Our ancestors got to fight, kill, plunder (and in some cases die) for real. Things some of us enjoy doing but are limited to video games.
How did they feel about it? Did some of them enjoy devoting their life to traning, mastering weapons and fighting in sieges and skirmishes? Did they enjoy the thrill of combat? Or was it just a fearsome and painful experience they would all have prefered to avoid?
Today's movies and shows sometimes make medieval warfare look cool and epic, how much truth would there have been to this? Did some knights actually enjoy fighting and look forward to battle? Is there record of badass and cool knights and lords who enjoyed their life? Or is it just in Vikings and Game of Thrones and a modern, romanticized version of a medieval time?
>Did knights enjoy fighting? Some did, some didn't. Just look at today's soldiers, many do like to be deployed and getting in firefights.
Nicholas Anderson
There's certainly a rush to be had in combat as with any thrill seeking/life threatening sport. I can attest to that as someone who's been in near death situations that it is truly the most "alive" I've ever felt.
However, war is something to be glorified only as a story with values and lessons, not an actuality.
95% of war is truly horrific, soul crushing, horrible stuff. Not least boredom, disease, malnourishment and generally suffering that would only be worse as you go further back down the line of history.
So to answer your question, yes a few knights with good fortune and the right disposition would have the time of their lives. Likely butchering people and raping women. Most however would not be doing it for the enjoyment of it or anything remotely resembling that.
Jace Peterson
>Today's movies and shows sometimes make medieval warfare look cool and epic
Any time a movie makes warfare look cool and epic it really indicates that that shit was terrible for the people involved IRL.
Michael Ward
>You love your comrade so much in war. When you see your quarrel is just and your blood is fighting well, tears rise to your eyes. A great sweet feeling of love and pity fills your heart on seeing your friend so valiantly exposing his body to execute and accomplish the command of our Creator. And then you prepare to go and live or die with him and for love not to abandon him. And out of that there arises such delectation, that he who has not tasted it is not fit to say what a delight is. Do you think that a man who does that fears death? Not at all: for he feels strengthened, he is so elated he does not know where he is. Truly he is afraid of nothing.
tl;dr at least some knights doesn't afraid of anything
Parker Campbell
People enjoy war even today, the rush from being in a battle that can't be captured in many ways
Levi Lopez
Yes. They had a life time of training and superior weapons and armour to the less wealthy soldiers in the army. If you were somewhat famous you could be confident that even if you were bonked on the head and defeated you would still be ransomed rather than killed. By the late middle ages you didn't have much to fear from missile weapons.
I would have much preferred to be a European knight than a Calvaryman centuries later.
James Robinson
this, fuck having to charge a square of guns and bayonets
Kayden Perry
As has been noted, some did, other did not. As an example of the first type the poem "Be·m platz lo gais temps de pascor" by Bertrand Born is pretty famous. He began telling how much he likes the spring when the flowers bloom and the birds sing to then tell that he likes the view of tents and armies even more.That the horses without rider, the fighters wounded themselves, the cries of the men full his heart with joy. He ends up with an advice/petition to Barons, to never stop warrying, even if they have to pawn their own holdings.
>Baron, metetz en gatge >Castels e vilas e ciutatz >Enans q'usqecs no·us gerreiatz.
The Teutonic Order pretty much developped their yearly campaigns agaisnt Lithuanians as an "amusement park" for bored nobles. They fought in a very swampy area, so the ideal season for war was winter, when everything was frozen, just when the rest of Europe stop infighting. So they promoted themselves among knights as an area in which you could get some salvation fighting agaisnt pagans which you could celebrate with a glorious feast. During your spare time.
Oliver Price
and then they got their largest tour slaughtered at Tannenberg
Adrian Rivera
1914, never forget :^)
Nolan Sullivan
>1914 ;^)
Cameron Rivera
Yup, but thats irrelevant for this thread.
Andrew Morris
In every single war prior to the 20th century, deaths from disease, malnutrition, and exposure far outnumbered those actually killed in combat. Real warfare is an utterly miserable experience before you even get to the fighting part, and for the vast majority even the fighting part wouldn't involve much if any actual fighting, just being screamed at to march here and there without any understanding of why.
That said, if you can skip to the exciting parts and remove all real consequences, I can easily see it being lots of fun, which is why so many games are essentially war simulators.
Aaron Wilson
You've heard of adrenaline?
David Cook
Some undoubtedly did, as others have addressed in the thread.
If you get the chance, read The Face of Battle by John Keegan. Specifically the chapter on Agincourt. It talks a little about the glory-seeking mentality of a knight (glory in battle was one of the single best ways for social advancement/fame), and the prospects to get incredible wealth by bagging a good hostage. Many knights wanted to be the guy who surmounts an equal or superior knight on the opposite side, for the same reason you might fantasize about being a celebrity or star athlete. That sort of mentality would engender a certain amount of excitement and anticipation to fight in battle, but the battles themselves were still generally pretty shitty. Keegan's description of Agincourt goes into detail on the unpleasantness of being unable to go to the bathroom in full plate, the crush of men against men, the constant possibility of tripping over somebody and basically being stuck, and what an uncertain and generally unpleasant affair a cavalry charge would be.
Wyatt King
>things some of us enjoy doing Can you stop being a kid?
Jaxson Taylor
what?
Nathaniel Thompson
I wonder, shouldn't Knights and other inheritable warrior classes have a different view of war compared to modern day grunts?
