altered, but the characters acted appropriately for their age and society. This was not a fantasy or costume-romance. The weakness of the book is that it focuses on only a short, albeit critical, phase in William Marshal's long life. This book describes a mature William Marshal at a pivotal moment in his life, the moment when he earns a barony from not one, but two, kings. Readers picking up a book on William Marshal, however, likely expect more. Many will, like me, be interested in the whole man, his development over time, what made him tick, how he managed to survive and come out ahead in such turbulent times, his relationships with the different kings he served. Because the book does not even attempt to address these issues, it will -- despite its virtues -- disappoint some readers.

The Ideal of Chivalry

Chivalry evolved out of the military and literary traditions of antiquity, and emerged at the beginning of the High Middle Ages as a concept that rapidly came to dominate the ethos and identity of the nobility. Chivalry is inextricably tied to knighthood, a phenomenon distinct to Europe in the Middle Ages. There have been cavalrymen in many different ages and societies, but the cult of knighthood, including a special dubbing ceremony and a code of ethics, exists only in the Age of Chivalry.

Chivalry was always an ideal. It defined the way a knight was supposed to behave. No one in the Middle Ages seriously expected every knight to live up that ideal. Even the heroes of chivalric romances usually fell short of the ideal at least some of the time – and many only achieved their goal and glory when they overcame their baser instincts or their natural shortcomings to live, however briefly, like “perfect, gentle knights.” Chivalry was a code of behavior that young men were supposed to aspire to – not to already have. The code was articulated and passed on to youths in the form of romances and poems lionizing the chivalric deeds of fictional heroes. It was also recorded in the biographies of historical personages viewed as examples of chivalry, from William Marshal to Geoffrey de Charney and Edward, the Black Prince. Finally, there were a number of textbooks or handbooks that attempted to codify the essence of chivalry.

So what defined chivalry? First and foremost, a knight was supposed to uphold justice by protecting the weak, particularly widows, orphans, and the Church. He was also supposed to be upon a permanent quest for honor and glory, sometimes translated as “nobility.” The troubadours, meanwhile, had introduced for the first time the notion that “a man could become more noble through love."Thus love for a lady became a central – if not the central – concept of chivalry, particularly in literature.The chivalric notion of love was that it must be mutual, voluntary, and exclusive – on both sides. It could occur between husband and wife – and many of the romances such as Erec et Enide by Chrétien de Troyes or Wolfram von Eschenbach’s Parzivalrevolve in part or in whole around the love of a married couple. But the tradition of the troubadours put love for another man’s wife on an equal footing with love for one’s own – provided the lady returned the sentiment!  The most famous of all adulterous lovers in the age of chivalry were, of course, Lancelot and Guinevere, closely followed by Tristan and Iseult.

Likewise noteworthy in a feudal world was the fact that the lover and the beloved were supposed to be valued not for their social status or their wealth, but for their personal virtues, albeit only within the band of society that was “noble.” By definition, the heroes of chivalry are knights, and their ladies are just that: ladies. Stories about peasants, priests, and merchants are simply not part of the genre, any more than lusting after a serving “wench” qualifies as “love” in the chivalric tradition. But within the chivalric class, a lady was  supposed to be loved and respected for her beauty and her graces regardless of her status, and a knight was supposed to be loved for his chivalric virtues, not his lands or titles.In more practical terms, one of the handbooks on chivalry written by the Spanish nobleman Ramon Lull lists the virtues of a knight as nobility, loyalty, honor, righteousness, prowess (courage), love, courtesy, diligence, cleanliness, generosity, sobriety, and perseverance. Wolfram von Eschenbach in Parzifal, on the other hand, stresses a strong sense of right and wrong, compassion for the unfortunate, generosity, kindness, humility, mercy, courtesy (particularly to ladies), and cleanliness.


It is lamentable that nowadays the discussion of "chivalry" is so often confined to whether a man should open a door for a woman and similar nonsense! Chivalry wasn't about a set of anachronistic manners, it was a fundamental code of conduct that put the strong in the service of the weak -- a concept that ennobled both.

For more about chivalry, I recommend especially the following sources:

Barber, Richard W. 1970, 1974, 1995. The Knight and Chivalry. Woodbridge, Suffolk: The Boydell Press, 1970, 1974, 1995.Duby, George. 1985. William Marshal: The Flower of Chivalry. New York: Random House, 1985.

Hopkins, Andrea. 1990. Knights: The Complete Story of the Age of Chivalry, from Historical Fact to Tales of Romance and Poetry. London: Quarto Publishing, 1990.

