The History of Chivalry; Or, Knighthood and Its Times, Volume 1 (of 2)Mills, Charles
Philosophy
The History of Chivalry; Or, Knighthood and Its Times, Volume 1 (of 2)
Mills, Charles
Chivalry
Now if the romance whence the above lines are extracted is to be
considered as a picture of the earliest days of chivalry it is certainly
incorrect, for it was not before the middle age of knighthood that the
face was concealed by a vizor, the earlier defence of the nasal piece
certainly not serving as a mask. The romances are unexceptionable
witnesses for the general customs of chivalry, but we cannot fix their
statements to any particular time, for they were varied and improved by
successive repetitions and transcriptions, and when they were rendered
into prose still further changes were made in order to please the taste of
the age. Thus, in an old Danish romance, a knight fighting for his lady
remains on his horse; but when in the fifteenth century the tale was
translated into the idioms of most chivalric countries, he is represented
as alighting from his milk-white steed and giving it to his fair companion
to hold; and the reason of this departure from the old ballad was, that
the translators, wishing to make their work popular, adapted it to the
manners of the age; and it was the general fashion then for the knights to
dismount when they fought.
[Sidenote: Its general features interesting]
In spite of all our attempts at chronological accuracy, something or other
is perpetually baffling us. We commonly think that mixed armour was the
defensive harness in the days of our Edward the Third; but in Chaucer's
portrait of the knightly character of that time, only the haubergeon is
assigned to the cavalier. Plate-armour seems to have been the general
costume of the fifteenth century; and in any pictorial exhibition of the
murder of John Duke of Burgundy in the year 1419, the artist who should
represent the Duke as harnessed in chain-mail, would be condemned by a
synod of archæologists as guilty of an unpardonable anachronism; yet we
know, on the unquestionable authority of Monstrelet, that when the Duke
lay on the ground, Olivier Layet, assisted by Pierre Frotier, thrust a
sword under the haubergeon into his belly; and that after he had been thus
cruelly murdered, the Dauphin's people stripped from him his coat of
mail.[115] But though it is difficult to determine the fashion of any part
of armour in any particular century, and life may afford nobler
occupations than considering the precise year and month when the Normans
gave up the clumsy expedient of inserting the sword through a hole in the
hauberk, and adopted the more graceful and convenient form of a
belt[116], yet viewing the subject of armour in some of its broad
features, matter of no slight interest may be found. We may not regard the
precise form and fashion of a warrior's scarf, or care to enquire whether
the embroidery were worked with gold or silver, but the general fact
itself involves the state of manners and feelings among our ancestors: it
carries us to the lady's bower where she was working this token of love;
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account