# data[].attributes.body
William Marshal obeyed his leaders, e.g on the bridge

# data[].attributes.body
Chivalry back then was romanticised and probably had a different meaning, so violence alongside it was in a way 'pardoned' as part of knighthood. As long as there was Chivalry then violence that was an inescapable part of knighthood was more accepted

# data[].attributes.body
Chivalry could be seen as an excuse by the knights to validate the violence in their lifestyle. So therefore it could be said that chivalry must include violence just to accommodate themselves.

# data[].attributes.body
It depends on your definition on chivalry. Could it be that you can be chivalrous in all other aspects of life however in battle as long as you win then you are allowed to do pretty much anything therefore the example in the extract may be acceptable

# data[].attributes.body
Most fighting is contained within tournaments, not wars, so it's justified

# data[].attributes.body
With William being a Knight, its hard to escape the violence needed. Every violent act committed by William is often legitimised because he did it for his King or his people. Violence is in every aspect of Knighthood.

# data[].attributes.body
Despite the graphic description, it is clear that Marshall abided by a code of warfare, and shunned any dishonorable behaviour (e.g. the behaviour of his captors toward him is framed in a barbaric manner). Chivalry thus seems to be connected to a more controlled form of warfare instead of mindless brutality.

# data[].attributes.body
Brutality was an accepted in a sense. The method of warfare was centred on the pillaging of peasants e.g. the Chevauchée. Although in the contemporary era we see a distinction between good and bad violence they may not have seen it in the same way, as long as it is done in the name of God.

# data[].attributes.body
Some contradiction, but Knights were fundamentally military figures, perhaps their violence viewed differently at the time.
William avenging his uncle could be justified considering the cowardice/non-chivalry of assassination

# data[].attributes.body
Through the text’s comparison of William to a “starving lion”. This reflects that his actions are placed in a positive manner and therefore his violence is seen as necessary and chivalrous.

# data[].attributes.body
A key part of chivalry is protecting your honour, of your king, family, country etc. Fighting is a necessary part of this