however, as a system, known under the denomination of Chivalry, is to be dated only from the 11th century. All Europe being reduced to a state of anarchy and confusion on the decline of the house of Charlemagne, every proprietor of a manor or lordship became a petty sovereign; the manor-house was fortified by a moat, defended by a guard, and called a castle. The governor had a party of 700 or 800 men at his command; and with these he used frequently to make excursions, which commonly ended in a battle with the lord of some petty state of the same kind, whose cattle was then pillaged, and the women and treasures borne off by the conqueror. During this state of universal hostility, there was no friendly communications between the provinces, nor any high roads from one part of the kingdom to another: the wealthy traders, who then travelled from place to place with their merchandise and their families, were in perpetual danger; the lord of almost every castle extorted something from them on the road; and at last, some one more rapacious than the rest, seized upon the whole of the cargo, and bore off the women for his own use.

Thus castles became the warehouses of all kinds of rich merchandise, and the prisons of the distressed females whose fathers or lovers had been plundered or slain, and who being therefore seldom disposed to take the thief or murderer into favour, were in continual danger of a rape.

But as some are always distinguished by virtue in the most general defection, it happened that many lords insensibly associated to repel these follies of violence and rapine, to secure property, and protect the ladies. Among these were many lords of great fiefs; and the association was at length strengthened by a solemn vow, and received the sanction of a religious ceremony. As the first knights were men of the highest rank, and the largest possessions, such having most to lose, and the least temptation to steal, the fraternity was regarded with a kind of reverence, even by those against whom it was formed. Admission into the order was deemed the highest honour; many extraordinary qualifications were required in a candidate, and many new ceremonies were added at his creation. After having sailed from his native land, confessed himself, and received the sacrament, he was dressed in a white tunic, and placed by himself at a side-table, where he was neither to speak, to smile, nor to eat; while the knights... knights and ladies, who were to perform the principal parts of the ceremony, were eating, drinking, and making merry at the great table. At night his armour was conveyed to the church where the ceremony was performed; and here having watched it till the morning, he advanced with his sword hanging about his neck, and received the benediction of the priest. He then kneeled down before the lady who was to put on his armour, who being assisted by persons of the first rank, buckled on his spurs, put an helmet on his head, and accoutred him with a coat of mail, a cuirass, bracelets, cuisses, and gauntlets.

Being thus armed cap-a-pee, the knight who dubbed him struck him three times over the shoulder with the flat side of his sword, in the name of God, St Michael, and St George. He was then obliged to watch all night in all his armour, with his sword girded, and his lance in his hand. From this time the knight devoted himself to the redress of those wrongs which "patient merit of the unworthy takes;" to secure merchants from the rapacious cruelty of banditti, and women from ravishers, to whose power they were, by the particular confusion of the times, continually exposed.

From this view of the origin of chivalry, it will be easy to account for the castle, the moat, and the bridge, which are found in romances; and as to the dwarf, he was a constant appendage to the rank and fortune of those times, and no castle therefore could be without him. The dwarf and the buffoon were then introduced to kill time, as the card-table is at present. It will also be easy to account for the multitude of captive ladies whom the knights, upon seizing a castle, set at liberty; and for the prodigious quantities of useless gold and silver vessels, rich stuffs, and other merchandise, with which many apartments in these castles are said to have been filled.

The principal lords who entered into the confraternity of knights, used to send their sons to each other to be educated, far from their parents, in the mystery of chivalry. These youths, before they arrived at the age of 21, were called bachelors, or bas chevaliers, inferior knights, and at that age were qualified to receive the order.

So honourable was the origin of an institution, commonly considered as the result of caprice and the source of extravagance; but which, on the contrary, rose naturally from the state of society in those times, and had a very serious effect in refining the manners of the European nations. Valour, humanity, courtesy, justice, honour, were its characteristics: and to these were added religion; which, by infusing a large portion of enthusiastic zeal, carried them all to a romantic excess, wonderfully suited to the genius of the age, and productive of the greatest and most permanent effects both upon policy and manners. War was carried on with less ferocity, when humanity, no less than courage, came to be deemed the ornament of knighthood, and knighthood a distinction superior to royalty, and an honour which princes were proud to receive from the hands of private gentlemen: more gentle and polished manners were introduced, when courtesy was recommended as the most amiable of knightly virtues, and every knight devoted himself to the service of a lady; violence and oppression decreased, when it was accounted meritorious to check and to punish them: a scrupulous adherence to truth, with the most religious attention to fulfil every engagement, but particularly those between the sexes as more easily violated, became the distinguishing character of a gentleman, because chivalry was regarded as the school of honour, and inculcated the most delicate sensibility with respect to that point; and valour, seconded by so many motives of love, religion, and virtue, became altogether irresistible.

