Kaeuper R.W. - Chivalry and violence in medieval europe (1999)(en)

extended peace to the land: ÔPerceval remained in his own land and for seven years he held it in peace, free of war, untroubled by any man.Õ37

Sometimes the wickedness and sheer lack of wisdom in Þghting Christian against Christian is stressed. GirartÕs war with King Charles in Girart de Roussillon, is stopped by divine intervention: God sends a great storm and the banners of both sides are symbolically destroyed by Þre.38 Several characters in this chanson get the message and speak out for the peace God obviously wants; Galeran de Senlis advises the king that one who Þghts a long and unjust war must pay for it. The former enemies are soon, however, hard at work Þghting side by side against pagan foes, Slavs, Saxons, and Frisians.39 In The Story of Merlin, Queen Guinevere argues the same line, after a tournament at her wedding has got out of hand: the knights, she says, should save their prowess for the Saxons and not waste it in destroying one another.40 This same advice was given to the kings of England and France in the closing years of the fourteenth century by Philippe de MŽzi•res: they must think whether they want to appear before the throne of divine judgement with blood dripping from their Þngers Ôthrough following the advice of your knights, nurtured in bloodshedÕ.41

Could the fears have been even more comprehensive? R. Howard BlochÕs argument for a general, brooding fear about the social cost of warfare in early chivalric literature can be extended throughout the literature of the entire chivalric era.42 This persistent countercurrent, however thin and infrequent, suggests either that at some subliminal level the fear of violence gave knights themselves some second thoughts, or that some authors were speaking their own minds to the necessary but dangerous warriors. Whoever wrote the Vows of the Heron (likely to have been someone interested in the peace and prosperity needed by the commercial society of the Low Countries) produced a Ôgrimly satiricalÕ text early in the Hundred Years War. This biting parody of chivalric vows of wartime prowess links the knights with Ôunsuccessful, mean or revolting actsÕ by an author Ôwho realized that only peace could bring prosperityÕ.43

Less savage but equally interesting critiques appear in better-known texts. If Cador speaks out powerfully against the softening effects of peace in Geoffrey of MonmouthÕs History of the Kings of Britain, his successors Wace and

39See ibid., laisses 184, 186, 190. In fact, a leitmotif of this poem is the cost of starting and continuing wrongful war.

40Pickens, tr., Story of Merlin, 352; Sommer, ed., Vulgate Version, II, 333.

41Coupland, ed., tr., Letter to King Richard II, 90. He at one point calls the warriors sharptoothed locusts, at another leeches who so greedily suck the lifeblood of the poor that they burst: pp. 132Ð3.

42Bloch, Medieval French Literature and Law.

43Analysed, with full textual citations, in Whiting, ÔVows of the HeronÕ.

Lawman give a short but powerful answering speech in praise of peace to no less a Þgure than Gawain.44 The Mort Artu, written a century later, regularly cautions against the danger of Ôa war which will never come to an endÕ, the war which in fact destroys the Round Table by the end of this romance.45 Nearly two centuries later, Malory carried the theme forward in the monumental closing section of his Morte Darthur. He pictures Arthur reduced to tears as he mutters, ÔAlas, alas, that ever yet thys warre began!Õ46 The knights who support Lancelot in this struggle know the cost: Ôin thys realme woll be no quyett, but ever debate and stryff, now the felyshyp of the Rounde Table ys brokyn.Õ And Lancelot himself, undergoing the transformation that marks his character both in the Mort Artu and here, declares that Ôbetter ys pees than allwayes warreÕ.47

Warning statements may be more indirect, and partial, yet even more dramatic. In an unforgettable scene in the Perlesvaus, Perceval drowns his motherÕs enemy, the Lord of the Fens, by suspending him upside-down in a vat of his own knightsÕ blood, to allow the man Þnally to get enough of the blood of knights for which he has seemingly longed. The result is a land with untroubled joy. Yet Perceval has, just before this, responded to his motherÕs pleas for a more peaceful solution with a Þrm dictum: Ô ÒMy Lady,Ó he said, Òit is thus: you must make war on the warlike and peace with the peaceful.Ó Õ48

Conduct of War

Could one not argue, however, that in the inevitable warfare of early European history chivalry functioned as a restraining force, that war on its sliding medieval scale of possibilitiesÑfrom the dispute of two lords over a mill to the dispute of two kings over a provinceÑwas less horriÞc because its key practitioners were knights? As John Gillingham and Matthew Strickland have shown, chivalric ideals may indeed have made Þghting less barbaric for the knights themselves. Gillingham has argued strenuously that a reduction in torture and killing of prisoners came with the advent of chivalry. Strickland suggests even more broadly a lessening of the horrors of war for the knights;

44 Thorpe, tr., Geoffrey of Monmouth, 231Ð2; Arnold, ed., Brut de Wace, 562Ð4; Allen, tr.,

Lawman, Brut, 318.

