Part 13

KNIGHT-SERVICE, the dominant and distinctive tenure of land under the feudal system. It is associated in its origin with that development in warfare which made the mailed horseman, armed with lance and sword, the most important factor in battle. Till within recent years it was believed that knight-service was developed out of the liability, under the English system, of every five hides to provide one soldier in war. It is now held that, on the contrary, it was a novel system which was introduced after the Conquest by the Normans, who relied essentially on their mounted knights, while the English fought on foot. They were already familiar with the principle of knight-service, the knight's fee, as it came to be termed in England, being represented in Normandy by the _fief du haubert_, so termed from the hauberk or coat of mail (_lorica_) which was worn by the knight. Allusion is made to this in the coronation charter of Henry I. (1100), which speaks of those holding by knight-service as _milites qui per loricam terras suas deserviunt_.

The Conqueror, it is now held, divided the lay lands of England among his followers, to be held by the service of a fixed number of knights in his host, and imposed the same service on most of the great ecclesiastical bodies which retained their landed endowments. No record evidence exists of this action on his part, and the quota of knight-service exacted was not determined by the area or value of the lands granted (or retained), but was based upon the _unit_ of the feudal host, the _constabularia_ of ten knights. Of the tenants-in-chief or barons (i.e. those who held directly of the crown), the principal were called on to find one or more of these units, while of the lesser ones some were called on for five knights, that is, half a _constabularia_. The same system was adopted in Ireland when that country was conquered under Henry II. The baron who had been enfeoffed by his sovereign on these terms could provide the knights required either by hiring them for pay or, more conveniently when wealth was mainly represented by land, by a process of subenfeoffment, analogous to that by which he himself had been enfeoffed. That is to say, he could assign to an under-tenant a certain portion of his fief to be held by the service of finding one or more knights. The land so held would then be described as consisting of one or more knights' fees, but the knight's fee had not, as was formerly supposed, any fixed area. This process could be carried farther till there was a chain of mesne lords between the tenant-in-chief and the actual holder of the land; but the liability for performance of the knight-service was always carefully defined.

The primary obligation incumbent on every knight was service in the field, when called upon, for forty days a year, with specified armour and arms. There was, however, a standing dispute as to whether he could be called upon to perform this service outside the realm, nor was the question of his expenses free from difficulty. In addition to this primary duty he had, in numerous cases at least, to perform that of "castle ward" at his lord's chief castle for a fixed number of days in the year. On certain baronies also was incumbent the duty of providing knights for the guard of royal castles, such as Windsor, Rockingham and Dover. Under the feudal system the tenant by knight-service had also the same pecuniary obligations to his lord as had his lord to the king. These consisted of (1) "relief," which he paid on succeeding to his lands; (2) "wardship," that is, the profits from his lands during a minority; (3) "marriage," that is, the right of giving in marriage, unless bought off, his heiress, his heir (if a minor) and his widow; and also of the three "aids" (see Aids).

The chief sources of information for the extent and development of knight-service are the returns (_cartae_) of the barons (i.e. the tenants-in-chief) in 1166, informing the king, at his request, of the names of their tenants by knight-service with the number of fees they held, supplemented by the payments for "scutage" (see SCUTAGE) recorded on the pipe rolls, by the later returns printed in the _Testa de Nevill_, and by the still later ones collected in _Feudal Aids_. In the returns made in 1166 some of the barons appear as having enfeoffed more and some less than the number of knights they had to find. In the latter case they described the balance as being chargeable on their "demesne," that is, on the portion of their fief which remained in their own hands. These returns further prove that lands had already been granted for the service of a fraction of a knight, such service being in practice already commuted for a proportionate money payment; and they show that the total number of knights with which land held by military service was charged was not, as was formerly supposed, sixty thousand, but, probably, somewhere between five and six thousand. Similar returns were made for Normandy, and are valuable for the light they throw on its system of knight-service.

