Category: Chivalry

Chivalry as a system of moral and social virtues has developed during the medieval period and has been popularized in its literature. It serves to establish a notion of knighthood, but also nobility and honour. Chivalry is one of the most explored themes of the medieval literature and the fact that there are many points of views on it, makes this concept attractive as a subject of research. The Knight’s Tale and Lanval are about chivalry and are quite similar as they both explore the idea of chivalry having a complicated relationship with courtly love. As they are similar in themes, what makes the comparison so interesting to analyse is the difference not only of the time period in which they were created but also authors’ origins, as well as gender. All those personal circumstances are a shaping element of perspective which defined both stories and the differences between Chaucer and Marie de France create an intense topic for research of their literary pieces and their content.

Burgess, Glynn S, ‘Chivalry And Prowess In The Lais Of Marie De France’, French Studies, vol. 37 (1983), 129-142

The article studies the relationship between chivalry and male characters of lais in regards to the language used to describe them and how that vocabulary is used in order to show which characters and their actions are supported by the author herself. There is a clear connection established between male characters, the position they find themselves in and the descriptive language that is used in relation to them to reflect the author’s judgement of her own work. Once that relationship is thoroughly explained, Burgess examines the chivalry of men in relation to all of Marie’s lais as she focuses on each lai individually but also equally, which gives an opportunity to compare the content of the lais and literary devices used. There is a clear comparison made between the conflicts that the protagonists of lais are encountering as the essay legitimizes the patterns that can be found in all stories as well as the manifestation of a feudal establishment of the certain community members. The article also studies chivalry in relation to other medieval virtues such as loyalty, primarily the loyalty of a man to a woman, and service to the community rather than to an individual, and how those partnerships are uncovered and in which way they are affecting protagonists’ actions and emotions. In the context of Lanval, the article focuses on the fact that the word vassal has been used numerously in order to describe the protagonist and how that in itself increases the feeling of isolation and the need for validation which Arthur refuses to give to him. Burgess outlines that it is that feeling of alienation from the community that Lanval is struggling with and that is the starting point for his conflict between his chivalry and his romance.

Burgess Glynn S, Busby Keith, The Lais Of Marie De France (London: Penguin Books, 1999)

Lanval is a story about a knight of the King Arthur’s court, who is faced with jealousy from other knights which leads him into starting a relationship with a fairy queen. The author of the lais is portraying historical context of the society of twelfth-century France in which gender stereotypes were challenged, but by putting Lanval into the supernatural convention, Marie de France is avoiding a controversy that gender reversal and feminist notion could bring. Being a perfect example of knighthood and chivalry, Lanval is also consumed by loneliness and the way in which his personal circumstances affected his relationship with a fairy queen is connected to how this relationship affected his life. Marie portrays Lanval, the perfect knight envied by others, as weak and not being able to save himself when in danger, but she also makes a connection between Lanval and his failed chivalry which is especially visible in his pattern of dependency and inferiority to the female. He is nothing but his knighthood, but that is not enough to provide for himself and it is clearly established how Lanval, who started as a character of strength and morality, essentially becomes an example of an unmarried woman in need of financial and emotional support. By gender reversal and a belittlement of chivalry, Marie de France adds a trace of feminist superiority as she explores masculine vulnerability and redefining the code of morality as well as the code of courtly love.

Helterman, Jeffrey. “The Dehumanizing Metamorphoses of The Knight’s Tale.” ELH, vol. 38, no. 4, (1971), 493–511

The article studies the relationship between animalistic and beastly imageries and their relationship with human inner metamorphosis. In The Knight’s Tale, it is love that is refined to the abstraction of the courtly ideal as it causes a man to violate his own nature an as a consequence his harmony with Nature. Halterman states that all of it is a result of divine interference which the dehumanising of characters and that dehumanisation depends upon the courtly love ideal of raising earthly love to the highest good. Chaucer counterpoints the ideal by having each lover equate himself with the beasts in the course of elevating love simile which reveals that love turns man, striving blindly upward, into a beast showing it in the example of Palamon promising war in exchange for full possession over Emylie. The article studies Chaucer restructures Boccaccio’s Teseida and the description of the opposing forces to reveal that when a man seeks to move up the ladder of being, as do Palamon and Arcite in their idealization of Emelye and earthly love, he ends up as a beast and Helterman proves it by his analysis of verse used in the description of the tournament. As The Knight’s Tale in a way a constant rejection of chivalry practice, it is also a dream of order for a man who has spent his entire life in the turmoil of war. The tale presents the dream of order as the Knight would wish it, but imagery and metaphor reveal the reality of the chaos within and the article concludes with the statement that The Knight’s Tale is built upon the parallel ordering principles of courtly love and pagan chivalry, both of which attempt to turn man s animal instincts into celestial perfection.

Ireland, Patrick J. “The Narrative Unity of the ‘Lanval’ of Marie De France.” Studies in Philology, vol. 74, no. 2, (1977), 130–145.

The article starts with stating its focus on the genre of the literary work itself and that acknowledging the widespread disagreement about calling Marie’s poems lais, as by looking at the content that she has created and its high originality, imagination and diversity, her work does not have a precise distinction of one form. The article pays close attention to the structure of Lanval and studies the unity of its narrative. By precise examination of the language structure and form, Ireland is able to make some interesting statements about the concepts of chivalry being failed or fulfilled in an uncommon context. He explains the failure of Arthur in his chivalry by failing to do justice to Lanval, but he also explains how in his resistance to commit adultery Lanval is showing his code of morality and virtues. The article also examines the conflict that Lanval find himself in – as he pledges into the idea of courtly love and the fairy queen, he unknowingly surrenders his chivalric allegiance to King Arthur. By keeping his relationship private, Lanval puts a taboo on it, but by his loyalty, he presents his absolute commitment to the chivalric ideal of the court of love and that loyalty is enough to forgive him for his breach of the taboo. Ireland studies to the subject of this paradox of the situation as Lanval cannot serve Arthur and the fairy queen at the same time but by wanting to both he fails. He acts wrongly and he does that to protect the honour of love which is acceptable in the Court of Love, but his action is also a breach of the rules of Arthurian court and the Court of Chivalry. In consequence, by trying to be a member of two courts, Ireland notes how Lanval becomes an outcast of both and his own enemy. The article concludes in calling Lanval a story of both parallels and contrast, in which as a human being Lanval lack rational control, but as a man of nobility and in possession of boundless love, he also deserves Avalon.

Mitchell-Smith, Ilan, ‘As Olde Stories Tellen Us”: Chivalry, Violence, And Geoffrey Chaucer’S Critical Perspective In “The Knight’s Tale’’, in Fifteenth-Century Studies, Vol. 32 (Columbia, S.C.: Camden House, 2007), pp. 83-99

Mitchell-Smith’s article offers an exploration of the idea of chivalry and its relationship to violence while also explaining the close connection between Chaucer’s The Knight’s Tale and Boccaccio’s Troilus and Criseyde and how the traces of Boccaccio’s story can be found in Chaucer’s tale as well as how they are affected by Chaucer’s point of view. The author carefully studies the personalities of Palamon and Arcite by comparison of both in relation to the language of the narrator used while describing them, including behaviour and as well as mental and physical condition. The explanation for that is given in the form of research that is performed on finding traces of gods, Venus and Mars accordingly, and how those traces influence both characters, especially in terms of desires and how they act on them. To emphasize the extreme nature of the knights, the focus of the essay shifts into examining animalistic features and imagery of the tale, especially during the combat between Palamon and Arcite, while also embracing the differences between how the fight was meant to be and how it actually was. The essay concludes with legitimizing Chaucer’s treatment of excessive behaviour and justification of the tale’s ending in which all characters are being taught a lesson of the importance to avoid indulgences and beastly temptations, as their ideal of chivalry and virtues is either lost or transformed.

