to produce those distinctions in the order of knighthood which we are now to notice. The most ancient, and originally the sole order of knighthood, was that of the Knight-Bachelor. This was the proper degree conferred by one knight on another, without the interference either of prince, noble, or churchman, and its privileges and duties approached nearly to those of the knight-errant. Were it possible for human nature to have acted up to the pitch of merit required by the statutes of Chivalry, this order might have proved for a length of time a substitute for imperfect policy, a remedy against feudal tyranny,-a resource for the weak when oppressed by the strong. Unquestionably, in many individual instances, knights were all that we have described them. But the laws of Chivalry, like those of the ascetic orders, while announcing a high tone of virtue and self-denial, unfortunately afforded the strongest temptations to those who professed its vows to abuse the character which they assumed. The degree of knighthood was easily attained, and did not subject the warrior on whom it was bestowed to any particular tribunal in case of his abusing the powers which it conferred. Thus the knight became, in many instances, a wandering and licentious soldier, carrying from castle to castle, and from court to court, the offer of his mercenary sword, and frequently abusing his character, to oppress those whom his oath bound him to protect. The license and foreign vices imported by those who had returned from the crusades, the poverty also to which noble families were reduced by those fatal expeditions, all aided to throw the quality of knight-bachelor lower in the scale of honour, when unsupported by birth, wealth, or the command of followers. The poorest knight-bachelor, however, long continued to exercise the privileges of the order. Their title of bachelor (or Bas Chevalier, according to the best derivation) marked that they were early held in inferior estimation to those more fortunate knights, who had extensive lands and numerous vassals. They either attached themselves to the service of some prince or rich noble, and were supported at their expense, or they led the life of mere adventurers. There were many knights, who, like Sir Gaudwin in the romance of Partenopex de Blois, subsisted by passing from one court, camp, and tournament, to another, and contrived even, by various means open to persons of that profession, to maintain, at least for a time, a fair and goodly appearance. "So riding, they o'ertake an errant-knight Well horsed, and large of limb, Sir Gaudwin hight; He nor of castle nor of land was lord, And sure his mind and bearing were akin, It seem'd that he, such pomp his train bewray'd, These bachelor-knights, as Mr Rose has well described Sir Gaudwin, set their principal store by valour in battle; and perhaps it was the only quality of Chivalry which they at all times equally prized and possessed. Their boast was to be the children of war and fight, living in no other atmosphere but what was mingled with the dust of conflict and the hot breath of charging steeds. A 66 gentle bachelor" is so described in one of the Fabliaux translated by Mr Way: "What gentle bachelor is he, Whose infant food a helm did yield." His resistless gallantry in tournament and battle, -the rapidity with which he traversed land and sea, from England to Switzerland, to be present at each remarkable occasion of action, with his har dihood in enduring every sort of privation,—and his generosity in rewarding minstrels and heralds, -his life of hazard and turmoil,—and his deeds of strength and fame,-are all enumerated. But we hear nothing of his redressing wrongs, or of his protecting the oppressed. The knight-bachelor, according to this picture, was a valiant prize-fighter, and lived by the exercise of his weapons. In war, the knight-bachelor had an opportunity of maintaining, and even of enriching himself, if fortunate, by the ransom of such prisoners as he happened to make in fight. If, in this way, he accumulated wealth, he frequently employed it in levying followers, whose assistance, with his own, he hired out to such sovereigns as were willing to set a sufficient price on his services. In time of peace, the tournaments afforded, as we have already observed, a certain means of income to these adventurous champions. The horses and arms of the knights who succumbed on such occasions, were forfeited to the victors, and these the wealthy were always willing to reclaim by a payment in money. At some of the achievements in arms, the victors had the right, by the conditions of the encounter, to impose severe terms on the vanquished, besides the usual forfeiture of horse and armour. Sometimes the unsuccessful combatant ransomed himself from imprisonment, or other hard conditions, by a sum of money; a transaction in which the knightbachelors, such as we have described them, readily engaged. These adventurers called the sword which they used in tourneys, their gagne-pain, or breadwinner, as itinerant fiddlers of our days denominate their instruments. "Dont i est gaigne-pain nommée, Car par li est gagnies li pains." Pelerinage du Monde, par Guigneville. Men of such roving and military habits, subsisting by means so precarious, and lying under little or no restraint from laws, or from the social system, were frequently dangerous and turbulent members of the commonwealth. Every usurper, tyrant, or rebel, found knights-bachelors to espouse his cause in numbers proportioned to his means of expenditure. They were precisely the "landless resolutes," whom any adventurer of military fame or known enterprise could easily collect, "For food and diet, to some enterprise Sometimes knights were found who placed themselves directly in opposition to all law and good order, headed independent bands of depredators, or, to speak plainly, of robbers, seized upon some castle |