Antique Reminiscences in Christine de Pizan’s Medieval Military Textbook The Book of Deeds of Arms and Chivalry One

One of the most interesting late‑medieval literary monuments is the military textbook entitled The Book of Deeds of Arms and Chivalry (beginning of the 15th century). The fact that the author of this book on war and chivalry is a woman, Christine de Pizan, is understandably arousing the interest of medievalists – but it is only one of the fascinating issues connected with this work. Equally interesting is the fact of the author’s reference to the antique models and their presence in the textbook. The aim of this paper is to engage in polemics with the thesis that invoking antique authorities was merely a form of “rhetorical” strategy of de Pizan, who wanted to demonstrate her knowledge of classical literature. My intention is to remind the readers that the function of the antique auctoritates (mainly Vegetius and Frontinus, as well as Valerius Maximus) was not purely ornamental, intended to demonstrate the author’s erudition, but that the quotations from the works of antique writers and the references to them constituted an integral part of the author’s line of thinking and argumentation. Their presence in the textbook testifies to the timeless value of the recommendations of the antique writers and their decisive role in the author’s argumentation.

One of the most interesting late‑medieval literary monuments is the military textbook entitled The Book of Deeds of Arms and Chivalry (beginning of the 15th century). The fact that the author of this book on war and chivalry is a woman, Christine de Pizan, is understandably arousing the interest of medievalists – but it is only one of the fascinating issues connected with this work. Equally interesting is the fact of the author’s reference to the antique models and their presence in the textbook. The aim of this paper is to engage in polemics with the thesis that invoking antique authorities was merely a form of “rhetorical” strategy of de Pizan, who wanted to demonstrate her knowledge of classical literature. My intention is to remind the readers that the function of the antique auctoritates (mainly Vegetius and Frontinus, as well as Valerius Maximus) was not purely ornamental, intended to demonstrate the author’s erudition, but that the quotations from the works of antique writers and the references to them constituted an integral part of the author’s line of thinking and argumentation. Their presence in the textbook testifies to the timeless value of the recommendations of the antique writers and their decisive role in the author’s argumentation.