The Age of Chivalry

Chivalry was a phenomenon of the High Middle Ages. The influence of chivalry was greatest in the period from 1100 to 1450 AD, and this is the period in which my novels are set. During this period, Europe was Catholic; there was no alternative to the Church of Rome, and the Pope was an extremely powerful political figure. Furthermore, monasticism flourished and several important new monastic orders were founded, notably the Cistercians, the Dominicans, the Franciscans, and – most important for students of chivalry – the Hospitallers, the Templars, and the Teutonic Knights.
The dominant political system in the period was feudalism. Government was organized hierarchically, based on a complex system of obligations in exchange for rights and privileges. Because land ownership varied from region to region and across time, it is impossible to describe it here in detail, but the notion behind feudalism was that the king controlled all the territory in his kingdom and simply “lent” or “leased” it to tenants-in-chief (i.e., his barons), in exchange for their services in administration, justice, and particularly war. He could also grant land to the Church in exchange for the prayers and spiritual services of the Church. The barons and bishops did the same, granting rights to the land they held from the king to their vassals, again in exchange for military service and so on, down to the peasant class, or serfs. The peasants, who might or might not be free, were responsible for tilling the soil for their overlord in exchange for retaining a portion of the produce for their own use. It is important to keep in mind that even serfs could accumulate considerable wealth, which they sometimes used to buy their freedom – or just to build larger, more comfortable homes. Archaeological evidence suggests that many “peasant homes” were as large and as luxurious as the homes of knights and squires. (Wood, 1985, 1990) (Emery, 2007) (Platt, 1978)
In fact, contrary to popular opinion, medieval society was highly fluid, and fortunes could be made – and lost – in just a few generations. Judicious marriages, the use of heiresses to reward loyal but landless followers, and the fortunes of war enabled men of “lesser birth” to rise very high in medieval society. The sons of peasants could, in the right circumstances, be knighted, and landless knights could become barons. (Keen, 1990) (Wilkinson, 1969) (Gies, 1974)Examples of the latter are William Marshal, Thomas Holland, and Bertrand du Guesclin. Nevertheless, at the heart of feudalism was the notion that in an ordered society, each man and woman had a God-ordained role to play based on his or her “estate.” The king and his nobles were responsible for protecting the realm against outside threats, ensuring the security of law-abiding citizens against criminals, and dispensing justice. The Church was responsible for the spiritual welfare of the people, providing services from baptism and marriage to absolution, burial, and prayers for the dead. The “Third Estate,” composed of peasants and merchants, ensured the material well-being of all. From the medieval perspective, each estate made an essential contribution to good governance; the notion that the “Third Estate” was supporting “useless” and “exploitive” noble and clerical classes is a modern idea introduced most dramatically in the French Revolution. (Keen, 1990)
The historical record makes it abundantly clear that the Middle Ages was a period in which violence, cruelty, injustice, and oppression were rampant. Terms such as “feudalism,” “the Crusades,” and “the Inquisition” have become synonymous with oppression, injustice, torture, cruelty, and mindless aggression. Indeed, it is commonplace, nowadays, to refer to anything particularly inhumane or primitive as “medieval.” This is a gross oversimplification of medieval society. Although medieval society did not fulfill modern ideals of good governance, and instances of brutality and repression existed in abundance, many aspects of medieval society were more “progressive” and “enlightened” than popular wisdom suggests. Women, for example, enjoyed considerably more freedom and financial independence in the medieval/feudal age than after the industrial revolution. (Ward, 1992) (Mertes, 1988) (Gies, 1987) Also, by the High and Later Middle Ages, the level of education among the nobility, clergy, and merchant class was significant. Nobles spoke, read, and wrote at least their own language and Latin, and sometimes they knew a second modern language or Greek as well. Women of the nobility and the merchant class were generally literate; they conducted correspondence and acted as their husbands’ deputies, or as the heads of their own households as widows or heiresses. (Mertes, 1988) (Ward, 1992) Furthermore, the clergy and many noblemen were more familiar with the works of antiquity than was the case after the Reformation. Last but not least, to name another example that might surprise readers new to the topic, bathing was more common in the Middle Ages than in the Renaissance, and – in the residences of the higher nobility – hot and cold running water was not unknown!
The Middle Ages was a period of intellectual and artistic flourishing. Trade was booming and was for the first time extended to China and the Americas. (The Norwegians maintained regular ties to Vinland until the plague decimated the Norwegian population in the mid-14th century.) Some of the most magnificent works of architecture known to man were built during the Middle Ages. Most readers will be familiar with medieval sacred architecture, from the awe-inspiring cathedrals such as York and St. Chapel to the breathtaking beauty of monasteries such as Senanque, Moissac, and Bellapais. Less familiar, however, may be the secular architecture of the period, which increasingly offered (to those able to afford it) comfortable and gracious accommodations with heating, plumbing, and light. The Palace of the Popes in Aquitaine, the residence of the Counts of Poitiers, and the home of the Earls of Northumberland at Warkworth Castle were magnificent residences. Even the lesser nobility and the upwardly mobile merchant and peasant class increasingly built and lived in houses that were substantial, well-lit, and warm. (Wood, 1985, 1990) (Emery, 2007)This, then, is the world in which my “Tales of Chivalry” are set. For more information visit www.tales-of-chivalry.com.

Bibliography

Emery, Anthony. 2007. Discovering Medieval Houses. Prince's Risborough, Buckinghamshire: Shire Publications Ltd., 2007.
Gies, Frances and Joseph. 1987. Marriage and the Family in the Middle Ages. New York: Harper and Row, 1987.
Gies, Joseph & Frances. 1974. Life in a Medieval Castle. New York: Harper and Row, 1974.
Keen, Maurice. 1990. English Society in the Later Middle Ages: 1348-1500. London: Penguin Books, 1990.
Mertes, Kate. 1988. The English Noble Household, 1250–1600: Good Governance and Politic Rule. Oxford: Basil Blackwell, 1988.
Platt, Colin. 1978. Medieval England: A Social History and Archaeology from the Conquest to A.D. 1600. London: Routledge, 1978.
Ward, Jennifer C. 1992. English Noblewomen in the Later Middle Ages. London: Longman Group Inc., 1992.
Wilkinson, B. 1969. The Later Middle Ages in England, 1216-1485. Harlow, Essex: Longman Group Ltd., 1969.
Wood, Margaret. 1965, 1983, 1990. The English Mediaeval House. London: Bracken Books, 1965, 1983, 1990.