They were literally raised all their lives being told by their parents and teachers "look at this shit, this is what you'll have to do. You're nothing if you don't do this. You're born to do this shit."
Lincoln Torres
"My heart is filled with gladness when I see Strong castles besieged, stockades broken and overwhelmed, Many vassals struck down, Horses of the dead and wounded roving at random. And when battle is joined, let all men of good lineage Think of naught but the breaking of heads and arms, For it is better to die than be vanquished and live. . . . I tell you I have no such joy as when I hear the shout 'On! On!' from both sides and the neighing of riderless steeds, And groans of 'Help me! Help me!' And when I see both great and small Fall in the ditches and on the grass And see the dead transfixed by spear shafts! Lords, mortgage your domains, castles, cities, But never give up war!" --Bertrand de Born, French aristocrat and troubadour
Gabriel Hill
You know it from your years of playing COD?
Connor Edwards
The cape ruined that set.
Oliver Scott
It's worth noting that most of medieval warfare was about sieges not pitched battles which meant usually your average medieval warrior was bored as fuck and waited for the enemy to run out of supplies after months or even years of siege.
David Gonzalez
Against an armed peasant? Yes Against another Knight? No
Mason Cruz
Yeah that's why tournaments were a thing right? They didn't enjoy fighting other knights.
Ryan Sanchez
Knights would avoid each other on the battlefield because fighting anyone in full armor is a real fucking hassle. Tournaments had rules and stuff.
Eli Wright
If they avoided each other they wouldn't carry maces or warhammers specifically to fuck up other knights stop making shit up. Besides capturing enemy knight for ransom meant some serious money.
Nathan Reyes
>Yeah that's why tournaments were a thing right? Tournaments are a thing to give people training in warfare, do some history research into early french tournaments which were essentially mock battles to harden kings and knights, they became spectacles after the fact - they were generally hated among the populace.
They literally exist because Knights needed training in warfare and fighting other knights.
Chase Rivera
But a knight in armour was relatively safe and he was valuable as a prisoner. He was likely, if defeated, to be slightly wounded or just captured and ransomed, not killed. So sometimes it was not so terribly different from a tournament.
Zachary Gomez
Knights rarely died in a battlefield, even when fighting against other knights. Killing your knightly opponent was a pretty dumb idea since you could easily capture him instead and later pick up a hefty ransom for his freedom, and this is exactly the mindset most medieval knights entered battles with. especially poor knights without estate who hoped to gain fame and fortune in wars. Feel free to read accounts from some medieval battles, for example in battle of Lincoln in 1217 out of some 400 knights fighting only one actually died and everyone were shocked such thing even happened.
Easton Hill
Can you imagine some peasants just lugging a fully armored knight who surrendered all over the fucking place because half of them wanted to ransom him and the other half wanted to murder him?
Jack Bell
A bigger reason seems to have been that France was too peaceful in the 12th century for the taste of the knights, especially young landless knights hoping to make money. In tournament as in war, you could ransom a prisoner, take his horse and armour. That was indeed a mock battle, but even in battle, knights prefered to capture other knights rather than killing them.
Jayden Bell
The other half would be retarded what kind of peasant doesn't want a ton of cash?
Gavin Turner
They did die in Agnicourt though.
Charles Sanders
You don't know how right you are. You do read amusing stories of people claiming the same knight on the battlefield. But killing him is not the best idea. He's worth money.
Dylan Jones
They probably enjoyed tactical victories in combat and didnt mind fighting.
Adrian Perry
That's because they were dumb enough to charge longbowmen over the muddy field
Chase Evans
So how did that work? The first one to get to the knight could claim him? Who got the money?
Jacob Clark
Maybe even more because of the mass executions of prisoners ordered by king Henry after the actual fight.
Colton Walker
I believe the general rule was that a defeatedknight would surrender to someone, and this person would get the money. At Poitiers, the king of France surrendered to a knight because he could speak French. He simply saw that the battle was lost, heard a guy offering to lead him as a prisoner to the Black Prince, and gave him his gauntlet, I think. He was not even physically defeated. And then a bunch of idiots tried to claim him.
I remember another story, at Bouvines, a count was captured by several knights who started arguing over him. Then another knight came with his friends and tried to take the count for himself. Finaly some bishop fighting on the French side arrived and the count surrendered to him.
>Our ancestors Nah, I bet your ancestors were at best light infantries.
Michael Bell
No it didn't. Capes are cool. Without the cape, the whole set would be a flavorless deluge of gray.
Joseph Wilson
>Did knights enjoy fighting?
Entire depends. Most of them didn't enjoy the gargoyles, but Nito was a really nice fight.
Jackson Gutierrez
Im sure there were plenty of wanna-be hardass Nobles sons who talked a big game like battle was so cool. Im sure plenty of them got a small taste of war and wimped out too
Camden Scott
Oh fuck off. Better than wearing thief rags like most players seem to
Gabriel Barnes
>light infantries
Nah, I bet his ancestors were at best townsfolk.
Eli Torres
>Did knights enjoy fighting? No not much, theres a reason they consistently paid scutage and the Kings would levy scutage. Scutage was a payment the Knight would have to pay if he didn't want to answer the Kings call to take up arms. The Kings knew that most of their Knights didn't want to fight, despite being obligated by their feudal oaths, so they used the scutage tax as a good way of raising money. To then buy mercenaries with, who are much more reliable and probably better troops.
