Hubbry Logo
KnightKnightMain
Open search
Knight
Community hub
Knight
logo
8 pages, 0 posts
0 subscribers
Be the first to start a discussion here.
Be the first to start a discussion here.
Knight
Knight
from Wikipedia

A 14th-century depiction of the 13th-century German knight Hartmann von Aue, from the Codex Manesse

A knight is a person granted an honorary title of a knighthood by a head of state (including the pope) or representative for service to the monarch, the church, or the country, especially in a military capacity.[1][2]

The concept of knighthood may have been inspired by the ancient Greek hippeis (ἱππεῖς) and Roman equites.[3] In the Early Middle Ages in Western Christian Europe, knighthood was conferred upon mounted warriors.[4] During the High Middle Ages, knighthood was considered a class of petty nobility. By the Late Middle Ages, the rank had become associated with the ideals of chivalry, a code of conduct for the perfect courtly Christian warrior. Often, a knight was a vassal who served as an elite fighter or a bodyguard for a lord, with payment in the form of land holdings.[5] The lords trusted the knights, who were skilled in battle on horseback. In the Middle Ages, knighthood was closely linked with horsemanship (and especially the joust) from its origins in the 12th century until its final flowering as a fashion among the high nobility in the Duchy of Burgundy in the 15th century. This linkage is reflected in the etymology of chivalry, cavalier, and related terms such as the French title of chevalier. In that sense, the special prestige accorded to mounted warriors in Christendom finds a parallel in the furusiyya in the Islamic world. The Crusades brought various military orders of knights to the forefront of defending Christian pilgrims traveling to the Holy Land.[6][unreliable source]

In the Late Middle Ages, new methods of warfare – such as the introduction of the culverin as an anti-personnel, gunpowder-fired weapon – began to render classical knights in armour obsolete, but the titles remained in many countries. Holy Roman Emperor Maximilian I (1459–1519) is often referred to as the "last knight" in this regard;[7][8][ISBN missing] however, some of the most iconic battles of the Knights Hospitaller, such as the Siege of Rhodes and the Great Siege of Malta, took place after his rule. The ideals of chivalry were popularized in medieval literature, particularly the literary cycles known as the Matter of France, relating to the legendary companions of Charlemagne and his men-at-arms, the paladins, and the Matter of Britain, relating to the legend of King Arthur and his Knights of the Round Table.

Today, a number of orders of knighthood continue to exist in Christian Churches, as well as in several historically Christian countries and their former territories, such as the Roman Catholic Sovereign Military Order of Malta, the Protestant Order of Saint John, as well as the English Order of the Garter, the Swedish Royal Order of the Seraphim, the Spanish Order of Santiago, and the Norwegian Order of St Olav. There are also dynastic orders like the Order of the Golden Fleece, the Imperial Order of the Rose, the Most Ancient and Most Noble Order of the Thistle and the Order of St George. In modern times these are orders centred around charity and civic service, and are no longer military orders. Each of these orders has its own criteria for eligibility, but knighthood is generally granted by a head of state, monarch, or prelate to selected persons to recognise some meritorious achievement, often for service to the Church or country. The modern female equivalent of a knight in the English language is dame. Knighthoods and damehoods are traditionally regarded as prestigious.[9]

Etymology

[edit]

The word knight, from Old English cniht ("boy" or "servant"),[10] is a cognate of the German word Knecht ("servant, bondsman, vassal").[11] This meaning, of unknown origin, is common among West Germanic languages (cf Old Frisian kniucht, Dutch knecht, Danish knægt, Swedish knekt, Norwegian knekt, Middle High German kneht, all meaning "boy, youth, lad").[10] Middle High German had the phrase guoter kneht, which also meant knight; but this meaning was in decline by about 1200.[12]

The meaning of cniht changed over time from its original meaning of "boy" to "household retainer". Ælfric's homily of St. Swithun describes a mounted retainer as a cniht. While cnihtas might have fought alongside their lords, their role as household servants features more prominently in the Anglo-Saxon texts. In several Anglo-Saxon wills cnihtas are left either money or lands. In his will, King Æthelstan leaves his cniht, Aelfmar, eight hides of land.[13]

A rādcniht, "riding-servant", was a servant on horseback.[14]

A narrowing of the generic meaning "servant" to "military follower of a king or other superior" is visible by 1100. The specific military sense of a knight as a mounted warrior in the heavy cavalry emerges only in the Hundred Years' War. The verb "to knight" (to make someone a knight) appears around 1300; and, from the same time, the word "knighthood" shifted from "adolescence" to "rank or dignity of a knight".

An Equestrian (Latin, from eques "horseman", from equus "horse")[15] was a member of the second highest social class in the Roman Republic and early Roman Empire. This class is often translated as "knight"; the medieval knight, however, was called miles in Latin (which in classical Latin meant "soldier", normally infantry).[16][17][18]

In the later Roman Empire, the classical Latin word for horse, equus, was replaced in common parlance by the vulgar Latin caballus, sometimes thought to derive from Gaulish caballos.[19] From caballus arose terms in the various Romance languages cognate with the (French-derived) English cavalier: Italian cavaliere, Spanish caballero, French chevalier (whence chivalry), Portuguese cavaleiro, and Romanian cavaler.[20] The Germanic languages have terms cognate with the English rider: German Ritter, and Dutch and Scandinavian ridder. These words are derived from Germanic rīdan, "to ride", in turn derived from the Proto-Indo-European root *reidh-.[21]

History and evolution of medieval knighthood

[edit]

Pre-Carolingian legacies

[edit]

In ancient Rome, there was a knightly class Ordo Equestris (order of mounted nobles). Some portions of the armies of Germanic peoples who occupied Europe from the 3rd century CE onward had been mounted, and some armies, such as those of the Ostrogoths, were mainly cavalry.[22] However, it was the Franks who generally fielded armies composed of large masses of infantry, with an infantry elite, the comitatus, which often rode to battle on horseback rather than marching on foot. When the armies of the Frankish ruler Charles Martel defeated the Umayyad Arab invasion at the Battle of Tours in 732, the Frankish forces were still largely infantry armies, with elites riding to battle but dismounting to fight.

Carolingian age

[edit]

In the Early Medieval period, any well-equipped horseman could be described as a knight, or miles in Latin.[23] The first knights appeared during the reign of Charlemagne in the 8th century.[24][25][26] As the Carolingian Age progressed, the Franks were generally on the attack, and larger numbers of warriors took to their horses to ride with the Emperor in his wide-ranging campaigns of conquest. At about this time the Franks increasingly remained on horseback to fight on the battlefield as true cavalry rather than mounted infantry, with the discovery of the stirrup, and would continue to do so for centuries afterwards.[27] Although in some locations the knight returned to foot combat in the 14th century, the association of the knight with mounted combat with a spear, and later a lance, remained a strong one. The older Carolingian ceremony of presenting a young man with weapons influenced the emergence of knighthood ceremonies, in which a noble would be ritually given weapons and declared to be a knight, usually amid some festivities.[28]

A Norman knight slaying Harold Godwinson (Bayeux tapestry, c. 1070). The rank of knight developed in the 12th century from the mounted warriors of the 10th and 11th centuries.

These mobile mounted warriors made Charlemagne's far-flung conquests possible, and to secure their service he rewarded them with grants of land called benefices.[24] These were given to the captains directly by the Emperor to reward their efforts in the conquests, and they in turn were to grant benefices to their warrior contingents, who were a mix of free and unfree men. In the century or so following Charlemagne's death, his newly empowered warrior class grew stronger still, and Charles the Bald declared their fiefs to be hereditary, and also issued the Edict of Pîtres in 864, largely moving away from the infantry-based traditional armies and calling upon all men who could afford it to answer calls to arms on horseback to quickly repel the constant and wide-ranging Viking attacks, which is considered the beginnings of the period of knights that were to become so famous and spread throughout Europe in the following centuries. The period of chaos in the 9th and 10th centuries, between the fall of the Carolingian central authority and the rise of separate Western and Eastern Frankish kingdoms (later to become France and Germany respectively) only entrenched this newly landed warrior class. This was because governing power and defense against Viking, Magyar and Saracen attack became an essentially local affair which revolved around these new hereditary local lords and their demesnes.[25]

Multiple crusades and military orders

[edit]
Hungarian knights routing Ottoman sipahi cavalry during the Battle of Mohács in 1526

Clerics and the Church often opposed the practices of the Knights because of their abuses against women and civilians, and many such as St. Bernard de Clairvaux were convinced that Knights served the devil and not God, and needed reforming.[29]

In the course of the 12th century, knighthood became a social rank with a distinction being made between milites gregarii (non-noble cavalrymen) and milites nobiles (true knights).[30] As the term "knight" became increasingly confined to denoting a social rank, the military role of fully armoured cavalryman gained a separate term, "man-at-arms". Although any medieval knight going to war would automatically serve as a man-at-arms, not all men-at-arms were knights.

The first military orders of knighthood were the Knights of the Holy Sepulchre and the Knights Hospitaller, both founded shortly after the First Crusade of 1099, followed by the Order of Saint Lazarus (1100), Knights Templars (1118), the Order of Montesa (1128), the Order of Santiago (1170) and the Teutonic Knights (1190). At the time of their foundation, these were intended as monastic orders, whose members would act as simple soldiers protecting pilgrims.