The principle of commuting for money the obligation of military service struck at the root of the whole system, and so complete was the change of conception that "tenure by knight-service of a mesne lord becomes, first in fact and then in law, tenure by escuage (i.e. scutage)." By the time of Henry III., as Bracton states, the test of tenure was scutage; liability, however small, to scutage payment made the tenure military.

The disintegration of the system was carried farther in the latter half of the 13th century as a consequence of changes in warfare, which were increasing the importance of foot soldiers and making the service of a knight for forty days of less value to the king. The barons, instead of paying scutage, compounded for their service by the payment of lump sums, and, by a process which is still obscure, the nominal quotas of knight-service due from each had, by the time of Edward I., been largely reduced. The knight's fee, however, remained a knight's fee, and the pecuniary incidents of military tenure, especially wardship, marriage, and fines on alienation, long continued to be a source of revenue to the crown. But at the Restoration (1660) tenure by knight-service was abolished by law (12 Car. II. c. 24), and with it these vexatious exactions were abolished.

BIBLIOGRAPHY.--The returns of 1166 are preserved in the _Liber Niger_ (13th cent.), edited by Hearne, and the _Liber Rubeus_ or _Red Book of the Exchequer_ (13 cent.), edited by H. Hall for the Rolls Series in 1896. The later returns are in _Testa de Nevill_ (Record Commission, 1807) and in the Record Office volumes of _Feudal Aids_, arranged under counties. For the financial side of knight-service the early pipe rolls have been printed by the Record Commission and the Pipe Roll Society, and abstracts of later ones will be found in _The Red Book of the Exchequer_, which may be studied on the whole question; but the editor's view must be received with caution and checked by J. H. Round's _Studies on the Red Book of the Exchequer_ (for private circulation). The _Baronia Anglica_ of Madox may also be consulted. The existing theory on knight-service was enunciated by Mr Round in _English Historical Review_, vi., vii., and reissued by him in his _Feudal England_ (1895). It is accepted by Pollock and Maitland (_History of English Law_), who discuss the question at length; by Mr J. F. Baldwin in his _Scutage and Knight-service in England_ (University of Chicago Press, 1897), a valuable monograph with bibliography; and by Petit-Dutaillis, in his _Studies supplementary to Stubbs' Constitutional History_ (Manchester University Series, 1908). (J. H. R.)

KNIGHTS OF THE GOLDEN CIRCLE, a semi-military secret society in the United States in the Middle West, 1861-1864, the purpose of which was to bring the Civil War to a close and restore the "Union as it was." There is some evidence that before the Civil War there was a Democratic secret organization of the same name, with its principal membership in the Southern States. After the outbreak of the Civil War many of the Democrats of the Middle West, who were opposed to the war policy of the Republicans, organized the Knights of the Golden Circle, pledging themselves to exert their influence to bring about peace. In 1863, owing to the disclosure of some of its secrets, the organization took the name of Order of American Knights, and in 1864 this became the Sons of Liberty. The total membership of this order probably reached 250,000 to 300,000, principally in Ohio, Indiana, Illinois, Iowa, Wisconsin, Kentucky and south-western Pennsylvania. Fernando Wood of New York seems to have been the chief officer and in 1864 Clement L. Vallandigham became the second in command. The great importance of the Knights of the Golden Circle and its successors was due to its opposition to the war policy of the Republican administration. The plan was to overthrow the Lincoln government in the elections and give to the Democrats the control of the state and Federal governments, which would then make peace and invite the Southern States to come back into the Union on the old footing. In order to obstruct and embarrass the Republican administration the members of the order held peace meetings to influence public opinion against the continuance of the war; purchased arms to be used in uprisings, which were to place the peace party in control of the Federal government, or failing in that to establish a north-western confederacy; and took measures to set free the Confederate prisoners in the north and bring the war to a forced close. All these plans failed at the critical moment, and the most effective work done by the order was in encouraging desertion from the Federal armies, preventing enlistments, and resisting the draft. Wholesale arrests of leaders and numerous seizures of arms by the United States authorities resulted in a general collapse of the order late in 1864. Three of the leaders were sentenced to death by military commissions, but sentence was suspended until 1866, when they were released under the decision of the United States Supreme Court in the famous case _Ex parte Milligan_.

