This channel is vital and keep it up. There are so many misconceptions concerning knights and knighthood that are widely accepted by the misinformed. You know that there many misconceptions and outright lies about the Crusaders. They don't even teach about the Feudal System anymore as historical ignorance is everywhere. The facts here are excellent. Thanks for the reminder that most knights were quite literate. Page to Squire to Knight was a progression even when professional squires existed
About squires participating in battle, that would also depend on the age of the squire. An 11 year old squire might be more of a liability but a 17-20 year old squire would not only be more physically capable but also would be more experienced as well. Jerusalem was always short of men so in an emergency like at Montgisard an older squire who might have a hauberk and horse would probably be expected to participate, likely to defend his knight.
Love your work. Your channel is one of the best sources on the Crusades. I have a suggestion on the viewpoint of the status of Squires. I suggest that the orderly idea of a noble boy starting as a Paige, improving to Squire, and finally graduating to a Knight is a lazy Victorian simplification. As you have touched upon, not all nobles were knights. In fact, because of the obligations inherent between the knight and the man who made him a knight, some chose never to become knights at all. The logical omission many people make is to ignore the simple question of, “what were they then?” A king might make his son a prince. A man might win or inherent some other office or title, but all potentially without choosing to accept the special status and obligation of knighthood. This was especially prevalent by the 14th and 15th centuries, particularly in France, where knighthood involved belonging to a specific Order of Chivalry. These orders were almost cult-like in their exclusivity and specific, real, obligations. Which meant that some powerful lords deliberately chose to refuse knighthood in order to avoid these obligations. So what was their status? They were Squires. The attentive reader will note that Joinville often mentions squires, but not as helpers. Rather, they simply seem to be mounted warriors, just like the knights. (But not Sergeants, who are clearly a non-noble class of mounted warrior). A squire was simply a noble, mounted warrior who had not yet been formally knighted. I’ll direct your attention to two works that I think make this even clearer: Craig Taylor’s “Chivalry and the Ideals of Knighthood in France During the Hundred Years War”, Cambridge University Press. And, Mario Damen’s “The Knighthood in and around Late Medieval Brussels”, Journal of Medieval History.
Found out recently my ancestors were Knights. Slightly later than the area you cover but he fought at Crecy and his son fought at Agincourt. Still doing research but i find it fascinating, thank you for the insight
Bravery was also a way to be dubbed knight ( not sure of the english word) .Poor people could not afford to leave their families if they had no land or rent to survive in their absence.
It would be nice gesture to give credit to those long gone artists, whose paintings you are using by mentioning their names in the video info -sheet. Btw. I appreciate your work and dedication on this interesting subject. My favorite video was the one where you analyze romantic era paintings of crusades.
I know, I am dying to figure out what this painting is called and who painted it 😭 I really want to buy a print but just googling “crusader and lady painting” isn’t brining up good results
That professional squire, how did that differ from a sergeant at arms (the English term for the job) I'm sure it varied from country to country. I'm under the impression that sergeants at arms were a poorer and lighter versions of knights, am I wrong?
So Knights could be owners of lands and settlements? So Knights owned villages and would be the vassals of a Baron, then a number of Barons would be vassals of a Duke. It's all very complicated and they had many different names. Could a Barony be independent be a lord to vassals owned by knights?
Even up to the present people do not "own" land. In English tradition since William all land is owned by the crown and individuals have an interest in land such as fee simple
@@lukemcinerny8220 Complementing, Spanish nobility: Grande sp. /Grandee eng. (It's the highest dignity under the royal titles in Europe since the privileges exceed those of the peers and the pairie, Grandes are over in seniority to anyone even if the title per se is lower than that of the other person, eg. a viscount who is Grandee is over a Duke that isn't a Grandee, however all Duchies nowadays have the Grandee, many of the Marches, Counties, a couple of the Viscounties and a pair of the Lordships, do mind that the traditional hierarchy applies between the grandee titles, but it is made complicated since spanish nobles can inherit as many titles as proven right allows them between the laws of the inheritance system, which means a Duke who is a Grandee can be simultaneously a Marquess, Count, Lord, etc... often families end up with a bunch of titles and many titled nobles with still too many titles are siblings, unlike the british). Duke Marquess Count Viscount Baron (it is seemingly shown over the Lordship, however it must be said that in Spain most Baronies pre XIX century came from the previous kingdom of Aragón and that the Castillian Lordship was similar, I would say for this case that there's no superiority). Lord Hidalgo (this is where the untitled nobility is situated, mostly dissapeared but surely their descendants are abundant, some were descendants of younger sons of prominent families like the most powerful of the landed gentry in Britain but most were descendants of knights defending marches and similar things, or men who had earned the status through merit).