It was only over the following century, with the successful conquest of the Holy Land and the rise of the crusader states, that these orders became powerful and prestigious.

The great European legends of warriors such as the paladins, the Matter of France and the Matter of Britain popularized the notion of chivalry among the warrior class.[31][32] The ideal of chivalry as the ethos of the Christian warrior, and the transmutation of the term "knight" from the meaning "servant, soldier", and of chevalier "mounted soldier", to refer to a member of this ideal class, is significantly influenced by the Crusades, on one hand inspired by the military orders of monastic warriors, and on the other hand also cross-influenced by Islamic (Saracen) ideals of furusiyya.[32][33]

Knightly culture in the Middle Ages

[edit]

Training

[edit]

The institution of knights was already well-established by the 10th century.[34] While the knight was essentially a title denoting a military office, the term could also be used for positions of higher nobility such as landholders. The higher nobles grant the vassals their portions of land (fiefs) in return for their loyalty, protection, and service. The nobles also provided their knights with necessities, such as lodging, food, armour, weapons, horses, and money.[35] The knight generally held his lands by military tenure which was measured through military service that usually lasted 40 days a year. The military service was the quid pro quo for each knight's fief. Vassals and lords could maintain any number of knights, although knights with more military experience were those most sought after. Thus, all petty nobles intending to become prosperous knights needed a great deal of military experience.[34] A knight fighting under another's banner was called a knight bachelor while a knight fighting under his own banner was a knight banneret.

Some knights were familiar with city culture[36][37] or familiarized with it during training. These knights, among others, were called in to end large insurgencies and other large uprisings that involved urban areas such as the Peasants' Revolt of England and the 1323–1328 Flemish revolt.

Page

[edit]

A knight had to be born of nobility – typically sons of knights or lords.[35] In some cases, commoners could also be knighted as a reward for extraordinary military service. Children of the nobility were cared for by noble foster-mothers in castles until they reached the age of seven.

These seven-year-old boys were given the title of page and turned over to the care of the castle's lords. They were placed on an early training regime of hunting with huntsmen and falconers, and academic studies with priests or chaplains. Pages then become assistants to older knights in battle, carrying and cleaning armour, taking care of the horses, and packing the baggage. They would accompany the knights on expeditions, even into foreign lands. Older pages were instructed by knights in swordsmanship, equestrianism, chivalry, warfare, and combat (using wooden swords and spears).

Squire

[edit]

When the boy turned 14, he became a squire. In a religious ceremony, the new squire swore on a sword consecrated by a bishop or priest, and attended to assigned duties in his lord's household. During this time, the squires continued training in combat and were allowed to own armour (rather than borrowing it).[citation needed]

David I of Scotland knighting a squire

Squires were required to master the seven points of agilities – riding, swimming and diving, shooting different types of weapons, climbing, participation in tournaments, wrestling, fencing, long jumping, and dancing – the prerequisite skills for knighthood. All of these were even performed while wearing armour.[38]

The knighting of a squire represented passage into adulthood, and while the age a squire was knighted at could vary, typically they were younger men.[39]

Accolade

[edit]

The accolade or knighting ceremony was usually held during one of the great feasts or holidays, like Christmas or Easter, and sometimes at the wedding of a noble or royal. The knighting ceremony usually involved a ritual bath on the eve of the ceremony and a prayer vigil during the night. On the day of the ceremony, the would-be knight would swear an oath and the master of the ceremony would dub the new knight on the shoulders with a sword.[34][35] Squires, and even soldiers, could also be conferred direct knighthood early if they showed valor and efficiency for their service; such acts may include deploying for an important quest or mission, or protecting a high diplomat or a royal relative in battle.

Chivalric code

[edit]
The miles Christianus allegory (mid-13th century), showing a knight armed with virtues and facing the vices in mortal combat.

Knights were expected, above all, to fight bravely and to display military professionalism and courtesy. When knights were taken as prisoners of war, they were customarily held for ransom in somewhat comfortable surroundings. This same standard of conduct did not apply to non-knights (archers, peasants, foot-soldiers, etc.) who were often slaughtered after capture, and who were viewed during battle as mere impediments to knights' getting to other knights to fight them.[40]

Chivalry developed as an early standard of professional ethics for knights, who were relatively affluent horse owners and were expected to provide military services in exchange for landed property. Early notions of chivalry entailed loyalty to one's liege lord and bravery in battle, similar to the values of the Heroic Age. During the Middle Ages, this grew from simple military professionalism into a social code including the values of gentility, nobility and treating others reasonably.[41] In The Song of Roland (c. 1100), Roland is portrayed as the ideal knight, demonstrating unwavering loyalty, military prowess and social fellowship. In Wolfram von Eschenbach's Parzival (c. 1205), chivalry had become a blend of religious duties, love and military service. Ramon Llull's Book of the Order of Chivalry (1275) demonstrates that by the end of the 13th century, chivalry entailed a litany of very specific duties, including riding warhorses, jousting, attending tournaments, holding Round Tables and hunting, as well as aspiring to the more æthereal virtues of "faith, hope, charity, justice, strength, moderation and loyalty."[42]

In the military orders, knights tried to maintain moral principles such as honor, loyalty, courage, generosity, justice, and religious principles such as faith, charity, humility and temperance.[43] The orders were influenced by the Rule of Saint Benedict and Cistercian spirituality; a knight of a military order was seen as a soldier-monk and was required to have the discipline and piety of a monk, along with the bravery and honor of a knight, although the rules in the military orders were less strict than those of Saint Benedict. For example, while monks could only eat twice a day, being forbidden the meat of four-legged animals, knights of the orders could eat more frequently.[44] The Liber ad milites templi de laude novae militiae (1129), written by Saint Bernard of Clairvaux, explains it clearly: the Templar had to fight with physical courage and spiritual purity, without fear of death, because he served Christ himself.

Knights of the late medieval era were expected by society to maintain all these skills and many more, as outlined in Baldassare Castiglione's The Book of the Courtier, though the book's protagonist, Count Ludovico, states the "first and true profession" of the ideal courtier "must be that of arms."[45] Chivalry, derived from the French word chevalier ('cavalier'), simultaneously denoted skilled horsemanship and military service, and these remained the primary occupations of knighthood throughout the Middle Ages.

Chivalry and religion were mutually influenced during the period of the Crusades. The early Crusades helped to clarify the moral code of chivalry as it related to religion. As a result, Christian armies began to devote their efforts to sacred purposes. As time passed, clergy instituted religious vows which required knights to use their weapons chiefly for the protection of the weak and defenseless, especially women and orphans, and of churches.[46]

Tournaments

[edit]
Tournament from the Codex Manesse, depicting the mêlée

In peacetime, knights often demonstrated their martial skills in tournaments, which usually took place on the grounds of a castle.[47][48] Knights could parade their armour and banner to the whole court as the tournament commenced. Medieval tournaments were made up of martial sports called hastiludes, and were not only a major spectator sport but also played as a real combat simulation. It usually ended with many knights either injured or even killed. One contest was a free-for-all battle called a melee, where large groups of knights numbering hundreds assembled and fought one another, and the last knight standing was the winner. The most popular and romanticized contest for knights was the joust. In this competition, two knights charge each other with blunt wooden lances in an effort to break their lance on the opponent's head or body or unhorse them completely. The loser in these tournaments had to turn his armour and horse over to the victor. The last day was filled with feasting, dancing and minstrel singing.

Besides formal tournaments, there were also unformalized judicial duels done by knights and squires to end various disputes.[49][50] Countries like Germany, Britain and Ireland practiced this tradition. Judicial combat was of two forms in medieval society, the feat of arms and chivalric combat.[49] The feat of arms were done to settle hostilities between two large parties and supervised by a judge. The chivalric combat was fought when one party's honor was disrespected or challenged and the conflict could not be resolved in court. Weapons were standardized and must be of the same caliber. The duel lasted until the other party was too weak to fight back and in early cases, the defeated party were then subsequently executed. Examples of these brutal duels were the judicial combat known as the Combat of the Thirty in 1351, and the trial by combat fought by Jean de Carrouges in 1386. A far more chivalric duel which became popular in the Late Middle Ages was the pas d'armes or "passage of arms". In this hastilude, a knight or a group of knights would claim a bridge, lane or city gate, and challenge other passing knights to fight or be disgraced.[51] If a lady passed unescorted, she would leave behind a glove or scarf, to be rescued and returned to her by a future knight who passed that way.[citation needed]

Heraldry

[edit]

One of the greatest distinguishing marks of the knightly class was the flying of coloured banners, to display power and to distinguish knights in battle and in tournaments.[52] Knights are generally armigerous (bearing a coat of arms), and indeed they played an essential role in the development of heraldry.[53][54] As heavier armour, including enlarged shields and enclosed helmets, developed in the Middle Ages, the need for marks of identification arose, and with coloured shields and surcoats, coat armoury was born. Armorial rolls were created to record the knights of various regions or those who participated in various tournaments.

Equipment

[edit]
Elements of a harness of the late style of Gothic plate armour that was a popular style in the mid 15th to early 16th century (depiction made in the 18th century)

Knights used a variety of weapons, including maces, axes and swords. Elements of the knightly armour included helmet, cuirass, gauntlet and shield.

