Conflicting Perspectives: Chivalry in Twelfth-Century Historiography
By Stephanie L. Carlson
Constructing the Past, Vol.16:1 (2015)
Abstract: Historians have found the task of defining medieval chivalry to be an elusive task. Chivalry was at the intersection of warrior culture, aristocratic values and religious ideals. By analyzing twelfth-century historians William of Malmesbury, Henry of Huntingdon, and Orderic Vitalis, I have found that contemporary historians were just as conflicted over these factors as modern historians. Twelfth-century commentators all ascribed different precedence to social and moral factors and the examination of their connections between these values brings the nature of chivalry as a system of interactions between social groups into the open.
Introduction: Chivalry was the dominant social structure of the Middle Ages. Its tenets were limited to the ruling class, but it affected all members of medieval society. Despite its overwhelming prevalence, a definition of chivalry has eluded most historians. Twelfth-century sources range from histories and chronicles of events, to epic poetry based on facts but depicting idealized or demonized characters, to manuals of knightly behavior. Modern perceptions of chivalry are shaped by which sources historians choose to include in their analyses; modern historians get most of their arguments from medieval literature and texts that are dedicated specifically to chivalry. While these sources are beneficial and offer their own details about medieval chivalry, a vital source is unfortunately left out of scholarly discussion. A comparative analysis of twelfth-century histories offers a more thorough understanding of the conflicting elements and ideas that made up medieval chivalry; they also show how, while ubiquitous, not everyone practiced or interpreted chivalry in the same way. Twelfth-century histories do this very well, but are often ignored by modern historians in favor of more glamourous sources.
Chivalry in the twelfth century was conceptualized in a series of behaviors and social choices that knights and aristocrats used to define their class and control their behavior. Throughout this paper, I will explore some of these choices as they appear in the narratives of twelfth-century historians. One of the most visible choices that aristocrats made in this period was whether or not they were going to be vicious or merciful. Often throughout twelfth-century texts, there are examples of aristocrats either burning and pillaging, or offering mercy to their victims. These choices are often based on social class, but are also attributed to personal qualities of aristocrats. Some of these choices also relate to loyalty to ones lord, a core pillar of chivalry, or qualities such as courtesy or generosity. Knights and aristocrats could also choose how pious they chose to be in their practice of their duties and responsibilities. Just as much as churchmen could vary their applications of religious values, aristocrats could also vary their own piety as it related to their secular lives.
Click here to read this article from Illinois Wesleyan University
By Stephanie L. Carlson
Constructing the Past, Vol.16:1 (2015)
Abstract: Historians have found the task of defining medieval chivalry to be an elusive task. Chivalry was at the intersection of warrior culture, aristocratic values and religious ideals. By analyzing twelfth-century historians William of Malmesbury, Henry of Huntingdon, and Orderic Vitalis, I have found that contemporary historians were just as conflicted over these factors as modern historians. Twelfth-century commentators all ascribed different precedence to social and moral factors and the examination of their connections between these values brings the nature of chivalry as a system of interactions between social groups into the open.
Introduction: Chivalry was the dominant social structure of the Middle Ages. Its tenets were limited to the ruling class, but it affected all members of medieval society. Despite its overwhelming prevalence, a definition of chivalry has eluded most historians. Twelfth-century sources range from histories and chronicles of events, to epic poetry based on facts but depicting idealized or demonized characters, to manuals of knightly behavior. Modern perceptions of chivalry are shaped by which sources historians choose to include in their analyses; modern historians get most of their arguments from medieval literature and texts that are dedicated specifically to chivalry. While these sources are beneficial and offer their own details about medieval chivalry, a vital source is unfortunately left out of scholarly discussion. A comparative analysis of twelfth-century histories offers a more thorough understanding of the conflicting elements and ideas that made up medieval chivalry; they also show how, while ubiquitous, not everyone practiced or interpreted chivalry in the same way. Twelfth-century histories do this very well, but are often ignored by modern historians in favor of more glamourous sources.
Click here to read this article from Illinois Wesleyan University
Related Posts
Subscribe to Medievalverse