Part 3, Chapter 6: What constitutes boldness in a knight?

Without going far from our theme, we must now consider what constitutes boldness in a knight. I say that this may be shown in several ways. I say that a knight, may be bold in order, to possess and acquire the vain-glory of this world, and its honour and commendation, simply because he sees the bold honoured and cowards dishonoured. Another knight will be bold for fear of diminishing the honour and profit of his lord, and through fear of being captured if he plays the coward.  Another will be so by mere habit, because if a knight has long borne arms and harness, merely because he knows their use he will find courage in himself so that no one may speak against him for doing the opposite. There is another kind and manner of bold knight.  A knight may be bold because his arms are good, because he knows well that they are arms of proof, and true. A knight is bold, too, by reason of his horse in which he has complete trust.  Then there is the knight who is bold because of his good captain, whom he knows to be wise and fortunate. There are other knights who are bold through mere angry temper.  Others are bold through ignorance, for they, are so simple that they know nothing of the virtue of courage but do as they see others do who are in front of them. Others, gain, are bold through covetousness to, gain riches, and for no other reason.

Know that in all these kinds of boldness there is no virtue whatever; but virtue exists only in him who is bold through right knowledge and understanding, who has the will to hear reason and justice, and the will to sustain all due and possible things, by the virtue of courage. So much is sufficient concerning this virtue for the present.

Chapter 7: Whether a Man should prefer the death to flight from Battle

Now we must consider a rather difficult question: that is, whether a man ought to choose death, rather than flee from the battle.

I show, first, that he should choose flight in preference to awaiting death, and the reason is this.  It is better, according to the philosopher, to choose what gives most delight.  It is plain that to live is more agreeable and pleasant than to die, so that it is better to flee than to wait for death.   As to the second reason: death is the most terrible and strongest of all things, and hence the most feared; but, since this is not, in the nature of things, a pleasure, it follows that it is not desired; for choice is, influenced by pleasure, and by freedom of choice.

Yet Aristotle, prince of philosophers, holds the contrary, for the following reason: "I say that for nothing in the world should a man do what is dishonourable and reprehensible. But it is plain that to flee is wicked, and brings great reproach and shame."  On this matter I wish to bring forward certain reasons which support the philosopher's opinion.  First, our decrees say that it is better to suffer and sustain all ills rather than consent to evil.  But to flee and quit the right is an evil thing. Plainly then, he must by no means flee. A stronger proof is this: of two things a man must choose the better, and: if he does he will have life everlasting.  So it is better to remain than to take flight to save the life of this mortal body, which is but meat for worms.

In this discussion I wish to add my own opinion, and it seems to me that if a knight is engaged in battle with Christians against Saracens, and thinks that by his flight he Christians may lose the battle; he must await death rather than take to flight, because he knows he will die for the Faith and be saved. If, on the other hand, he knows that by remaining he will not be helpful to the extent of preventing the loss of the battle, and he finds that he can save himself, and escape the hands of his enemies, I say he should go. If, however, he sees and recognises clearly that flight will not mean escape, indeed he would do better to stay; for it is better that he should await the issue defending himself and others, and die with his comrades, if God permits it, than that in such case he should flee. If a knight is fighting against Christians in his lord's service, I tell you, as I said before, that he should be willing to die to keep the oath of his faith to his lord.  I say the same of the knight in receipt of wages from the king or other lord, for since he has pledged to him his faith and oath he must die in defence of him and his honour; and thus does he maintain in himself the virtue of courage, so that he fears nothing that may befall in fighting for justice.

Chapter 8: The Punishment of the Man who leaves the Battle without the consent or command of his Constable

In this part I will put a question to make clear certain matters to which I have referred before. I put then this case. A wise and bold knight goes with his whole company, against the order of the constable or marshal of the army, to attack the enemy, and routs them utterly.  I ask whether, according to the laws, this knight should lose his head.

I show first, that he should; for the law says that the man who acts contrary to the orders of the governor of the army should lose his head, even though what he has done proves very profitable to his lord. The second reason is that, according to the written laws, the man who is bound to obey his sovereign is punished for disobedience when he acts contrary to his orders.  There is another strong, argument. An evil act should never be excused by reason of any advantage which by chance results from it. If he has been successful against the enemy it is by hazard, and against the general plan, for by his departure from the host he placed the whole battle in peril of loss.  Hence he should lose his head.

We must now say something on the other side. A deed of great utility should excuse disobedience to the sovereign's command, and because of the happy issue he should not lose his head.  Again, we must consider always the intention of him who acts thus.  It is evident that this knight acted with the best intention, so we say there is no crime.   Further, in all things we have to consider the result.  We have seen that the end, in the case of this knight, was good, and so he should suffer no punishment.

A doctor named Monseigneur Malumbre said that such a knight-bachelor should be severely punished, but, as the result was fortunate, the punishment should not be too severe.  But in truth, according to strict law, he should lose his head.  Yet the lord may well, if he wishes, pardon him, wholly or in part, of us own will or at the request of others, according as he thinks good, or in consideration of the person concerned; for if he has acted as a noble and loyal man it is to be presumed that he has not acted with evil purpose. Hence he should be pardoned, according to mercy, which is sometimes better than rigour. In this connection Monseigneur St. Augustine says that it is better to render account at the last for mercy granted, rather than for strict justice done, so that one may not receive justice without mercy.  This is to be avoided, according to a saying of the apostle: "Omnes quidem peecaverunt et egent gratia Dei.î

Part 4, Chapter 8: The Duties of a good Knight

Now we must see what are the qualities of all good knights, and what their duties are.