El Güero he’s had a few I believe. The deal with the Carolingian period its kind of a hard time to describe and we don’t know much about it until later. 1066 onward is a much easier time period to describe because a lot of our romantic views of the period came about in this time. While in the carolingian time period it was the stepping stones into the later period.
Also the carolingians starting with Martel was the beginning of having larger battles and armies. After and around the time of the fall of Rome a battle with 1,000 on either side was a large battle.
Can we hope to see debates on this channel? It would help strengthen people's arguments against the common cases made for or against what's true and not true. Another thing to keep in mind is that if a channel has only one narrative, with no consideration for other narratives, it closely resembles a propaganda channel. Rather like CNN or Fox.
i should be sleeping right now.. but deus vult is life
Yeah, nothing better than bow down like pleb to foreign semitic god.
censor i'm not even religious
@@papageorgie1083 This, my friend, this is not a kek.
@@censor5837 ok, Odinist boomer.
@@censor5837 somebody is hell bound
This channel is vital and keep it up. There are so many misconceptions concerning knights and knighthood that are widely accepted by the misinformed. You know that there many misconceptions and outright lies about the Crusaders. They don't even teach about the Feudal System anymore as historical ignorance is everywhere. The facts here are excellent. Thanks for the reminder that most knights were quite literate. Page to Squire to Knight was a progression even when professional squires existed
About squires participating in battle, that would also depend on the age of the squire. An 11 year old squire might be more of a liability but a 17-20 year old squire would not only be more physically capable but also would be more experienced as well. Jerusalem was always short of men so in an emergency like at Montgisard an older squire who might have a hauberk and horse would probably be expected to participate, likely to defend his knight.
Love your work. Your channel is one of the best sources on the Crusades. I have a suggestion on the viewpoint of the status of Squires. I suggest that the orderly idea of a noble boy starting as a Paige, improving to Squire, and finally graduating to a Knight is a lazy Victorian simplification. As you have touched upon, not all nobles were knights. In fact, because of the obligations inherent between the knight and the man who made him a knight, some chose never to become knights at all. The logical omission many people make is to ignore the simple question of, “what were they then?” A king might make his son a prince. A man might win or inherent some other office or title, but all potentially without choosing to accept the special status and obligation of knighthood. This was especially prevalent by the 14th and 15th centuries, particularly in France, where knighthood involved belonging to a specific Order of Chivalry. These orders were almost cult-like in their exclusivity and specific, real, obligations. Which meant that some powerful lords deliberately chose to refuse knighthood in order to avoid these obligations. So what was their status? They were Squires. The attentive reader will note that Joinville often mentions squires, but not as helpers. Rather, they simply seem to be mounted warriors, just like the knights. (But not Sergeants, who are clearly a non-noble class of mounted warrior). A squire was simply a noble, mounted warrior who had not yet been formally knighted. I’ll direct your attention to two works that I think make this even clearer: Craig Taylor’s “Chivalry and the Ideals of Knighthood in France During the Hundred Years War”, Cambridge University Press. And, Mario Damen’s “The Knighthood in and around Late Medieval Brussels”, Journal of Medieval History.
Thanks again for posting top tier content! Much appreciated
Found out recently my ancestors were Knights. Slightly later than the area you cover but he fought at Crecy and his son fought at Agincourt. Still doing research but i find it fascinating, thank you for the insight
What were their names? How did you trace this all the way back?
How do you know they were knights?
@@frauleinhohenzollern jaquavious octavius dingleberry bartholomeigh the third jr
For England or France ? My ancestors fought for England in both battles.
@@thicclegendfeep4050 which battles
Bravery was also a way to be dubbed knight ( not sure of the english word) .Poor people could not afford to leave their families if they had no land or rent to survive in their absence.
You should release Why Does the Heathen Rage as an audiobook.
Thanks for such great video
Could you do a video on doctors or medical practices?
I loved this video.. it was really good
Thank you
The thumbnail is the perfect romanticized expression of knighthood and chivalry.
It would be nice gesture to give credit to those long gone artists, whose paintings you are using by mentioning their names in the video info -sheet. Btw. I appreciate your work and dedication on this interesting subject. My favorite video was the one where you analyze romantic era paintings of crusades.
