Did You Know European Tradition of Chivalry Originated from the Middle East?

[motiv-8]

The notion of Arabs having been chivalrous is mostly a 19th Century invention of Europeans, primarily through works by Walter Scott. He created the image of chivalrous Saracens.

Say what? Are you saying that Walter Scott fabricated 11th-12th century Arab poems, etc.?

[jo the greek]

a theory based on evidence
it reminds me

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

[Odovacar]

The chivalric culture may had some eastern influence that's all. The world's cultures are interwoven.

As for chivalry as a social class, it appeared first in the 9-10 century Western Europe.

[Koelkastmagneet]

Chivalry is more of a romanticist thing.

[konny]

As for chivalry as a social class, it appeared first in the 9-10 century Western Europe.

Knights not really were a class. This is also because there was (and is) no clear definition of what makes a "knight". These can be

• military: all heavy lancers
• cultural: all living according the code of chivalry
• social: all men knighted

Knights would not always have been nobles, indeed not all of them would have been free men, but could also have been ministeriales. Even though the "knights" and ministeriales developed into the low nobility in the 12th Century, the group of people considering themselves knights was much larger and also included the high nobility, even kings.

That way, being a "knight" changed from the military meaning to the cultural one during the Middle Ages. But at the same time we also have the social group of the knights, i.e. those that acutally were knighted. This group always was smaller (and even was shrinking) than the group of the people that considered themselves knights. At the end of the Middle Ages, in fact, only members of the high nobility would have been knighted, turning the term into the opposite of what it once had been (knight = knave = serveant).

[Lysimachos11]

Say what? Are you saying that Walter Scott fabricated 11th-12th century Arab poems, etc.?

? No I said the contemporary image of noble/chivalrous Arabs stems from the 19th Century, for a large part from Romantic literature like Walter Scott's. Have you seen Kingdom of Heaven? It portrays Saladin in a purely Scottian Romantic view, as an enlightened nobleman in a world of religious barbarism. Or look at Saddam Hussein, the Arab dictator who took a Kurdish warlord as his rolemodel for a chivalrous Muslim ruler.

[motiv-8]

? No I said the contemporary image of noble/chivalrous Arabs stems from the 19th Century, for a large part from Romantic literature like Walter Scott's.

I am simply confused, because the way you formed your statement seemed to imply that Walter Scott fabricated that image from nothing, which would be grievously inaccurate. The inclusion of the words "contemporary image" do a small part to clarify, but..

[diegis]

From what i know, at least from military point of view, europeans knights have as "grandfathers" and inspiration source the roman heavy cavalry, "cataphractari", inspired as well mostly by parthian/sassanid heavy cavary.

Romans had as well a noble class called "equites", a second rank noble class, first being the patricians senatorial class. This equites noble class usualy formed the roman cavalry, and in late roman empire romans formed a heavy cavalry too, called "cataphractari", inspired by the persian heavy cavalry, (so from this point of view, yes, the origin of heavy cavalry comes from orient). This inspired in medieval times the european knights, a second rank noble class fighting usualy as heavy cavalry, exaclty like roman "equites" cataphractari. I saw long ago a documentary where was said that even the basics of chivalry code originated from those roman "knights" who fight against "barbarians" and pagan persecutors who atack the new christians peaceful peoples of the empire. Even the fight against the dragon, one of the usual themes of knights bravery in medieval times come from the legend of St. George, a roman equites who killed a dragon. Ofcourse this was developed later in medieval times with ading the save the young virgin girl and swear loyalty to the king (or whatever high noble), and so on, etc..

[konny]

This inspired in medieval times the european knights, a second rank noble class fighting usualy as heavy cavalry, exaclty like roman "equites" cataphractari. I saw long ago a documentary where was said that even the basics of chivalry code originated from those roman "knights" who fight against "barbarians" and pagan persecutors who atack the new christians peaceful peoples of the empire.

