...and anyone else who is interested...

Bushido and Chivalry, Knights and Samurai

When attempting to explain what a Samurai is to a Westerner, it is often said that they are the Japanese equivalent to the Chivalrous Knights of Europe. It is often pointed out that Western Knights and Japanese Samurai evolved at around the same time in history. It is also widely known they both served similar roles in society as Feudal Lords. These similarities are used to draw parallels between the two. Further study shows that this is an oversimplification. Although they evolved from similar roots for similar reasons around the same time, there are several marked differences such as the importance of religion, attitudes towards combat, and attitudes towards suicide between Western knights and Japanese samurai.

What could be recognized as knights by most modern people began to appear in what would become Europe in the time of Charlemagne. Over the next few hundred years, technological advances such as the stirrup coupled with the rise of feudalism would lead to the rise of medieval knights and their code of ethics, chivalry. “The medieval knight can thus be seen emerging from the cavalry of Carolingian times, his status changing with innovations in military technique and the feudalization of Europe.”

The idea of chivalry was not an overnight development. In the tenth century, knights were “Ignorant and unlettered, rough in speech and manners, he earned his living largely by violence, uncontrolled by a public justice that that had virtually disappeared. Civil disputes and criminal cases alike had ceased to be adjudicated by the enfeebled royal power and were instead settled by the sword…In the words of George Duby, ‘Moral obligations and the persuasion of their peers were all that could impose a limit to violence and greed.’” This chaos and anarchy caused the Church to get involved. The Church issued what became known as the Gregorian reform. First, the Peace of God was issued in 989. This threatened spiritual sanctions against those attacking churches, members of clergy, the poor, merchants, or other unarmed laymen. The Truce of God soon followed, which was more focused toward knights and nobility. The Truce of God set down specific rules for when it was acceptable to engage in combat. Violence was forbidden in churches, near churches, on Sundays, and other holy days. In 1041, a Peace Council in Toulouges combined the two into a single edict, giving specific guidelines for conduct of warfare. This laid the groundwork for the Crusades.
Chivalry stemmed from a custom idealized by the Church and was a value rather than an institution. It was the Christian form of the military profession, and the knight was the Christian soldier. Thus the violence of the warrior class was not only justified by the Church, but became an acceptable part of everyday life. Violence became a civil action, a service to God and country, and men of the sword were cheered and celebrated for their actions. As the crusades glamorized the “knights of Christ”, romantic literature shows us a picture of the knighthood seeking to soften its warrior harshness with lessons of courtesy and learning. This adoption of courtesy, coupled with the growing spread of literacy and the idea of the just cause, was a primary motive for the civilizing of medieval knights. “Crusading broadened the horizons of the rustic knight whose world had consisted of the village, the neighboring castle, and an occasional chevauche or pilgrimage…This mingling of the European elite helped to counteract the feudal political fragmentation and was a factor in the development of national feeling. At the same time, the knights acquired a taste for travel and for luxury that enriched their life-style.” In the twelfth century, knights became poets and gentlemen. Literature blossomed. The idea of chivalry spread to other aspects of life. Love began to take a greater importance. However, the Church remained first and foremost. “A knight’s duties and responsibilities were threefold: he must ‘maintain and defend the Catholic faith,’ he must be a ‘governor,’ and he must ‘uphold and defend his worldly or earthly lord.’”

As the ethos of chivalry became entrenched into medieval society, the image of the chivalric knight became a fusion of martial, aristocratic and Christian elements. This fusion became a way of life. Romantic literature flourished, particularly in Aquitaine and Provence, celebrating military prowess and courage in battle, loyalty, honor and endurance. Romance and history around 1200 show us a picture of the knighthood seeking to soften its warrior harshness with lessons of courtesy. Early stories tell us of proud, arrogant youth being sent to court in order to learn virtue and chivalry. Educated clerics began writing treatises instructing knights in the art of love. As the push for civility and courtesy took gained strength, so did the argument for a harmonizing of learning and chivalry. As the popularity of courtly romance over took the traditional epics of violence and battle, a synthesis of the warrior and the statesmen occurred, bringing together the knight and the courtly cleric as one learned, accomplished individual. From the second half of the twelfth century onwards, literary heroes represented the harmonizing of warrior violence and courtliness. This is strong evidence for religious and romantic images of chivalry both justifying the violence of the warrior class and civilizing the medieval knight. Jean de Marmoutier offers a portrait of Geoffrey the Fair in the third continuation of the Angevin Chronicles. In it, both warrior and courtier qualities come together to present a picture of the perfect knight. “He is not only the perfect courtier, civilized in every aspect, but also shows clemency when waging 'civil warfare', thus satisfying both the church and the court. He was therefore gentle, gracious, of a most mild spirit; he bore offences and injuries patiently and clemently; upon hearing abuse heaped upon him, he ignored it patiently. He was amiable and jocund to all men alike, but especially to knights; and there was so much goodness and kindness in him that those whom he subjected by arms he conquered even more through clemency.”

