Chivalry?

[jamesq]

On Facebook, a friend asked what was chivalry. This started a fairly interesting discussion about how it applied to the SCA. My only quibble with the discussion? 1) It included a notion that fighting prowess was a necessary component. While that is certainly true for the SCA's Order of the Chivalry (aka Knighthood), I certainly don't think it's a requirement to be chivalrous. 2) The idea that "Wheaton's Maxim" (Don't be a dick) was sufficient. Necessary, certainly, but we can do so much better than a basic civil standard of behaviour.

Looking it up on Wikipedia, I found the following Ancient Code of Chivalry:

• Believe the Church's teachings and observe all the Church's directions.
  
• Defend the Church.
  
• Respect and defend all weaknesses.
  
• Love your country.
  
• Do not recoil before an enemy.
  
• A single coward could discourage an entire army. Even if the knights knew death was near, they would rather die fighting than show weakness.
  
• Show no mercy to the Infidel. Do not hesitate to make war with them.
  
• Perform all duties that agree with the laws of God.
  
• Never lie or go back on one's word.
  
• Be generous to everyone.
  
• Always and everywhere be right and good against evil and injustice.

I certainly think that someone who is interested in persona-development could do a lot worse than this. Which is to say, if you're a Templar in the SCA, you would certainly be expected to go on about the church and pushing the infidels out of the holy-land. If you're not one of those balls-to-the-wall always-in-character types, you might want to lay off talk about infidels - it's rude. Still, I think we can do better if we look at this with modern eyes and a modern understandings of civil rights.

Church and country can easily be generalized to your community or to humanity in general. We can add in those modern ideas of equality. And we can make an attempt to explain why the rules are important, and not just some arbitrary rules from an age of sexism.

• Defend your family, friends and community.
  
• Respect one another, both those like you and those who are different.
  
• Fight the good fight, even if it means defeat.
  
• Be honest.
  
• Be generous.
  
• Be merciful.
  
• Understand that courtesy - both in small and large things - is done for the sake of doing it, and not because you think others are less capable.

I think this is a decent start. I've known people who follow these rules (albeit, not formalized as such) and they are all people I would respect or admire. I strive for it, but often fail.

Comments

[oblivions.livejournal.com]

My focus does include the combat portion of it, but most of this applies to all other aspects of the SCA too.

That said, it's hard to be held up to nearly impossible standards by people who don't follow them to the same degree they expect us to. Strive for better, sure, but leading by example doesn't hurt now does it?

[ya-inga.livejournal.com]

That is a very very good list hon - well said

[minyata.livejournal.com]

I think there is a distinct set of expectations of chivalry on and off the field. The "on field" portion can/does/should (take your pick) have prowess as an aspect... but that doesn't mean those of us who dont fight shouldn't strive to be chivalric in our day to day activities and lives. I do like your list, and maybe putting it in laymen terms will allow people to better apply them to ourselves rather then assuming chivalry is something only heavy fighters should be worried about.

[jamesq]

From the perspective of a combatant in the SCA, how does this apply in a tournament or war? What is chivalric behavior when trying to beat your worthy opponent?

For example, I've heard two opposite takes on deliberately hobbling yourself when fighting someone (i.e. fighting kneeled after taking a leg, or not using your shield after taking an arm). Some feel that this is showing the person respect by fighting them in an even manner; others feel it shows disrespect because it says the person hasn't got a chance against you unless you "fight down" to them. The former seems to be the fashion in Avacal, but I've heard there are regional differences. I also say "fashion" because it seems to swing back and forth over time.

I suppose it would be chivalrous to ask your opponent which they prefer, but then it gets weird if they're trying to be chivalrous to you in turn. "After you", "no, after you".

I have no clear thoughts on the matter and bring it up purely for discussion.