Rigby, Stephen H, Wisdom And Chivalry: Chaucer’s Knight’s Tale And Medieval Political Theory, (Leiden: Brill, 2013)

Rigby studies the motifs of chivalry and wisdom and its exploration in Chaucer’s The Knight’s Tale, by relating it to medieval politics of historical context and literature of the period, however, his book is focused almost entirely on applying it into the character of Theseus, and not other characters of the tale: Palamon and Arcite. He structures his research into three parts: Theseus’s personal ethics, how the character applies those ethics in public action and finally Theseus rule of self and others with the context of godly dominion over the universe. To make his analysis more accurate, Rigby links his studies by relating it to one of the other writers of Chaucer’s period by which he could be directly or indirectly familiar. By using Giles of Rome’s De Regimine Principum as his reliable source of medieval ethics, Rigby is able to show that the ideas of moral principles and code of chivalry presented in The Knight’s Tale were commonly known among educated men of the period, while also acknowledging that is it uncertain whether Chaucer ever read Giles and thus was influenced by his ideas in the process. Rigby also compares personalities of characters from the tale, stating that where Palamon and Arcite beastly surround to their passion and lose their values in the process, Theseus controls them and arrives at an acceptable solution for it. He is a nobleman of virtues, however, as a pagan ruler, he is not expected to demonstrate the virtues that are purely theological such as faith and hope of divine grace and charity, but as an exemplary character, he is expected to display the virtue of righteous governing over himself and his people. The book relates the perception of Theseus as a ruler calling it ‘monarchy of an as perfect as a fallen human man can be’ and answers the question of whether or not Theseus is Chaucer’s response for the reign of Richard II. Rigby states that The Knight’s Tale in modern reading is being the strategic intervention for social and political conflicts, but that does not necessarily mean that fourteenth century literature is a reflection of political, economic, social and religious divisions, but he also sets the character of Theseus and his moral code as perfect ideology and utopian potential, but not without flaws. In the conclusion of the book, Rigby legitimizes the idea of The Knight’s Tale being both the reflection of conflicts as well as a strategic weapon offering the mythical solution in the form of ideology and virtues.

Sánchez-Martí, Jordi, ‘The Representation Of Chivalry In The Knight’s Tale’, Revista Alicantina de Estudios Ingleses (2000), 161-173

The paper examines the way in which contemporaneous state of chivalry has affected Chaucer’s Knight in his attempt of the telling the tale. The author begins by analysing Knight’s personality, his military background and nature of being nonconformists, and how those personal circumstances directly affect his literary product as he attempts to determine the individuality of the Knight by defining him in his historical context and the reality of chivalry in the last half of the fourteenth century in which knighthood and the code of morality expresses the notion of decadence. The author explains how examining the character of the Knight and the historical period of his life is the key to understanding Knight’s treatment of the representatives of knighthood in his tale. Having described the context by which the tale is narrated, Sánchez-Marti then focuses on the content of the story and the relationship between Arcite and Palamon, which he calls ‘compagnonnage’. As he explains the meaning of this institution, its social tradition and implied obligations, the author examines the corruption of the characters, the brotherhood that has been belittled and the oath that has been broken. The author also finds it interesting that in other literary works of the period the institution of compagnonnage has been used to explore the themes of complete loyalty whereas Chaucer uses it to project degrading behaviour and chivalry that is left with minimal personal meaning, even if a character of Theseus is devoted to his moral code.

The Path to Knighthood: From Page to Dubbing

The easiest way to become a knight was to be the son of a noble. At age 7, the sons were taken to a different castle to be trained as a page. They spent their time becoming strong, riding horses, and mastering the use of weapons. They learned how to read, write and speak Latin and French. They also learned about dancing. At the age of 16, the page became a squire whose duty was to work for a knight. The squire’s job was to dress the knight, serve the knights meals, tend to their horses, and clean their weapons. They could practice wearing armor and using weapons. Once the squire turned the age of 20 and was considered worthy, they would have to go through a ceremony called ‘dubbing’. During the ceremony, the knight-to-be would kneel in front of a leading lord and be touched on each shoulder with a sword, and proclaimed a knight.

Chivalry was taken very seriously, and it was a very subjective thing. What chivalry was, was different depending on who you were. One lord would have a different version from another, and a knight would have a different version from a clergy. Chivalry is the qualities that essentially make a knight good at his job. What the individual felt made a knight good at his job was what chivalry meant to them. So that meant showing no mercy to the infidel or anyone that dared give them the slightest offense. But if that also meant always showing mercy and fair play and true righteous combat, that would be chivalry to someone else, and those two concepts directly contradict each other. So, people nowadays generally raise the more idyllic noble form of chivalry code because that was what was romanticized in literature. In literature, they didn’t describe chivalry; they described how knights felt knights should behave, not what knights were like. Knights in most cases, were pragmatists over idealists, and they did what their lord ordered and wanted them to do to find success.

Catapults were not common on the medieval battlefield, especially sieges. So many images show knights in war with catapults, but that’s wrong. Catapults were a very ineffective weapon to be used, especially in sieges.

When a siege happened, a parlay would take place between the besiegers and the defenders. The besiegers would generally say something like this, “Surrender right now and let us take over the castle and if you do, then we will spare everyone’s life, not a single life will be lost, and you will be free to go on your way”, or be taken into captivity one or the other generally. The defenders would have the option to surrender or try to defend, but then an ultimatum would be stated, and the besiegers would say something like, “If you do not surrender now, we are going to take over your castle, and when we do, we will kill every single one of you”. The problem is if you want that threat to have any weight at all for the next time you besiege someone, you need to follow through with it. If you don’t follow through with it, the defenders know that you’re not going to kill them, so they’re going to fight till the last man standing or until you take the castle, meaning they are going to kill as many of you as possible. So, when besiegers took a city or a castle, they killed and pillaged, but it was often seen on their side as a form of retaliation for the lives they were forced to lose because the others didn’t surrender. So, because of that taking over their castle was what they considered punishment for the lives they were going to lose. The next time they besiege a castle they have a lot more weight behind the statement, “If you don’t surrender, we are going to kill you”. Many sieges ended with the defenders just surrendering or winning, so besieging was a big gamble. There are cases where besieges stormed castles and then let the people go free or took them into captivity without slaughtering everyone.

The Stirrup and the Role of Knights

Many people believe the stirrup enabled mounted warriors to charge at the enemy effectively. But, it had very little effect in the development of impact warfare on mounted charges. People say a stirrup enables you to effectively brace your body weight on the horse to transfer more force. We know this isn’t true because when people are jousting, they get knocked back, their legs fly up, and the stirrup is not used to brace their weight or hold them in their saddle.

Another thing that debunks the stirrup misconception is that mounted charges can be done without stirrups very effectively. A guy named Richard Alvarez did a whole study on this and recreated it. He does full-blown mounted charges with the stirrup and even without a saddle. We even have the mounted horseman who existed before the medieval period and did mount charges with spears in hand, and they were called cataphract. Stirrups were really used for assisting in getting up the horse. Also, pushing yourself up on the saddle and keeping balance, not necessarily for mounted charges. Firearms and crossbows made knights obsolete. I was watching a YouTube video on knights, and the man said that the rise of firearms and crossbows made the role of knights more obsolete by the end of the 15th century. I thought this was interesting and decided to do further research on it. I found that that statement was wrong as knights were still around and employed during the time of crossbows for a very long period.