Ancient Yayoi warriors developed weapons, armor and a code during the ensuing centuries that became the centerpiece for the Japanese Samurai. Early weapons included bows, arrows and swords. Armor included a helmet that protected head and neck, a breastplate that protected the chest, arm and shoulder protectors, and a belly wrap. Later armor included protection for the legs and thighs. Armor changed as the type of battles changed. The code developed from the Chinese concept of the virtues of warriors doing battle to the Samurai code of conduct known as Kyuba no michi ("The Way of Horse and Bow") to the Bushido ("Way of the Warrior") code. Bushido means "way of the warrior." It was at the heart of the beliefs and conduct of the samurai. The philosophy of Bushido is freedom from fear. It meant that the samurai transcended his fear of death. That gave him the peace and power to serve his master faithfully and loyally and die well if necessary. Duty is a primary philosophy of the samurai, as is loyalty.

The Samurai rose out of the continuing battles for land among three main clans: the Minamoto, the Fujiwara and the Taira. The Samurai eventually became a class unto themselves between the 9th and 12th centuries A.D. They were called by two names: Samurai (knights-retainers) and Bushi (warriors). Some of them were related to the ruling class. Others were hired men. They gave complete loyalty to their Daimyo (feudal landowners) and received land and position in return. Each Daimyo used his Samurai to protect his land and to expand his power and rights to more land. The Samurai became expert in fighting from horseback and on the ground. They practiced armed and un-armed combat. The early Samurai emphasized fighting with the bow and arrow. They used swords for close-in fighting and beheading their enemies. Battles with the Mongols in the late thirteenth century led to a change in the Samurai's fighting style. They began to use their sword more and also made more use of spears and naginata. The Samurai slowly changed from fighting on horseback to fighting on foot. The concepts of bushido were well entrenched early on though. In the year 1256 CE, the Shogunal Deputy in Kyoto, Hojo Shigetoki wrote a letter to his son and house elders of his clan. The letter, now known as The Message Of Master Gokurakuji emphasized the importance of loyalty to one's master. “When one is serving officially or in the master's court, he should not think of a hundred or a thousand people, but should consider only the importance of the master. Nor should he draw the line at his own life or anything else he considers valuable. Even if the master is being phlegmatic and one goes unrecognized, he should know that he will surely have the divine protection of the gods and Buddhas.” Additionally in 1383 CE the feudal lord Shiba Yoshimasa wrote The Chikubasho, a set of precepts for the young men of his clan. In his writings, Shiba Yoshimasa dictated that a warrior should not hesitate to lay down his life for an important cause such as the defense of the emperor. “First, a man whose profession is the use of arms should think and then act upon not only his own fame, but also that of his descendants. He should not scandalize his name forever by holding his one and only life too dear. On the other hand, in the light of this, to consider this life that is given to us only once as nothing more than dust and ashes, and lose it at a time when one should not, would be to gain a reputation that is not worth mentioning. One's main purpose in throwing away his life is to do so either for the sake of the Emperor or in some great undertaking of a military general.”

One of the most notable differences between chivalry and bushido is the role of religion. Chivalry is a direct result of the Church. Chivalry was essentially handed down to the warrior class from outside, with the Gregorian Reform. This resulted in piousness and religion being central to chivalry. While Bushido certainly has some often blatant religious overtones, they are less central than other, more earthly elements, such as fealty. Knights were loyal to the Church first and their lords second. In the eleventh century, Pope Gregory VII solidified this concept during a conflict between German Emperor Henry IV and him. Gregory recruited followers by promising salvation for service, stating that “soldiers of Christ” would be paid by total remission of sins. “A knight, he said, could hardly hold secular lords dearer to than the Pope, for ‘they confer what is but wretched and transitory,’ that is, land and booty, while the Pope promised ‘eternal blessings, absolving from all sins’” In contrast, samurai were loyal to their lords above all else. “In feudal Japan, there was no more despicable crime than that of rebellion against a master (or father); and no series of punishments, inflicted cumulatively according to the dictates of the penal code, was considered harsh enough to erase the deed or even atone for it.” “The guilt of a vassal murdering his suzerain is in principal the same as that of an arch-traitor to the Emperor. His immediate companions, his relations-all even to his most distant connections-shall be cut off, hewn to atoms, root and fibre. The guilt of a vassal only lifting his hand against his master, even though he does not assassinate him, is the same.” Compare this to the story of the Henry II and his son the Young King in 1173. The Young King declares war on his father, and arranged to be knighted to lend credence to the rebellion. His brother also joins him in rebellion. After a year and a half, the rebellion ends, Henry II signs treaties with his sons, and they resume cordial relations. This could not have been tolerated according to bushido. The fact that it was accepted as common practice illustrates the lack of loyalty to a father or master, especially given that he was knighted specifically to further the rebellion against his father. Of course, one of the greatest exhibits of loyalty in history involved Japanese samurai, known as the forty-seven ronin. In the house of the Shogun, two lords had a dispute, and one drew his sword and struck the other, but didn’t kill him. Since drawing a weapon in the Shogun’s house was forbidden, the offended lord was ordered to commit ritual suicide. The Shogun also ordered his lands seized and his samurai disbanded. With this order, the disbanded samurai were to give up there loyalty to their dead lord. The samurai submitted and re-entered society. However, two years later they rejoined and exacted revenge on the opposing lord, attacking his castle and beheading him, thus disobeying the order of the Shogun. They then committed ritual suicide to follow their lord into death.