45Cable, tr., Death of King Arthur, 114, 117, 123; Frappier, ed., La Mort, 114, 118, 125.

46Vinaver, ed., Malory.Works, 691. The line also appears more than once in the Stanzaic Morte Arthur, on which Malory drew. See Benson, ed., King ArthurÕs Death, e.g., ll. 2204Ð5, 2442Ð3. Lancelot often expresses a desire for peace late in this romance, e.g. ll. 2498Ð9, 2596Ð603. Even the lords of England are said to complain that ÔArthur loved nought but warringÕ: l. 2975. In her last conversation with Lancelot, Guinevere urges that he Ôkeep thy reme from war and wrakeÕ and decries a world with Ônought, / But war and strife and batail soreÕ: ll. 3666, 3720Ð1.

47Benson, Morte Arthur, 699, 701.

48Bryant, tr., Perlesvaus, 151Ð2, 150; Nitze and Jenkins, eds, Perlesvaus. 234Ð5, 232.

despite their martial culture, medieval warriors tried to limit the occurrence and mortality of serious combat, granted truces and respites, treated prisoners well, and ransomed rather than massacred them.49

Chivalric literature, especially from the thirteenth century, supports the idea of a lively concern about the proper way knights should treat each other when they Þght. Since single combats or small group encounters are pictured in romance, the writer may have tournament in mind as much as the chaos of battle.50 The focus is on taking unfair advantage of another; the use of horses in combat is a topic of special importance. Can one Þght an unarmed or inadequately armed opponent? Is an opponentÕs horse a legitimate target? Should a mounted man attack one already unhorsed? Should a mounted man ride his great warhorse over an enemy knocked ßat on the ground?51

ChrŽtien de Troyes, near the end of the twelfth century, tells his readers that Yvain and the Storm Knight Ôfought most honourablyÕ because neither strikes his opponentÕs horse.52 Early in the next century, the biography of William Marshal tells the vivid story of William, fully armed and acting as rear-guard for Henry II, confronting Richard the Lion-Heart, unarmed and in active pursuit of his father. When Richard pointed out the disparity to William, the Marshal simply disabled RichardÕs horse with his lance.53 The courtesy here, certainly the prudence, lay in not striking at Richard himself. In The Marvels of Rigomer (written about the same time), important charactersÑand sometimes the author himselfÑspeak out against the idea of several Þghting against one, claiming that knights in their day simply Þght to win, but that in the good old days such practice was considered felony.54 Gawain, the hero of this text, is said to want to defeat an opponent using nothing but Ôstrict chivalry (droit chevalerie)Õ.55 Le Bel Inconnu takes the same line, declaring that in the good old days knights fought one-to-one, but now twenty-Þve will attack a solitary opponent.56

Over the next several decades the vast cycle of romances based on Lancelot and the Grail provides repeated discussions of ideal martial behaviour. When, in the Merlin Continuation, Gawain Þghts a knight at a ford, and knocks him

49John Gillingham, ÔIntroduction of ChivalryÕ; Strickland, War and Chivalry.

50A point of view in agreement with Ayton, Knights and Warhorses, 20.

51The examples that follow are largely drawn from Old French literature. For many examples drawn from Middle English texts, see Gist, Love and War, 155Ð90.

3619Ð798, 8511Ð38.

55Foerster, Mervelles de Rigomer, ll. 11501Ð3.