But I found that there was a weapon that had a larger effect on the decline of knights on the battlefield: the bow. It wasn’t really because of the effectiveness of the bow. It was the employment of a state-run military because these were more common soldiers being raised and run by King Henry V that could be so effective, and fielding a knight was a much more costly and complicated thing. They told common peasants to train with a bow once a week as a new rule in the kingdom. When war came, he would hire them as archers to join their army with no need to be a knight and no need to be paid more, but archers were paid a decent amount of money in the army. They joined an army and had a really effective fighting force, whereas fielding knights was complicated, costly, and way harder to get them to do exactly what you want and when you want. As a result of that, people started saying, “A more organized army weighed with common folk is pretty effective”.

The Enduring Legacy of Knights

Knights never disappeared from the scene of history. They still exist today and even more so when the states like kingdoms, nations, and whatever government systems they have are fielding their own armies generally, especially during the early Renaissance and even up to World War I, commanders or people running these armies were generally knighted so the knights were still there they just weren’t the common foot soldier, but that wasn’t really a military rank but of a side note they would be knighted because knighthood devolved.

Knighthood started off as a military thing. The original word for knight, chevalier, just meant horseman and if you’re a horseman, you’re basically a knight this other social element came in that was very important with it because it was the structure of the medieval period and the use of vassalage as a social system and then you have the second component which is a social kind of honorific that was attached to the military component which is where you get the classical knight but the military component left and the thing the knight originally was left and knighthood even to this day remained social honorific but it still certainly stayed around.

The classical medieval knighted soldier-warrior disappeared, but you can still kind of say it still existed all the way until about WW1, but the concept of knighthood and the social honorific, it evolved, it changed, and it’s still around to this day.

The historical definition of chivalry would imply a summation of all Knights, Noblemen, and horsemen in Medieval times. Upon breaking down the old French origin of the word, “chivalry,” boils down to two French words, “chevalier” and “cheval,” which mean “knight” and “horse” in English respectively. In the past, this is all the word would imply. However, time has evolved humans’ perception of the word and changed its meaning accordingly.

In old French, the word “chivalry” might create the image in one’s mind likely to be recognized by most today as a “knight in shining armor.” This particular image expanded and evolved even further throughout feudal Europe in the 10th century. Mass amounts of violence plagued the Frankish Kingdoms at the time. Villages were filled with conflict: robbery, rape, assault, and murder. Feudal Knights entered these villages on their horses with good intentions to help innocent bystanders and facilitate more peace. To the innocent bystanders, these knights were their “knights in shining armor.” But not only that, it was so much more to them, these knights defined bravery, nobility, etc. The original concept implied these knights that helped protect civilians throughout their kingdoms; however, the idea quickly became a social elite standard. Peasants and all non-nobility did know or care to use chivalry.

Chivalries is the plural noun meaning courteous behavior, especially that of a man toward women. In modern times the term chivalry has been conflated with gentlemanly. The current idea of chivalry is the result of Sir Walter Scott, whose novels painted the picture of romantic knights during the middle ages. In the novels, the knights were described as honorous, courageous, and courteous to the “weaker sex”. This description has molded the modern concept of chivalry from a code of honor for knights to be courteous to women.

Chivalry was demonstrated mostly in medieval Europe. Other cultures and empires had very similar concepts for their soldiers and civilians to live by. The concept of rules setting a precedent for society is known as the Code of Conduct.

Japan’s code of conduct is known as Bushido, it was a code of morals for samurai. Similarities between these two concepts are evident when seeing the periods both took effect in. Bushido was created during feudal Japan to lead their samurai down a morally right path. However, Bushido isn’t stemmed from religion, it is based heavily on Confucianism and Buddhism. The codes are written very differently due to the 10 commandments of chivalry being aimed toward very religious and socially elite people. Bushido was aimed at the samurai only and was used as a very sacred set of rules that had no religious connection. Even the 8 principles of bushido are very similar to the 10 commandments of Chivalry, both hold their loyalty and honor to the highest degree. The code was created in 749 and was used amongst the samurai it’ll 1945.

The catholic church created the concept of chivalry and it is apparent that it influenced the chivalry code of conduct. The major parallelism begins with the codes of conduct and rules they lived by. The ten commandments are a code of conduct for Judaism and Christianity providing a code for worshiping and morals. The 8th commandment of chivalry states – Thou shalt never lie, and shalt remain faithful to thy pledged word – this commandment is extremely comparable to the 9th commandment of the bible. These commandments order you to not lie to others and keep your word when promising, these rules are major cornerstones in the codes of conduct. Unlike the code of chivalry and bushido, the 10 commandments were made primarily for the common person. The religious commandments are simple to follow allowing millions of worshippers to follow these commandments.

In modern times chivalry has been perceived in a variety of ways by pop culture. The act of chivalry has been used in many tropes in films, animations, and literature. Three significant tropes are commonly used throughout our media. The first sub-category I will be addressing is Mook Chivalry, this form of chivalry is characterized through the way of combat. Mook chivalry follows a few guidelines such as no retreating, announcing a duel, and ganging up is dishonorable. These guidelines seem very abstract and unrealistic but, it’s been portrayed throughout the media. For example, in Kill Bill Vol. 1, the Bride faces off against the crazy 88, during this battle the eighty-eight enemies only attack one at a time. Even though they have an advantage in numbers, they abide by their code and wait for their allies to die before attacking. The enemies proceed to attack the bride even though they stand no chance this exemplifies their no retreating moral. The main character is outnumbered but in the face of danger, she asks who will go first. The crazy 88 begin attacking one at a time showing their honor and respect towards the chival code.

The second sub-category that will be addressed is Chivalrous Pervert, which is characterized as a very women-obsessed knight who is willing to die for the protection of a woman. The chivalrous pervert is a very rule-abiding man who will go to extreme lengths to protect women but is extremely hypersexual towards them. A character who is portrayed like this is Sanji, from the manga One Piece. Sanji’s character is a hyperbole of perverted chivalry, when Sanji sees women he immediately has heart eyes, nose bleeds and in extreme cases turns to stone. The difference between him and a pervert is his morals on harming women. During the Enies Lobby arc, Sanji was defeated by a much weaker woman due to his morals. There have been many cases in the manga where Sanji is willing to die before harming a woman.

In conclusion, chivalry has devolved from its social standard for knights and has evolved into a common courtesy for people. Chivalry is still being portrayed throughout a multitude of media while also sharing a variety of similarities with other cultures and religions. Chivalry as a concept is rarely seen in society but will continue to be portrayed throughout literature and films.

Life in the Medieval Era wasn’t as glamorous as people made it seem to be. Peasants and serfs had lived a hard life while the kings, queens, and lords lived luxuriously out of the expense of others who were under them. Reading and writing were luxuries only taught to those with power and money. Very few people in the middle ages were able to read and write. The only thing they could trust would be their faith in Christianity.

Due to feudalism, the Middle Ages was most possibly the worst time to live for those who weren’t kings, or lords. Common life for them included being slaves to lords which in those times were called serfs. This means that they were forced to pay high taxes for using facilities such as the mill and work long hours in their master’s land, but in exchange for their hard labor they would get protection against the tides of war, diseases, and poverty and a small place to live. Their only hope was their Christianity. It was going to church praying and waiting for their God to relieve them from their misery. While those in the higher social class were living their best lives with their castles and their many servants with a lot of food and wine and jewelry.