That the spirit of chivalry sometimes rose to an extravagant height, and had often a pernicious tendency, must however be allowed. In Spain, under the influence of a romantic gallantry, it gave birth to a series of wild adventures which have been deservedly ridiculed: in the train of Norman ambition, it extinguished the liberties of England, and deluged Italy in blood; and at the call of superstition, and as the engine of papal power, it desolated Asia under the banner of the cross. But there ought not to be considered as arguments against an institution laudable in itself, and necessary at the time of its foundation: and those who pretend to despise it, the advocates of ancient barbarism and ancient rusticity, ought to remember, that chivalry not only first taught mankind to carry the civilities of peace into the operations of war, and to mingle politeness with the use of the sword; but roused the soul from its lethargy, invigorated the human character even while it softened it, and produced exploits which antiquity cannot parallel. Nor ought they to forget, that it gave variety, elegance, and pleasure, to the intercourse of life, by making woman a more essential part of society; and is therefore entitled to our gratitude, though the point of honour, and the refinements in gallantry, its more doubtful effects, should be excluded from the improvement of modern manners.

For,

To illustrate this topic more particularly, we may observe, that women, among the ancient Greeks and Romans, seem to have been considered merely as objects of sensuality, or of domestic convenience: they were devoted to a state of seclusion and obscurity, had few attentions paid them, and were permitted to take as little share in the conversation as in the general commerce of life. But the northern nations, who paid a kind of devotion to the softer sex, even in their native forefathers, had no sooner settled themselves in the provinces of the Roman empire, than the female character began to assume new consequence. Those fierce barbarians, who seemed to thirst only for blood, who involved in one undistinguishing ruin the monuments of ancient grandeur and ancient ingenuity, and who devoted to the flames the knowledge of ages, always forbore to offer any violence to the women. They brought along with them the respectful gallantry of the north, which had power even to restrain their savage ferocity; and they introduced into the west of Europe a generosity of sentiment, and a complaisance toward the ladies, to which the most polished nations of antiquity were strangers.—These sentiments of generous gallantry were fostered by the institution of chivalry, which lifted woman yet higher in the scale of life. Instead of being nobody in society, she became the primum mobile. Every knight devoting himself to danger, declared himself the humble servant of some some lady, and that lady was often the object of his love. Her honour was supposed to be intimately connected with his, and her smile was the reward of his valour: for her he attacked, for her he defended, and for her he shed his blood. Courage, animated by so powerful a motive, lost sight of every thing but enterprise; incredible toils were cheerfully endured, incredible actions were performed, and adventures seemingly fabulous were more than realised. The effect was reciprocal. Women, proud of their influence, became worthy of the heroism which they had inspired: they were not to be approached but by the high-minded and the brave; and men then could only be admitted to the bosom of the chaste fair, after proving their fidelity and affection by years of perseverance and of peril.

Again, as to the change which took place in the operations of war, it may be observed, that the perfect hero of antiquity was superior to fear, but he made use of every artifice to annoy his enemy: impelled by animosity and hostile passion, like the savage in the American woods, he was only anxious of attaining his end, without regarding whether fraud or force were the means. But the true knight or modern hero of the middle ages, who seems in all his encounters to have had his eye on the judicial combat or judgment of God, had an equal contempt for stratagem and danger. He disdained to take advantage of his enemy: he desired only to see him, and to combat him upon equal terms, trusting that heaven would declare in behalf of the just; and as he professed only to vindicate the cause of religion, of injured beauty, or oppressed innocence, he was further confirmed in this enthusiastic opinion by his own heated imagination. Strongly persuaded that the decision must be in his favour, he fought as if under the influence of divine inspiration rather than of military ardour. Thus the system of chivalry, by a singular combination of manners, blended the heroic and sanctified characters, united devotion and valour, zeal and gallantry, and reconciled the love of God and of the ladies.

Chivalry flourished most during the time of the crusades. From these holy wars it followed, that new fraternities of knighthood were invented: hence the knights of the Holy Sepulchre, the Hospitallers, Templars, and an infinite number of religious orders. Various other orders were at length instituted by sovereign princes: the Garter, by Edward III. of England; the Golden Fleece, by Philip the Good, duke of Burgundy; and St Michael, by Louis XI. of France. From this time ancient chivalry declined to an empty name; when sovereign princes established regular companies in their armies, knights-banners were no more, though it was still thought an honour to be dubbed by a great prince or victorious hero; and all who professed arms without knighthood assumed the title of esquire.

