Today I conclude my mini-series on women in
the Middle Ages with a look at cult of courtly love and the controversial topic of how it impacted the status of women.
For readers tired of clichés and cartoons, award-winning novelist Helena P. Schrader offers nuanced insight to historical events and figures based on sound research and an understanding of human nature. Her complex and engaging characters bring history back to life as a means to better understand ourselves.
The “Middle Ages” ought to be called either the “Feudal Ages”
or the “Age of Chivalry” since the term “middle" (suggesting something interim or
transitory) is an odd designation for more than a thousand years of history. Feudalism, on the other hand, was a defining characteristic of the
Middle Ages, and Chivalry was the secular ethos of that age. It was chivalry
that gave birth to a radical transformation of man’s understanding of “love”
and with it to a revolution in sexual relations.
Critically, the chivalric notion of love was that it must be mutual, voluntary, and exclusive – on both sides. It could occur between husband and wife – and many of the romances such as Erec et Enide or my favorite Yvain, Or the Knight with the Lion (both by Chrétien de Troyes) or Wolfram von Eschenbach’s Parzival, revolve in part or in whole around the love of a married couple. The notion repeated so often nowadays that courtly love or the love of the troubadors was always about adulterous love is nonsense. Nevertheless, the tradition of the troubadours did put love for another man’s wife on an equal footing with love for one’s own – provided the lady returned the sentiment. The most famous of all adulterous lovers in the age of chivalry were, of course, Lancelot and Guinevere, closely followed by Tristan and Iseult.
All of these features set courtly or chivalric love apart from the erotic love of the ancients, the Arabs or the modern age. Sadly, people still confuse “chivalry” with superficial gestures of courtesy (such as opening doors) and women in the name of “liberation” reject the concepts that first truly liberated them.
To understand the latter, it is necessary to briefly
reiterate the importance of Christian beliefs, and then to look more closely at
chivalry itself. Christianity impacted the concept of love in two ways: 1) God
is defined as Love with Christ as Love incarnate, and 2) it elevated women into
souls, making them spiritual beings, equal to men in the eyes of God. Thus
Christianity values love, including
love for women, while making a clear distinction between love (which is divine)
and lust (which is a mortal sin.) Love for the Virgin was an expression of the
former, and extremely important in the history of the Medieval Church. Yet chaste love for a living woman was also
valued and cherished. Such feelings are well-illustrated by a letter from the 6th
Century poet and priest Venantius Fortunatus to the fifty-year-old Queen
Radegund, then living as a nun in the convent of the Holy Cross at Poitiers.
Fortunatus writes:
Honored
mother, sweet sister
Whom
I revere with a faithful and pious heart,
With
heavely affection, without bodily touch,
It
is not the flesh in me that loves
But
rather the desire of the spirit… (Pernoud, p.35.)
Chivalry, on the other hand, introduced for the first time the
notion that a man could become more worthy, more “noble,” through love for a
lady. Love for a lady became a central – if not the central – concept of chivalry, particularly in literature. Other
characteristics of chivalry, as defined in handbooks on chivalry such as that written
by the Spanish nobleman Ramon Lull, were nobility [of spirit not birth],
loyalty, honor, righteousness, prowess (courage), courtesy, diligence,
cleanliness, generosity, sobriety, and perseverance. Wolfram von Eschenbach in Parzifal stresses a strong sense of
right and wrong, compassion for the unfortunate, generosity, kindness,
humility, mercy, courtesy (particularly to ladies), and cleanliness. Simplified,
chivalry entailed upholding justice by protecting the weak, particularly
widows, orphans, and the Church. Yet regardless of the exact definition, the inspiration for knights striving to
fulfill the ideal of chivalry was love for a lady.
Critically, the chivalric notion of love was that it must be mutual, voluntary, and exclusive – on both sides. It could occur between husband and wife – and many of the romances such as Erec et Enide or my favorite Yvain, Or the Knight with the Lion (both by Chrétien de Troyes) or Wolfram von Eschenbach’s Parzival, revolve in part or in whole around the love of a married couple. The notion repeated so often nowadays that courtly love or the love of the troubadors was always about adulterous love is nonsense. Nevertheless, the tradition of the troubadours did put love for another man’s wife on an equal footing with love for one’s own – provided the lady returned the sentiment. The most famous of all adulterous lovers in the age of chivalry were, of course, Lancelot and Guinevere, closely followed by Tristan and Iseult.
Likewise noteworthy in a feudal world was the fact that the
lover and the beloved were supposed to be valued not for their social status or
their wealth, but for their personal virtues. A lady was to be loved and respected for her
beauty, her graces, her kindness, and her wisdom regardless of her status, and
a knight was to be loved for his manly virtues, not his lands or titles.
Even more important, however, is the fact that regardless of
which of the partners was the social superior, the lady always took on the role
and status of “lord” to her lover. The term of address that a lover used in
addressing his lady was “mi dons” ― literally “my lord.” The term denoted the
knight’s subservience to his lady, his position as her “man” ― her vassal, her
servant, her subject. In art, knights are shown kneeling before their lady and
placing their hands in hers ― the gesture of a vassal taking the feudal oath to
his lord. (I couldn't find an example of this exact gesture on the internet, but here are two images of knights keeling with folded hands before their ladies.
Last but not least, courtly or chivalric love was not a
means to sexual conquest. For lovers who had the luck to be married, it
certainly included physical love, and
in many of the adulterous romances consummation was also achieved. Yet physical
love was not the objective of courtly
love. The objective of love was to become greater ― more courageous, more
courteous, more generous, more noble, in short, more chivalrous than before. In this sense, courtly love reflected
religious love because it was first and foremost love of the spirit and
character rather than the body.
All of these features set courtly or chivalric love apart from the erotic love of the ancients, the Arabs or the modern age. Sadly, people still confuse “chivalry” with superficial gestures of courtesy (such as opening doors) and women in the name of “liberation” reject the concepts that first truly liberated them.
For more on this fascinating, complex and hotly debated
subject, I recommend:
Barber, Richard W. The Knight and
Chivalry. The Boydell Press, 1995.
Hopkins, Andrea. Knights: The
Complete Story of the Age of Chivalry, from Historical Fact to Tales of Romance
and Poetry. Quarto Publishing, 1990.
· Pernoud, Regine. Women
in the Days of the Cathedrals. Ignatius, 1989.
For readers tired of clichés and cartoons, award-winning novelist Helena P. Schrader offers nuanced insight to historical events and figures based on sound research and an understanding of human nature. Her complex and engaging characters bring history back to life as a means to better understand ourselves.
No comments:
Post a Comment