The sword was a weapon designed to be used solely in combat; it was useless in hunting and impractical as a tool. Thus, the sword was a status symbol among the knightly class. Swords were effective against lightly armoured enemies, while maces and warhammers were more effective against heavily armoured ones.[55]: 85–86 

One of the primary elements of a knight's armour was the shield, which could be used to block strikes and projectiles. Oval shields were used during the Dark Ages and were made of wooden boards that were roughly half an inch thick. Towards the end of the 10th century, oval shields were lengthened to cover the left knee of the mounted warrior, called the kite shield. The heater shield was used during the 13th and the first half of the 14th century. Around 1350, square shields called bouched shields appeared, which had a notch in which to place the couched lance.[55]: 15 

Until the mid-14th century, knights wore mail armour as their main form of defence. Mail was extremely flexible and provided good protection against sword cuts, but weak against piercing weapons such as the lance and projectiles. Padded undergarment known as aketon was worn to absorb shock damage and prevent chafing caused by mail. In hotter climates metal rings became too hot, so sleeveless surcoats were worn as a protection against the sun, and also to show their heraldic arms.[55]: 15–17  This sort of coat also evolved to be tabards, waffenrocks and other garments with the arms of the wearer sewn into it.[56]

Helmets of the knight of the early periods usually were more open helms such as the nasal helmet, and later forms of the spangenhelm. The lack of more facial protection lead to the evolution of more enclosing helmets to be made in the late 12th to early 13th centuries, this eventually would evolve to make the great helm. Later forms of the bascinet, which was originally a small helm worn under the larger great helm, evolved to be worn solely, and would eventually have pivoted or hinged visors, the most popular was the hounskull, also known as the "pig-face visor".[57][58]

Plate armour first appeared in the 13th century, when plates were added onto the torso and mounted to a base of leather. This form of armour is known as a coat of plates, and was initially used over chain mail in the 13th and 14th centuries, at the time of Transitional armour. The torso was not the only part of the knight to receive this plate protection evolution, as the elbows and shoulders were covered with circular pieces of metal, commonly referred to as rondels, eventually evolving into the plate arm harness consisting of the rerebrace, vambrace, and spaulder or pauldron. The legs too were covered in plates, mainly on the shin, called schynbalds which later evolved to fully enclose the leg in the form of enclosed greaves. As for the upper legs, cuisses came about in the mid 14th century.[59] Overall, plate armour offered better protection against piercing weapons such as arrows and especially bolts than mail armour did.[55]: 15–17 Plate armor reached its peak in the 15th and 16th centuries, but was still used at the beginning of the 17th century by the first Cuirassiers like the London lobsters.

Knights' horses were also armoured in later periods; caparisons were the first form of medieval horse coverage and was used much like the surcoat. Other armours, such as the facial armouring chanfron, were made for horses.[60]

Medieval and Renaissance chivalric literature

[edit]
Page from King René's Tournament Book (BnF Ms Fr 2695)

Knights and the ideals of knighthood featured largely in medieval and Renaissance literature, and have secured a permanent place in literary romance.[61] While chivalric romances abound, particularly notable literary portrayals of knighthood include The Song of Roland, Cantar de Mio Cid, The Twelve of England, Geoffrey Chaucer's The Knight's Tale, Baldassare Castiglione's The Book of the Courtier, and Miguel de Cervantes' Don Quixote, as well as Sir Thomas Malory's Le Morte d'Arthur and other Arthurian tales (Geoffrey of Monmouth's Historia Regum Britanniae, the Pearl Poet's Sir Gawain and the Green Knight, etc.).

Geoffrey of Monmouth's Historia Regum Britanniae (History of the Kings of Britain), written in the 1130s, introduced the legend of King Arthur, which was to be important to the development of chivalric ideals in literature. Sir Thomas Malory's Le Morte d'Arthur (The Death of Arthur), written in 1469, was important in defining the ideal of chivalry, which is essential to the modern concept of the knight, as an elite warrior sworn to uphold the values of faith, loyalty, courage, and honour.

Instructional literature was also created. Geoffroi de Charny's "Book of Chivalry" expounded upon the importance of Christian faith in every area of a knight's life, though still laying stress on the primarily military focus of knighthood.

In the early Renaissance, greater emphasis was laid upon courtliness. The ideal courtier—the chivalrous knight—of Baldassarre Castiglione's The Book of the Courtier became a model of the ideal virtues of nobility.[62] Castiglione's tale took the form of a discussion among the nobility of the court of the Duke of Urbino, in which the characters determine that the ideal knight should be renowned not only for his bravery and prowess in battle, but also as a skilled dancer, athlete, singer and orator, and he should also be well-read in the humanities and classical Greek and Latin literature.[63]

Later Renaissance literature, such as Miguel de Cervantes's Don Quixote, rejected the code of chivalry as unrealistic idealism.[64] The rise of Christian humanism in Renaissance literature demonstrated a marked departure from the chivalric romance of late medieval literature, and the chivalric ideal ceased to influence literature over successive centuries until it saw some pockets of revival in post-Victorian literature.

Decline

[edit]
The Battle of Pavia in 1525. Landsknecht mercenaries with arquebus.

By the mid to late 16th century, knights were quickly becoming obsolete as countries started creating their own standing armies that were faster to train, cheaper to equip, and easier to mobilize.[65][66] The advancement of high-powered firearms contributed greatly to the decline in use of plate armour,[citation needed] as the time it took to train soldiers with guns was much less compared to that of the knight. The cost of equipment was also significantly lower, and guns had a reasonable chance to easily penetrate a knight's armour. In the 14th century the use of infantrymen armed with pikes and fighting in close formation also proved effective against heavy cavalry, such as during the Battle of Nancy, when Charles the Bold and his armoured cavalry were decimated by Swiss pikemen.[67] As the feudal system came to an end, lords saw no further use of knights. Many landowners found the duties of knighthood too expensive and so contented themselves with the use of squires. Mercenaries also became an economic alternative to knights when conflicts arose.

Armies of the time started adopting a more realistic approach to warfare than the honor-bound code of chivalry. Soon, the remaining knights were absorbed into professional armies. Although they had a higher rank than most soldiers because of their valuable lineage, they lost their distinctive identity that previously set them apart from common soldiers.[65] Some knightly orders survived into modern times. They adopted newer technology while still retaining their age-old chivalric traditions. Examples include the Knights of the Holy Sepulchre, Knights Hospitaller and Teutonic Knights.[68]

Types of knighthood

[edit]

Hereditary knighthoods

[edit]

Continental Europe

[edit]

In continental Europe different systems of hereditary knighthood have existed or do exist.

In the Kingdom of Spain, the Royal House of Spain grants titles of knighthood to the successor of the throne. This knighthood title, known as Order of the Golden Fleece, is probably the most prestigious and exclusive chivalric order. This order can also be granted to persons not belonging to the Spanish Crown, as the former Emperor of Japan Akihito, Queen of United Kingdom Elizabeth II or the relevant Spanish politician of the Spanish democratic transition Adolfo Suárez, among others.

Ridder, Dutch for "knight", is a hereditary noble title in the Netherlands. It is the lowest title within the nobility system and ranks below that of "Baron" but above "Jonkheer" (the latter is not a title, but a Dutch honorific to show that someone belongs to the untitled nobility). The collective term for its holders in a certain locality is the Ridderschap (e.g. Ridderschap van Holland, Ridderschap van Friesland, etc.). In the Netherlands no female equivalent exists. Before 1814, the history of nobility is separate for each of the eleven provinces that make up the Kingdom of the Netherlands. In each of these, there were in the early Middle Ages a number of feudal lords who often were just as powerful, and sometimes more so than the rulers themselves. During this period, knights ranked below the ruler and above the feudal barons (Dutch: heren). In the Netherlands only 10 knightly families are still extant, a number which steadily decreases because in that country ennoblement or incorporation into the nobility is not possible anymore.

Fortified house – a family seat of a knight (Schloss Hart by the Harter Graben near Kindberg, Austria)

Likewise Ridder, Dutch for "knight", or the equivalent French Chevalier is a hereditary noble title in Belgium. It is the second lowest title within the nobility system above Écuyer or Jonkheer/Jonkvrouw and below Baron. Like in the Netherlands, no female equivalent to the title exists. Belgium still does have about 232 registered knightly families.

The German and Austrian equivalent of an hereditary knight is a Ritter. This designation is used as a title of nobility in all German-speaking areas. Traditionally it denotes the second lowest rank within the nobility, standing above "Edler" (noble) and below "Freiherr" (baron). For its historical association with warfare and the landed gentry in the Middle Ages, it can be considered roughly equal to the titles of "Knight" or "Baronet".

The Royal House of Portugal historically bestowed hereditary knighthoods to holders of the highest ranks in the Royal Orders. Today, the head of the Royal House of Portugal Duarte Pio, Duke of Braganza, bestows hereditary knighthoods for extraordinary acts of sacrifice and service to the Royal House. There are very few hereditary knights and they are entitled to wear an oval neck badge with the shield of the house of Braganza. As there are two classes of hereditary knights in Portugal, the highest grade is the hereditary knight with grand collar. Portuguese hereditary knighthoods confer nobility.[69]

In France, the hereditary knighthood existed similarly throughout as a title of nobility, as well as in regions formerly under Holy Roman Empire control. One family ennobled with a title in such a manner is the house of Hauteclocque (by letters patents of 1752), even if its most recent members used a pontifical title of count. In some other regions such as Normandy, a specific type of fief was granted to the lower ranked knights (French: chevaliers) called the fief de haubert, referring to the hauberk, or chain mail shirt worn almost daily by knights, as they would not only fight for their liege lords, but enforce and carry out their orders on a routine basis as well.[70] Later the term came to officially designate the higher rank of the nobility in the Ancien Régime (the lower rank being Squire), as the romanticism and prestige associated with the term grew in the Late Middle Ages and the Renaissance.