AUTHORITIES.--_An Authentic Exposition of the Knights of the Golden Circle_ (Indianapolis, 1863); J. F. Rhodes, _History of the United States from the Compromise of 1850_ (New York, 1905) vol. v.; E. McPherson, _Political History of the Rebellion_ (Washington, 1876); and W. D. Foulke, _Life of O. P. Morton_ (2 vols., New York, 1899). (W. L. F.)

KNIPPERDOLLINCK (or KNIPPERDOLLING), BERNT (BEREND or BERNHARDT) (c. 1490-1536), German divine, was a prosperous cloth-merchant at Münster when in 1524 he joined Melchior Rinck and Melchior Hofman in a business journey to Stockholm, which developed into an abortive religious errand. Knipperdollinck, a man of fine presence and glib tongue, noted from his youth for eccentricity, had the ear of the Münster populace when in 1527 he helped to break the prison of Tonies Kruse, in the teeth of the bishop and the civic authorities. For this he made his peace with the latter; but, venturing on another business journey, he was arrested, imprisoned for a year, and released on payment of a high fine--in regard of which treatment he began an action before the Imperial Chamber. Though his aims were political rather than religious, he attached himself to the reforming movement of Bernhardt Rothmann, once (1529) chaplain of St Mauritz, outside Münster, now (1532) pastor of the city church of St Lamberti. A new bishop directed a mandate (April 17, 1532) against Rothmann, which had the effect of alienating the moderates in Münster from the democrats. Knipperdollinck was a leader of the latter in the surprise (December 26, 1532) which made prisoners of the negotiating nobles at Telgte, in the territory of Münster. In the end, Münster was by charter from Philip of Hesse (February 14, 1533) constituted an evangelical city. Knipperdollinck was made a burgomaster in February 1534. Anabaptism had already (September 8, 1533) been proclaimed at Münster by a journeyman smith; and, before this, Heinrich Roll, a refugee, had brought Rothmann (May 1533) to a rejection of infant baptism. From the 1st of January 1534 Roll preached Anabaptist doctrines in a city pulpit; a few days later, two Dutch emissaries of Jan Matthysz, or Matthyssen, the master-baker and Anabaptist prophet of Haarlem, came on a mission to Münster. They were followed (January 13) by Jan Beukelsz (or Bockelszoon, or Buchholdt), better known as John of Leiden. It was his second visit to Münster; he came now as an apostle of Matthysz. He was twenty-five, with a winning personality, great gifts as an organizer, and plenty of ambition. Knipperdollinck, whose daughter Clara was ultimately enrolled among the wives of John of Leiden, came under his influence. Matthysz himself came to Münster (1534) and lived in Knipperdollinck's house, which became the centre of the new movement to substitute Münster for Strassburg (Melchior Hofmann's choice) as the New Jerusalem. On the death of Matthysz, in a foolish raid (April 5, 1534), John became supreme. Knipperdollinck, with one attempt at revolt, when he claimed the kingship for himself, was his subservient henchman, wheedling the Münster democracy into subjection to the fantastic rule of the "king of the earth." He was made second in command, and executioner of the refractory. He fell in with the polygamy innovation, the protest of his wife being visited with a penance. In the military measures for resisting the siege of Münster he took no leading part. On the fall of the city (June 25, 1535) he hid in a dwelling in the city wall, but was betrayed by his landlady. After six months' incarceration, his trial, along with his comrades, took place on the 19th of January, and his execution, with fearful tortures, on the 22nd of January 1536. Knipperdollinck attempted to strangle himself, but was forced to endure the worst. His body, like those of the others, was hung in a cage on the tower of St Lamberti, where the cages are still to be seen. An alleged portrait, from an engraving of 1607, is reproduced in the appendix to A. Ross's Pansebeia, 1655.