Before the Roman empire fell, the people in the middle ages were protected by the soldiers of the Roman Emperor. “But once the empire fell, the people didn’t have any laws protecting them so they began to trust their lords to keep the peace and to act on behalf of them” (Northeastern Educational Television of Ohio). Due to this type of ruling, feudalism began, it was the system of land ownership and duties. Due to this, not many peasants were free. They became servants to the lord”. Under the feudal system, everyone except for the king would have a ruling lord above them to where they should owe him loyalty and service. The king would give fiefs which were concessions of land to the nobles and, sometimes to the churches in exchange for the use of their soldiers or their influence on the citizens to protect the land. Most people lived in a manor, which was isolated and consisted of the castle, church, village and any surrounding farmland. The manors would receive occasional visits from peddlers, pilgrims on their way to the crusades or soldiers from other fiefdoms (Northeastern Educational Television of Ohio).

In many british literature books the writers try to portray the realistic life in the medieval times as much as they could in their books. Including their social, political, and economical styles. Chivalry was a big aspect in the Middle Ages and was portrayed in many prose type books. Chivalry was “a combination of qualities expected of a knight like courage, honor, courtesy and justice” (Dictionary). The knights had a code which they had to go by. It required for them to be loyal not just to each other but other people too, to work hard, and to know the code of honor. An example of that would be the book ‘Le Morte d’Arthur’, which in translation is ‘The Death of Arthur’. In that book it talks about King Arthur and his life in the Middle Ages. It especially talks about the importance of the Code of Chivalry.

The myth of ‘The Sword in the Stone’ symbolizes power, protection, and authority. It shows us the discrimination and the penetrating power of intellect in those times thorugh the book because in those times only people of higher-social class would be able to get a sort of education, where they were able to be taught how to read and write while those who were slaves to the lord or were peasants were forced to work in their mills, farms or as blacksmiths without given a chance to be taught these things just because of their lower-social class.

There are many aspects to being a male in the medieval times of Spain, whether you are a king, knight or peasant. To determine a man’s class was through their wealth and land owned. For example, men with more money, titles and more land had more rights, freedom, and dominance. The higher class for men were noblemen, knights, and kings. “Men were expected to exude dominance in order to be considered masculine, in terms of women, war, and authority”, – stated by Stoss, Laura R. (‘An Exploration of Conformity to Medieval Male and Female Roles in the Chronicle of Alfonso X’, 2013). First of all, due to society men had different expectancy compare to women. While women were expected to stay home and have children for their husbands, women did not get to decide when they were ready children their companions were the ones to decide when it was time to out-branch. “In order to portray these historical figures as an ideal male or female t,he chronicler explores what signified the archetypical mold of each gender to determine whether or not Alfonso X and Queen Violante did, in fact, conform to the traditional norms of medieval masculinity and femininity”, – informed from Stoss, Laura R. (‘An Exploration of Conformity to Medieval Male and Female Roles in the Chronicle of Alfonso X’, 2013). Men were only ones allowed to go fight in a war, especially the unwealthy men. Most peasants’ jobs were to serve richer men and women and farming. Richer men relied on their workers to work and take care of their land which most money was generated from their lands or inheritance. Middle-class men were usually employed by knights and noblemen and they work for the king. The wealthy had a say and vote to make in major decisions in society and in court.

The class above peasants are knights who go through a long process to become apart of the knighthood. They usually start out as a squire to a classified knight and live in a castle learning the skills and codes of chivalry. There are strict regulations to be in the knighthood. For instance, once a young man has passed they are not officially a knight until taking Holy Orders, oaths and go through ceremonies. The Code of Chivalry of the knighthood is to withhold courtly manners and love, to be brave and fearless in battle. The qualities of a knight’s devotion, loyalty, courteous and generosity. The usual activities they were involved in was jousting, archery and hand to hand combat. The time of knighthood was in the “Medieval Spain started with the arrival of the Visigoths in the late 5th century to the end of the reign of Ferdinand and Isabella in the 16th century”, – informed by Medieval Chronicles (‘Medieval Spain’, 2014-2018). Chivalry in Spain created a clash between South Spain, the Moorish Rule and the Christian kingdoms of the North. Knights fought against the Moorish and won against their armies with bravery and courage. After those battles, “Many of these knights went on to amass enough political and military leverage to carve out their own independent dominions or to exert significant influence over one of the already existent Christian kingdoms”, – stated by Medieval Chronicles (‘Famous Spanish Knights’, 2014-2018). Within this time frame, there were two famously known knights in Spain. One of them was Rodrigo Diaz de Vivar but commonly known as El Cid. He was hailed in Castile, Spain during the 11th century. El Cid had helped King Sancho against the wars between him and his brother and as well as the Muslims. With El Cid by Sancho’s side, it expanded the territory of Castile. Sancho’s brother Ferdinand killed Sancho and took his throne and exiled El Cid. The knight went on to the Muslim rulers of Zaragoza and offered his services which led him to regain his independence and military excellence. Later on, he ruled Valencia with Alfonso. The second most commonly known knight in Spain was Reverter de la Guardia during the 12th century. Knight Guardia was hailed in Barcelona and was one of the finest warriors in this time period. In his early knighthood days, he did not accomplish much until he was captured by the Almoravids and was offered to Muslims against the Almoravids. As the knight succeeded between both armies it is said “According to some historical sources, he also probably led the entire Almoravid army at one period during this conflict. It has been speculated that his military prowess was one of the key factors that sustained the Almoravid dynasty in its final years” – by Medieval Chronicles (‘Famous Spanish Knights’, 2014-2018). But Reverter de la Guardia died 1142 in battle, which steered the Almoravids to collapse. The chivalry of Spain knights was not completely involved with the military, their orders were given to them by royalty and the pope.

Spanish nobility is bestowed by heritance of the firstborn son of noble who would inherit the titles and honors of Spain next. It is not automatic it has to be approved by the court and the king himself. Nobility is not only granted through blood but can be granted by the king. There are even different classes within the nobility, they have all the same privileges but not grandeeships. This grandee title does not only apply to people with the title but anyone. “A grandee of any rank outranks a non-grandee, even if that non-grandee’s title is of a higher degree”, – knowledge by Almanach de Saxe Gotha (‘Nobility of Spain’, 1995-2019).

In the course of Medieval Spain, the Christian kingdoms and independent Muslim dominions were in a dispute over the southern territories of Spain. Over decades the Spanish kingdoms campaign to regain the those lands from the Muslims. This influenced Spain into evolution. Beginning with Ferdinand I in the 11th century, the king of Leon. Within his reign he merged Leon and Castile as one and crowned himself Emperor of Spain. In 1056. He conduct many wars against Zaragoza, Toledo, Badajoz and Seville and due to those campaigns Muslims taifas paid tribute to Ferdinand. Before the king had died in 1057, he had redeemed Portugal and Valencia. Son of Ferdinand I, Alfonso VI inherited the kingdom of Leon the same year of his father’s death. Downstream of his reign he had fought against his brothers to expand his power. Alfonso VI had lost to his brothers until one of them had died and regained his throne of Leon, Castile and Galicia in 1077. He was as a fierce and chivalrous nobleman and the ‘Emperor of Spain’ as he followed his father’s path. Alfonso VI was influenced by the Papacy in Spain to forge ties with different realms. This king died in 1109 and led to Alfonso VII who became king in 1126 of Leon, Castile and Galicia and titled ‘Emperor of all Spain’. Alfonso VII led many campaigns against the Moors for the southern territories. “During his reign, the fighting with the Muslims to the south took on a more religious fervour as Alfonso VII became patron to different Church institutions within his realm” (Medieval Chronicles, 2014-2018). Not long after he ruled over both Christians and Muslims and was passionate for the art of patron and culture. “During his reign, culture and arts flourished in the Spanish court” (Medieval Chronicles, 2014-2018). Later on King Alfonso VII died in 1157. Ferdinand III of Castile was ruler of Leon, Castile and Galicia by 1230. Ferdinand III was one of the most significant kings that gave Reconquista in southern Spain. During his reign he pushed Leon and Castile to become one entity. His power lowered the Almoravids and the Moorish territory. Ferdinand III claimed the heartland of the Muslim land, Cordoba. And he had died in 1252.

