The History of Chivalry — Context and Discussion

James’s Method and Sources

James is explicit about his historiographical method. He names his principal authorities for the early crusade: William of Tyre, Albert of Aix, Fulcher of Chartres, Raimond of Agiles, Guibert of Nogent, Radulph of Caën, and Robert the Monk. He notes that many were present at the events they describe, and that later writers took infinite pains to render their accounts correct. He distinguishes William of Tyre as superior in education and intellectual quality to the general chroniclers of his age, and highlights that William was born in Palestine, educated for the church, and mingled in political changes as preceptor to a king and chancellor of the kingdom of Jerusalem. James’s own voice emerges in his critique of a favourite theory that, like the bed of the ancient Greek, stretches or lops away facts to fit it.

Kingship and Sovereignty in France

James draws a sharp distinction between sovereignty and kingship. Under Philip I, he writes, French monarchs were but sovereigns who could call vassals to the field for a set number of days, their rights personal or only general against foreign invasion. Louis VI, called the Fat, was the first to raise the functions of royalty above those of sovereignty. James credits Louis and his minister Suger with seizing the just idea of monarchical government: the right of punishing private crime and opposing universal wrong, the duty of maintaining public order. This authority, he notes, was not pleasing to the barons, whose license was curtailed. The passage is notable for its precise legal vocabulary and its argument that the feudal system began to assume the character of an organized hierarchy.

The Rise of the Communes

James describes how the nobles found themselves assailed from below as well as above. The people of the towns, though subject to terrible and grievous exactions, had thriven under commerce and industry. At length, the precise time unknown, they began to think of protecting themselves. The word commune was introduced, and each town hastened to struggle for its liberty. The horror and indignation of the nobles were beyond all conception, but the spirit of union among them was not sufficiently active to put down that which animated the commons. After long and sanguinary contests, sometimes the baron succeeded in subjugating the people, sometimes the burghers wrung a charter from the nobles. James presents this struggle as reaching its height when the fall of Edessa called Europe to a second crusade, but the barons found their privileges invaded both by the crown and the people.

Diction and Argumentative Voice

James’s prose is marked by a lawyerly precision and a willingness to judge his sources. He uses phrases such as indisputable authority and the distinction between the two states is an important one. He is not afraid to correct other authors, and he frames his own work as a corrective. His diction is formal and periodic, with sentences that pile up clauses before reaching their main verb. He also employs metaphor sparingly but effectively, as when he compares a favourite theory to the bed of the ancient Greek. The excerpts show a writer who is deeply engaged with his material and who expects his reader to follow a chain of reasoning. He does not merely narrate events; he argues about their meaning and about the reliability of those who recorded them.

Readers approaching this history should attend to James’s marginal references and his prefatory evaluation of chroniclers. He is not a neutral compiler but an advocate for a particular method: evidence-based correction of received opinion. His focus on the institutional and legal dimensions of chivalry—kingship, sovereignty, the commune—gives the work a distinctive analytical cast. Those interested in the Crusades will find here a nineteenth-century historian’s effort to ground narrative in documentary authority, and a voice that is both learned and argumentative.

Sometimes I think back to how The History of Chivalry lingered on the weight of oaths, the fraying of old bonds. There’s a quieter ache in reading about crusaders who believed so fiercely. I found that same earnest, complicated faith again in The Deeds of God Through the Franks — Story, Setting & Ideas, and it felt a little like meeting an old friend in a dusty archive.