I know, I am dying to figure out what this painting is called and who painted it 😭 I really want to buy a print but just googling “crusader and lady painting” isn’t brining up good results
Realizing "the last duel" is pretty spot on in their depiction of medieval life
That professional squire, how did that differ from a sergeant at arms (the English term for the job) I'm sure it varied from country to country. I'm under the impression that sergeants at arms were a poorer and lighter versions of knights, am I wrong?
Medival system of vassalage seems very similar to the roman patronage system
The age of chivalry gallant crusades to the wars of the roses medieval allure mysticism
So Knights could be owners of lands and settlements? So Knights owned villages and would be the vassals of a Baron, then a number of Barons would be vassals of a Duke. It's all very complicated and they had many different names. Could a Barony be independent be a lord to vassals owned by knights?
Even up to the present people do not "own" land. In English tradition since William all land is owned by the crown and individuals have an interest in land such as fee simple
Below, a ranking of the British nobility:
Duke (Duchess) ...
Marquess (Marchioness) ...
Earl (Countess) ...
Viscount (Viscountess) ...
Baron (Baroness) ...
Baronet (Baronetess) ...
Knight.
You forgot to mention
Emperor (Empress)
King (Queen)
@@lukemcinerny8220 Complementing, Spanish nobility:
Grande sp. /Grandee eng. (It's the highest dignity under the royal titles in Europe since the privileges exceed those of the peers and the pairie, Grandes are over in seniority to anyone even if the title per se is lower than that of the other person, eg. a viscount who is Grandee is over a Duke that isn't a Grandee, however all Duchies nowadays have the Grandee, many of the Marches, Counties, a couple of the Viscounties and a pair of the Lordships, do mind that the traditional hierarchy applies between the grandee titles, but it is made complicated since spanish nobles can inherit as many titles as proven right allows them between the laws of the inheritance system, which means a Duke who is a Grandee can be simultaneously a Marquess, Count, Lord, etc... often families end up with a bunch of titles and many titled nobles with still too many titles are siblings, unlike the british).
Duke
Marquess
Count
Viscount
Baron (it is seemingly shown over the Lordship, however it must be said that in Spain most Baronies pre XIX century came from the previous kingdom of Aragón and that the Castillian Lordship was similar, I would say for this case that there's no superiority).
Lord
Hidalgo (this is where the untitled nobility is situated, mostly dissapeared but surely their descendants are abundant, some were descendants of younger sons of prominent families like the most powerful of the landed gentry in Britain but most were descendants of knights defending marches and similar things, or men who had earned the status through merit).
ohh what merch!!!!!!!
Very cool
Dagnabit, how come no one does videos about Carolingian times?!
El Güero he’s had a few I believe. The deal with the Carolingian period its kind of a hard time to describe and we don’t know much about it until later. 1066 onward is a much easier time period to describe because a lot of our romantic views of the period came about in this time. While in the carolingian time period it was the stepping stones into the later period.
Also the carolingians starting with Martel was the beginning of having larger battles and armies. After and around the time of the fall of Rome a battle with 1,000 on either side was a large battle.
We need Knights of the Round Table running this country right now
I have a feeling knights are more like the Game of thrones knights. Most of them went around and did whatever they wanted to
Not at all. There were laws in place that governed behavior at all levels of society.
they had to be high level and at least landed knights to get away with behavior like that
Is there any connection between the knight-page system and the trimarcisia? They share many similarities.
do you not agree that the story of William the marshall … explains it all in one step,,,,,,, or at least gets damn close to it?
Can we hope to see debates on this channel? It would help strengthen people's arguments against the common cases made for or against what's true and not true.
Another thing to keep in mind is that if a channel has only one narrative, with no consideration for other narratives, it closely resembles a propaganda channel. Rather like CNN or Fox.
Go melt snowflake. Don't infest this channel with PC sh_t.
This channel is about real history. It's not opinions that are up for debate. Why give lies a platform?
In Spanish it literally means horsemen
Space Force flags
Lots and lots of fish..
Just like today's.
I liked because before it had 666 likes.
Great video! DEUS VULT!
Mounted knights made up a chivalry not a cavalry
A group of mounted knights is a cavalry.
Real Crusades History your getting it confused with Chevalier the French version of Knight. It’s where the term Calvary comes from.
@@gabrielm.942 I think you meant to reply to fx()sparrow$ or something but anyways....
@@gabrielm.942 "Cavalry" comes from "Cheval" meaning "horse", not "Chevalier"meaning "knight"