The Medieval Spain had been battling for lands for 700 years because of this, the male roles were in the front to fight for Spain. What was expected of a man was courage and bravery like a knight. When readers like Don Quixote read about men in chivalry, he thought how they have manners, devotation and protect women and children. Because the world is no longer in such a state, however, ‘the order of knight-errantry was instituted to defend maidens, to protect widows, and to rescue orphans and distressed persons’, stated in story of Don Quixote. There various things that come with being a male in medieval time.

Can anyone remain entirely chivalrous? The medieval institution of knighthood had only one answer for this; to live and die by a code of chivalry that included courage, honour, loyalty and consideration of others was indispensable. The influences of noble love and Christianity expanded the code of chivalry to include complete devotion to the church followed by impeccable etiquette and social talent. Despite its respectable nature, this knightly code of honour, as seen in ​Sir Gawain and the Green Knight​, can be deceitful and may alternately bring many issues. These said issues can evolve from a knight’s sense of pride and feeling of necessary obligation to religious duties and the eternal longing for honour. The authorial knight, Sir Gawain, is the spitting image of the loyal and dutiful knight that was strived for in Medieval times. However, Gawain faces multiple hardships; he struggles to choose between temporary and eternal love. In ​Sir Gawain and the Green Knight​, the author uses different characters to assess Gawain’s honour to the chivalrous code he is expected to attain. In doing so, the author illustrates the significance of hardships and their role in fully understanding one’s sense of maturity to embrace inevitable imperfection.

The author uses the actions of King Arthur’s character as a means to contrast the expectations Gawain has for his own standard of chivalry. Although he has a very minor role, King Arthur is crucial in the description of Gawain’s character. In many early medieval romances, Arthur is described as an ideal king who’s court of knights were prototypes of said perfection, free of corruption:

But because your name, my lord, is so renowned— Your castle and your court—and your knights known

As the hardiest on horseback, in armour the most Formidable, the fiercest at mêlées and tournament,

The bravest and best in the wide world,

And because they say the bright crown of courtesy

Itself sits here—these things have brought me by. (258-264)

Because of this high reputation Arthur withholds, the green knight is intrigued as to how true this code of chivalry truly is. Being the nephew of Arthur as well as a knight in his court, it is understandable that Gawain feels he must attain this level of perfection. However, it is soon understood that king Arthur may not be as perfect as assumed to be. The author showcases these impurities in part one of the book when Arthur refuses to eat until “someone had told him a strange story or a splendid adventure” (92-93). This action alludes to the immaturity of King Arthur and his petulant mindset. When faced with the challenge from the Green Knight to strike his neck, King Arthur is shocked by this request and reveals a side contrary to his renowned reputation, cowardliness. Arthur remains silent when the Green Knight says his request: “All the pageantry and power of the Round Table made nothing by the words of one man? You’re all white with fear, and not a whack fallen!” (313-315). In revealing this controversial side to King Arthur’s character, the author is proving that imperfections remain inevitable; even the most praised for the code of chivalry have slight moments of fear and childishness.

Lady Bertilak is used by the author to show the hypocrisy behind Gawain’s values and his loyalty to the code of chivalry. Amid Lady Bertilak’s sexual advances, Gawain becomes tempted by the choice between temporary and eternal pleasure. At first, Gawain remains true to his chivalric duty:

“Delighted in each other’s bright company, and in the deft dalliance of courtly conversation. No innuendo darkened their delicate speech;” (1011-1013). Behind closed doors, Lady Bertilak begins to entice Gawain to kiss her. She attempts to manipulate Gawain and twist the rules of courtly love, implying that to deny her request would be to disappoint one’s beloved and thus rejecting a rule of the chivalric code. Knowing his chivalric code restricts him from sleeping with a married woman, Gawain realizes this manipulation and takes on the role himself, outsmarting Lady Bertilak. When Gawain uses his knowledge of the true rules of the chivalric code to escape the uncomfortable situation, he manages to maintain his chivalry however, in doing this he becomes the manipulator. This shows that Gawain will remain loyal to the code, even if it means lowering his morals. However, in Lady Bertilak’s final attempt, she manages to trick Gawain into accepting her green girdle and satisfies her goal to force Gawain to fail in following his code of chivalry: “No one will know except themselves, no matter what the price.” (1864-1865). In the end, Gawain could not outsmart Lady Bertilak or manipulate the system of chivalry. The author uses this as a way to illustrate that no one can truly be chivalrous nor outsmart the system of imperfection.

Bertilak Of Hautdesert also found out to be the Green Knight, is used to represent a level of standard of which should be accepted: He is used as a foil character against King Arthur. Rather than the standard of the Arthurian knight, the author reveals there should be a level of leniency when it comes to the code of chivalry and ultimately the moral standard one has for themselves. Bertilak shows an extensive amount of generosity to Gawain while staying in his castle: “Indeed as long as I live, I’ll be the better for it, That Gawain has been my guest at God’s feast.” (1035-1036). Bertilak represents a sense of power, bravery and goodness which is ultimately what the author believes Gawain should aspire to be instead of his uncle. Even though Gawain goes against the code of chivalry by hiding the girdle underneath his armour, the Green Knight chooses to only wound and not kill him. This shows the author believes in forgiveness and that it should be accepted to make mistakes:

“You’re the most faultless warrior who walks on foot! As a pearl is more precious than a snow-pea

So is Gawain, upon my oath, among other knights.

Yet here you lacked a little your loyalty

Was wanting—not out of greed, not out of wantonness,

But because you loved your life—and I blame you much less For that” (2364-2369)

The Green Knight’s initial challenge to Arthur’s court to test the accuracy of his honour alludes to the author’s criticism of the formulaic code of Christian chivalry that Camelot follows. Showing forgiveness of Gawain’s imperfection, the author confirms his belief of forgiveness; perfection is unattainable.

The author of ​Sir Gawain and the Green Knight​ portrays characters to illustrate their belief that it is impossible to escape imperfection. Different characters are used to challenge Gawain’s character and allow him to realize the truth about his chivalric code. Throughout the adversity that Gawain is faced with, he is able to mature and forgive himself for his past mistakes. The challenges he fails allows him to realize the unattainability of his past expectations. What used to be fear and self-doubt is now forgiveness and strength.

During the 14th Century, when Chaucer wrote The Canterbury Tales, knighthood was generally reserved for upper class members of society. Knights were an integral part of the feudal system and acquired land in exchange for protecting the King. They were bound by the chivalric code, which was a collection of moral standards, such as honor, courtesy, and bravery. However, as the feudal system declined, knighthood began to collapse as well. While chivalry was initially used to restrain knights from immoral behavior, it became a moral code for the upper and noble classes, making it invaluable to upper class society. The attempt to preserve and justify the potentially declining chivalric ideals is witnessed in Chaucer’s The Canterbury Tales with the Knight’s Tale. As Chaucer witnessed the dying code in 14th century society, the Knight fails to effectively justify the disintegrating chivalric code. Through the Knight’s inclusion and defense of incongruities, Chaucer constructs the Knight to inadvertently satirize himself and chivalry in the “Knight’s Tale”.