Italy and Poland also had the hereditary knighthood that existed within their respective systems of nobility. Just as with the Royal House of Portugal, the Royal House of Italy – House of Savoy, continue to confer their dynastic orders of chivalry on both Italian and non-Italian citizens, these dynastic orders include the; Supreme Order of the Most Holy Annunciation, Order of Saints Maurice and Lazarus and the Civil Order of Savoy. Additionally the Royal House of Bourbon-Two Sicilies confers their dynastic orders of chivalry on both Italian and non-italian citizens, including the dynastic orders of; Order of Saint Januarius, Sacred Military Constantinian Order of Saint George, and the Order of Saint Ferdinand and of Merit.

Ireland

[edit]

There are traces of the Continental system of hereditary knighthood in Ireland. Notably all three of the following belong to the Hiberno-Norman FitzGerald dynasty, created by the Earls of Desmond, acting as Earls Palatine, for their kinsmen.

Another Irish family were the O'Shaughnessys, who were created knights in 1553 under the policy of surrender and regrant[71] (first established by Henry VIII of England). They were attainted in 1697 for participation on the Jacobite side in the Williamite wars.[72]

British baronetcies

[edit]

Since 1611, the British Crown has awarded a hereditary title in the form of the baronetcy.[73] Like knights, baronets are accorded the title Sir. Baronets are not peers of the Realm, and have never been entitled to sit in the House of Lords, therefore like knights they remain commoners in the view of the British legal system. However, unlike knights, the title is hereditary, through male primogeniture, and the recipient does not receive an accolade. The position is therefore more comparable with hereditary knighthoods in continental European orders of nobility, such as Ritter, than with knighthoods under the British orders of chivalry. However, unlike the continental orders, the British baronetcy system was a modern invention, designed specifically to raise money for the Crown with the purchase of the title. Baronetcies are granted infrequently and the last notable one was the elevation of Denis Thatcher on the departure from the office of prime minister of his wife, Margaret, which was widely considered in the media to be in order to allow her son Mark to inherit the title, because her own title to the House of Lords as a baroness was a life peerage and died with her.

Chivalric orders

[edit]

Military orders

[edit]

Other orders were established in the Iberian peninsula, under the influence of the orders in the Holy Land and the Crusader movement of the Reconquista and generally aligned with geographical area, for example:

Honorific orders of knighthood

[edit]
Pippo Spano, the member of the Order of the Dragon

After the Crusades, the military orders became idealized and romanticized, resulting in the late medieval notion of chivalry, as reflected in the chivalric romances of the time. The creation of chivalric orders was fashionable among the nobility in the 14th and 15th centuries, and this is still reflected in contemporary honours systems, including the term order itself. Examples of notable orders of chivalry are:

Francis Drake (left) being knighted by Queen Elizabeth I in 1581. The recipient is tapped on each shoulder with a sword.

From roughly 1560, purely honorific orders were established, as a way to confer prestige and distinction, unrelated to military service and chivalry in the more narrow sense. Such orders were particularly popular in the 17th and 18th centuries, and knighthood continues to be conferred in various countries:

There are other monarchies and also republics that also follow this practice. Modern knighthoods are typically conferred in recognition for services rendered to society, which are not necessarily martial in nature. The British musician Elton John, for example, is a Knight Bachelor, thus entitled to be called Sir Elton. The female equivalent is a Dame, for example Dame Julie Andrews.

In the United Kingdom, honorific knighthood may be conferred in two different ways:

In the British honours system the knightly style of Sir and its female equivalent Dame are followed by the given name only when addressing the holder. Thus, Sir Elton John should be addressed as Sir Elton, not Sir John or Mr John. Similarly, actress Dame Judi Dench should be addressed as Dame Judi, not Dame Dench or Ms Dench.

Wives of knights, however, are entitled to the honorific pre-nominal "Lady" before their husband's surname. Thus Sir Paul McCartney's ex-wife was formally styled Lady McCartney (rather than Lady Paul McCartney or Lady Heather McCartney). The style Dame Heather McCartney could be used for the wife of a knight; however, this style is largely archaic and is only used in the most formal of documents, or where the wife is a Dame in her own right (such as Dame Norma Major, who gained her title six years before her husband Sir John Major was knighted). The husbands of Dames have no honorific pre-nominal, so Dame Norma's husband remained John Major until he received his own knighthood.

Up until 1965 it was not permitted to use these titles until after the knight concerned had received the accolade; but in that year the prohibition was lifted, and it is now permitted to use the titles immediately, from the time the award is gazetted.[93]

The English fighting the French knights at the Battle of Crécy in 1346

With the award of a KCVO to the Rt Rev. Randall Davidson in 1902,[94] the custom was established whereby a clerk in holy orders in the Church of England, on being appointed to a degree of knighthood, does not receive the accolade.[93] He receives the insignia of his honour and may place the appropriate letters after his name or title but he may not be called Sir[95] and his wife may not be called Lady. This custom is not observed in Australia and New Zealand, where knighted Anglican clergymen routinely use the title "Sir". Ministers of other Christian Churches are entitled to receive the accolade. For example, Sir Norman Cardinal Gilroy did receive the accolade on his appointment as Knight Commander of the Most Excellent Order of the British Empire in 1969. A knight who is subsequently ordained does not lose his title. A famous example of this situation was The Revd Sir Derek Pattinson, who was ordained just a year after he was appointed Knight Bachelor, apparently somewhat to the consternation of officials at Buckingham Palace.[95] A woman clerk in holy orders may be made a Dame in exactly the same way as any other woman since there are no military connotations attached to the honour. A clerk in holy orders who is a baronet is entitled to use the title Sir.

Outside the British honours system it is usually considered improper to address a knighted person as 'Sir' or 'Dame' (notable exceptions are members of the Order of the Knights of Rizal in the Republic of the Philippines.) Some countries, however, historically did have equivalent honorifics for knights, such as Cavaliere in Italy (e.g. Cavaliere Benito Mussolini), and Ritter in Germany and the Austro-Hungarian Empire (e.g. Georg Ritter von Trapp).

Miniature from Jean Froissart Chronicles depicting the Battle of Montiel (Castilian Civil War, in the Hundred Years' War)

State knighthoods in the Netherlands are issued in three orders: the Order of William, the Order of the Netherlands Lion, and the Order of Orange Nassau. Additionally there remain a few hereditary knights in the Netherlands.

In Belgium, honorific knighthood (not hereditary) can be conferred by the king on particularly meritorious individuals such as scientists or eminent businessmen, or for instance to astronaut Frank De Winne, the second Belgian in space. This practice is similar to the conferral of the dignity of Knight Bachelor in the United Kingdom. In addition, there still are a number of hereditary knights in Belgium (see below).

In France and Belgium, one of the ranks conferred in some orders of merit, such as the Légion d'Honneur, the Ordre National du Mérite, the Ordre des Palmes académiques and the Ordre des Arts et des Lettres in France, and the Order of Leopold, Order of the Crown and Order of Leopold II in Belgium, is that of Chevalier (in French) or Ridder (in Dutch), meaning Knight.

In the Polish–Lithuanian Commonwealth the monarchs tried to establish chivalric orders, but the hereditary lords who controlled the Union did not agree and managed to ban such assemblies. They feared the king would use orders to gain support for absolutist goals and to make formal distinctions among the peerage, which could lead to its legal breakup into two separate classes, and that the king would later play one against the other and eventually limit the legal privileges of hereditary nobility. But finally in 1705 King August II managed to establish the Order of the White Eagle which remains Poland's most prestigious order of that kind. The head of state (now the President as the acting Grand Master) confers knighthoods of the order to distinguished citizens, foreign monarchs and other heads of state. The order has its chapter. There were no particular honorifics that would accompany a knight's name, as historically all (or at least by far most) of its members would be royals or hereditary lords anyway. So today, a knight is simply referred to as "Name Surname, knight of the White Eagle (Order)".

In Nigeria, holders of religious honours like the Knighthood of St. Gregory make use of the word Sir as a pre-nominal honorific in much the same way as it is used for secular purposes in Britain and the Philippines. Wives of such individuals also typically assume the title of Lady.