56Fresco, ed., and Donagher, tr., Renaut de B‰gŽ, ll. 1011Ð24, 1066Ð82, 5818Ð21. The editor and translator suggest a date Ôfrom 1191 into the Þrst quarter of the thirteenth centuryÕ (p. xii). The elusive nature of any Ôgolden ageÕ of chivalry is once again evident in these passages.

from his saddle, he is taught proper manners: ÔEither come down on foot,Õ shouts the dismounted man, gripping his lance, Ôor you will cause your horse to be killed; then you will be completely humiliated.Õ Though Gawain with one blow splits the manÕs head like a melon, he has accepted the dictum.57 Having learned, he teaches. Not long after, when Morholt, who had unhorsed him, charges him on horseback, he cries out, ÔMorholt, if you donÕt dismount, youÕll make me kill your horse, for which the blame will be mine and the shame yours.Õ Morholt accepts the admonition at once, exclaiming, ÔYou have just taught me a courtesy so great that I will observe it all my life, provided I am not in too bad a situation.Õ58 The reform quality of the passage is as clear as the prudent qualiÞer, which clings to it like a burr.

This same romance pictures Arthur, having unhorsed Pellinor, voluntarily dismounting to Þght on foot, Ôsomething no one had yet done in the kingdom of Logres, although later many a valiant man would do itÕ.59 Such basic lessons are preached repeatedly: not only do good men disdain mounted advantage, they refuse to Þght several against one, and (as Lancelot instructs Mordred) they will not Þght, armed, against an unarmed man.60

Yet all these romances show somewhat more ambiguity on the question of riding over prostrate opponents. The valiant Bors rides his horse over a ßattened opponent, for example, until the trampled man yields. Even Lancelot can appear graciously dismounting to Þght an unhorsed enemy in one passage and then shortly thereafter ride over anotherÕs body Ôuntil he had completely broken itÕ so that Ôthe knight fainted in his great agonyÕ.61 Debate and ambiguity continue through the texts of the post-vulgate cycle of romances.62 A similar tension can be found in MaloryÕs Morte Darthur.63

On one aspect of knightly Þghting chivalric literature is quite unambiguous: the standard display of all-important prowess takes the form of combat on horseback, at least as long as the knights could keep their saddles. Malory has Sir Lamerok say to his brothers, unhorsed on the sixth day of the great tournament at Surluse:

Bretherne, ye ought to be ashamed to fall so of your horsis! What is a knyght but whan

57Asher, tr., Merlin Continuation, 231; Paris and Ulrich, eds, Merlin, II, 84Ð5.

58Asher, Merlin Continuation, 272; Roussineau, ed., Merlin, II, 375.

59Asher, Merlin Continuation, 179Ð80; Paris and Ulrich, Merlin, II, 191. These ÔlaterÕ displays of courtesy have, of course, actually already appeared in romances that preceeded this one in date of composition.

60E.g. Krueger, tr., Lancelot Part IV, 44, 61, 93; Micha, ed., Lancelot, II, 152, 221, 347; IV, 69; V, 207Ð8; Kibler, tr., Lancelot Part V, 130; Carroll, tr., Lancelot Part VI, 257.

61Krueger, Lancelot Part IV, 44, 34Ð5; Micha, Lancelot, II, 152Ð3, 116Ð17.

62See, e.g., Asher, Merlin Continuation, 13, 17, 27Ð8; Quest, 190, 275; Sommer, ed., Zeitschrift, 42, 53, 76; Bogdanow, ed., Version Post-Vulgate, 361; Piel, ed., Demanda, 396.

63Examples can be found in Stroud, ÔMalory and the Chivalric EthosÕ, 336.

he is on horseback? For I sette nat by a knyght whan he is on foote, for all batayles on foote ar but pyllours in batayles, for there sholde no knyght fyghte on foote but yf hit were for treson or ellys he were dryvyn by forse to fyght on foote. Therefore, bretherne, sytte fast in your sadyls, or ellys fyght never more afore me!64

This link between a focus on mounted prowess in all ideological statements and the changing role of heavy cavalry in actual combat provides us with a fact of considerable importance. Many scholars have argued that chivalry began to take on recognizable form at roughly the time a basic set of changes appeared in the favoured mode of Þghting. Mounted shock combat had arrived.65 With feet planted in sturdy platform stirrups and lance Þrmly tucked under the arm, an individual knight or a thundering line of knights could be expected to deliver the decisive blow on the tournament Þeld or the battleÞeld. In fact, such a charge delivered at lance point all the combined force of man and mount. Two lines of such units clashing produced a roar of battle so deafening that, as one medieval writer after another swears, Ôyou could not hear GodÕs thunderÕ.66

