XIV. Facilis perceptio contemptibilem reddit amorem, difficilis eum parum facit haberi.
XV. Omnis consuevit amans in coamantis as pectupallescere.
XVI. In repentina coamantis visione, cor tremescit amantis.
XVII. Novus amor veterem compellit abire.
XVIII. Probitas sola quemc.u.mque dignum facit amore.
XIX. Si amor minuatur, cito deficit et raro convalescit.
XX. Amorosus semper est timorosus.
XXI. Ex vera zelotypia affectus semper crescit amandi.
XXII. De coamante suspicione percepta zelus interea et affectus crescit amandi.
XXIII. Minus dormit et edit quem amoris cogitatio vexat.
XXIV. Quilibet amantis actus in coamantis cogitatione finitur.
XXV. Verus amans nihil beatum credit, nisi quod cogitat amanti placere.
XXVI. Amor nihil posset amori denegare.
XXVII. Amans coamantis solatiis satiari non potest.
XXVIII. Modica praesumptio cogit amantem de coamante suspicari sinistra.
XXIX. Non solet amare quem nimia voluptatis abundantia vexat.
x.x.x. Verus amans a.s.sidua, sine intermissione, coamantis imagine detinetur.
x.x.xI. Unam feminam nihil prohibet a duobus amari, et a duabus mulieribus unum.
Of these articles, the translation of a few may suffice.
The allegation of marriage is an insufficient plea against love.
No one should love two people at the same time.
Without exceeding good reason no one should be forbidden to love.
No one need love unless persuasion invite.
It is not seemly to love one whom it would be unseemly to marry.
A new love banishes an old one.
Love readily yielded is lightly held.
The establishment of courts for the maintenance of principles such as these may seem unnecessary. Yet they had their raison d"etre. In cases of tort and felony the lord of a fief possessed the right of justice high and low. There are crimes now which the law cannot reach. It was the same way then. There were controversies which no mere man could adjust. To remedy the defect the wives of the lords created tribunals of their own.
In the English dominions on the Continent generally, as also in Flanders, Champagne and Provence, these courts were frequent. In describing them Nostradamus said that "disputes arising from the beautiful and subtle questions of love were submitted to ill.u.s.trious ladies who, after deliberation, rendered judgments termed, "Lous arrests d"amours.""
Of the beautiful and subtle questions here is one: A confidant charged by a friend with messages of love found the lady so to his liking that he addressed her in his own behalf. Instead of being repulsed he was encouraged. Whereupon the injured party brought suit. Maitre Andre, prothonotary of the court, relates that the plaintiff prayed that the fraud be submitted to the Countess of Champagne, who, sitting in banco with sixty ladies, heard the complaint and, on deliberation, rendered judgment as follows: "It is ordered that the defendants henceforth be debarred the frequentation of honest people." Here is another instance. A knight was charged by a lady not to say or do anything in her praise. It so fell about that her name was lightly taken. The knight challenged the defamer. Thereupon the lady contended that he had forfeited all claim to her regard. Action having been brought the court decided that the defence of a lady being never illicit the knight should be rehabilitated in favor and reinstated in grace. Which, the prothonotary states, was done.
It was over these delicate matters, over others more delicate still, that the Courts of Love claimed and exercised jurisdiction. Execution of the decrees may seem to have been arduous. But judgments were enforced not by a constabulary but by the community. Disregard of a decision entailed not loss of liberty but loss of caste. In the case of a man, entrance was denied him at the tournaments. In the case of a woman, the drawbridges were up. Throughout the land there was no one to receive her. As a result the delinquent was rare. So too was contempt of the jurists. Sometimes a girl appeared before them. Sometimes a king.
To-day it all seems very trivial. But at the time marriage was a matter concerning which the party most interested had the least to say. Love was not an element of it and disinclination a detail. Moreover in the apoplectic conditions of the world a woman"s natural guardians were not always at hand, the troubadour always was; the consequence being that a lady was left to do more or less as she saw fit and it was in order that she might do what was fittest that decretals were made.
They served another purpose. They set a standard which is observed to-day.
Article XI of the code: Non decet amare quarum pudor est nuptias affectare,--It is not seemly to love one whom it would not be seemly to marry, is one of the pivots of modern ethics. On it was constructed _Ruy Blas_. The tale is tragic but then the entire realm of love is choked with tragic tales, though it is less so when the precept is observed and still less when there is regard for the injunction against double loving.
In addition, the provisions of the code were instrumental in originating that regard for appearances which society previously had neglected and from which contemporaneous refinement proceeds. Chivalry came with the crusades; with the Courts of Love, good manners.
