[377] Ashmole, p. 105.
[378] Pp. 5. 9. 11. ante.
[379] The exact degree of this influence it is impossible to ascertain now. The author of the romance of Ivanhoe appears to deny it altogether; and while he represents the Normans as perfectly chivalric, he describes, for the sake of contrast, the Anglo-Saxons as totally unadorned with the graces of knighthood. This is a sacrifice of historic truth to dramatic effect, and materially detracts from the merit of Ivanhoe as a faithful picture of ancient manners.
[380] Glaber Rod. c. 5.
[381] Snorre. Malmsbury, p. 174.
[382] Ingulf, p. 512. Order. Vit. p. 460. 463, &c. Malmsbury, passim. Dudo, p. 82.
[383] Magna Charta, cl. xiv.
[384] Lord Lyttleton gives no higher date to this compulsory knighthood than the reign of Henry III. But it surely must have existed earlier, as it seems the natural consequence of the change of constitution, effected by William I., by his uniting chivalry to feudalism.
[385] Wace tells us that William Rufus never could hear a knight of prowess spoken of without endeavouring to engage his services.
“Li reis ros fu de grant noblesce
Proz, et de mult grant largesce.
N’oist de chevalier parler,
Qui de proesse oist loer,
Qui en son breif escrit ne fust,
Et qui par an del soen n’eust.”