In Chivalry and Violence in Medieval Europe, Richard Kaeuper explores the concept of chivalry in an attempt to understand its true nature and place in medieval society. He takes into consideration the tendency of early writers and more modern historians to take a romantic view or a cynical view of chivalry based on prejudices. In his book, Kaeuper disputes a modern romanticized belief that chivalry was a positive and uncomplicated factor that helped to restrain men and that the problems with order in medieval society brought about by war and violence were not inherent in chivalry, but rather a lack of properly dispersed chivalric ideals. He argues that, "in the problem of public order the knights themselves played and ambivalent problematic role and that the guides to their conduct that chivalry provided were in themselves complex and problematic."(3)

To support his thesis, Kaeuper draws on a variety of medieval literature and histories, as well as some modern interpretation. He seeks to explain, through these sources, the concept of violence in medieval society, and to explain how that violence figured in the medieval social structure and in the minds of the knights who practiced it. Keauper recognizes, as do many of the medieval sources he quotes, that during the medieval period there was both licit and illicit violence. Licit violence was used to bring about order. He first turns to the Norman monk Orderic Vitalis who believed that violence for the right cause was acceptable. He quotes Vitalis who said, "Wrong must be done to put an end to a wrong thing."(13) He also refers to the French abbot Suger, who praised the royal use of force in the interest of order.

Kaeuper also used chivalric literature as a source of information about the use of violence in medieval society. He claims that, "Almost without failure these works give prominence to acts of disruptive violence and problems of control."(22) Regarding the effects of illicit violence, Kaeuper refers to the literary images of unusual power such as the black knights who fight each other and attack others. These knights are demonic in nature, and in some cases are the souls of knights being punished for sins. These knights are found in the story of Arthur, Lancelot and Gawain on the grail pilgrimage as well as others.

Kaeuper brings up the question of whether knights read romances, which is important to understanding how or if knights and chivalric literature interacted. Kaeuper states that there is evidence to believe knights did read such literature since Geoffrey de Charny referred to Lancelot do Lac, and Raymond Llull "drew heavily on thirteenth century romances."(31)

Kaeuper next looks at the idea of knights as pious people. Examples of this are again found by Kaeuper in literature as Galahad in The Quest for the Holy Grail and Lancelot in Mort Artu both regularly hear mass and take pains to do so. William Martel's biographer, according to Kaeuper, "recorded William's belief that all his knightly achievement was the personal gift of God."(47) Further, according to Kaeuper, both William Marshall and Geoffrey de Charny were crusaders, who also founded religious houses.

Despite their piety, there can be no doubt that knights were violent men. This is again supported through medieval literature. Kaeuper finds reference in Lancelot do Lac where upon hearing there would be a war with Arthur, "The good and bold knights were happy and joyful at this, for they felt there had been peace too long."(162-163) He also looks to the Chanson Gaydon where he finds that knights, "have no desire to make peace, they have always heard the war-cry."(163) He also finds such reference in biography such as the Chandos Herald's portrayal of the Black Prince, "There they made many a widowed lady and many a poor child orphan."(182)

Kaeuper arranges his book topically. Within each topic, he draws on various sources to make his point. This book is easily read, and supplies enough literary reference and narrative of events to be entertaining. Kaeuper has attempted to write a balanced description of the realities of a life dedicated to chivalry, and he succeeds. He consistently points out the good and bad associated with chivalry and knightly violence.



Michael E. Watson and Dr. Carl Edwin Lindgren