We now know that the dominance of heavy cavalry on medieval battleÞelds was much less total than was once thought.67 Moreover, war typically took the form of the less-than-heroic raid, or the grind of siege operations, and even setpiece battles might depend on dismounted knights rather than the sweeping cavalry charge, pennons snapping in the wind. The knights themselves, most famously the English in the course of the Hundred Years War, could Þght with much success on foot. Some of the most famous engagements of even the twelfth century had been won by dismounted knights.68 Moreover, specialist footmen with crossbows and eventually with longbows, engineers with increasingly powerful forms of counterweight artillery, throwing Ôstinking Greek ÞreÕ69 or sizeable projectiles, sappers with humble picks and shovelsÑ all actually formed essential elements of military victory.70

64Vinaver, ed., Malory. Works, 408. This same knight is surprised when Palomides wants to Þght him on foot: Ôhit wolde beseme a knyght to juste and to fyght on horsebackeÕ (p. 367).

65A discussion of the classic thesis of Heinrich Brunner, with an emphasis on the signiÞcance of the stirrup, appears in White, Medieval Technology, 1Ð38.

66See comments in D. J. A. Ross, ÔPleine sa hansteÕ, and idem, ÔLÕoriginalitŽ de ÒTuroldusÓ Õ.

67See especially DeVries, Infantry Warfare.

68Strickland, War and Chivalry, 23; Ayton, Knights and Warhorses, 19Ð20.

69Muir, tr., Capture of Orange, 113; RŽgnier, ed., Prise dÕOrange, l. 1118.

70For the most recent and thorough overviews, see Prestwich, Armies and Warfare; Strickland, War and Chivalry; Bachrach, ÔCaballus and CaballariusÕ. The actual breeding of suitable horses is explored in R. H. C. Davis, Medieval Warhorse; the relationship between military technology and military service in Ayton, Knights and Warhorses.

Yet the powerful strata of medieval society maintained and projected in the literature they patronized a belief in the superiority of the mounted warriors who were chivalry.71 The Lancelot do Lac, playing with cheval and chevalier, states that when knighthood originated Ôas the Scriptures reveal, no one was so bold as to mount a horse, if he was not a knight; and that is why they were called knightsÕ.72 In his equally mythical account of the origins of chivalry, Ramon Llull places the choosing of the horse as the knightÕs characteristic beast immediately after his account of the selection of the knight for his characteristic role.73

One literary passage after another links chivalric ideology with mounted shock combat. Boson, in Girart de Roussillon, we learn, is ready to Þght anyone, once he was on his horse.74 Having discovered the liaison between his queen and Lancelot, Arthur, in the Stanzaic Morte Arthur, pragmatically doubts if Lancelot can be taken ÔYif he were armed upon his steedÕ.75 The author of the Perlesvaus tells us that Lancelot, besieged by robber knights in a hall, Ôwould have cared little for their threats if he had had his horse with him, but in combat he was not so sure of himself on foot as on horseback, nor has any good knight ever beenÕ.76 Being Lancelot, he, of course, accounts for himself well, breaking out of the hall, cutting off the leg of one of his mounted opponents at the thigh, and getting the essential horse, Ôand at once he felt more assuredÕ.77 If we want a real-life parallelÑthough with a less successful conclusionÑwe need only consider Richard Maluvel, a twelfth-century Scottish knight, who did marvellous feats of arms in a battle at Alnwick: ÔAs long as he was on his horse he feared nothing; he had a splendid horse and he was splendidly accoutred; but once his horse was slain, he promptly surrenderedÕ.78

Horses are, of course, signiÞcant characters in early chivalric literature; those ridden by heroes are often named and may be as individualized as any other character. Aliscans, for example, features VivienÕs horse which even

71The same mounted self-image appears in manuscript illuminations and on seals. As Ayton points out, the illustrations in the Ellesmere manuscript shows the knight and squire mounted not on the palfreys they would have routinely ridden, but on their status horses, the great beasts they would ideally ride into battle: Knights and Warhorses, 31Ð2. Rezak surveys chivalric use of seals in ÔMedieval SealsÕ.

72Corley, tr., Lancelot of the Lake, 53; Elspeth Kennedy, ed., Lancelot do Lac, I, 143. This text mentions in passing a signiÞcant bit of imagined chivalric history, the Þrst appearance of a warhorse covered in protective iron. Corley, ibid., 384; Kennedy, ibid., 550.

73Byles, ed., Book of the Ordre of Chyvalry, 15. He later feels compelled, signiÞcantly, to remind his reader that chivalry lies not in horse and arms, but in the knight himself: p. 114.