See L. Keller, _Geschichte der Wiedertäufer und ihres Reichs zu Münster_ (1880); C. A. Cornelius, _Historische Arbeiten_ (1899); E. Belfort Bax, _Rise and Fall of the Anabaptists_ (1903). (A. Go.*)

KNITTING (from O.E. _cnyttan_, to knit; cf. Ger. _Knütten_; the root is seen in "knot"), the art of forming a single thread or strand of yarn into a texture or fabric of a loop structure, by employing needles or wires. "Crochet" work is an analogous art in its simplest form. It consists of forming a single thread into a single chain of loops. All warp knit fabrics are built on this structure. Knitting may be said to be divided into two principles, viz. (1) hand knitting and (2) frame-work knitting (see HOSIERY). In hand knitting, the wires, pins or needles used are of different lengths or gauges, according to the class of work wanted to be produced. They are made of steel, bone, wood or ivory. Some are headed to prevent the loops from slipping over the ends. Flat or selvedged work can only be produced on them. Others are pointed at both ends, and by employing three or more a circular or circular-shaped fabric can be made. In hand knitting each loop is formed and thrown off individually and in rotation and is left hanging on the new loop formed. The cotton, wool and silk fibres are the principal materials from which knitting yarns are manufactured, wool being the most important and most largely used. "Lamb's-wool," "wheeling," "fingering" and worsted yarns are all produced from the wool fibre, but may differ in size or fineness and quality. Those yarns are largely used in the production of knitted underwear. Hand knitting is to-day principally practised as a domestic art, but in some of the remote parts of Scotland and Ireland it is prosecuted as an industry to some extent. In the Shetland Islands the wool of the native sheep is spun, and used in its natural colour, being manufactured into shawls, scarfs, ladies' jackets, &c. The principal trade of other districts is hose and half-hose, made from the wool of the sheep native to the district. The formation of the stitches in knitting may be varied in a great many ways, by "purling" (knitting or throwing loops to back and front in rib form), "slipping" loops, taking up and casting off and working in various coloured yarns to form stripes, patterns, &c. The articles may be shaped according to the manner in which the wires and yarns are manipulated.

KNOBKERRIE (from the Taal or South African Dutch, _knopkirie_, derived from Du. _knop_, a knob or button, and _kerrie_, a Bushman or Hottentot word for stick), a strong, short stick with a rounded knob or head used by the natives of South Africa in warfare and the chase. It is employed at close quarters, or as a missile, and in time of peace serves as a walking-stick. The name has been extended to similar weapons used by the natives of Australia, the Pacific islands, and other places.

KNOLLES, RICHARD (c. 1545-1610), English historian, was a native of Northamptonshire, and was educated at Lincoln College, Oxford. He became a fellow of his college, and at some date subsequent to 1571 left Oxford to become master of a school at Sandwich, Kent, where he died in 1610. In 1603 Knolles published his _Generall Historie of the Turkes_, of which several editions subsequently appeared, among them a good one edited by Sir Paul Rycaut (1700), who brought the history down to 1699. It was dedicated to King James I., and Knolles availed himself largely of Jean Jacques Boissard's _Vitae et Icones Sultanorum Turcicorum_ (Frankfort, 1596). Although now entirely superseded, it has considerable merits as regards style and arrangement. Knolles published a translation of J. Bodin's _De Republica_ in 1606, but the _Grammatica Latina, Graeca et Hebraica_, attributed to him by Anthony Wood and others, is the work of the Rev. Hanserd Knollys (c. 1599-1691), a Baptist minister.

See the _Athenaeum_, August 6, 1881.