They had another merit. In guiding the affections they educated them. To love and to be loved is not simple but complex. Love may come from mutual attraction. That is common. It may come of natural selection, which is rare. Natural selection presupposes a discernment that leads a man through mazes of women to one woman in particular, to a woman who to him is the one woman in all the world, to the woman who has been awaiting him and who recognizes him when he comes. Or _vice versa_. In the Middle Ages it was usually from the woman that the initial recognition proceeded. It was she who did the selecting. In the best society she does so still.
To encourage her the Courts of Love authorized a form of contemplative union in which lovers exchanged vows similar to those taken at the invest.i.ture of a va.s.sal. The knight knelt before the lady, put his hands in hers and acknowledged himself her liegeman. The homage was formally accepted. The knight received a kiss which was renewable every year. But nothing more. In theory at least. Any further reward of fealty being due to the sheer generosity of the lady who then was lord. The kiss however was collectable. In the event of deferred payment action could be brought.
One was. By way of defence the defendant alleged that Mr. Danger was present. Mr. Danger was the defendant"s husband.[45]
These hymens of the heart, inst.i.tuted by virtue of Article I, Causa conjugii ab amore non est excusatio recta--Against love marriage is an insufficient excuse--resulted in a sort of moral bigamy that was sanctioned generally by custom, in Provence by the clergy, and which, like marriage was contracted in the presence of witnesses. Gerard de Roussillon, a mediaeval writer, described a lady who while marrying one man coincidentally gave a ring and promise of love to another. The proceeding was strictly in accordance with the sentiment of the day which regarded love as incompatible with marriage.
A case in point is contained in the reports of Martial d"Auvergne. A knight loved a lady who could not accept his vows inasmuch as she loved some one else. But she promised to do so if it so happened that she lost the other man--a contingency which to-day would mean if he died or ran away. Very differently the jurisprudence of the epoch interpreted it. The lady married the man she loved whereupon the knight exacted fulfilment of the agreement. Queen Eleanor, before whom the case was heard, decided in his favor, on the ground, perhaps subtle, that the lady"s husband, in becoming her husband, became _ipso facto_, by that very act, amatorially defunct.
In a case not similar but cognate, judgment rendered by the Countess of Champagne was as follows: "By these presents we declare and affirm that love cannot exist between married people for the reason that lovers grant everything unconstrainedly whereas married people are obliged to submit to one another. Wherefore shall this decision, reached prudently in conformity with the opinion of many other ladies, be to you all a constant and irrefragible truth. So adjudged in the year of grace 1174, the third day of the calends of May, seventh indiction."
In another case Ermengarde of Narbonne decided that the addition of the marriage tie cannot invalidate a prior affair, _nisi_--unless the lady has in mind to have done with love forever.
Decretals of this nature, however absurd they may seem, were at least serviceable in the reforms they effected. According to the civil law if a husband absented himself for ten years, the wife had the right to remarry.
According to the law of love, the absence of a lover, however prolonged, did not release the lady from her attachment. The civil law authorized a widow to remarry in a year and a day. The law of love exacted for the heart a widowhood of twice that period. The civil law permitted a husband to beat his wife reasonably. The law of love enforced for the lady respect.[46]
The resulting conditions, perhaps a.n.a.logous to those of eighteenth-century Italy where every woman of position had, in addition to a husband a cavaliere servente, succeeded none the less in developing outside of marriage and directly in opposition to it, the ideal of what marriage is, the union not only of hands but of hearts. The Courts of Love might go, their work endured. They made woman what she had been in republican Rome and what she is to-day, the guide and a.s.sociate of man.
Slowly thereafter they followed knight-errantry to its grave without however meanwhile becoming what Hallam described as "fantastical solemnities." "I never had," Hallam declared, "the patience to look at the older writers who discussed this tiresome subject." In view of which his opinions are not important, particularly as the Courts of Love so far from becoming fantastic went to the other extreme. Instead of questions beautiful and subtle, there arose others, highly realistic, together with investigations _de visu_ which young gentlewomen treated in terms precise.
Before decadence set in, at a time when these establishments were at their best and notwithstanding the ethical purport of their decisions, misadventures occurred. Of these, one, commonly reported by all authorities, is curious.
The Lord Raymond of Castel-Roussillon had for wife the Lady Marguerite.
Guillaume de Cabstain, a lad of quality came to their court where he was made page to the countess and where, after certain episodes, he composed for her the lai which runs:
"Sweet are the thoughts That love awakes in me."
Etc. When Raymond heard the song he led Guillaume far from the castle, cut his head off, put it in a basket, cut his heart out, put it also in a basket, returned to the castle, had the heart roasted and had it served at table to his wife. The Lady Marguerite ate without knowing what it was.
The repast concluded, Raymond stood up. He told his wife that what she had eaten was the heart of the page. He fetched and showed her the head and asked how the heart had tasted.
The Lady Marguerite, recognizing the head, replied that the heart had been so appetizing that never other food or drink should take from her its savor. Raymond ran at her with his sword. She fled away, threw herself from a balcony and broke her skull.