History Chivalry vs the Romantic Chivalry

There are very few things in this world that has been as distorted as the real role of chivalry in history.  What started out as a code for mounted warriors for how they should act when on and off the war field, over many centuries, was twisted and torn apart into a method to decide how men should act even when doing anything, wiping their nose.  And yes, I say men, because at the time it became this shell of its former self, it was directed as manners for men.

Chivalry, in its origin, comes from the french meaning horsemanship.  It's where we get the more modern word "Cavalry" and was a way to show a difference between those on foot and those on horse.  That's all it meant in originally.  Horse Soldier.  One of the first uses of this word was in the 12th century, where the first notions of the  Code of Chivalry was started.  For many centuries, this code was modified and expanded.  Overall, this code would always hearken back to the ideas that the Chivalry was aimed at the fighter, with good reason.

Think back to the first mental image people have of a knight, and then realize that the modern American Football or Rugby player has more in common with a real medieval knight than anyone poets or gentlemen.  They trained hard, day in and day out, to be the best fighter they could be, because their job was to win battles.  They didn't care about being able to woo women, marriages were often arranged in those days anyway.  They didn't care about shining armor, they cared that it fit and didn't prevent them from swinging their mace into someone's body.  They didn't care about defending the weak, they were too busy besieging and  ransacking fortifications for wealth and the obedience of their commander.

It took many many generations and outsiders to change the idea that Chivalry was anything but the rules for the warriors to keep them somewhat at bay.  The vision that we as modern people get of chivalry comes from the Victorian Era, same our view of the "damsel in distress". 

There are two great sources for these points I can cite.  The first is the Wikipedia page on chivalry, detailing the origins and history of Chivalry.  It goes into the literary vs historic, the origins and evolution of code of chivalry,

The next is a documentary, hosted by Terry Jones.  It's called "Medieval Lives"  and each of the 8 episodes deals with dispelling the myths about a common type of person in the medieval world.  The episode on the knight goes in depth about what chivalry meant to a knight, and to the people around them.

This is all to be a springboard to develop what chivalry is and isn't,  by first looking at what it was and wasn't.  It wasn't a code of conduct detailing the correct way to drape a cape over a puddle.  It wasn't a code of conduct showing the correct way to hold a fork and knife (the fork is a modern invention, anyway).  It wasn't a code of conduct for the correct way to rescue a damsel locked in a tower.  But, it was a code of conduct, and that's a place to start and build a version of chivalry that doesn't end with being seen as chauvinistic, degrading, or elitist

Chivalry isn't dead, it's just distorted and broken

Growing up, I was fascinated with the medieval world. Knights in armor, sword fighting, castles, you get the idea. I always wanted to be a knight. As I grew older, I learned more and more about the world then and now

The world of the medieval knight was very different than we all grew up thinking. The world now has a jaded view on what it means to be "knightly" based on ideals of knighthood put onto it long after it's heyday. Now, a person can do something they think is being knightly and be told they are not just wrong for doing it, but they are part of the problem.

On this blog I hope to explore the real world of knighthood, the distortion it went through, and how being truly "knightly" can make the world around us better