Women

[edit]
England and the United Kingdom
[edit]

Women were appointed to the Order of the Garter almost from the start. In all, 68 women were appointed between 1358 and 1488, including all consorts. Though many were women of royal blood, or wives of knights of the Garter, some women were neither. They wore the garter on the left arm, and some are shown on their tombstones with this arrangement. After 1488, no other appointments of women are known, although it is said that the Garter was conferred upon Neapolitan poet Laura Bacio Terricina, by King Edward VI. In 1638, a proposal was made to revive the use of robes for the wives of knights in ceremonies, but this did not occur. Queens consort have been made Ladies of the Garter since 1901 (Queens Alexandra in 1901,[96] Mary in 1910 and Elizabeth in 1937). The first non-royal woman to be made Lady Companion of the Garter was The Duchess of Norfolk in 1990,[97] the second was The Baroness Thatcher in 1995[98] (post-nominal: LG). On 30 November 1996, Lady Fraser was made Lady of the Thistle,[99] the first non-royal woman (post-nominal: LT). (See Edmund Fellowes, Knights of the Garter, 1939; and Beltz: Memorials of the Order of the Garter). The first woman to be granted a knighthood in modern Britain seems to have been Nawab Sikandar Begum Sahiba, Nawab Begum of Bhopal, who became a Knight Grand Commander of the Order of the Star of India (GCSI) in 1861, at the foundation of the order. Her daughter received the same honor in 1872, as well as her granddaughter in 1910. The order was open to "princes and chiefs" without distinction of gender. The first European woman to have been granted an order of knighthood was Queen Mary, when she was made a Knight Grand Commander of the same order, by special statute, in celebration of the Delhi Durbar of 1911.[100] She was also granted a damehood in 1917 as a Dame Grand Cross, when the Order of the British Empire was created[101] (it was the first order explicitly open to women). The Royal Victorian Order was opened to women in 1936, and the Orders of the Bath and Saint Michael and Saint George in 1965 and 1971 respectively.[102]

France
[edit]

Medieval French had two words, chevaleresse and chevalière, which were used in two ways: one was for the wife of a knight, and this usage goes back to the 14th century. The other was possibly for a female knight. Here is a quote from Ménestrier, a 17th-century writer on chivalry:

It was not always necessary to be the wife of a knight in order to take this title. Sometimes, when some male fiefs were conceded by special privilege to women, they took the rank of chevaleresse, as one sees plainly in Hemricourt where women who were not wives of knights are called chevaleresses.

Modern French orders of knighthood include women, for example the Légion d'Honneur (Legion of Honor) since the mid-19th century, but they are usually called chevaliers. The first documented case is that of Angélique Brûlon (1772–1859), who fought in the Revolutionary Wars, received a military disability pension in 1798, the rank of 2nd lieutenant in 1822, and the Legion of Honor in 1852. A recipient of the Ordre National du Mérite recently requested from the order's Chancery the permission to call herself "chevalière," and the request was granted.[102]

Italy
[edit]

As related in Orders of Knighthood, Awards and the Holy See by H. E. Cardinale (1983), the Order of the Blessed Virgin Mary was founded by two Bolognese nobles Loderingo degli Andalò and Catalano di Guido in 1233, and approved by Pope Alexander IV in 1261. It was the first religious order of knighthood to grant the rank of militissa to women. However, this order was suppressed by Pope Sixtus V in 1558.[102]

The Low Countries
[edit]

At the initiative of Catherine Baw in 1441, and 10 years later of Elizabeth, Mary, and Isabella of the house of Hornes, orders were founded which were open exclusively to women of noble birth, who received the French title of chevalière or the Latin title of equitissa. In his Glossarium (s.v. militissa), Du Cange notes that still in his day (17th century), the female canons of the canonical monastery of St. Gertrude in Nivelles (Brabant), after a probation of 3 years, are made knights (militissae) at the altar, by a (male) knight called in for that purpose, who gives them the accolade with a sword and pronounces the usual words.[102]

Spain
[edit]
A battle of the Reconquista from the Cantigas de Santa Maria

To honour those women who defended Tortosa against an attack by the Moors, Ramon Berenguer IV, Count of Barcelona, created the Order of the Hatchet ("Orde de la Atxa" in catalan) in 1149.[102]

The inhabitants [of Tortosa] being at length reduced to great streights, desired relief of the Earl, but he, being not in a condition to give them any, they entertained some thoughts of making a surrender. Which the Women hearing of, to prevent the disaster threatening their City, themselves, and Children, put on men's Clothes, and by a resolute sally, forced the Moors to raise the Siege. The Earl, finding himself obliged, by the gallentry of the action, thought fit to make his acknowlegements thereof, by granting them several Privileges and Immunities, and to perpetuate the memory of so signal an attempt, instituted an Order, somewhat like a Military Order, into which were admitted only those Brave Women, deriving the honour to their Descendants, and assigned them for a Badge, a thing like a Fryars Capouche, sharp at the top, after the form of a Torch, and of a crimson colour, to be worn upon their Head-clothes. He also ordained, that at all publick meetings, the women should have precedence of the Men. That they should be exempted from all Taxes, and that all the Apparel and Jewels, though of never so great value, left by their dead Husbands, should be their own. These Women having thus acquired this Honour by their personal Valour, carried themselves after the Military Knights of those days.

— Elias Ashmole, The Institution, Laws, and Ceremony of the Most Noble Order of the Garter (1672), Ch. 3, sect. 3

Notable knights

[edit]

See also

[edit]

Counterparts in other cultures

[edit]

Notes

[edit]

References

[edit]
Revisions and contributorsEdit on WikipediaRead on Wikipedia
from Grokipedia
A knight was a mounted heavy cavalryman in , serving as a feudal bound by oaths of to a in exchange for land or maintenance, forming the backbone of aristocratic warfare from the 9th to the 15th centuries. Originating in the Carolingian military reforms of the 8th and 9th centuries, where elite horsemen were rewarded with benefices, knighthood formalized as a distinct social institution by the , requiring extensive training in arms, , and skills often beginning in boyhood as pages and squires. Equipped with chainmail or plate armor, lances, swords, and warhorses—whose upkeep demanded significant wealth—knights dominated battlefields through , as seen in conflicts like the in 1066 and the , though their effectiveness waned with the advent of longbowmen and artillery. The chivalric code, idealized in 12th-century as a fusion of Christian piety, courtly manners, and honor, served partly to restrain the inherent brutality of these fighters, yet historical reveal frequent deviations marked by plunder, feuds, and pragmatic rather than consistent . By the , knighthood transitioned toward ceremonial orders like the , while in modern contexts it persists as a non-hereditary honor conferred for civil or , detached from its origins.

Etymology

Linguistic and Conceptual Origins

The English term "knight" derives from the cniht, originally denoting a , , or servant, with roots in Proto-Germanic knehtaz shared with terms like Dutch knecht and German Knecht, both implying a retainer or . This initial connotation emphasized social subordination and personal service rather than martial prowess, reflecting the word's application to attendants in early Germanic societies. By the late Anglo-Saxon period, around the , cniht began extending to military retainers who served lords in combat, gradually shifting toward mounted fighters as horse warfare gained prominence among elites by the . In contrast, continental European equivalents highlight the equestrian dimension more explicitly from the outset. The chevalier, from Latin caballarius via caballu (horse), directly signified a mounted or horseman, underscoring the conceptual link between knighthood and service in Frankish and Norman contexts. Latin miles, classically meaning any foot or mounted , evolved in medieval usage to denote a professional often of noble status, paralleling the knight's transition from retainer to armored , though without the initial servant implication of cniht. This semantic divergence illustrates how Anglo-Saxon retained servile undertones longer, while prioritized the technological and tactical role of the horse in elevating fighters to status. Conceptually, the knight's origins trace to Germanic tribal comitatus systems, where chieftains maintained personal retinues of loyal followers bound by oaths of service in battle and daily protection, fostering connotations of fealty and martial companionship over mere employment. These retinues, known as hearthweru or hearth-guard among early Germanic warlords, embodied a reciprocal bond of honor and combat readiness, influencing the knight's ideal of devoted armed service. Roman precedents in the comitatenses, mobile field troops derived from comitatus (entourage or suite), similarly connoted troops accompanying emperors or generals as a privileged, loyal cadre, blending imperial mobility with personal allegiance and prefiguring feudal military hierarchies without direct institutional continuity.

Historical Origins

Ancient and Pre-Carolingian Influences

The Roman equites, the equestrian class serving as early , provided a foundational model for mounted warriors through their role in Republican and Imperial legions, where they functioned as mobile flank protectors emphasizing speed and status-linked service. By the 1st-2nd centuries AD, Roman adoption of —heavily armored units with scale protection for both rider and horse—emerged as a direct tactical response to Eastern threats, as evidenced by depictions of Sarmatian cataphracts on (completed 113 AD), illustrating charges during the Dacian Wars (101-106 AD). These prototypes prioritized shock impact over maneuverability, driven by the empirical need to counter nomadic with superior penetration power in set-piece battles. Among Germanic tribes, the comitatus warband system, detailed by in (98 AD), bound young retainers to chieftains through oaths of personal loyalty, fostering small, elite groups reliant on individual valor for survival and plunder during raids. This persisted into the (c. 375-568 AD), where and organized similar retinues around warlords, as seen in Gothic federate units under Roman service and Frankish conquests, prefiguring vassalage by tying landless warriors' status to direct lordly amid fragmented polities and constant intertribal conflict. The causal driver was mutual dependence: lords gained reliable fighters for expansion, while followers secured protection and spoils, enabling cohesive forces without centralized . Eastern armored horsemen from Persian Sassanid cataphracts influenced Byzantine kataphraktoi, who integrated full and composite bows for versatile dominance, transmitting techniques westward via 6th-7th century invasions by Avars and . Avars introduced stirrups to around 560 AD, adopted by Merovingian (c. 500-751 AD) through assimilation of captives and border skirmishes, allowing stable couched-lance charges that amplified a rider's mass and control against unarmored foes. Archaeological finds of stirrup-equipped graves in eastern Merovingian territories confirm this diffusion by the late , rooted in the pragmatic exigency to match Avar mobility during campaigns like Clovis I's expansions (late 5th century) and responses to Slavic incursions. These adaptations underscored heavy cavalry's edge in open terrain, prioritizing empirical advantages in armor, leverage, and loyalty over infantry-centric Roman legacies.

