The outward appearance and internal decorations of his castle bespoke his rank. The crennels and towers which were intended for their defence, marked also the dignities and honours of the owner. On the highest sum mit of them, a vane, or pennon, or a helmet was fixed, which served as a signal of courteous and welcome hos pitality to all of the same order, who were journeying that way on affairs of gallantry or war. Every apart ment of his castle, and the furniture with which it was embellished, and the whole domestic economy and ar iangemcnt also, were marked by the peculiar privileges and honours of knighthood.
While, however, the knight possessed these privileges and rights, and was authorised to exercise over the esquires and pages of his household supreme authority, be was deemed answerable for the faults they might commit, and every infraction of the laws of chivalry or justice of which they might be guilty. If his armorial bearing, the symbol and proof of his rank, opened for him a passage through every fortified place, and admit ted him to the palaces of sovereigns, where he was re ceived with the utmost hospitality, and when he departed loaded with costly presents, and even supplied with mo ney to defray the expellees of his journey ; he was on his part expected not only to demean himself with the utmost courtesy, but to maintain such good discipline among his esquires, pages, and other attendants, that there might be no room to complain against them. Ile was obliged to recompense by every means in his pow er, or which were required of him, every act of in justice or violence which they committed. The law fined, or punished with infamy, all who detained strayed hawks, hunting dogs, or horses ; and if these were found in the possession of any of the family of a knight, not only the guilty person, but the knight himself, payed the fine, and was exposed to the infamy of the punishment. So com plete and unrestricted was his authority over all who in habited his castle, that nothing was supposed to be clone without his orders, permission, or knowledge.
The institutions and laws of chivalry were so careful to mark out the knight, that the line of distinction be tween him ancl the esquire was drawn with great minute ness and particularity. This has been already partly noticed in describing the armour, the dress, and the pri vileges of the knight ; but there are a few other particu lars which we shall now point out.. A shield and sword
were the only weapons allowed the esquire ; and he was not permitted, nor with this imperfect armour would it have been prudent, for him to engage in combat with a knight." He \Vas also debarred from engaging in tour naments, at least on the most solemn day, and on high occasions. While the spurs of the chevalier were gilt, those of the esquire were only silvered. The hair on the forehead of the former was carefully kept cut short, probably in order that no advantage might otherwise be taken of him in combat; the hair of the latter was not thus distinguished. It would appear, also, from two passages quoted by St Palaye, (i. 329.), from William of Tudela, that the horses of the chevaliers and the esquires were distinguished, by the former neither hav ing their hair cut off or concealed by the armour ; bile the latter were unarmed, and with their hair in its natu ral state. It is probable that the hair of the chevaliers horses were cut off, in order that the armour might sit more closely and easily.
Besides awarding to the knight double the sum when he came into a court of law, which, under the same cir cumstances, would have been awarded to an esquire ; the former, when he received Presents from his sove reign, or any noble, had always double in value to the latter. After a battle, when the booty was to be divided, the gold, silver, the war-horses, and the palfreys, be longed to the knights of the army ; the rest were given to the esquires. In the plunder of a country, it was deemed below the dignity of the former to take any of the sheep or cattle for their share ;—the ransom of a knight, also, was double that of an esquire. While the esquires and pages were obliged to perform military watch, this duty was dispensed with on the part of the knights. The appellations of themselves and their wives were also kept carefully distinct ; while the titles of Don, Sire, Messire, Monseigneur, (for we must be indebted to the French language for the several terms), were given to the chevaliers, and those of Dame or Madame to their ladies. The titles of Monsieur, or Damoiseau, were given to the esquires, and to their wives that of Demoiselle. In short, the coat of arms, the grand sym bol of chivalry, not only brought along with it many pri vileges, but also drew a broad and marked line of dis tinction betwixt all who wore it, and those who had not attained that honour.