Knights and Chivalry, a video by Ryan Reeves
Given
the warring nature of society during the early Middle Ages, especially in the
regions of today’s France, and the not uncommon attacks against non-warring
peasants, the Church stepped in to address this via a series of actions and
decrees.
The
first tactic was to scold the knights. This evolved eventually into
a meaningful and formal attempt, captured under the banner of the Peace and
Truce of God. it was not an avenue to bless fighting; it was
designed as a means to curtail the fighting that was in any case occurring.
The
Peace of God
The Peace of God or Pax Dei was
a proclamation issued by local clergy that granted immunity from violence to
noncombatants who could not defend themselves, beginning with the peasants (agricolae)
and with the clergy. The Synod of Charroux decreed a limited Pax Dei in 989,
and the practice spread to most of Western Europe over the next century,
surviving in some form until at least the thirteenth century.
Further
protections would be offered, regarding women and children, the theft of farm
animals, protection of church property, etc. The penalty for
violations could rise to excommunication.
Its origins coincided with the failure of
the last Carolingian rulers to keep order in West Frankland, and the accession
of Hugh Capet, founder of a new dynasty in 987.
This
was a popular movement, as the discussions involved many people in large, open
fields, and not merely a discussion amongst the bishops and
nobles. Saints’ relics were brought from the region; the warriors
would then swear an oath on the relics in the presence of the
crowds. Paul Collins would write, in The Birth of the West:
The biggest threat to those breaking the peace was the use of
relics and the bodies of the saints to frighten warlords with curses of from
the afterlife if they engaged in warfare.
Those who refused to keep the peace were excluded from Mass and
Communion, refused forgiveness of sin, and denied church burial in consecrated
ground, which effectively condemned them to hell.
Tom
Holland would add, from his book Millennium:
Fearsome were the sanctions proclaimed against any horseman who
might subsequently go back upon his word. A lighted candle,
extinguished by the fingers of a bishop himself and dropped into the dust,
would serve to symbolise the terrible snuffing out of all his hopes of
heaven. “May he render up his bowels into the latrine.”
The
movement gained momentum around the millennium anniversary of Christ’s death –
assumed 1033. Such popular movements, however, did not instantly
transform the nobility. Many historians traditionally looked at the
movement as a failure:
That traditional view, however, by concentrating on the failure
of the movement to accomplish its quasi-messianic goals, misses the indirect
impact it had. More recently historians accord a central place to the Peace in
the transformations of European culture in this period, a period often
characterized as the birth of Western (as opposed to Mediterranean)
civilization.
The
lack of a coercive force behind the demand for peace may have been what moved
European culture and tradition:
For without recourse to force, it had to depend on more
fundamental cultural activity: building a wide and powerful social consensus,
developing courts of mediation, educating a lay populace, high and low, to
internalize peaceful values.
In
other words, don’t look to the state (or king) to enforce a proper cultural
view; the only way to transform a culture is to transform the
culture. This had many follow-on effects: it awakened the populace
to the possibility of self-organization; it Christianized the nobility, leading
to a chivalric code (with more on this shortly); it gave authority to the
Church, giving it space as a major player in the political and social life of
the time; it opened up a dialogue on the true meaning of Christianity.
The
Peace of God evolved to include the idea that the shedding of a Christian’s
blood was the shedding of Christ’s blood. This had ramifications for
the peace internally, but also toward views regarding those on the outside –
primarily Muslims.
Through its high moral vision and its appeals to communal
action, the Peace of God furthered the peaceful organization of a violent
society.
And
this, I think is key: the society was violent; the Church led action to curb
this violence. That heaven on earth was not achieved is almost
irrelevant; that the culture was shifted toward considerations of peace is both
valuable and without doubt.
It was during this period, and in no small part to the sentiment
behind the Peace of God despite the lack of consistent application, that the
individual was discovered. Returning to Collins:
Individuality here refers to a sense of self-awareness, personal
identity, and moral responsibility. It also involves
spirituality. As Morris says, “A sense of individual identity and
value is implicit in a belief in a God who has called each man by name.”
It
was Christianity that identified the individual, and this well before the
Enlightenment or even the Renaissance.