And I tell you that the first and principal thing is that they should keep the oath which they have made to their lord to whom they belong, and to whom they have sworn and promised to do all that he shall command for the defence of his land, according to what is laid down by the laws. He is no true knight who, for fear of death, or of what might befall, fails to defend the land of his lord, but in truth he is a traitor and forsworn. A knight must be obedient to him who is acting in place of his lord as governor of the host, and if he is not obedient to him he is no good knight but is overbearing and insolent. And knights, especially those who are in the king's service, or in a lord's, should in thought and deed be occupied only with the practice of arms, and with camñpaigning for the honour of their lord, and for his peace, as says the law. They must always carry out the orders of him who takes the place and guards the interests of their lord, and if a knight acts contrary to such command he must lose his head.

Further, the laws say that a knight must not till the soil, or tend vines, or keep beasts, that is to say, be a shepherd, or be a matchmaker, or lawyer; otherwise he must lose knighthood and the privileges of a knight. And he should never, if he is a paid soldier, buy land or vineñyards while he is in service, and what he does buy must belong to his lord.  If you wish to know why this was so ordained, I tell you that it was that knights should have no cause to leave arms for desire of acquiring worldly riches.

Chapter 9: The Duties of the Commander of the Army

Now we must consider what are the duties of the commander of the army. This commander or duke used to be called, and still is called in France, the great constable or marshal.  And I tell you that it is his business to give licence to soldiers to go where need calls, for without his licence they should go nowhere at all; and further, he should give them orders to ride, now hither, now thither, as he may deem needful for his lord's honour. He should prevent either horses or soldiers from leaving his lord's lands for other countries. He must see that the knights do not pass their time in castles or fortresses.  He should not make it his business to send his men-at-arms to catch fish, or hunt venison.

Again, it is part of his office to hold the keys of the gates of the towns where he is lodged, and to keep good guard both day and night. Also he must give an eye to the measures of bread and wine and all grains, and must punish all who have and use false measures. Then, it is part of his office to examine the quarrels and complaints of the members of his army, and to do justice between man and man. Also it is his duty to visit the sick and the wounded in his army and to see to their cure, according to what is laid down in the civil law. It is for him to control the passage of his men over rivers and waters, and he must take care that no man washes himself where the horses are to drink, lest the horses lose their sight. When the building of a fort is required he should have it built in a place where there is sufficient wood and water, and further, he should take heed that it is not too near the sea or too high in the mountains. Again, he should avoid putting his men in a place or field that is aguish, or too marshy in time of rain, or so placed that water from the high ground may damage his men. This is the doctrine of a doctor called Monseigneur Vegedus, in his Book of Chivalry. It also belongs to the constable's office to avenge injuries done to his knights; and he must be wise and well-informed in the matter of combat, for, according to the country, the place, the time, and the people against whom he is to fight, he must decide which branch of his men he can best employ that day; for sometimes the foot could give battle better on a certain day than the horse, and sometimes the horse could fight better, according to the position, the place, and the condition of the men.

Also it is the duty of this constable, who in law is called the duke of the army, to administer justice to his people in the requests they make to him: as for instance, in the case of a merchant who complains of a man-at-arms or other person. He is judge in this case, and should listen to both sides.

Here, then, you have the constable's duties.

Chapter 10: How and for what Offences Knights should be punished

But we must now consider how, and for what offences, knights should be punished. You must understand that, according to the laws, it is death to strike the provost of the army with intent to injure him, and the same penalty is incurred by him who is disobedient to the governor of the host, and by the man who is the first to flee from the battle while the others stand their ground. Similarly, the man should be executed who is sent to discover the condition of the enemy, and reveals his lord's secrets to the other side.  The same is true of the man who refuses to be at his lord's side in battle on the excuse of sickness, when he is, in fact, sound and well.  That man, too, must die who strikes his companion in arms without cause, and the same applies to the man who inflicts a wound on himself and kills himself.  Again, the soldier should die who does not defend his captain when it is possible for him to do so, otherwise he is pardoned. And all that has been said in this present chapter is contained in the decrees of the laws.

Further, the man must lose his head who separates himself from the battle against the command of his chief, as some do who wish, outside the main battle, to challenge a foe to single combat. In order to show their great courage they leave the battle, and thus do wrong, and, however well they succeed, they must lose their heads. Again, the law lays down that a knight who hinders the making of peace should die, and also he who causes dissension and deadly rumour to be spread through the host. Also the knight who incites to riot or other dangerous trouble in his lord's host should lose his head; and, in truth, there are examples of this in time of war. If a knight quits his lord in time of peace, whilst in receipt of wages, he should be conñdemned to go henceforth not mounted, but on foot like a sergeant. And he who leaves his lord's following should be condemned to go always on foot under arms, like a sergeant, and not be allowed to mount a horse again. A wise man, however, would weigh carefully the life and rank of him who so departed from his lord, and if in times past this man has been a good knight and true, he should receive pardon more easily, and account should be taken of how many days he has spent before returning to his lord, and if it has so fallen out that for some good and just reason he has been unable to return, he should be pardoned.  You must know, too, that if a knight is condemned to death for leaving his lordís host and for absenting himself without licence, according to the laws all his goods are confiscate to the lord.