Masculinity In The Real Knight

Sex, as a biological state, did not truly determine whether one was masculine or feminine, which were instead determined by an individual’s characteristics. Social groups – such as the church, a group of knights, or a particular King’s court – had separate definitions; therefore, the Medieval male constantly demonstrated his masculinity, both physically and socially. The clash of values created two main categories, encompassing all others, in which a knight’s masculinity could fall: the ideal knight, young, wealthy, brave, desirous, and satisfying to any female lovers; and the real knight, a less extreme version of the ideal, that didn’t suffer the same standards. In both cases, a knight’s masculinity was extremely fragile; the ideal knight, for example, had to be completely ruined, through wounds to the genitals, or upper thigh. …show more content…
Truly, a knight had to prove his masculinity through action and reputation, through social virtues, protecting and politely courting women while still dominant and restraining his own emotional investment. Accomplishing physical masculinity over other knights, ideal knights proved themselves worthy of the ‘natural’ dominance over their lovers, or, failing this, died. In Marie de France’s “Yonec”, the knight, son of a married woman and an ideal knight, satisfies this fate with his father’s own sword against the disgraced husband. On the other end of the spectrum, fulfilling physical requirements, but with lacking reputation, the ‘real’ knight Lanval only takes on the image of an ideal knight for a moment, but still holds on to the reputation of a chivalric knight despite his teetering masculine reputation. In “Yonec” and “Lanval,” Marie de France reveals the clashing images of the ideal knight and the real knight, displaying the weaknesses of their masculinity and the effects of a knight trying to retain these