Guinevere, and Elaine, and Enid, of ladies in these ethical novels.
But the women of the mediaeval Cours d'Amour (the originals from whom
the old romancers drew) were nothing if not casuists. "Spiritual
delicacy" (as they understood it) was their delight.

Mr Harrison even argues that Malory's men lived hot-blooded lives in
fierce times, "before an idea had arisen in the world of 'reverencing
conscience,' 'leading sweet lives,'" and so on. But he admits that
they had "fantastic ideals of 'honour' and 'love.'" As to
"fantastic," that is a matter of opinion, but to have ideals and to
live in accordance with them is to "reverence conscience", which the
heroes of the romances are said by Mr Harrison never to have had an
idea of doing. They are denied even "amiable words and courtliness."
Need one say that courtliness is the dominant note of mediaeval
knights, in history as in romance? With discourtesy Froissart would
"head the count of crimes." After a battle, he says, Scots knights
and English would thank each other for a good fight, "not like the
Germans." "And now, I dare say," said Malory's Sir Ector, "thou, Sir
Lancelot, wast the curtiest knight that ever bare shield, . . . and
thou wast the meekest man and the gentlest that ever ate in hall
among ladies." Observe Sir Lancelot in the difficult pass where the
Lily Maid offers her love: "Jesu defend me, for then I rewarded your
father and your brother full evil for their great goodness. . . .
But because, fair damsel, that ye love me as ye say ye do, I will,
for your good will and kindness, show you some goodness, . . . and
always while I live to be your true knight." Here are "amiable words
and courtesy." I cannot agree with Mr Harrison that Malory's book is
merely "a fierce lusty epic." That was not the opinion of its
printer and publisher, Caxton. He produced it as an example of "the
gentle and virtuous deeds that some knights used in these days, . . .