The
Truce of God
The Truce of God, or Treuga Dei came
in 1027, the result of another council meeting this time in
Normandy. The Truce of God is after a temporary suspension of
hostilities, unlike the Peace of God, which is intended to be perpetual.
It confirmed permanent peace for all churches and their grounds,
the monks, clerks and chattels; all women, pilgrims, merchants and their
servants, cattle and horses; and men at work in the fields. For all others
peace was required throughout Advent, the season of Lent, and from the
beginning of the Rogation days until eight days after Pentecost.
More
days were added to the list, until only about 80 days per year were available
for fighting.
From William Ward Watkin: the long sweep from
Constantine’s reign until the close of the Hundred Years’ War cannot be
considered a period of peace, but a period of seeking peace – to include a
search for just causes of war and also establishing a just
peace. Early churchmen expressed that “justice is a quality of the
will of God.”
“It is the Divine will which gives to each man his Jus (strict
law), for it is the good and beneficial Creator who grants men to seek to hold,
and to use what they need, and it is He who commands men to give such things to
each other and forbids men to hinder their fellows from enjoying them.”
The
feudal system, contrary to the stereotype, was a system of reciprocal
obligation: the serf owed duty only as long as the noble kept his oath to the
serf. Yes, the serf was tied to the land – so was the noble; it was
an agrarian society, after all. The serf, unlike slaves before or
after, could own and accumulate personal property and could leave it for his
heirs.
From
about the ninth century through the thirteenth, Christian civilization came
into full flower. While every region had its cultural differences,
the over-riding clarity and purpose was one aimed at Christianity.
In
the middle of the thirteenth century, Thomas Aquinas would challenge the Truce
of God, holding that it was lawful to wage war for purpose of safeguarding the
commonweal on holidays and feast days. Yes, there was still fighting
– this is the human condition.
Yet,
it was the time of the building of the greatest cathedrals: a generation before
saw Chartres as well as other cathedrals in France. From Watkin:
We find civilization at one of its extreme high levels in
philosophy, in religion, and in creative construction. No age has
followed which approached it.
Chivalry
As
mentioned, the Peace and Truce of God only had a limited effect – the Church
had no physical means by which to curb the violence. Therefore, the
Church then sought to direct the desire of violence to something more noble:
the chivalric code, a code of honor, developed by poets and writers affiliated
with the Church. Listen to the women; they will not send you off to
senseless war but to a cause more noble.
Returning
to Reeves: The key figure in developing the chivalric code is Chrétien de
Troyes, in the twelfth century. He was a chaplain, or pastor, in the
area of Champagne in France. He writes stories of King Arthur,
including Perceval and the Holy Grail: seek the Church, seek the sacraments;
this was the more noble undertaking for the knight.
He
also added the story of Lancelot of the Lake, Lancelot who fell in love with
King Arthur’s wife Guinevere. He seeks to win Guinevere’s respect by
doing good. These stories were written not in Latin, but in the
common vernacular. This made it accessible to a larger portion of the
knight class.
Hence,
chivalry was not a result of male patriarchy or oppression of women; this is
reading history backwards, from our time looking back. Instead, the
chivalric code sought to elevate women to a position of soft authority over the
warrior instinct of the men.
There
were other authors and works as well – written
independently and without knowledge of the other works: the anonymously
authored poem Ordene de chevalerie; the Libre del ordre de
cavayleria, written by Ramon Llull; the Livre de Chevalerie of
Geoffroi de Charny. While differing in detail, they combine to show
a way of life where the military, the nobility, and religion combine.
Conclusion
It
is easy to point to the history of Christianity and find untoward behavior; we
are all human after all. Yet, every time one digs a little deeper,
one finds that it was through Christianity that such behavior was tempered.
Epilogue
The Hundred Years’ War, along with the
Black Death, fundamentally terminated this progress. This long war
was between the two powers – France and England – that were most centralized,
most consolidated. In its wake, nationalism grew while the
commonality of a Christian culture receded.
In earlier times, the king’s powers
were limited by the law – the old and good law or the common
law. This changed to a position where the king was the
law. Here is where one can begin to see a state in our understanding
of the word.
World War One was the culmination, the
final blow, the suicide of the West.
http://bionicmosquito.blogspot.com/2020/08/the-church-and-violence.html
