Nobility in the medieval time shad unquestionable value attached to it. Majority of the nobles lived their lives in luxury and were rich beyond the common man’s wildest dreams. The thought of the medieval knights often brings nobility in mind, hence the question whether knights had to emanate from the noble class. Exemplary works by Sir Thomas Malory (1408–1471) recount the marvelous adventures of chivalrous, heroic knights of super-human ability. The knights, abiding by the chivalry's strict codes of honor and demeanor went on quests to fight and defeat monsters and giants, thereby winning favor with a lady. Chivalry simply means having the skills to handle a horse. This ability, especially in combat, was of utmost importance to a medieval knight. This term began to take on new meanings, especially during the first crusade (1095 AD) when Christianization of knights began in earnest. The protection of the less fortunate, women and children, and defense of the church were some of the honorable codes that a knight was always to follow(Kennedy, Beverly, 10). The Tale of Sir Gareth is one such work by Malory that examines this issue thereby presenting an interesting view on the real value of a knight. Through the actions of some key characters, Malory revealed his opinion that a knight’s nobility was secondary to his integrity, benevolence and courage.
Most characters in Malory’s time viewed nobility as an absolute necessity and even synonymous to being a knight. Sir Kay illustrates this at the start of this tale, where he chastises Beaumains (Sir Gareth) by saying “were he of noble birth he would have asked for a horse and armor.”“No! He is nothing but a great loafer born of serving wench.” Thus, by disregarding Beaumains’ potential, Sir Kay clarifies his position on knighthood. Through his statement, Sir Kay effectively equates knighthood with nobility from birth. As such Sir Kay doubts Beaumains to the extent of challenging him to combat. Subsequently, Beaumains swiftly defeats Sir Kay even though unarmed with neither a spear nor a shield. Beaumains there after give sout Sir Kay’s symbol of knighthood (his horse) to his dwarf implying that the dwarf would have become a better knight than Sir Kay. These developments reduced Sir Kay to a lowly, laughable knight of little significance. Sir Kay is demeaned in this manner and as such Malory effectively shows that Sir Kay is wrong on the noble and essential qualities a knight.
The fall of Arthur’s Camelot was not due to economic or military failure but rather due to chivalric failure. Arthur’s knights could not observe the code established in their society. Malory provides a portrait of the causes of the eventual ruin due to failure of chivalry, with each knight’s tale adding a chapter to the tragedy of the Round Table. The individual tales of Lancelot, Gareth, and Tristram by Malory differently illustrate the problems brought about by mixing the chivalry of war and feudal servitude with the chivalry of courtly love.
Malory demonstrates, through Gareth, the problems the rigid code had for young and lusty lovers who were impatient in their love. Gareth’s failure in courtly love, however, does not imply a failure of chivalry given that he discarded the convention of courtly love when it ceased to live up to his beliefs. He willingly chose to give up courtly love, and seemed better without it. His story ends happily with his marriage to Lyones. As such, Sir Gareth of Orkeney was a noble knight who wedded Dame Lyonesse with honor bestowed on him by the many people for whose welfare he had fought and shown mercy. Even Lancelot, the respected champion of the chivalry and courtly love has no reproach for Gareth years later. Gareth did not adhere to courtly love long enough for it to permanently change his concept of chivalry; thus, he is still a noble knight. Gareth experienced his problems with courtly love and forbade it for the traditional form of chivalry that served him as long as chivalry itself endured in Arthur’s court.
On the other hand, Tristram’s tale does not signify a failure of chivalry given that he was long adjusting chivalry and courtly love to suit him. The consequence of Tristram’s distortion of chivalry was a barely recognizable pseudo-chivalry that carried him from an adventure to adventure. He forever searched for praise and honor yet never reached the pinnacle. Chivalry and courtly love lost their forms under Tristram’s management while he also lost substance thereby being reduced to retrospections in the tale of another knight.
The real defeat of nobility and chivalry is seen in Lancelot’s fall. Lancelot could not maintain the standard that he so diligently strove to keep, and thus there was little hope for the other less-worthy knights in Arthur’s court. Lancelot’s adultery was not just an infringement upon his knightly oath but an attack upon and a removal of most supposed loyalty from his liege lord, who was his king. Thus, his indiscretion was viewed as an act of treason. The enormity of Lancelot’s offense caused the entire body of knights suffer. Not only did the knights lose their paradigm of chivalry, but this created divisions among them that led to Camelot’s downfall. The final collapse of nobility is most clearly illustrated in Lancelot’s killing of Gareth to rescue Guenevere from the execution pyre. Gareth chivalrously refused to fight his fellow knight and courageously faced death at the hands of this same knight.
