Knighthood

Origin of Mediaeval Knighthood.—Concerning the origin of knighthood or chivalry as it existed in the middle ages—imply ing as it did a formal assumption of and initiation into the pro fession of arms—nothing beyond conjecture is possible. But some of the rudiments of chivalry may be detected in early Teu tonic customs, and they may have made some advance among the Franks of Gaul. We know from Tacitus that the German tribes in his day were wont to admit the young man into the ranks of their warriors with much ceremony. The people of his district were called together; his qualifications were inquired into; and, if he were deemed worthy, his chief, his father, or one of his near kinsmen presented him with a shield and a lance. Again, among the Franks we find Charlemagne girding his son Louis the Pious, and Louis the Pious girding his son Charles the Bald with the sword, when they arrived at manhood. It seems certain here that some ceremony was observed which was a thing of recognized importance. It does not follow that a similar ceremony extended to personages less exalted than the sons of kings and emperors. But if it did we must suppose that it applied first to the mounted warriors of the Franks. It was among the Franks indeed that cavalry first acquired the place which it long maintained in Europe. In early society, where the army is the armed nation, the cavalry must consist of the noble and wealthy, and cavalry and chivalry,- as Freeman observes, will be the same. Since then we discover in the Capitularies of Charlemagne mention of "cabal larii" as a class of warriors; it may be concluded that formal investiture with arms applied to the "caballarii" if it was a usage extending beyond the sovereign and his heir-apparent.

In spite of the silence of our records, Stubbs thinks that such kings as Ethelred, Canute and Edward the Confessor could hardly have failed to introduce into England the institution of chivalry then springing up in every country of Europe ; it is nowhere mentioned as a Norman innovation. Yet the fact that Harold received knighthood from William of Normandy makes it clear either that Harold was not yet a knight, which in the case of so tried a warrior would imply that "dubbing to knighthood" was not yet known in England, or, as Freeman thinks, that in the middle of the 11th century the custom had grown in Normandy into "something of a more special meaning" than it bore in England.

As a military organization, the feudal system of tenures was better adapted to the purposes of defensive than of offensive warfare. When kings and kingdoms were in conflict, and distant and prolonged expeditions became necessary, it was discovered that the resources of feudalism were inadequate. Then there grew up all over Europe a system of fining the knights who failed to respond to the sovereign's call or to stay their full time in the field ; and in England this fine developed, from the reign of Henry II. to that of Edward II., into a war-tax called escuage or scutage (q.v.). In this way funds for war were at the disposal of sovereigns, and the conditions under which feudatories served were altogether changed. Their military service was now far more the result of special agreement. In the reign of Edward I., whose

warlike enterprises after he was king were within the four seas, this alteration does not seem to have gone very far. But the armies of Edward III., Henry V. and Henry VI. during the century of warfare between England and France were recruited and sus tained to a very great extent on the principle of contract. On the Continent the employment of mercenaries was both an early and a common practice.

Besides the convenience of sovereigns and their feudatories, there were other causes which contributed towards bringing about those changes in the military system of Europe which were finally accomplished in the 13th and 14th centuries. During the cru sades vast armies were set on foot in which feudal rights had no place. It was thus established that pay, the love of enterprise and the prospect of plunder were as useful for enlisting troops and keeping them together as the tenure of land and the solemnities of homage and fealty. Moreover, the crusaders who survived an expedition to Palestine were seasoned and experienced although frequently impoverished and landless soldiers, ready to hire them selves to the highest bidder, and well worth their wages.

Knighthood Independent of Feudalism.

To distinguished soldiers of the cross the honours and benefits of knighthood could hardly be refused on the ground that they did not possess a sufficient property qualification—of which perhaps they had de nuded themselves in order to get equipment for the Holy War. And thus the conception of knighthood as of something distinct from feudalism arose and gained ground. It was then that the analogy was first detected between the order of knighthood and the order of priesthood, and that a union of monachism and chiv alry was effected in the religious orders of which the Knights Templars and the Knights Hospitallers were the most eminent examples. Somewhat later is marked the existence of a large and noble class who either from the subdivision of fiefs or from the effects of the custom of primogeniture were very insufficiently provided for. To them only two callings were generally open, that of the churchman and that of the soldier, and the latter as a rule offered greater attractions. Hence men of birth, although not of fortune, would attach themselves to some prince or magnate in whose military service they were sure of maintenance, and might hope for reward in the shape of booty or of ransom. It is probably to this period and these circumstances that we must look for, at all events, the rudimentary beginnings of the military as well as the religious orders of chivalry. It seems likely enough therefore that there should grow up bodies of knights banded together by engagements of fidelity, although free from monastic obligations; wearing a uniform or livery, and naming themselves after some special symbol or some patron saint of their adoption. And such bodies placed under the command of a sovereign or grand master, regulated by statutes and enriched by endowments would have been precisely what in after times such orders as the Garter in England, the Golden Fleece in Burgundy, the Annunziata in Savoy and the St. Michael and Holy Ghost in France actually were.