Arcite’s and Palomon’s beliefs and behavior are antithetical to chivalrous qualities. In the General Prologue, Chaucer describes the Knight as achieving the pinnacle of knighthood. Chaucer claims the Knight is the “most distinguished man who had followed chivalry, truth, honor, generosity, and courtesy… /he was wise and in his bearing modest as a maid,” and constructs these attributes as constituting chivalry and knighthood (TCT 4-5). He confirms the already prevailing view of knighthood by praising the Knight for these qualities and also establishes expectations for chivalrous behavior in the Knight’s tale. However, the Knight’s Tale subverts these expectations through Arcite and Palamon’s unwarranted jealousy towards each other. In the beginning of the tale, the reigning king, Theseus, condemns Palomon and Arcite to prison, where they fall in love with Thesesus’s sister-in-law, Emily. When Arcite’s friend implores Theseus for Arcite’s freedom, Theseus compiles but orders him never to return. Yet Arcite, preoccupied with Emily, laments his loss. He says, “‘O my dear cousin Palamon/ Yours is the victory in this adventure/ How blissfully you serve your long indenture/ In prison – prison? No, in Paradise’ ”(TCT 36). Arcite, as a knight freed from his perpetual imprisonment, should be courteous and gracious for the ability to return to his chivalrous duties. However, Arcite is envious of Palamon for being able to “blissfully” watch Emily from afar everyday in his prison cell and insinuates prison is “Paradise” (TCT 36). Similarly, Palomon has “bitter tears” upon discovering Arcite has been released, not because Arcite now gets to be free and resume his knightly duties, but rather because Emily “may become [his] lady” (TCT 37). Palamon and Arcite’s envy of one another is incongruous with the honor and courtesy expected of a chivalrous knight. They also lack the wisdom of a knight by failing to realize neither of them have an advantage in accessing Emily, as Arcite is banished and Palomon is imprisoned. Palamon’s frustration with his imprisonment leads him to ask why he should adhere to moral behavior if he has to endure misfortune. He asks, “Where is the right rule in your foreknowledge/ When such torments fall on innocent, helpless men/ Yet there is more, for added to my load/ I am to pay duties that are owed to God/ for Him I am to curb my will/in all the lusts cattle may fulfill” (TCT 38). Palamon’s anger about having to “curb his will” or restrain from certain “lusts” when he is not rewarded by God or Fate is contradictory to the honor a chivalrous knight should have without expectation of reward. It exposes Palamon as not inherently courteous and only willing to act honorable and chivalrous as a knight if he obtains some benefit. Additionally, prompted by his sadness, Arcite decides to disobey the agreement made with Theseus and return to Athens, where he “remained with Emily the bright, her page-of-state/ and gave it out his name was Philostrate” (TCT 41). By assuming a false identity and deceiving Emily and Theseus, he contradicts the value of honesty that a knight is supposed to uphold further undermining his credibility as a knight. Arcite and Palomon’s behavior contradicts the chivalry expected of the two knights.

Theseus’s competition is undermined by the greater authority and belief in Fate which makes the competition redundant and superfluous. Once Theseus discovers Palamon and Arcite are in love with Emily, he not only pardons them for violating prior pacts and escaping from prison, he organizes a competition between Arcite and Palamon for Emily’s love. The Knight suggests the competition embodies knighthood and chivalry because it as a desirable method to acquire honor. He praises the competition : “Everyone with a taste for chivalry/ and keen (you bet!) to win a glorious name/ had begged to be allowed to join the game” (TCT 59). However, the competition was proposed mainly to see whether Arcite or Palamon “proves of greater might, backed by the hundred knights allowed” and to determine who Theseus “shall give Emily to wife” (TCT 53). Ironically, the knights themselves do not believe in the impact of the competition for the purpose of finding who Emily’s husband should be. For example, while the competition was supposedly created to determine the more chivalrous winner of Emily’s love, Palamon spends his time praying to God rather than simply preparing to win. In his prayer, he does not ask to win the competition, which would mean winning Emily’s hand. Instead he says, “the ways I care not how, whether it be/ by my defeat of them, or theirs of me/ so that I may have my lady in my arms” (TCT 63). If Palamon believed the competition yielded the merit or impact the Knight describes, he would have insisted on being its winner instead of proclaiming indifference to its victor. Palamon’s demonstration of the competition’s redundancy is reinforced when Emily speaks to the goddess Diana, who reveals to her that Fortune is guiding the winner. Diana tells Emily, “For thee the Gods on high have set their term/ and by eternal word and writ confirm/ that thou shalt be espoused to one of those/ Make plan they destiny in this forever” (TCT 66). Diana’s claim that destiny has already determined the winner before the competition demonstrates the superseding authority of Fate that renders to competition useless in determining the more chivalrous winner. Furthermore, the Knight’s description depicts the competition as a reason for extravagant celebration and therefore, an incongruity with chivalry. The Knight describes how “dukes and kings were gathered in this noble company” to reaffirm the importance of the competition to Theseus as well as to other knights and nobility (TCT 62). He also describes “how richly decked the palace was” and illustrates the “ladies loveliest in the dancing throng” which contradicts the modesty used to define chivalry in the General Prologue (TCT 62). The obvious juxtaposition between the chivalric values of modesty and the extravagant competition serve to mock the competition as an inept representation of chivalry. As a result, the competition is undercut by the greater authority of Fate and depicted as excess.

Through the Knight’s defense of incongruities and his inclusion of excessive descriptions of violence, Chaucer undermines the credibility of the Knight, and by extension, chivalry. The Knight inadvertently satirizes himself because of his sympathy and lack of criticism to Arcite and Palamon’s unchivalrous behavior. Following Arcite’s banishment and envy towards Palamon, the Knight sympathizes with Arcite and says, “What misery it cost him to depart!” (TCT 36). The Knight is unable to recognize the absurdity and incongruity of Arcite’s jealousy and lack of gratitude for his freedom. The Knight continues to express strong empathy for both Arcite and Palomon for their misfortune with regard to Emily. He says, “double the miseries and appetites of lover in jail and lover free as air, I cannot tell you which had the most to bear” (TCT 39). By ignorantly equating Arcite’s freedom and Palomon’s imprisonment as indistinguishable misfortunes and ignoring their incongruous envy, the Knight undermines his own credibility as a “wise man” (TCT 5). Additionally, his sympathy of the two knights follows Palamon’s rejection of chivalrous behavior if there is no benefit, which further undermines the Knight’s own chivalry. Chaucer constructs the Knight to represent the “perfect gentle knight” in the General Prologue, but ironically subverts that construction further with his defense of the competition (TCT 5). The Knight describes the competition with an excitement and praise saying, “great was the festival they held that day … put everyone so well in countenance” and describes the “shrill heralds shouting friendly and high joy for honour” (TCT 74). However, The Knight’s unconscious inclusion of Palamon’s prayers and Diana’s conversation with Emily as clear depictions of Fate at work which weakens his own praise of the competition. Due to Fate’s decision that Emily’s husband must be Palamon, Arcite encounters a fatality after winning the competition. However, even after Fate undercut the outcome of the competition, the Knight continues to defend it by claiming “there’s nothing despicable about all of this/ No one could ever call it cowardice” (TCT 76). His insistence that the competition was simply not “despicable” is primarily a weak justification and further satirizes the Knight for not recognizing the illegitimacy of the competition. Finally, the Knight’s narration with excessive violent descriptions reveal the Knight’s obsession with violence, which contradicts his position as a “perfect gentle knight” (TCT 5). Theseus himself recognizes the incongruity in unnecessary bloodshed and instantes rules to avoid death. Yet the Knight, focuses his narration on the bloodshed during the competition. He brutally describes the competition and says, “You would have thought, seeing Palamon engage,/ He was a lion fighting-mad with rage,/ Arcite a cruel tiger, as they beat,/ And smote each other, or as boars that meet/ And froth as white as foam upon the flood./ They fought till they were ankle-deep in blood…” (TCT 47). His choice to use similes of the “cruel tiger” and “lion” and gory details contribute to an overemphasized detailed account. It is ironic that his crude description continues for quite some time, because he repeatedly laments about his “lack of time to tell” much, which indicates the violence was significant to him to describe at length (TCT 81). The Knight, proposed by Chaucer as the representation of the chivalric code, allows Chaucer criticizes incongruity of chivalry through his flawed narration. The Knight’s flawed narration, riddled with incongruities, is completely unconscious and constructed by Chaucer. As Edward E. Foster writes, “There are instances of humor which cannot properly be assigned to the intention of the Knight [and] these instances [are] more probably the unconscious result of the noble nostalgia of the Knight’s aspirations (Foster 90). The Knight’s aspirations to defend chivalry effectively fail and lead to inadvertent self delegitimizing. The multi-faceted satire Chaucer constructs, both through the tale itself and the Knight’s narration of it, invalidate the chivalry represented by the competition and the Knight.