Carolingian Reforms and Feudal Foundations

Charlemagne's military reforms, implemented during his reign from 768 to 814, prioritized the development of professional mounted forces to maintain imperial control amid frequent campaigns against , , and other foes. These reforms shifted reliance from broad levies to elite units, termed caballarii, which served as the empire's striking force in expeditions. This demanded specialized and , with horsemen expected to furnish their own mounts and arms in exchange for royal favor. Administrative mechanisms, such as the capitularies—royal decrees outlining obligations—and the missi dominici system, enforced these military mandates by dispatching paired lay and clerical envoys to inspect local compliance, including the mustering of mounted warriors for scarae (select field armies). The Capitulary of Herstal (779) and subsequent edicts required counts and vassals to supply equipped horsemen proportional to their landholdings, fostering a cadre of loyal, mobile defenders. This structure addressed causal vulnerabilities in decentralized territories, where rapid response to invasions necessitated pre-trained cavalry over ad hoc levies. The economic foundation for these warriors emerged through benefices, conditional land grants (beneficia) awarded for faithful service, which enabled recipients to sustain the high costs of , armor, and maintenance. Evident in 8th-century practices and elaborated in documents like the Capitulary de villis (c. 800), which regulated estate productivity to support imperial needs, benefices tied military duty directly to , prefiguring feudal reciprocity. Technological adaptations, including the stirrup's integration—disseminated via Avar influences by the late —facilitated , allowing lance-armed riders to deliver massed charges without dismounting instability. Grave goods and harness fittings from Carolingian sites, such as those in the , attest to this evolution, which prioritized weight-bearing impacts over skirmishing. By the 9th and 10th centuries, under Charlemagne's successors like and amid Carolingian fragmentation, these elements coalesced into proto-feudal knightly service, with benefices often heritable and local lords assuming defensive roles previously centralized.

Evolution in the High Middle Ages

Crusades and the Rise of Military Orders

The , proclaimed by at the in 1095 and launched in 1096, mobilized thousands of feudal knights from who took religious vows to recapture from Muslim control, culminating in the city's siege and capture on July 15, 1099. These knights, often equipped with lances, chainmail, and horses, formed the core striking force, leveraging in battles such as Dorylaeum (1097) and Antioch (1098), though the expedition suffered heavy attrition from disease, starvation, and combat, with estimates of overall participant losses exceeding 50% before reaching the . , duke of , exemplified the piety-driven leadership of these warriors; having mortgaged his estates to fund his contingent of around 1,500 knights and infantry, he refused the title of king in , opting instead for "Advocate of the Holy Sepulchre" to underscore religious humility over secular ambition. While papal indulgences promised spiritual remission of sins as a primary motivator, material incentives were evident, as surviving knights acquired fiefs in the nascent of Outremer, including the Kingdom of , , , and , established between 1098 and 1100 to secure coastal and inland territories for Latin settlement and defense. The establishment of permanent military orders arose from the logistical vulnerabilities of these transient feudal levies, which proved inadequate for sustained garrison duties and pilgrim escorts amid ongoing threats from Seljuk Turks and Fatimids. The Knights Hospitaller, originating as a Benedictine hospital in around 1080 to aid pilgrims regardless of faith, militarized in the 1120s by incorporating knightly recruits who combined charitable care with armed protection, receiving formal papal recognition via the bull Pie Postulatio Voluntatis in 1113. Similarly, the Poor Fellow-Soldiers of Christ and of the Temple of (Knights Templar) formed in 1119 under to safeguard pilgrims on routes from to , initially numbering nine knights who adopted monastic vows of , , and obedience alongside obligations. These orders addressed causal gaps in Outremer's defense—rotating European reinforcements were unreliable due to distance and feudal obligations—by creating disciplined, celibate cadres exempt from local taxes and tithes, enabling long-term land holdings like Templar preceptories that generated revenue from agriculture and early banking services for crusaders. Papal endorsements solidified their role, with Pope Innocent II's bull Omne Datum Optimum in 1139 granting the Templars direct accountability to the , autonomy from episcopal oversight, and rights to retain spoils from Muslim captives, which facilitated rapid expansion to over 15,000 members by the mid-12th century and fortified commanderies across and the . Empirical outcomes included the orders' pivotal defense of key sites, such as the Templars' stand at the (1177) where fewer than 500 knights routed a larger Ayyubid force, though chronic understaffing in Outremer—often fewer than 1,000 knights total for all orders—underscored reliance on economic incentives like Italian merchant privileges in ports, which boosted trade in spices and silks to subsidize warfare. This fusion of knighthood with religious institutionality not only extended Crusader viability into the 13th century but highlighted pragmatic adaptations to warfare's realities, where ideological zeal intertwined with territorial and fiscal gains to counterbalance high knightly mortality rates from sieges and skirmishes.

Institutionalization Across Europe

In the wake of the of in 1066, the institutional framework of knighthood from northern was systematically imposed, with William I redistributing lands to approximately 180 barons who in turn subinfeudated knight's fees—parcels sufficient to equip and sustain a mounted for royal service. The , compiled in 1086, surveyed these tenures across , documenting feudal obligations that bound knights to provide 40 days of unpaid annually, thereby embedding knighthood as a cornerstone of land-based . This model emphasized aristocratic control, with knights often drawn from Norman elites, contrasting earlier Anglo-Saxon thegns who lacked the formalized equestrian ethos. In the , knighthood evolved differently through the ministerial system, where ministeriales—unfree knights of servile origin—served as hereditary functionaries and warriors for princes and bishops, amassing administrative and military roles without full noble privileges. The , a compilation authored by Eike von Repgow around 1220–1235, codified these arrangements, regulating , inheritance of ministerial status, and distinctions from free nobles, which fostered a bureaucratic layer of knights reliant on imperial or ecclesiastical patronage rather than independent s. This non-aristocratic base, peaking in the 13th century with thousands of such families, diverged from the French chevaliers, who by the same era had consolidated as a hereditary noble estate, with dubbing rituals and fief grants increasingly restricted to gentilshommes via royal and seignorial charters. On the , knighthood institutionalized amid the by fusing feudal vassalage with militant Christianity, as Christian rulers granted frontier lands to knights for perpetual warfare against Muslim taifas, blending jihad-like indulgences with service contracts. The Poema de mio Cid, an epic recounting Rodrigo Díaz de Vivar's campaigns around 1094 and likely composed between 1140 and 1200, illustrates this hybrid: the Cid leads a mesnada of sworn knights in conquests yielding parias (tributes) and fiefs, exemplifying how secular knighthood adapted Carolingian models to reconquest imperatives without full reliance on monastic orders. By the 13th century, Castilian and Aragonese monarchs formalized knightly confraternities through fueros (charters), tying status to mounted service in battles like Las Navas de Tolosa (1212), where 12,000–15,000 Christian knights decisively weakened Almohad power.

Knightly Training and Social Integration

Stages of Youth: Page and Squire

The progression to knighthood commenced with the page stage, typically beginning around age seven for sons of the , who were placed in a to instill foundational skills and habits through service. As pages, boys aged approximately seven to fourteen performed domestic duties including waiting at table, attending to the lady of the , and basic errands, while receiving rudimentary training in courtly manners, , , and initial horsemanship using hobby horses or ponies. This phase emphasized practical socialization away from home, fostering discipline via structured routines documented in contemporary guides like The Babees' Book, which prescribed behaviors for young attendants in noble establishments to build obedience and loyalty to patrons. Advancement to squire occurred around age fourteen, extending to about twenty-one, where the youth served a specific knight more intensively, handling advanced responsibilities such as weapon sharpening, armor polishing, and horse grooming. Squires accompanied knights to tournaments for observation and support, practiced escalated combat drills including lance handling and swordplay in full plate armor for both mounted and dismounted individual combat using the long sword, lance, and shield, and participated in actual campaigns, maintaining equipment under field conditions as described in fourteenth-century accounts like those of Jean Froissart. These combat skills were honed through jousting tournaments and melee duels, which provided practical simulation of one-on-one engagements under pressure. Empirical evidence from battle narratives indicates squires faced substantial injury risks, often fighting alongside or replacing fallen mounts and lords, comprising a notable portion of medieval armies' support yet exposed personnel. Tournament records further attest to fatalities among squires, underscoring the hazardous apprenticeship. This hierarchical system, rooted in feudal fostering practices verifiable through manorial and ledgers, causally reinforced by embedding youths in superior households, where daily subordination and skill-building under oversight cultivated the reliability essential for martial service. Variations existed by region and era, but the core sequence prioritized incremental competence in equestrian and arms skills alongside personal , preparing candidates for efficacy without formal academies.