KNOLLES (or KNOLLYS), SIR ROBERT (c. 1325-1407), English soldier, belonged to a Cheshire family. In early life he served in Brittany, and he was one of the English survivors who were taken prisoners by the French after the famous "combat of the thirty" in March 1351. He was, however, quickly released and was among the soldiers of fortune who took advantage of the distracted state of Brittany, at this time the scene of a savage civil war, to win fame and wealth at the expense of the wretched inhabitants. After a time he transferred his operations to Normandy, when he served under the allied standards of England and of Charles II. of Navarre. He led the "great company" in their work of devastation along the valley of the Loire, fighting at this time for his own hand and for booty, and winning a terrible reputation by his ravages. After the conclusion of the treaty of Brétigny in 1360 Knolles returned to Brittany and took part in the struggle for the possession of the duchy between John of Montfort (Duke John IV.) and Charles of Blois, gaining great fame by his conduct in the fight at Auray (September 1364), where Du Guesclin was captured and Charles of Blois was slain. In 1367 he marched with the Black Prince into Spain and fought at the battle of Nájera; in 1369 he was with the prince in Aquitaine. In 1370 he was placed by Edward III. at the head of an expedition which invaded France and marched on Paris, but after exacting large sums of money as ransom a mutiny broke up the army, and its leader was forced to take refuge in his Breton castle of Derval and to appease the disappointed English king with a large monetary gift. Emerging from his retreat Knolles again assisted John of Montfort in Brittany, where he acted as John's representative; later he led a force into Aquitaine, and he was one of the leaders of the fleet sent against the Spaniards in 1377. In 1380 he served in France under Thomas of Woodstock, afterwards duke of Gloucester, distinguishing himself by his valour at the siege of Nantes; and in 1381 he went with Richard II. to meet Wat Tyler at Smithfield. He died at Sculthorpe in Norfolk on the 15th of August 1407. Sir Robert devoted much of his great wealth to charitable objects. He built a college and an almshouse at Pontefract, his wife's birthplace, where the almshouse still exists; he restored the churches of Sculthorpe and Harpley; and he helped to found an English hospital in Rome. Knolles won an immense reputation by his skill and valour in the field, and ranks as one of the foremost captains of his age. French writers call him Canolles, or Canole.

KNOLLYS, the name of an English family descended from Sir Thomas Knollys (d. 1435), lord mayor of London. The first distinguished member of the family was Sir Francis Knollys (c. 1514-1596), English statesman, son of Robert Knollys, or Knolles (d. 1521), a courtier in the service and favour of Henry VII. and Henry VIII. Robert had also a younger son, Henry, who took part in public life during the reign of Elizabeth and who died in 1583.

Francis Knollys, who entered the service of Henry VIII. before 1540, became a member of parliament in 1542 and was knighted in 1547 while serving with the English army in Scotland. A strong and somewhat aggressive supporter of the reformed doctrines, he retired to Germany soon after Mary became queen, returning to England to become a privy councillor, vice-chamberlain of the royal household and a member of parliament under Queen Elizabeth, whose cousin Catherine (d. 1569), daughter of William Carey and niece of Anne Boleyn, was his wife. After serving as governor of Plymouth, Knollys was sent in 1566 to Ireland, his mission being to obtain for the queen confidential reports about the conduct of the lord-deputy Sir Henry Sidney. Approving of Sidney's

## actions he came back to England, and in 1568 was sent to Carlisle to

take charge of Mary Queen of Scots, who had just fled from Scotland; afterwards he was in charge of the queen at Bolton Castle and then at Tutbury Castle. He discussed religious questions with his prisoner, although the extreme Protestant views which he put before her did not meet with Elizabeth's approval, and he gave up the position of guardian just after his wife's death in January 1569. In 1584 he introduced into the House of Commons, where since 1572 he had represented Oxfordshire, the bill legalizing the national association for Elizabeth's defence, and he was treasurer of the royal household from 1572 until his death on the 19th of July 1596. His monument may still be seen in the church of Rotherfield Grays, Oxfordshire. Knollys was repeatedly free and frank in his objections to Elizabeth's tortuous foreign policy; but, possibly owing to his relationship to the queen, he did not lose her favour, and he was one of her commissioners on such important occasions as the trials of Mary Queen of Scots, of Philip Howard earl of Arundel, and of Anthony Babington. An active and lifelong Puritan, his attacks on the bishops were not lacking in vigour, and he was also very hostile to heretics. He received many grants of land from the queen, and was chief steward of the city of Oxford and a knight of the garter.