There is scarce a prince in Europe that has not thought fit to institute an order of knighthood; and the simple title of knight, which the kings of Britain confer on private subjects, is a derivation from ancient chivalry, although very remote from its source. See Knight-Bachelor.

Knight-Service (Cervitium militare, and in law French chivalry); a species of Tenure, the origin and nature of which are explained under the articles Chivalry, and Feudal System, n° 13—21.

The knights produced by this tenure differed most essentially from the knights described in the preceding article; though the difference seems not to have been accurately attended to by authors (a). The one class of knights was of a high antiquity; the other was not heard of till the invention of a fee. The adorning with arms and the blow of the sword

---

(a) "The terms knight and chivalry (Dr Stuart * observes), denoted both the knight of honour and knight of tenure; and chivalry was used to express both knighthood and knight-service. Hence, it has proceeded, Society in Europe, pointed, that one must wonder that writers should mistake them. It is not, however, mean and common compilers only who have been deceived. Sir Edward Coke, notwithstanding his distinguishing head, is of this number. When estimating the value of the knight's fee at L. 20 per annum, he appeals to the statute de militibus, an. I Ed. II. and, by the force of his illustration, he conceives, that the knights alluded to there were the same with the possessors of knight's fees: and they, no doubt, had knight's fees; but a knight's fee might be enjoyed not only by the tenants in capite of the crown, but by the tenants of a vassal, or by the tenants of a sub-vassal. Now, to these the statute makes no allusion. It did not mean to annex knighthood to every land-holder in the kingdom who had a knight's fee; but to encourage arms, by requiring the tenants in capite of the crown to take to them the dignity. He thus confounds knighthood and the knight's fee." Coke on Littleton, p. 69.

"If I am not deceived, Sir William Blackstone has fallen into the same mistake, and has added to it. Speaking of the knights of honour, or the equites aurati from the gilt spurs they wore, he thus expresses himself: 'They are also called, in our law, milites, because they formed a part, or indeed the whole, of the royal army, in virtue of their feudal tenures; one condition of which was, that every one who held a knight's fee (which in Henry II.'s time amounted to L. 20 per annum), was obliged to be knighted, and attend the king in his wars, or fined for his noncompliance. The exertion of this prerogative, as an expedient to raise money, in the reign of Charles I. gave great offence, though warranted by law, and the recent example of Queen Elizabeth; but it was, at the restoration, together with all other military branches of the feudal law, abolished; and this kind of knighthood has since that time fallen into great disrepute.' Book I. ch. 12.

"After what has been said, I need hardly observe, that this learned and able writer has confounded the knight of honour and the knight of tenure; and that the requisition to take knighthood was not made to every possessor of a knight's fee, but to the tenants of knight's fees held in capite of the crown, who had merely a sufficiency..." sword made the act of the creation of the ancient knight; the new knight was constituted by an investment in a piece of land. The former was the member of an order of dignity which had particular privileges and distinctions; the latter was the receiver of a feudal grant. Knighthood was an honour; knighthood-service a tenure. The first communicated splendor to an army; the last gave it strength and numbers. The knight of honour might serve in any station whatever; the knight of tenure was in the rank of a soldier.—It is true at the same time, that every noble and baron were knights of tenure, as they held their lands by knight-service. But the number of fees they possessed, and their creation into rank, separated them widely from the simple individuals to whom they gave out grants of their lands, and who were merely the knights of tenure. It is no less true, that the sovereign, without conferring nobility, might give even a single fee to a tenant; and such vassals in capite of the crown, as well as the vassals of single fees from a subject, were the mere knights of tenure. But the former, in respect of their holding from the crown, were to be called to take upon themselves the knighthood of honour; a condition in which they might rise from the ranks, and be promoted to offices and command. And as to the vassals in capite of the crown who had many fees, their wealth of itself sufficiently distinguished them beyond the state of the mere knights of tenure. In fact, they possessed an authority over men who were of this last description; for, in proportion to their lands were the fees they gave out and the knights they commanded.

