Thomas, lord of Berkeley (1245-1321), counted on this as a regular and considerable source of income. Late in the 15th cen tury, in spite of the somewhat greater liberty of that age, we find Stephen Scrope writing nakedly to a familiar correspondent "for very need [of poverty], I was fain to sell a little daughter I have for much less than I should have done by possibility," i.e., than the fair market price. Startling as such words are, it is perhaps still more startling to find how frequently and naturally, in the highest society, ladies were degraded by personal violence. The proofs of this from the Chansons de Geste might be multi plied indefinitely. The Knight of La Tour-Landry (1372) relates, by way of warning to his daughters, a tale of a lady who so irri tated her husband by scolding him in company, that he struck her to the earth with his fist and kicked her in the face, breaking her nose. Upon this the good knight moralizes : "And this she had for her euelle and gret langage, that she was wont to saie to her husbonde." This was a natural consequence not only of the want of self-control which we see everywhere in the middle ages, but also of the custom of contracting child-marriages for unsenti mental considerations. Between 1288 and 15oo five marriages are recorded in the direct line of the Berkeley family in which the ten contracting parties averaged less than I 1 years of age : the marriage contract of another Lord Berkeley was drawn up before he was six years old. Moreover, the same business considerations which dictated those early marriages clashed equally with the strict theory of knighthood. In the same Berkeley family, the lord Maurice IV. was knighted in 1338 at the age of seven to avoid the possible evils of wardship, and Thomas V. for the same reason in 1476 at the age of five. Smyth's record of this great family shows that, from the middle of the 13th century onwards, the lords were not only statesmen and warriors, but gentlemen-farm ers on a great scale, even selling fruit from the castle gardens, while their ladies would go round on tours of inspection from dairy to dairy. Indeed, economic causes contributed much to the decay of romantic chivalry. It is not surprising, therefore, to find that at least as early as the middle of the 13th century the com mercial side of knighthood became very prominent. Although by the code of chivalry no candidate could be knighted bef ore the age of 21, we have seen how great nobles like the Berkeleys obtained that honour for their infant heirs in order to avoid possible pecuniary loss; and French writers of the 14th century complained of this knighting of infants as a common abuse. Moreover, after the knight's liability to personal service in war had been modified by the scutage system, it became necessary in the first quarter of the 13th century to compel landowners to take up the knighthood which in theory they should have coveted as an honour—a compulsion which was soon systematically enforced (Distraint of Knighthood, 1278), and became a recognized source of royal income. An indirect effect of this system was to break down another rule of the chivalrous code—that none could be dubbed who was not of gentle birth. This rule, however, had often been broken before; even the romances of chivalry speak not in frequently of the knighting of serfs or jongleurs. While knight hood was avoided by poor nobles, it was coveted by rich citizens. It is recorded in 1298 as "an immemorial custom" in Provence that rich burghers enjoyed the honour of knighthood; and less than a century later we find Sacchetti complaining that the dig nity is open to any rich upstart, however disreputable his ante cedents. Similar causes contributed to the decay of knightly
ideas in warfare. Even in the 12th century, when war was still rather the pastime of kings and knights than a national effort, the strict code of chivalry was more honoured in the breach than in the observance. Already about 116o Peter of Blois had written, "The so-called order of knighthood is nowadays mere disorder"; half a century earlier still, Guibert of Nogent gives • an equally unflattering picture of contemporary chivalry in his De vita sua. But when the Hundred Years' War brought a real national con flict between England and France, when archery became of su preme importance, and a large proportion even of the cavalry were mercenary soldiers, then the exigencies of serious warfare swept away much of that outward display and those class-con ventions on which chivalry had always rested. Several of the best English commanders (e.g., Sir Robert Knolles and Sir Thomas Dagworth) were of obscure birth, while on the French side even Du Guesclin had to wait long for his knighthood because he belonged only to the lesser nobility. The tournament again, which for two centuries had been under the ban of the church, was often almost as definitely discouraged by Edward III. as it was encour aged by John of France; and while John's father opened the 'Crecy campaign by sending Edward a challenge in due form of chivalry, Edward took advantage of this formal delay to amuse the French king with negotiations while he withdrew his army by a rapid march from an almost hopeless position. A quotation from Froissart will illustrate the extent to which war had now become a mere business. At the battle of Aljubarrota, as also at Agin court, the handful of victors were obliged by a sudden panic to slay their prisoners. "Lo, behold the great evil adventure that fell that Saturday. For they slew as many good prisoners as would well have been worth, one with another, 400,000 franks." BIBLIOGRAPHY.-Froissart is perhaps the source from which we may gather most of chivalry in its double aspect, good and bad. The brilliant side comes out most clearly in Joinville, the Chranique de Du Guesclin, and the Histoire de Bayart ; the darker side appears in the earlier chronicles of the crusades, and is especially emphasized by preachers and moralists like Jacques de Vitry, Etienne de Bourbon, Nicole Bozon and John Gower. John Smyth's Lives of the Berkeleys (Bristol and Gloucs. Archaeol. Soc., 2 vols.) and the Book of the Knight of La Tour-Landry (ed. A. de Montaiglon, or in the old English trans. published by the Early English Text Soc.) throw a very vivid light on the inner life of noble families. Of modern books, see A. Schultz, Hofisches Leben z. Zeit der Minnesiinger (Leipzig, 1879) ; S. Luce, Hist. de Du Guesclin et de son Epoque (2nd ed., 1882) ; Leon Gautier, La Chevalerie (1883) ; F. W. Cornish, Chivalry (19oI) . (G. G. C.) ORDERS OF KNIGHTHOOD When orders ceased to be fraternities and became more and more marks of favour and a means of recognizing meritorious services to the Crown and country, the term "orders," became loosely applied to the insignia and decorations themselves. Thus "orders," irrespective of the title or other specific designation they confer, fall in Great Britain generally into three main categories, accordini as the recipients are made "knights grand cross," "knights commander" or "companions." In some orders the classes are more numerous, as in the Royal Victorian, for instance, which has five, numerous foreign orders a like number, some six, while the Chinese "Dragon" boasted no less than II degrees. Generally speaking, the insignia of the "knights grand cross" con sist of a star worn on the left breast and a badge, usually some form of the cross-paty, worn suspended from a ribbon over the shoulder or, in certain cases, on days of high ceremonial from a collar. The "commanders" wear the badge from a ribbon round the neck, and the star on the breast; the "companions" have no star and wear the badge from a narrow ribbon at the button-hole.