How did knights from different European kingdoms (France, England, HRE) compare?
Skill?
Armour?
Weapons?
13th Century Knights
Aaron Torres
Other urls found in this thread:
en.wikipedia.org
twitter.com
Elijah Smith
In the 13th century
Chase Adams
Why are their expressions so weird?
Elijah Fisher
How powerful was the average knights cavalry charge?
Alexander Young
Bump
Nathaniel Taylor
As I understand it English knights were dogshit.
Dylan Hall
Was it poor training?
What facilitated such differences? How did the armours compare? Does anyone have any armour comparisons
Isaiah Lopez
First of all I'd imagine the French knights would have better armour and equipment in general due to the fact that France was wealthier. English knights, I don't think, used cavalry as effectively as French knights.
Eli Robinson
I thought England was wealthier due to the whole centralisation thing?
Justin Allen
This is a really arbitrary question worthy of clickbait YouTube video by a retard of the rank of Shaddiversity. It all depends. Each kingdom build its army to counter its immediate threats. For example the Battle of Adrianople in 1205. Excellent western knights who just a year before had managed the impossible and taken Constantinople absolutely shat themselves against the light cuman cavalry. Why? Because taking a city is their ball game but battle in the open fields of the balkans was not. By the time the knights reached the Bulgarian force the battle was over, that’s how effective was the light cuman cav against the most heavily armored soldiers of Europe. The knights fought more than valiantly, but as I said it was not their ball game. In the end the Latins fought the Bulgarians for 10 years and in that time managed to win only one battle. Those same Bulgarians on the other hand won only one battle against the ottomans 2 centuries later. So as I said arbitrary question.
Kayden Gomez
English knights didn't use horses as often. That's about all I can recall.
Connor Wright
What's wrong with horses?
Juan Fisher
They can’t climb a rampart. Cav is overrated as fuck
Jordan Wood
They're for nonces.
see: "the French"
Asher Perez
good post, it is like football players playing baseball
Owen Gutierrez
Chivalric knights trained in Toulouse got a +1 valour bonus
Matthew Jackson
More wives, your grace?
Evan Peterson
Bump
Alexander Evans
Nothing, the English just didn't like fighting from horseback IIRC. The Anglo-Saxons didn't like cavalry either, interestingly.
Christian Sanchez
England had a very tiny population for most of its history, around 1/4 to 1/5 of France's I think.
Logan Barnes
What was the Anglo-Saxon issue with cavalry? Didn't want to risk the horse's life?
Zachary Jackson
Takes up too much logistics and care which could be spent on feedings pack animals with supplies
Dylan Howard
Because that picture is probably smaller than a playing card in real life.
Wyatt Gonzalez
It's quite high detail for playing card size
Isaac Gutierrez
I don't actually know for sure. I know they placed more emphasis on infantry. They fought war similar to the way the Norse did. They rode to battle on horseback, but they'd dismount when they actually fought.
Parker James
The more well off yeomanry that could afford horses would also ride into batgle and become dismounted archers as well
Nathaniel Gray
Thomas Kelly
More wives, your grace?
Xavier Fisher
Haha fatty got tripped by a frog
William Foster
I WILL KILL YOU FRANCIS I WILL RIP OFF YOUR ARMS AND TEAR OUT YOUR HEART
Jeremiah Bennett
They rode to battle and dismounted. Sounds like they don't want dead horsies
Dominic Edwards
I'll give you the basics in broad strokes.
>French are considered the best of knights. They are exceptional on the horse.
>English knights were considered poor horsemen compared to their continental counterparts. However they made up for this fault by being some of the best at footslogging.(This could be attributed in part to the weather and remoteness of their home terrain, and to the loss of many of their wealthy continental holdings at the beginning of the century.)
>German knights are an in between. They are known to have fought well both in and out of the saddle.
Armour and Weapons will not differ to terribly between these three. Mail hauberks with built in coif and mittens, and mail chausses. All would have padded garments beneath, and likely a thick gambeson over the top of the mail. In the later part of the century the coat of plates, ailetes, and early plate supplements will appear. Since they are knights and knights fight from a horse a bucket helm will be the norm. The kettle helm(Which in a Norwegian text is stated to be,"A kettle hat like the Germans wear.) was also a popular choice. It provided less protection, but allowed for more air.
Not an average per say, but Anna Comnena said of the Norman and Frankish knights lead by Bohemond,"A mounted Celt is irresistible; he would bore his way through the walls of Babylon; but when he dismounts he becomes anyone's plaything." This is in a passage of the Alexiad where she talks of her father's war with the Normans, and his orders to shoot their horses out from under them.
Kevin Taylor
This is a very thorough answer, thank you.
Is it true that English knights mainly spoke French in the 13th century?
Nicholas Jenkins
Yeah. The Norman conquest in the 11th century replaced the majority of the Anglo-Saxon aristocracy with a Franco-Norman aristocracy with continental ties. With ancestral holdings on the continent reverting to the French crown during the reign of John came resentment and the rise of English nationalism(especially under Edward III) which in turn gave way to the English language(not quite the same English language though) taking back it's place as the primary language among the nobles.
Samuel James
>English knights mainly spoke French
The French knights of England indeed spoke French, they were French after all.
Eli Edwards
I don't think there were any important differences between french, english and german knights at this period.
The english used as much cavalry as everyone else until they faced scottish schiltrons, like in the battle of Bannockburn. Then they switched for archers as their main forces.
Nicholas Watson
CAREFUL NED CAREFUL NOW
Liam Gonzalez
As far plate armor quality is concerned, Milan, Innsbruck, and Augsburg seem to have had the most reputable makers.
Jeremiah Clark
More wives, your grace?
Blake Reed
>laughs in Swiss
Alexander Scott
*breathes in*
oh no.. no no no no OHNONONONONONO HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
Logan Cooper
en.wikipedia.org
>the 1647 Defensionale von Wil,[6] signed under the impression of the Swedes advancing as far as Lake Constance in the winter of 1646/47, the confederates declared "permanent armed neutrality", the historical starting point of Swiss neutrality
Brody Roberts
>"the confederates declared"
One.
James Morgan
French knights were known to be quick to organize on the battlefield. Which allowed them to do things like land quickly from boats and beat back Byzantine forrays during the 4th Crusade leading to the successful capture of Constantinople or in the 1st Crusade the ability to hold out against Turkish cavalry on the spot. However, it also led them to fucking up because they got too eager and just decided they wanted to charge like in Agincourt.