The Accolade and Knightly Initiation

The , or ceremony, served as the pivotal rite transitioning a into a full knight, imposing enforceable feudal obligations such as tied to . In exchange for a knight's —typically 100-120 hides of sufficient to equip and sustain one mounted —the new knight assumed duties including up to forty days of annual campaigning at personal expense, as codified in feudal regulating vassal-lord contracts across 12th- and 13th-century . This milestone distinguished knightly status from lesser roles, enforcing contractual loyalty through the symbolic of arms and spurs. Continental rituals, particularly in and the , emphasized elaborate purification and spiritual preparation, as detailed in 13th-century ordines ad faciendum militem (orders for making a knight). These sequences began with a night vigil in church for and reflection, followed by ritual to symbolize moral cleansing from past sins, vesting in white linen robes and a red mantle denoting purity and martyrdom, and finally the girding of and spurs before the central —a tap or colée with the sword's flat side on the neck or shoulder, administered by the lord or sovereign. English adoubement, by contrast, often streamlined these steps for practicality, omitting extended vigils in favor of expedited dubbing by the king during assemblies or campaigns, reflecting administrative priorities in Angevin governance. The of 1215 explicitly referenced post-accolade knightly burdens, with Clause 16 prohibiting for excessive service beyond that due for a knight's fee, thereby affirming the rite's role in calibrating feudal exactions amid baronial discontent with royal impositions. Clause 29 further protected knights from compelled cash equivalents for castle guard if willing to serve personally, underscoring the accolade's linkage to tangible military accountability rather than mere honorific elevation. Empirical records reveal the formal accolade's relative infrequency, with many elevations occurring summarily on battlefields or pre-combat to bolster forces, bypassing vigils and Masses for immediate utility. Non-noble mounted sergeants, equipped similarly but lacking , routinely filled roles in 13th-14th-century armies, performing tactical duties akin to knights without incurring full feudal ties or social prestige, as armies expanded beyond noble cadres. This pragmatic variance highlights the rite's evolution from battlefield to institutionalized , prioritized for heirs of enfeoffed lords over common levies.

Chivalric Ideology

Core Tenets of the Code

The core tenets of chivalric ideology emphasized prowess as the foundational virtue, requiring knights to demonstrate exceptional skill and courage in to earn respect and fulfill their societal role. , in his Book of Chivalry composed around 1350 amid the , described chivalry as inherently a code, where a knight's primary purpose was to engage in deeds of arms, prioritizing physical deeds over mere words or inheritance. This prowess extended to disciplined conduct in battle, with Charny advising knights to seek opportunities for honorable while avoiding rashness that could dishonor their order. Loyalty to one's lord formed another pillar, demanding unwavering and service in exchange for protection and land, as exemplified in early epic literature like the Song of Roland (c. 1100), where Roland's steadfast obedience to underscored the knight's duty to prioritize the lord's commands and the realm's defense above personal survival. This vassalic bond intertwined with fidelity to the Church, obliging knights to champion Christian causes, such as defending pilgrims and , thereby aligning secular warfare with divine order. Protection of the weak and vulnerable—encompassing peasants, women, orphans, and the unarmed—emerged as a prescriptive to mitigate the disruptions of feudal , reinforced through initiatives like the Peace of God movement, which began with the Council of Charroux in 989 and spread via oaths sworn by knights to abstain from plundering non-combatants and sacred sites during specified periods. Piety further bound knights to moral restraint, urging them to view their martial role as a holy , with in the embodying this through his final prayers and sacramental acts amid battle, linking personal valor to eternal salvation. Influences from 12th-century troubadours introduced elements of , portraying the knight's devotion to a as a refining force that elevated martial virtues through disciplined longing and service, though Charny subordinated such sentiments to core military and honorable obligations rather than romantic idealism. Enforcement of these tenets relied on oaths administered by church councils, as in the Peace of God decrees of the 989–1030s, which imposed spiritual penalties like for violations, thereby embedding chivalric prescriptions within a framework of religious accountability to curb private feuds and promote ordered society.

Ideals Versus Historical Practice and Criticisms

The chivalric emphasis on protecting the vulnerable frequently diverged from knights' routine involvement in predatory feudal conflicts, including castle-based and raids on agrarian communities that disrupted local economies and security. To mitigate such depredations, ecclesiastical authorities launched the Peace of God councils starting around 989 AD in , decreeing for assaults on non-combatants like peasants, , and pilgrims, while sparing armed knights in lawful . The Truce of God, formalized by the 1027 Council of Elne and expanded thereafter, further prohibited hostilities from Wednesday evening to Monday morning and during Advent and , targeting the knights' propensity for opportunistic violence outside formal campaigns. These reforms underscored the Church's recognition that knightly "prowess" often served personal enrichment rather than communal order, with violations routinely flouted by castellans enforcing private tolls and seizures. In the Crusades, this disconnect manifested acutely, as vows to safeguard Christendom yielded to plunder; the 1204 sack of Constantinople by Latin knights involved systematic desecration of churches, enslavement of thousands, and indiscriminate killings exceeding 2,000 civilians, directly contravening protections owed to fellow Christians under both papal mandates and chivalric oaths. Participants rationalized such acts through appeals to contractual debts and divine retribution against Byzantine "heretics," yet contemporary clerics decried the betrayal, with Pope Innocent III lamenting the perversion of holy war into rapacious conquest. Knights defended ransoms of high-value captives as a merciful alternative to execution, preserving noble lineages for future exchanges, but this selective mercy excluded peasants and clergy, enabling widespread pillage that netted relics, gold, and horses valued in millions of hyperpyra. Contemporary reveals as an construct for justifying dominance, with empirical records of tournaments devolving into lethal brawls and chroniclers documenting knights' prioritization of booty over ; economic imperatives, including the need for spoils to offset equipage costs exceeding 100 livres annually, routinely trumped prescriptions. While some knights invoked codes to temper excesses—sparing heralded foes or funding chantries—systematic non-adherence, as in routine exactions yielding up to 20% of rural output, aligns with causal drivers of status maintenance over . Clerical advocates like initially extolled military orders' discipline but later papal inquiries exposed Templar accumulations of wealth through usury-like lending, eroding idealized facades.

Military Role and Equipment

Armament Development from Chainmail to Plate

In the , European relied on chainmail hauberks—knee-length shirts of interlinked iron rings weighing around 25-30 pounds—for primary body protection, supplemented by nasal helmets and large shields that extended coverage to the legs when mounted. These elements are vividly depicted in the , an embroidered cloth from the 1070s illustrating the , where warriors are shown in hauberks and wielding shields during charges. The kite shield's elongated shape provided superior defense against ground-level threats compared to earlier round shields, reflecting adaptations for mounted combat. By the 12th and 13th centuries, vulnerabilities to improved piercing weapons like crossbows prompted incremental additions of rigid elements over , including splinted limb defenses and early breastplates. Great helms—enclosed cylindrical helmets offering facial protection—emerged around 1180, evolving from the crusading era's need for head defense in close-quarters . Coats of plates, consisting of small metal plates riveted between fabric layers, appeared in the late 13th century as precursors to comprehensive plating, providing better resistance to thrusts while distributed weight allowed mobility. The marked the shift to transitional and full plate armor, driven by metallurgical advances enabling thinner, harder plates that deflected arrows and bolts more effectively. At the in 1346, French knights wore such hybrid armors—bascinets with aventails and partial plate—but still suffered from and fire due to gaps and insufficient coverage, underscoring the urgency for enclosed designs. Milanese armorers led innovations by the late , producing articulated full harnesses with , greaves, and vambraces that by the 1400s offered comprehensive protection weighing 45-65 pounds yet allowing flexible movement through joints and lames. Equine protection evolved concurrently, with horse barding transitioning from mail cruppers and peytrals in the to plate chanfrons and flanchards by the 14th, destriers in charges. rests, fixed hooks on breastplates introduced in the mid-14th century, secured the couched under the armpit, channeling the full momentum of a galloping —up to 1,000 pounds of combined force—into devastating impacts without risking the rider's dislodgement. The expense of these developments restricted full harnesses to elites; a complete 14th-15th century suit cost approximately £8-20, equivalent to several months' wages for a skilled or the value of multiple warhorses, necessitating specialized workshops and imported high-quality .

Tactical Functions in Feudal Warfare

Knights in feudal warfare operated predominantly as within mixed armies, fulfilling roles in , shock assaults, and exploitation of victories through pursuit. In feudal levies, lords summoned knights to provide mounted service, where they scouted enemy positions, disrupted formations with lance-armed charges, and harried retreating forces to maximize gains. This cavalry-centric approach countered infantry-heavy myths by demonstrating knights' decisive impact in battles like in 1066, where Norman mounted charges broke English shield walls after tactical feints. Empirical evidence from medieval chronicles underscores that massed knightly charges often determined outcomes, rather than alone prevailing without support. During the (1337–1453), knights integrated into tactics, increasingly dismounting to anchor lines alongside sergeants and archers. At Crécy in 1346, English knights fought on foot in the center, their defensive stance shielding longbowmen on the flanks who decimated advancing French with volleys, highlighting the shift toward coordinated -cavalry hybrids over pure mounted reliance. French knights' disorganized charges failed against prepared positions and arrow storms, illustrating knights' adaptability but also the necessity of infantry integration for success. Knightly effectiveness faced empirical limits, particularly against massed longbows and logistical burdens. At Agincourt in , French knights' attempts at mounted and dismounted assaults bogged down in mud under relentless English , resulting in thousands of casualties and exposing vulnerabilities of armored to ranged fire. The exorbitant costs of , armor, and sustenance—often exceeding those of common soldiers—deterred prolonged feudal service, paving the way for mercenaries who delivered comparable shock power without tenure obligations. These factors did not diminish knights' core shock role but underscored the need for tactical flexibility in evolving warfare.