74Meyer, ed., tr., Girart de Roussillon, ll. 6289Ð90.

75Benson, ed., Morte Arthur, l. 1751.

76Bryant, tr., Perlesvaus, 135; Nitze and Jenkins, eds, Perlesvaus, 206.

77Bryant, Perlesvaus, 139; Nitze and Jenkins, Perlesvaus, 213.

78Prestwich, Armies and Warfare, 328. Michel, ed., tr., Chronicle, ll. 1878Ð86.

understandÕs the heroÕs conversation.79 In more than one story about William of Orange, the great hero Þghts with an interesting mixture of motives: the desire to defeat pagans threatening Christendom and the desire to possess his opponentÕs marvellous horse.80 Two centuries later the register of the Black Prince provides the proud names of some of his destriers: Grisel de Cologne, Morel de Burghersh, Bayard de Brucell, Bayard Dieu.81 Such horses possess equine prowess. In Yder we hear warhorses captured by the hero making a terrible racket as they neigh and try to injure one another.82 In the alliterative romance William of Palerne, the warhorse that had served the heroÕs father recognizes the returning son, bows down on its forelegs before him, and carries him proudly into battle, conscious of the knightÕs valour.83

French knights seem to have prided themselves on a particular act of knightly horsemanship, quick turns for a second charge against a surprised foe. Turning Ôin the French styleÕ is mentioned admiringly in more than one chanson de geste.84

The author of the Mort Artu (a man much interested in tactical details) informs his readers that King Arthur, on his way to the climactic battle against the traitor Mordred, wisely went at a pace that would not tire the warhorses for the critical moment of battle.85 Whoever wrote The Story of Merlin was likewise fascinated with horses and comments closely on the details of mounted formations.86

The staple of all combat in all chivalric literature, of course, is the encounter of two mounted knights, lances Ôstraight outÕ in the words of the Chanson de Roland.87 Many thousands of these combats appear in works that were listened

79Ferrante, tr., Guillaume dÕOrange, 201; Wienbeck et al., eds, Aliscans, 35. Don Pero Ni–oÕs biographer asserts that Ôhorses [have] been found that in the thick of battle have shewn themselves as loyal to their masters as if they had been menÕ. They are so Ôstrong, Þery, swift and faithful, that a brave man, mounted on a good horse, may do more in an hour of Þghting than ten or mayhap a hundred could have done afootÕ: Evans, tr., The Unconquered Knight, 11. He later describes such a horse, ridden by his hero against the Moors. Hit by many stones, the horse half-wheeled, causing Pero Ni–o to feel shame at turning from his foe. But the horse, Ôwhich was gallant and loyal, returned to the charge, feeling the will of its rider, amd thrust itself into the midst of the MoorsÕ: p. 194.

80Wienbeck et al., eds, Aliscans, 77. In the Crowning of Louis, William likewise covets his pagan opponentÕs great horse: see Hoggan, tr., Crowning of Louis, 15; Langlois, Couronnement de Louis, 22.

83Bunt, ed., William of Palerne, ll. 3282Ð95.

84Kay, ed., tr., Raoul de Cambrai, laisses 199, 206. Muir, tr., Song of William, 195; Suard, ed.,

Chanson de Guillaume, 204.

85Cable, tr., Death of King Arthur, 205; Frappier, ed., La Mort, 226.

86E.g. Pickens, tr., Story of Merlin, 240; Sommer, ed., Vulgate Version, II, 135: ÔRight away the squires ran to put their armour on. They got on their horses and lined up by rows and then squeezed right together, just as the knights showed them to do.Õ This text and others provide numerous battleÞeld scenes which turn on procuring horses for unhorsed comrades.

87Brault, ed., tr., Chanson de Roland, l. 1204.

to or read for centuries. Audiences seemingly never tired of the details: one lance pierces shield, hauberk, and body; or both lances splinter spectacularly, perhaps leaving the two knights unhorsed and temporarily dazed, soon to rise and go at each other with their sharp swords. Tens of thousands of lines of poetry and later of prose are devoted to the variations on this pattern. The rare comic scenes only make the same point more obliquely: the huge pre-knightly Rainouart in the William of Orange cycle mounted on a charger for the Þrst timeÑbackwardsÑor learning the economical use of the sword as opposed to his beloved but rather undiscriminating club (which crushes both the enemy and his valuable horse).88 In literature, chivalry Þghts its battles with lance, shield, and sword astride a cheval. Virtually every problem that arises in the great bulk of chivalric literature is solved by the outcome of such encounters.