By the tenure of knight-service, the greatest part of the lands in England were holden, and that principally of the king in capite, till the middle of the last century; and which was created, as Sir Edward Coke expressly testifies, for a military purpose, viz., for defense of the realm by the king's own principal subjects, which was judged to be much better than to trust to hirelings or foreigners. The description here given is that of knight-service proper, which was to attend the king in his wars. There were also some other species of knight-service; so called, though improperly, because the service or render was of a free and honourable nature, and equally uncertain as to the time of rendering as that of knight-service proper, and because they were attended with similar fruits and consequences. Such was the tenure by grand serjeanty, per magnum feretrium, whereby the tenant was bound, instead of serving the king generally in his wars, to do some special honorary service to the king in person; as to carry his banner, his sword, or the like; or be his butler, champion, or other officer, at his coronation. It was, in most other respects, like knight-service, only he was not bound to pay aid or escuage; and when tenant by knight-service paid five pounds for a relief on every-knight's fee, tenant by grand-serjeanty paid one year's value of his land, were it much or little. Tenure by cornage, which was to wind a horn when the Scots or other enemies entered the land, in order to warn the king's subjects, was (like other services of the same nature) a species of grand-serjeanty.

These services, both of chivalry and grand-serjeanty, were all personal, and uncertain as to their quantity or duration. But the personal attendance in knight-service growing troublesome and inconvenient in many respects, the tenants found means of compounding for it, by first sending others in their stead, and in process of time making a pecuniary satisfaction to the lords in lieu of it. This pecuniary satisfaction at last came to be levied by assessments, at so much for every knight's fee; and therefore this kind of tenure was called scutagium in Latin, or feretrium feuti; scutum being then a well-known denomination of money: and in like manner it was called, in our Norman French, escuage; being indeed a pecuniary instead of a military service. The first time this appears to have been taken, was in the 5 Hen. II. on account of his expedition to Tolouc; but it soon came to be so universal, that personal attendance fell quite into disuse. Hence we find in our ancient histories, that, from this period when our kings went to war, they levied scutages on their tenants, that is on all the landholders of the kingdom, to defray their expenses and to hire troops; and these assessments in the time of Henry II. seem to have been made arbitrarily, and at the king's pleasure. Which prerogative being greatly abused by his successors, it became matter of national clamour; and King John was obliged to consent, by his magna carta, that no scutage should be imposed without consent of parliament. But this clause was omitted in his son Henry III.'s charter; where we only find, that scutages or escuage should be taken as they were used to be taken in the time of Henry II.; that is, in a reasonable and moderate manner. Yet afterwards, by statute 25 Edw. I. c. 5. & 6. and many subsequent statutes, it was enacted, that the king should take no aids or tasks but by the common assent of the realm. Hence it is held in our old books, that escuage or scutage could not be levied but by consent of parliament; such scutages being indeed the groundwork of all succeeding subsidies, and the land-tax of later times.

Since, therefore, escuage differed from knight-service in nothing but as a compensation differs from actual service, knight-service is frequently confounded with it. And thus Littleton must be understood, when he tells us, that tenant by homage, fealty, and escuage, was tenant by knight-service: that is, that this tenure (being subversive to the military policy of the nation) was respected as a tenure in chivalry. But as the actual service was uncertain, and depended upon emergencies, so it was necessary that this pecuniary com-

sufficiency to maintain the dignity, and were thence disposed not to take it. The idea that the whole force of the royal army consisted of knights of honour, or dubbed knights, is so extraordinary a circumstance, that it might have shown of itself to this eminent writer the source of his error. Had every soldier in the feudal army received the investiture of arms? could he wear a seal, surplice in silk and wools, use ensigns-armorial, and enjoy all the other privileges of knighthood? But, while I hazard these remarks, my reader will observe, that it is with the greatest deference I dissent from Sir William Blackstone, whose abilities are the object of a most general and deserved admiration." compensation should be equally uncertain, and depend on the assessments of the legislature suited to those emergencies. For had the escuage been a settled invariable sum, payable at certain times, it had been neither more nor less than a mere pecuniary rent; and the tenure, instead of knight service, would have then been of another kind, called socage.