Another marked difference between samurai and knights was the attitude toward combat. Knights viewed combat as a tool, a means to an end. The idea of combat was generally thought of as useful, by with a somewhat reserved attitude. The idea was not just to win the fight, but survive to enjoy the spoils afterward. A commentary on William Marshal’s first battle illustrates this point well. “At the feast that night celebrating the victory, a night commented on William’s performance: William, he said, had fought to deliver the town rather than to take prisoners for ransom or to seize horses and equipment. He had behaved, in other words, like the ideal rather than the real knight. Such behavior was admired, but only to a point.” William Marshal has often been held up as the model of chivalry of his time. Another telling story involving William Marshal entails a strategy to win tournaments. He would use deception, allowing others to wear each other out before joining in. “William had Henry let it be understood that he would not enter the lists, and when combat raged at its height, he and his men charged onto the field and won the day for their chosen side.” Samurai, on the other hand, had a much more single-minded approach to combat. “It is interesting to note…that many duels in feudal Japan ended…in mutual slaying and that the doctrine of ai-uchi, or mutual striking down, was an accepted principal of swordsmanship, a principle which enabled many a desperately committed swordsman to dispatch an opponent of greater skill, even if he himself did not survive the encounter.” Where a knight seemed to be first a nobleman, and second a warrior. Samurai were warriors above all else. Knights studied combat to be able to defeat their enemies. While samurai’s main goal was also to defeat their enemies, they looked toward combat as a way to explore spirituality on an individual basis. An excellent illustration of this can be found in the writing of Miyamoto Musashi, considered the greatest swordsman in Japanese history. He writes in his preface to The Book of Five Rings “I have killed over sixty men in fights and duels. When I was sixty years old I looked back upon my life and in a flash of wisdom, realized that all my victories were based either on great luck, innate ability, or perhaps the methods of other schools were inadequate. When I came to terms with my own skills and abilities, the realities of what I had accomplished held me to a higher principle that left me no choice but to depart from the commerce of the world, seek isolation, and tear my soul apart so that I could examine what I seemed to know instinctively. I practiced and meditated constantly until I came to understand the workings of the spirit…Although I was committed to my sword, I was also dedicated to learning painting, sculpture, and poetry…I was not a particularly religious person, although I know of Buddhism, Shintoism, and Confucianism and am aware of there tenets…The Book of the Five Rings into five sections called Earth, Water, Fire, Wind, and No-thing-ness…The goals must be understood, definitive, and no diversion can be acknowledged or permitted if you are to attain enlightenment within the sphere of a chosen art…there is no guarantee that you will attain perfection. It must all come from inside you…” Musashi illustrates the very spiritual nature of combat, referencing the five elements of nature and relating them to aspects of swordsmanship. It is also noteworthy that Musashi retreats into the wilderness and meditate with the purpose not of religious enlightenment, but to codify his system of combat. He also refers to the idea that the arts tie into making someone a complete warrior. While knights did engage in poetry and literature, it was generally a social endeavor, separate from furthering their martial skill. Overall, the different attitudes towards combat is a great difference between East and West.

Of all the differences between bushido and chivalry, none are more striking than the attitude towards suicide. Knights, being Christians, considered suicide a mortal sin. St. Thomas Aquinas in his Summa Theologica that “…that the one who deliberately takes away the life given to him by his Creator shows the utmost disregard for the will and authority of God; in addition he does so in a way that prevents the possibility of repentance, thus jeopardising his salvation. Furthermore, suicide is worse than murder for in killing one's fellow man one is killing only the body, whereas in suicide one is killing both the body and the soul.” Given that the first tenant of chivalry was to uphold the Catholic Church, it is clear that the idea of suicide and chivalry would be completely incompatible. Samurai, on the other hand, revered the act of suicide. “Ritualistic suicide, considered the highest manifestation of command over one’s own destiny and unflinching courage in the face of death, represented a privilege in the eyes of the Japanese warrior.” Texts are filled with examples of suicide by Japanese warriors. The aforementioned forty seven ronin is one of the most famous, but it was hardly an isolated incident. Often the tie of loyalty to ones lord was strong enough, that a mass suicide after the death of the patriarch would decimate an entire clan. The idea of entire groups of knights committing suicide following a defeat, or the death of a lord would seem abhorrent to any Westerner, but especially to a knight.

Both had a powerful impact on society that continues to this day. While chivalry and knighthood faded into history in the 1500s, the samurai thrived up until the late nineteenth century, and then only ceased to exist after being outlawed and forcibly put down. While it is appropriate to say that Western knights and Japanese samurai shared many aspects of medieval life, they certainly were intrinsically different on a spiritual and philosophical level. Although they evolved from similar roots for similar reasons around the same time, there are several marked differences such as the importance of religion, attitudes towards combat, and attitudes towards suicide between Western knights and Japanese samurai.