Then that docu was telling nonsense: The late Roman Kataphrakts had nothing to do with the Republican Roman Equites. The one were professional soldiers (many foreign mercenaries), the other a social class of a much earlyer periode.

Most people in the Middle Ages were not even aware that the class of equites existed, hence 'knights' in MA sources usually being called milites. The term cataphracti for 'knights' never appeared in Medieval soruces. So any lineage from equites to kataphrakts to knights is just fantasy.

[CtrlAltDe1337]

What do you mean?

Originally it came from Middle Eastern culture (Moorish Spain and the Crusades) but then European/Christian influences put their own flavors into it.

I learned this from my history professor but you can just google it.

Iberian traditions probably influenced it, but Chivalry was really born in Frankish lands (France and to a certain extent you might include Switzerland/Luxembourg/Germany/Belgium/Netherlands).

[Stavroforos]

Chivalry never existed. As an idea, sure, but it is only through a romanticised view of history to argue that it existed in practice.

Agreed.

Also at OP, next time you make a thread, I suggest you post your argument in that first post.

[Arch-hereticK]

Chivalry is not tied to the existance of heavy cavalry. While it was the code of honor of the European Medieval heavy cavalry, other cultures had similar heavy cavalry without developing chivalry, but chivalry remained the code of honor of the European nobility and became the base of the general European code of behaviour long after the knights had disappeared from the battlefields.

It's not neccessarily tied to the heavy cavalry, but certainly connected. It wouldn't have come about in the same manner if it weren't for the elitist ethos of a feudal society. Look at Japan, they had a similar heavy cavalry serf system and had a reasonably similar code.

[konny]

It's not neccessarily tied to the heavy cavalry, but certainly connected. It wouldn't have come about in the same manner if it weren't for the elitist ethos of a feudal society. Look at Japan, they had a similar heavy cavalry serf system and had a reasonably similar code.

This is just coincident because richer people (=members of a higher social class) usually fought on horseback. The existance of the heavy cavalry that dominated the 12th Century battlefields did not require chivalry, and in return chivalry did not require a class of mounted elite warriors (=knights). Had it developed a bit earlyer and, for example, in Scandinavia or England the combat ethos would all have been about fighting on foot in a shield wall.

[diegis]

Then that docu was telling nonsense: The late Roman Kataphrakts had nothing to do with the Republican Roman Equites. The one were professional soldiers (many foreign mercenaries), the other a social class of a much earlyer periode.

Most people in the Middle Ages were not even aware that the class of equites existed, hence 'knights' in MA sources usually being called milites. The term cataphracti for 'knights' never appeared in Medieval soruces. So any lineage from equites to kataphrakts to knights is just fantasy.

Well, let see:
- Both equites and knights was a secondary noble class
- Both usualy fight as cavalry
- Roman cavalry evolved in a heavy armored one (inspired by parthians/sassanids one), where ofcourse at least officers and comanders come from this equites/knights.
- Tradition of helping the poors and weakest christians against barbarians and pagans who atack the roman citizens first.
- Tradition of fight and kill a dragon, first who did that was St.George, a roman "knight"/equites.

Ofcourse this was developed more in medieval times, mostly in western Europe, but the roots was in late roman empire, and under a oriental inspiration (as armour wear).

[Marie Louise von Preussen]

Chivalry was actually very real you know...

And the Equites were mainly a business class. Any associations with heavy cavalry were dropped in the Late Republic, never being strong at any stance.

[Arch-hereticK]

This is just coincident because richer people (=members of a higher social class) usually fought on horseback. The existance of the heavy cavalry that dominated the 12th Century battlefields did not require chivalry, and in return chivalry did not require a class of mounted elite warriors (=knights). Had it developed a bit earlyer and, for example, in Scandinavia or England the combat ethos would all have been about fighting on foot in a shield wall.

Yes, I absolutely agree. They certainly don't need each other. Heavy cavalry operated in India and china and Korea and the Kwazmirian Empire with disimilar effects.

