It is logical to assume that many of the ideas which are presented in the novel have their roots in the essay. Therefore the interest in the essay lies not simply in what it can tell us about Ivanhoe but also in what it can tell us about Waverley and possibly Scott's own opinions on history in 1818. Before tackling this task, I would like to point out that the essay is informative, illustrated with examples from history and literature, with a steady reliance on Shakespeare, Cervantes and Froissart. In every age and country valour is held in esteem, and the more rude the period and the place, the greater respect is paid to boldness of enterprise and success in battle.
Chivalry belongs to societies distant from modernity either in terms of time or place.
This would seem to lead us into a paradoxical situation where Fergus, as an example, is not distant - he is a Scot brought up in a civilised society, France, nor is he far away in time, as his execution took place in 1746. Furthermore, the whole of the novel's subtitle would argue that events were close both in time and place. But Scott goes much further than this, illustrating his arguments with descriptions of their cruelty, particularly the murder of innocent women classified as 'infidels'. Scott's analysis is based on the fact that chivalry is essentially a form of Catholic superstition, therefore the abuses its practised can be traced back to their religious origin. 43 The vows of celibacy introduced profligacy among the Catholic clergy, as the high-flown and overstrained Platonism of the professors of Chivalry favoured the increase of license and debauchery.