This essay is going to apply a number of theories on two practical issues in today’s society first of all in this essay it will evaluate the correspondence between criminality and gender by utilizing the analysis of crime statistics along with applying a series of theoretical approaches namely the chivalry thesis in conjunction with double deviance to show erudition on these practical issues in today’s society. Secondly, this essay will then perpetuate onto evaluate the application of a range of criminological approaches/perspectives theories to criminological uses, for instance, examine the relationship between the media and crime furthermore to visually perceive if the media engenders and possibly amplifies crime rather than the media just reporting it and engendering a moral panic. In addition to this, the theories of psychologists and sociologist will be applied to this area of deliberation. The chivalry thesis is a theoretical approach which challenges the validity of crime statistics as it shows that men are treated more harshly due to double standards. According to the official statistics, 19,031 women were convicted of several offences compared to 185,323 men in the year 2011 (Ministry of justice,2011:9). However, these statistics can be questioned, with the chivalry thesis as the court’s assessment of the characters of them being a woman who is accustomed to having more traditional roles in society as they should conform to accepted standards of monogamous heterosexuality and motherhood. So, therefore women are perceived to be less vulnerable and in need of protection. (Pollak, 1950 in Browne et al (2016)) supports this suggestion and argues that most people who work in the criminal justice system are male-dominated and they are socialised to act in a gentleman way with being polite and considerate towards women, this is known as chivalrous way. So, therefore, women are less guilty and treated more lenient than men. (Browne et al, 2016:490). So, to validate this argument this shows women who do commit crimes and are not prosecuted with it due to the chivalry theory, so this means that it will not be put on file and therefore it challenges the validity of official crime statistics.

The evidence that supports the chivalry theory is by Gelsthorpe and Louck (1997) they carried out 197 interviews with the magistrates court, and they never found any evidence of intentional discrimination however they found that the magistrates court did take into consideration the family circumstances of a women if she had any dependents and this means that they were more likely to be given less lenient sentences than a male would for the same crime. As female offenders are seen as less of a threat to the public as males have a stereotypical view as women being naiveand helpless. Therefore, this brings the general assumption that women are sentenced and punished more leniently than men. In 2017 the proportions of males and females throughout the criminal justice system 15% of arrests were females, compared to 85% being males. 69% of females are diagnosed with mental health needs comparing to 61% of males, where depressive illness was the most common need. In addition to supporting this theory, the average custodial sentence length for female offenders was 10.0 months whereas it being 17.6 months for males. A real-life example to supports the chivalry theory is the 2011 riots showed 78% of males interviewed had been stopped and searched compared to only 43% of women being stopped and searched. Therefore, this can support this theory in the criminal justice system along with the police force being less suspicious of women and being more lenient towards them. (the guardian,2011, women who riot, [ONLINE]). However, it can be argued by Smart that the chivalry thesis is the very opposite and that females are known to be treated more harshly in the justice system due to double standards which are known as the double deviance theory.

He argues that the justice system is unsympathetic towards women who commit crimes as they are seen as more deviant and possibly stigmatised with a negative identity such as evil. This is because women should have more sympathy and carry more emotions than what a male does especially if they have dependents, they should be good role models. To support Smart in the double deviance theory Steven Box concludes that women who commit more offences of a serious nature are not treated more favourably than what men are. Also, a lower rate of prosecutions of females that is compared with their self-reported offending is most likely less as the crimes they commit are far less serious. In addition to this woman often show more remorse which leads to them only getting a caution. Furthermore, the evidence to support the double deviance theory is in 2007 the conviction ratio for females increased from 84% to 88% in 2017, however, males followed a similar trend with conviction ratio of 81% in 2007 to 86% in 2017. (gov,2017, statistics on women and the criminal justice system, [ONLINE]) So accordingly, to these statistics shown you could say that women are treated more harshly, and the double deviance theory is in fact actually correct. (slide share,2015, gender crime deviance, [ONLINE]).

This could be argued by Flood-page et al as he rejects the double deviance theory as the figures, he found was that 1 in 11 females self-reported offender has been cautioned or prosecuted, as the figures in males where 1 in 7. Therefore, this can show that females are more likely to be cautioned that they are prosecuted. Furthermore, in relation to Flood-Page’s figures it can be supported by Hood, his study of 3,000 defendants found that women were one-third less likely to be jailed in similar cases to men. The chivalry thesis could be supported by functionalist sex role theory as it argues that males and females are socialised to take on pacific roles as it is a social psychological theory concerning sexual differences and similarities in social behaviour. Its main principle is that differences and similarities are mainly due to the distribution of men and women in social roles in their society. The behaviours of men and women generally support and sustain the socialisation and formation of gender roles dividing the work. For example, in industrialised economies, social roles are organised so that women are more likely than men to be homemakers and primary caregivers of children and to take care of other children in paid roles in the economy. In contrast, men are more likely to be primary family providers and to play full-time roles in the paid economy, often with physical strength, assertiveness, or leadership than that of a woman would. Therefore, after the functional sex role theory being analysed, it shows that it supports the chivalry theory in today’s society due to socialising males and females differently impacts on how they are controlled by society. However, there is also the biological explanation to explain criminal behaviour saw in criminals as differing significantly on a biological level from non-criminals.

The explanations of crime assume that some people are ‘born criminals’, who are physiologically distinct from non-criminals. This could be seen by looking at facial features or body types, to support the biological approach is Cesare Lombroso. He suggested that their brains were mal-developed or not fully developed. In his review of prisoners, he found that they shared several common physical attributes, such as sloping foreheads and receding chins. In so doing, Lombroso suggested that involvement in the crime was a product of biology and biological characteristics: criminals were born that way. Lombroso’s theory is essentially a theory of biological positivism. On the other hand of Lombroso’s studies, there are also two theories are that crime may be caused by genes, or that there is a criminal personality type that is inherited, which can be a possibility that a male or female is more likely to commit a crime. (new york times,1982, study say criminal tendencies may be inherited, [ONLINE]). Lombroso in 1876 was one of the earliest attempts to do a scientific study of criminal behaviours through using a biological explanation. Lombroso took measurements from both the heads and faces of prisoners, along with the skulls of dead criminals he put forward a theory that criminals differed biologically from non-criminals. (curriculum-press,2014,biological theories of crime, [ONLINE]. To support the biological theory in genetics there was a study carried out and it concluded that criminal tendencies may be inherited.