My point is that western chivalry came from a financial and political elite (the warrior part is almost irrelevant in reality) almost as a way to legitimise their ascendency.

[Odovacar]

Knights not really were a class. This is also because there was (and is) no clear definition of what makes a "knight".

Knights were maybe not a "class" as this is not an appropriate name, but certainly a rank.
In Middle Ages there was certainly a definition of knight. Simply: everyone who was knighted.

These were not always "nobles" though rather ministerials as you mentioned. Although unitzed nobility evolved from different social groups.

The rank of miles rose from lowly servant so far that in the flourishing middle ages even kings were considered to be knights. This process was slower in Germany than in France, and might not have appeared in some areas of western christianity, only late.

At the end of the Middle Ages, in fact, only members of the high nobility would have been knighted, turning the term into the opposite of what it once had been (knight = knave = serveant).

Not true, as in early new age many knights existed in Germany for example. Franz von Sickingen even designed a rebellion of knights against princes.

Most people in the Middle Ages were not even aware that the class of equites existed, hence 'knights' in MA sources usually being called milites. The term cataphracti for 'knights' never appeared in Medieval soruces. So any lineage from equites to kataphrakts to knights is just fantasy. .

The word 'miles' originally meant servitude in medieval latin. Probably that's why they have been called miles.
The roman equites had nothing to do with knights, of course, but medieval people could have confused the two rank though.

[Monarchist]

Anyone who has delved into Medieval European history knows that the claim of this thread's title is not true. Seeing how troubadors, minstrels, court poets, and other things came out of France starting around the 1070's, it couldn't possibly have been Crusades-influenced. The Peace and Truce of God, as motiv-8 well knows, was established long before the Crusades had managed to bring back shiploads of Arab culture. Besides, the Romans had a "Knightly Class" centuries before Islam even existed.

Songs of chansons de geste, from which came Roland and all the other tales of knighthood, were not Arabic in origin. Catalans may have been in close proximity to the Moors, but I see little relevance. Go on with your Muslim propaganda!

[Sher Khan]

Troubadour culture in the Occitan, however, was close enough to Andalus during a period of cultural flowering and trade with France and Italy to suggest some cultural diffusion between Islamic courtly culture and the romance of 11th century chivalry in Southern France.


The best answer to the question is, I think, that chivalric tradition as a centuries long endeavor by the European elite was an European phenomenon born of pre-turn-of-the-millennium Frankish and Gothic warrior virtues that, at multiple instances, was affected by and affected parallel developments of upper society in the rest of the Mediterranean world, from Southern Spain and North Africa to Egypt and the Levant.

The two worlds were similar by the late 12th century that diplomatic guests crossing the Christian-Muslim border or battle line seemed to have no problem entertaining each other with entertainment and chivalric courtesies expected of men and women of the upper class.

[diegis]

The best answer to the question is, I think, that chivalric tradition as a centuries long endeavor by the European elite was an European phenomenon born of pre-turn-of-the-millennium Frankish and Gothic warrior virtues that, at multiple instances, was affected by and affected parallel developments of upper society in the rest of the Mediterranean world, from Southern Spain and North Africa to Egypt and the Levant.
.

Frankish and Gothic was romanized, and was allowed to join the roman army, where they for sure meet the "cataphractari" heavy cavalry too (not too mention that others as Sarmatians and partialy even Dacians used the same type of heavy cavalry, and some of them was part of the multiethnic conglomerate called Goths). This "cataphractari" formed, no doubt, the base of military appearence of later medieval knights. And, the most prevalent myth of knights, the one with "kill the dragon and save the princess" is in fact the legend of St. George, a Roman soldier who is depicted as a cavalrymen who slay a dragon to save a princess (obviously).
Ofcourse during the time the armour evolved (but keep the appearence of being covered from head to toe), as well new stuff was added (the code of chivalry) or germanic stuff, as knights was under a lord, who was under the king, and so on, departing from the roman views, as an army who belong from head to toe to the state (empire), uniformly equiped and trained.