By the degenerating of knight service or personal military duty, into escuage or pecuniary assessments, all the advantages (either promised or real) of the feudal constitutions were destroyed, and nothing but the hardships remained. Instead of forming a national militia composed of barons, knights, and gentlemen, bound by their interest, their honour, and their oaths, to defend their king and country, the whole of this system of tenures now tended to nothing else but a wretched means of raising money to pay an army of occasional mercenaries. In the mean time the families of all our nobility and gentry groaned under the intolerable burdens which (in consequence of the fiction adopted after the conquest) were introduced and laid upon them by the subtlety and fineness of the Norman lawyers. For, besides the feutages to which they were liable in defect of personal attendance, which, however, were affected by themselves in parliament, they might be called upon by the king or lord paramount for aids, whenever his eldest son was to be knighted, or his eldest daughter married; not to forget the ransom of his own person. The heir, on the death of his ancestor, if of full age, was plundered of the first emoluments arising from his inheritance, by way of relief and primer seis; and if under age, of the whole of his estate during infancy. And then, as Sir Thomas Smith very feelingly complains, "when he came to his own, after he was out of wardship, his woods decayed, houles fallen down, flock wafted and gone, lands let forth and ploughed to be barren," to make amends, he was yet to pay half a year's profits as a fine for suing out his liberty; and also the price or value of his marriage, if he refused such wife as his lord and guardian had bartered for, and imposed upon him; or twice that value, if he married another woman. Add to this, the untimely and expensive honour of knighthood, to make his poverty more completely splendid. And when, by these deductions, his fortune was so shattered and ruined, that perhaps he was obliged to sell his patrimony, he had not even that poor privilege allowed him, without paying an exorbitant fine for a licence of alienation.

A slavery so complicated and so extensive as this, called aloud for a remedy in a nation that boasted of her freedom. Palliatives were from time to time applied by successive acts of parliament, which allayed some temporary grievances. Till at length the humanity of King James I. consented, for a proper equivalent, to abolish them all, though the plan then proceeded not to effect; in like manner as he had formed a scheme, and began to put it in execution, for removing the feudal-grievance of heritable jurisdictions in Scotland, which has since been pursued and effected by the statute 20 Geo. II. c. 43. King James's plan for exchanging our military tenures seems to have been nearly the same as that which has been since pursued; only with this difference, that by way of compensation for the loss which the crown and other lords would sustain, an annual fee-farm rent should be settled and inseparably annexed to the crown, and affixed to the inferior lords, payable out of every knight's fee within their respective seignories. An expedient, seemingly much better than the hereditary excise which was afterwards made the principal equivalent for these concessions. For at length the military tenures, with all their heavy appendages, were destroyed at one blow by the statute 12 Car. II. c. 24, which enacts, "that the court of ward or liveries, and all wardships, liveries, primer seisis, and outerlemanes, values and forfeitures of marriages, by reason of any tenure of the king or others, be totally taken away. And that all fines for alienations, tenures by homage, knights-service, and escuage, and also aids for marrying the daughter or knighting the son, and all tenures of the king in capite, be likewise taken away. And that all sorts of tenures, held of the king or others, be turned into free and common socage; save only tenures in frankalmogin, copyholds, and the honorary services (without the slavish part) of grandjerainty." A statute which was a greater acquisition to the civil property of this kingdom than even magna carta itself; since that only pruned the luxuriances that had grown out of the military tenures, and thereby preserved them in vigour; but the statute of King Charles extirpated the whole, and demolished both root and branches.

Knights Errant. During the prevalence of chivalry, the ardour of redressing wrongs seized many knights so powerfully, that, attended by esquires, they wandered about in search of objects whose misfortunes and misery required their assistance and succour. And as ladies engaged more particularly their attention, the relief of unfortunate damsels was the achievement they most courted. This was the rise of knights-errant, whose adventures produced romance. These were originally told as they happened. But the love of the marvellous came to interfere; fancy was indulged in her wildest exaggerations; and poetry gave her charms to the most monstrous fictions, and to scenes the most unnatural and gigantic. See Knight.

Knight-Bachelor. See Bachelor.

Knight-Baronet. See Baronet.

Knights of the Shire, or Knights of Parliament, are two gentlemen of worth, chosen on the king's writ in pleno comitatu, by such of the freeholders of every county as can expend 40 s. per annum, to represent such county in parliament. These, when every man who held a knights-fee in capite of the crown was customarily contrained to be a knight, were of necessity to be milites gladio cincti, for so the writ runs to this day; but now custom admits esquires to be chosen to this office. They must have at least 500 l. per annum; and their expenses are to be defrayed by the county, though this be seldom now required.

Knight-Marshal, an officer in the king's household, who has jurisdiction and cognizance of any transgression within the king's household and verge; as also of contracts made there, whereof one of the house is party.

Knights, in a ship, two short thick pieces of wood, commonly carved like a man's head, having four shivers in each, three for the halyards, and one for the