A long-term study of nearly 15,000 adopted children in Denmark strongly suggests that a predisposition to chronic criminal behaviour may be inherited, a California researcher has reported. So, on the other hand, biological approaches would argue it’s not social issues that create a difference in an offending but genetic predicament. Along with measuring physical features of the body, contemporary approaches focus on, Biochemical conditions which are linked to poor diet or hormone imbalance. Neurophysiological conditions which are learning disabilities caused by brain damage. In addition to this Genetic inheritance and/or abnormality and Intelligence. How the differential social control theory can challenge the biological approach as it is based upon the idea that an individual’s beliefs due to religion along with values, morals, commitments and relationships can foster a lawful environment. Individuals who have these beliefs and commitments often have a level of self-control over their own actions and are in control of there life. So therefore, the crime they commit is controlled and society and day to day life influences criminal behaviour. Examples to support this are people are not becoming more violent, rather, shifting modes of social control these are having a net widening effect on offences which is defined as violent and committing a crime. (alder and worall,2004). As a result of the official statistics could be argued that they are not as accurate as the difference between men and women who are convicted of offences, does not tell the whole story. There are many things that occur in between the time a crime committed along with the prosecution of that individual. There is a consolidation of these theories which leads to the official statistics not being accurate to how many actual crimes women do commit. It will require a massive cultural change afore women are optically discerned in the same way as males by the crimes equity system, denoting that their crimes may go undetected by the police, or when a crime is committed and the female offender is caught, discretion is utilised. Both issues designate that statistics are not recorded and, consequently lack validity. The judgment of the relationship between crime and gender are possibly influenced by the media and how it covers crime, this may be through the daily news and newspapers or even through films and dramas. There is some proposal that the media doesn’t just report a crime to the public however it expands and amplifies crime.

Anderson’s theory claims that media violence plays a major role and increases the likelihood of violent behaviour immediately as violence is in computer games, on the internet it is shown on TV news reports along with being in dramas and films. It is now a part of a popular culture therefore people are exposed to such violence in todays society than ever before. Accordingly, due to this you are expected to see a rise in violent crime in society. A Newson’s review and Andersons study to put forward the notion of ‘copycatting’ where an individual is exposed to these crimes due to the media. This then influences people to then imitate in what they have seen, which this then gives a notion to act in a violent way and commit criminal acts.(the guardian,2017,into the woods, [ONLINE]) To support Newson’s and Andersons study was When two 12-year-old girls in Wisconsin invited their classmate for a game of hide-and-seek in the forest, they planned to murder her. They later claimed they were forced to act by the mythical Slender Man. However, this theory can be rejected and argued by Cumberbatch as the findings were nothing but speculation which was fuelled by the press. A review of the research evidence by Cumberbatch (2004) for the video standards council found evidence for the media violence is has caused violence in society to be quite weak. However, over the 200 scientific studies based on media violence there is little reliability of any evidence about violence in the media leads to an increase in aggressive behaviour. While this may be true other theories such as relative deprivation is a view of social change and movements, according to which people act for social change in order to acquire something as it is a lack of resources such as wealth along with status which posses’ people to believe they should have, too. As they are being deprived of almost anything considered essential in their society. (thoughtco.,2018,relative deprivation,[ONLINE]).

A prime example of the concept of relative deprivation is often attributed to American sociologist Robert K. Merton, whose study of American soldiers during World War II revealed that soldiers in the Military Police were far less satisfied with their opportunities for promotion than regular GIs. However, the other theory that can be used is new values and crime coverage along with moral panic. News values is a social construction in how journalists and editors decide in whether s story is newsworthy which is a social process in which some potential stories are possibly rejected as it may not be worthy enough to make it into the newspaper. (young 1973). Due to the new values crimes can be amplified which create a criminological concept of moral panics which Is a feeling of fear spread among many people that some evil threatens the well-being of society. To support this concept Stanley Cohen (1942-2013) introduced the social theory of moral panic in his 1972 book titled Folk Devils and Moral Panics public reaction in England to fights between the ‘mod’ and ‘rocker’ youth subcultures of the ’70s. Through Cohens study of this youth, and the media and public reaction to them then perceive them as a threat to the community or society at large. This mean that the news media portrays the symbolic representation of the threat creating a widespread concern to society. On the other hand, McRobbie & Thornton (1995) argue that moral panics have less impact in modern day society as the world is use the shock, horror stories now therefore society react less to news worthy articles which can create moral panics. In conclusion, it could be argued that official statistics, whilst accurately reflecting the difference between the numbers of men and women convicted of offences do not tell the whole story. There are many social processes which occur in between a crime being committed and the prosecution of an individual. It is a result of a combination of these processes which leads to the official statistics not accurately reflecting the actual levels of crime that are committed by women. It will require a massive cultural change before women are seen in the same way as males by the criminal justice system, meaning that their crimes may go undetected by the police, or when a crime is committed and the female offender is caught, discretion is used. Both issues mean that statistics are not recorded and, therefore lack validity.

Bibliography

1. http://www.angelfire.com/falcon/sociology/female_offenders.pdf (Last accessed 4/02/2019)
2. https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.1111/j.1467-954X.1971.tb00618.x?journalCode=sora (Last accessed on 10/02/2019)
3. https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/759770/women-criminal-justice-system-2017..pdf Last Accessed on 12/02/2019
4. https://prezi.com/zcpb0nsajhef/the-chivalry-thesis/ Last accessed on 12/02/2019
5. https://www.theguardian.com/uk/2011/dec/09/women-who-rioted-english-riots Last accessed on 11/02/2019
6. https://www.slideshare.net/beth__/gender-crime-deviance Last accessed on 4/02/2019 Ministry of Justice (2011).
7. Statistics on Women and the Criminal Justice System 2011 A Ministry of Justice publication under Section 95 of the Criminal Justice Act 1991. Available from https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/220081/statistics-women-cjs-2011-v2.pdf last accessed on 29/01/2019
8. https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/pdf/10.1002/9781118663219.wbegss183 Last accessed on 04/02/2019
9. https://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1057/9781137390400_7 Last accessed 5/02/19
10. https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/45bf/b8b8c4965adf878b2eb27e25be6aa4ea3093.pdf Last accessed on 8/02/2019
11. https://www.nytimes.com/1982/01/08/us/study-says-criminal-tendencies-may-be-inherited.html Last accessed on 6/02/2019
12. https://www.google.co.uk/amp/s/theconversation.com/amp/drunk-women-convicted-of-assault-treated-harsher-in-sentencing-than-drunk-men-103631 Last accessed on 5/2/19
13. https://www.theguardian.com/news/2017/dec/07/slender-man-into-the-woods-how-an-online-bogeyman-inspired-children-to-kill Last accessed on 09/02/2019
14. https://www.thoughtco.com/relative-deprivation-theory-4177591 Last Accessed 10/02/2019
15. https://www.thoughtco.com/moral-panic-3026420 Last accessed on 14/02/2019
16. Browne, K et al. (2009) Sociology for A2 AQA. Cambridge: Polity Press
17. Browne, K et al. (2016) Sociology for AQA Volume 2. 2nd Year A Level 3rd Edition. Cambridge: Polity Press
18. Giddens, A & Sutton, P.W (2013) Sociology 7th Edition. Cambridge, Polity Press
19. Newburn, T (2013) Criminology 2nd Edition. Oxon, Routledge Swale, J. (2007) “Sociology of Crime & Deviance”, Oxfordshire,
20. Philip Allan updates Webb, R. (2009) “A2 Sociology: The complete course for the AQA specification”, Brentwood, Napier Press