Chivalry

Never to do outrage, nor murder, and always to flee treason. Also, by no means to be cruel, but to give mercy unto him that asketh mercy, upon pain of forfeiture of their worship and lordship of King Arthur for evermore: and always to do to ladies, damsels, and gentlewomen succor, upon pain of death. Also, that no man takes battles in a wrongful quarrel for no law, nor for world’s goods. Unto this were all the knights sworn of the table round.

Sir Thomas Malory, Le Morte D’Arthur


When Arthur began choosing Knights for his Round Table, these Knights took a vow, pledging their fealty to Arthur and the Order of Chivalry. There was a dream that was Camelot and this dream could only materialize if the people who were fighting for it aligned their behavior to the vision. There was to be no murdering of innocents, no treason, and mercy was to be given to any who asked for it. Moreover, the weak and defenseless were to always be given aid and comfort. This Code was to be held as a sacred trust because such ideal behavior would ensure the integrity of Arthur’s reign, it would maintain the moral high ground from which he would extend his kingdom, and it would lead to the realization of his vision.

A perfect description of chivalrous behavior is found in Malory’s, Le Morte D’Arthur where Sir Ector describes Lancelot, who has just died, as “a man meek in the hall with women and as the sternest of knights in battle.” He was both humble and fierce—and he knew when to be which. Blending and integrating strength and honor, a warrior’s spirit with humility, was the Code that governed the Knight’s behavior on the battlefield and “in the hall with women.”

Arthur established this Order not only because he wanted his Knights to behave in a way that reflected the ideals of Camelot, but, also, because he wanted the citizens of Britain to have examples that inspired them to adopt these same ideals. What is unique about these two behaviors—fierceness and humility—is that, while they are usually seen as antithetical, in Arthur’s mind, they were behaviors that must be wedded. If evil is to be defended against, people must be fierce in battle. However, these same people must also know when to be gentle and compassionate.

CS Lewis comments on the necessity of joining these two behaviors in his essay, The Necessity of Chivalry.

It taught humility and forbearance to the great warrior because everyone knew by experience how much he usually needed that lesson. It demanded valor of the urbane and modest man because everyone knew that he was likely as not to be a milksop.

If we cannot produce Lancelots, humanity falls into two sections—those who can deal in blood and iron but cannot be “meek in hall”, and those who are “meek in hall” but useless in battle …. The man who combines both characters—the knight—is a work not of nature but of art; of that art which has human beings, instead of canvas or marble, for its medium.

As Lewis points out, these ideal behaviors in the same person are not natural. It is, however, a necessary integration of ideal behaviors that will produce the kind of men and women it will take to bring about Arthur’s vision of Camelot.

Warrior or Servant?
The challenge for most of us is discerning when to take up the sword and when to put it down, when to do battle and when to be compassionate or humbly forbear. Looking back on my life, I see so many circumstances where I behaved as a warrior when compassion and humility would have been the wiser way of being. This was especially true during my 20’s and 30’s.

In the Memoirs of Christ’s Apostles, we rarely see Jesus taking up the sword, so to speak, and going to war. There were some dust ups with the Sadducees and Pharisees, and the time where he cleared the Temple of moneychangers but that’s about it. It seems to me that most of his interactions with people were conversational—and his words were quite gentle. This is especially true when he was speaking with “unbelievers.”

Looking back at your conversations with “unbelievers”—those people who do not agree with you on important issues regarding ideals, values and belief systems—what would have been the wiser way of being: warrior or servant? Which of these two behaviors would have been more effective? Which would have embodied your ideals and values more honorably?

Just something to think about …

Copyright, Monte E Wilson, 2009