While recognising the sophistication of the practice of medieval warfare, many people still have problems reconciling the widespread use of surprise and deception with the code of chivalric warfare. Was chivalry really just a meaningless veneer? If true, perhaps more perplexing are the many cases where surprise or deception were not employed and advantages were therefore sacrificed. This work argues that understanding these apparent inconsistencies requires an appreciation of the moral and legal context of medieval strategic thought. Through taking this approach, chivalric warfare can be seen for what it was - a very real framework or system of rules that allowed a result or decision to be reached which could be accepted by both sides.