The yawning gap between ideal and practice seems signiÞcant. If knights oftenÑand by the later Middle Ages increasinglyÑfought on foot, but appear without fail as mounted Þghters in chivalric literature, is this not a good case for discounting the evidence of imaginative literature? In fact, though the literary portrayal is not a guide to battleÞeld practice in this regard, it is assuredly an important window into chivalric mentalitŽ. The evidence of romance is, we should note, redoubled by that of historical writing (Froissart, the Chandos Herald) and of manuscript illumination (Sir Geoffrey Luttrell in the Luttrell Psalter): in all representations of themselves knights want to be seen mounted on great chargers, a noble man atop a noble beast, literally above commoners.89 Purveying this image must have been considerably more important than getting the particulars of battle right.

Moreover, the image was less far off than might seem, if we think of the entire range of deeds in a life of prowess and not just moments of full-scale battle. Tournaments Þlled more days than such battles and usually meant a classic mounted encounter. Even during campaigns jousts ˆ outrance were fought before or in place of battle, as individual knights or small groups challenged each other to these Ôjousts of warÕ, lovingly described by chroniclers and biographers. Hunting, too, meant horsemanship, another species of prowess, another active display of lordship. Even funerals make the Þnal point, as one or more caparisoned warhorses preceded the warriorÕs body in procession.90

The literary accounts may also reveal a congruence in timing between romance writing and military technique. Michael Prestwich suggests that after some signiÞcant experience of Þghting on foot in the twelfth century, English

88Muir, tr., Song of William, 196; Suard, ed., Chanson de Guillaume, 206; Wienbeck et al., eds,

Aliscans, 251, 261.

89Prestwich, Armies and Warfare, 13, provides the scene from the Luttrell Psalter.

90Ayton provides a good discussion in Knights and Warhorses, 20Ð39.

knights became reluctant to dismount on thirteenth-century battleÞelds. They had to relearn a willingness to Þght on foot in warfare with the Scots in the early fourteenth century.91 The ßourishing of chivalric literature and the setting of its conventions would Þt nicely into this chronology. The physical, social, and military superiority of the knight atop his huge warhorse could easily have become a Þxed theme in the heyday of the writing of chivalric works.

Looting and Destruction

If chivalry made warfare better for knights, what of everyone else? Historians have long been tempted to believe that knights tried to limit damage to noncombatants; some have attributed the horrors of medieval warfare to common soldiers who could simply not be regulated by their social superiors in brighter armour.92 What does the ÔhistoricalÕ and ÔliteraryÕ evidence show?

In the second half of the twelfth century the poetry of Bertran de Born glories in the very opportunities for looting non-combatants that war brings the knightly. Hoping that strained relations between Richard the Lion-Heart and Alfonso de Castile will bring war in the late twelfth century, he writes, in words that have become well known:

Trumpets, drums, standards and pennons and ensigns and horses white and black we soon shall see, and the world will be good. WeÕll take the usurersÕ money, and never a mule-driver will travel the roads in safety, nor a burgher without fear, nor a merchant coming from France. He who gladly takes will be rich.93

His poetry joins other works that show the knightÕs hand holding the torch that Þres peasant homes, bourgeois shops, even churches. Bertrand declared that ÔWar is no noble word when itÕs waged without Þre and bloodÕ.94 The English king Henry V agreed; speaking three centuries later he declared that ÔWar without Þre is like sausages without mustard.Õ95 This sentiment was far from theoretical: accounts of one fourteenth-century English chevauchŽe after another show that English commanders seldom denied themselves their mustard while campaigning in the French countryside. We also know that the royal ßeet which carried Edward III and his army to Brabant in 1338 indis-

91Prestwich, Armies and Warfare, 317Ð19.

92Idealist writers of the time could hope the same; Philippe de MŽzi•res wrote in 1395 that Ôcountless ills and cruelties . . . occur in war, against and outside the laws of chivalryÕ: see Coupland, Letter to King Richard II, 52Ð3, 126.

93Paden et al., eds., Poems of the Troubadour, 398Ð9.

94Ibid., 358Ð9. He says in another poem; ÔWar wants you to shed blood and set Þre and never avoid giving, or tire of itÕ (pp. 454Ð5).

95Quoted in Gillingham, ÔRichard IÕ, 85.