Knights were supposed to act nobly in all areas of life, whether in war, love, religion or sport. Over time, these areas started to blend with each other. War and religion, for instance, became one during the Crusades. Eventually, the path of nobility started to follow two distinct strands: chivalry between a knight and his lady and chivalry among knights. Battle prowess was the essential that inspired the order of knighthood and thus remained the noblest knightly quality, even as the order became degraded when the need for knights fizzled. With battle skills, came the noble qualities of loyalty, bravery and courtesy. Bravery was portrayed through one’s tenacity and ferocity on the battlefield. To be brave on the battlefield, to die unflinchingly and to be loyal to the leader were among the nobles of knighthood. Loyalty and bravery were intimately connected, whereby bravery was inspired by loyalty to the king, yet it was through bravery that a knight showed ultimate loyalty. Loyalty, however, stretched beyond the battlefield and was applicable to daily life. Knights were the king’s hands and arms; hence they were to perform his business where and at times when the king could not intervene. As such, it was imperative that a king trusted his knights as he would trust the members of his body. A king needed to trust his knights so that they could act on his stead. Here, the noble role of the knight can be seen to divulge from that a noble soldier to that of a peacemaker or enforcer.
With the introduction of courtly love into chivalric tradition, the knighthood attributes never changed. Heraldry increased, and knights were still required to portray loyalty, bravery and courtesy and to protect the Church. However, the reason for this devotion changed. Heraldry began to include favors to ladies such as Guenevere’s and Elaine’s sleeves that Lancelot wore in his helmet in Malory’s work. It also became common for knights to spot shields having the portrait of the Virgin Mary. Eventhe customary knightly qualities of loyalty, bravery and courtesy evolved from a love for the lady instead of one’s lord. This sentiment occurs many times in Malory’s work, whereby as Schofield observed; true love is exalted as a noble inspiration to valor. However, the two sides of chivalry did not merge as cleanly as one may think. The reason for such outrageous discrepancy could be that while chivalry among knights for the lord’s sake existed for centuries in both practice and literature, courtly love was mostly a literary idea. Thus, a rift formed in chivalry that divided the codes that followed by real knights from the much-idealized chivalry literature.
Malory’s accounts of Gareth, Tristram and Lancelot portrayed the parasitic relationship that courtly love played upon nobility. The loyalty a knight showcased to his woman and actions towards he finds their worth in and trace their origins to the loyalty that a he had. In addition, he had the deeds that he performed for his lord(Stroud, Michael, 4). The characters of Gareth, Tristram and Lancelot, illustrated inconsistencies due to the inconsistent nature of the standard they were expected to keep. Tristram’s distortion of chivalry and courtly love, in Gareth’s abandonment of courtly love in favor of traditional chivalry or Lancelot’s strict adherence to the chivalric code. The tenets of courtly love, each tale displays the problems that arise from the amalgamation of the two sides to chivalry and proves the incompatibility of these two systems in a single, unified chivalric code.
Conclusion
Combat involved taking nobles and knights as prisoners; their lives were dignifiedly spared and were often held as captives for ransom in impressively comfortable surroundings. The treatment did not apply to those who were not knights (archers, peasants, foot-soldiers, etc.), who were most of the time slaughtered after capture. As such, the knights of medieval times were highly valued as being noble. However, the well-intended chivalric code was rarely observed by most knights who often plundered, slaughtered, and looted when given chance. What led Gareth, Lancelot and Tristram to their individual failures in chivalry was their apparent lack of wisdom to reconcile their loyalty to their king and their honorable oath with their loyalty to their respective ladies. Whereas Gareth abandoned courtly love for amore traditional form of chivalry, Tristram exhibited a perversion of courtly love that consequently produced a flawed chivalry. Additionally, Lancelot’s failure ultimately signified the impossibility of honoring both chivalry and the professed love as a single entity(Malory, Thomas, 15).Wholesomely, Malory’s account of these knights’ stories showcases the slow but unavoidable fall of chivalry when aligned with courtly love.Our modern notion of knights and the nobility attached to them is very much based on the ideas of chivalry. Thus, the survival of medieval writings that showed knights as the chivalrous people influences our view of medieval knighthood.
Works Cited
Kennedy, Beverly. Arthurian Studies XI: Knighthood in the Morte Darthur. Cambridge:Brewer, 1985. Print.
Malory, Thomas, Sir. Le Morte Darthur or The Hoole Book of Kyng Arthur and of His Noble Knyghtes of The Rounde Table.New York: Norton, 2004. Print.
Stroud, Michael. Chivalric Terminology in Late Medieval Literature.Journal of the History of Ideas 37 (1976): 323-34. 2008. Print