Cultural Practices

Tournaments as Training and Spectacle

Medieval tournaments originated in northern around the mid-11th century, with the earliest recorded mention appearing in a from the of St. Martin at Tours. Initially resembling small-scale battles known as , these events involved teams of knights charging against each other across open fields to simulate wartime conditions. By the , they had spread across , evolving into structured competitions that included with lances. As training mechanisms, tournaments allowed knights to hone essential military skills such as horsemanship, handling, and close-quarters combat without the full consequences of actual warfare, practicing individual combat in full plate armor for both mounted and dismounted fighting with long swords, lances, and shields through jousting tournaments and melee duels. Participants practiced maneuvering in formation during melees, which demanded and tactical coordination akin to engagements. This preparation was critical in an era when feudal levies relied on mounted knights for decisive charges, though the mock nature limited exposure to or infantry tactics prevalent in real conflicts. Tournaments also functioned as grand spectacles that reinforced social hierarchies and chivalric display, attracting crowds of and commoners to witness feats of prowess. Elaborate events featured heraldic pageantry, with victors receiving prizes like horses, armor, jewels, or symbolic favors from ladies, such as embroidered sleeves or rings. These gatherings often coincided with feasts or political alliances, as seen in the 1453 Feast of the Pheasant at , where tournaments underscored crusading vows among European elites. Despite regulations introducing blunted weapons and barriers in later centuries, tournaments remained perilous, with frequent injuries to heads and eyes leading to maimings or deaths. In 1273, a tournament near Chalons escalated into genuine fatalities when participants discarded mock arms for real ones. Mortality persisted even in controlled jousts, exemplified by King Henry II of France's fatal lance splinter to the eye in 1559, prompting further restrictions and contributing to the events' decline by the .

Heraldry, Symbolism, and Identity

Heraldry served as a critical system for identifying knights on medieval battlefields, where full-face helmets and chainmail obscured personal features, necessitating visible emblems for distinguishing friend from foe in chaotic engagements. Emerging in the , coats of arms—painted on shields, surcoats, and banners—enabled rapid visual recognition amid dust, smoke, and combat, evolving from earlier field signs into standardized designs by the early . The introduction of enclosed helms around 1200 further amplified this need, as facial visibility diminished, making heraldic symbols indispensable for tactical coordination and preventing in feudal armies. Documented in 13th-century rolls of arms, such as Matthew Paris's circa 1244 English armorial enumerating 75 distinct coats, grounded knightly identity in empirical records rather than alone. These rolls, including the Roll from 1298, cataloged arms hierarchically by rank and region, reflecting their practical role in verifying allegiances during campaigns like the Scottish Wars of Independence. Blazonry, the precise verbal description of arms using terms for charges (e.g., lions rampant), tinctures (e.g., gules for ), and positions, standardized post-12th-century to ensure clarity across linguistic barriers in multinational forces, aiding commanders in directing units obscured by battlefield haze. Arms were hereditary, passing patrilineally to preserve familial continuity, with differencing applied to lines—such as adding a for the eldest son or a for the second—to denote without diluting the core paternal bearings. This mechanism, evident in practices by the 13th century, maintained distinct identities within extended kin groups serving the same , as seen in armorials where siblings bore modified versions of shared arms. The Westminster Tournament Roll of 1511, depicting over 50 participants with quartered and differenced shields, exemplifies this among late medieval , where modifications like bordures or annulets signaled collateral branches tied to feudal obligations. Beyond identification, enforced causal feudal bonds: retainers displayed their lord's badges or colors on tabards, visibly affirming loyalty and enabling lords to rally dispersed vassals in , thus functioning as a proto-logistical tool rather than ornamental excess.

Representations in Literature

Medieval Chivalric Romances

Medieval chivalric romances emerged in the late as verse narratives composed primarily by educated clerics for noble audiences, portraying idealized knights undertaking quests infused with and moral virtues. , active circa 1160–1181, authored five key Arthurian works, including Erec et Enide (c. 1170), Cligés (c. 1176), Lancelot, ou Le Chevalier de la Charrette (c. 1177–1181), Yvain, ou Le Chevalier au Lion (c. 1177–1181), and the incomplete Perceval, ou Le Conte du Graal (c. 1181). These texts centered on Arthurian figures like , emphasizing prowess, loyalty, and refined amorous devotion to elevate the knight's role beyond mere warfare. Composed under patronage from figures such as Marie de Champagne for and Philip of Flanders for Perceval, these romances served to propagate chivalric ideals among the , fostering self-restraint and cultural refinement among a warrior class prone to violence. The narratives idealized knightly conduct as a means to legitimize feudal courts, with clerics like Chrétien adapting Celtic motifs into frameworks that promoted ethical codes over historical brutality. This literary construct diverged markedly from contemporaneous realities, such as the Third Crusade (1189–1192), where knights engaged in sieges, plunder, and massacres that contradicted professed chivalric mercy and piety. Surviving manuscripts, often richly illuminated and produced in monastic or courtly scriptoria from century onward, indicate dissemination confined to circles capable of commissioning copies, underscoring the genre's role in reinforcing identity rather than broad societal instruction. Early fragments and codices reveal patterns of selective copying among , prioritizing aspirational tales over documentary accounts of knightly service. Thus, chivalric romances functioned as cultural , shaping perceptions of knighthood to align with courtly aspirations while glossing over the causal disconnect from feudal levies and crusade exigencies.

Renaissance Adaptations and Enduring Myths

Sir Thomas Malory's , compiled in the 1460s and printed by in 1485, synthesized earlier Arthurian cycles from French prose romances and English chronicles into a unified narrative emphasizing knightly prowess, loyalty, and moral quests. This adaptation reflected early Tudor efforts to evoke chivalric nostalgia, as Henry VII propagated Arthurian descent—claiming lineage from a purported Welsh —to consolidate legitimacy after his 1485 victory at Bosworth Field over Richard III. Post-medieval literary persistence amplified these ideals despite knighthood's tactical obsolescence, as and pike formations rendered armored charges increasingly ineffective by the of 1494–1559. works like Spenser's The Faerie Queene (1590–1596) further adapted knightly archetypes to allegorize Elizabethan virtues, blending mythic heroism with Protestant ethics. In the , Alfred Lord Tennyson's (1859–1885) recast Arthurian knights as emblems of social order and imperial duty, selling over 10,000 copies in its first year and influencing public perceptions of as a timeless . Modern historiography, however, debunks this romanticization by highlighting chivalry's historical role as a selective code prioritizing lordly enforcement and battlefield pragmatism over universal honor, with knights routinely conducting sieges involving starvation and ransom-driven atrocities rather than pure gallantry. Such myths nonetheless shaped national ideologies; Prussian romantics in the invoked Teutonic Knights' Baltic conquests (13th–15th centuries) to forge a narrative of disciplined militarism, mythologizing 1,200 knights' campaigns as foundational to virtues like obedience and expansion, thereby underpinning Bismarck's unification efforts post-1871.

Decline and Transformation

Military Innovations and the End of Feudal Levy

The proliferation of powerful missile weapons, particularly the and , eroded the traditional dominance of knightly in feudal warfare during the 14th century. At the on August 26, 1346, approximately 6,000-8,000 men unleashed volleys of arrows with superior range and rate of fire, inflicting heavy casualties on repeated French knightly charges and compelling a tactical reevaluation of reliance. This engagement highlighted how disciplined could neutralize the of armored mounted knights, foreshadowing shifts away from feudal levies centered on noble-provided horsemen. The introduction of gunpowder weaponry, including hand-held firearms and , decisively undermined knightly charges by the mid-15th century. During the on July 17, 1453, French forces under Jean Bureau deployed around 200-300 cannons that raked advancing English ranks led by John Talbot, Earl of Shrewsbury, shattering assaults before they could close and contributing to the final expulsion of English forces from continental holdings in the . Such barrages demonstrated the vulnerability of heavily armored knights to explosive and projectile firepower, rendering massed feudal formations increasingly ineffective against prepared defensive positions. Pike squares and tactics further countered any residual advantages of mounted knights, as long formations repelled while units provided standoff killing power. By the late 15th and early 16th centuries, these innovations diminished the feudal levy system's emphasis on knights as primary , prompting reliance on more versatile . In , Tudor-era musters from the 1510s onward reflected this empirical transition, with knights evolving into officers responsible for organizing and leading trained bands of foot soldiers rather than personal on horseback. This adaptation underscored the obsolescence of the knight's traditional battlefield role amid technological imperatives favoring professionalized, firearms-equipped forces over ad hoc noble contingents.

Shift to Mercenary and Standing Armies

The Black Death, which ravaged Europe from 1347 to 1351, killed an estimated 30-60% of the population, creating severe labor shortages that eroded the feudal manorial system underpinning knightly service. With fewer peasants available to work estates, lords commuted serf labor for cash rents, reducing the economic viability of maintaining large bodies of vassal knights bound by traditional obligations; many nobles, facing diminished revenues, increasingly hired professional soldiers for campaigns rather than relying on feudal levies. This shift intensified as knightly families, strained by inheritance disputes and the costs of prolonged wars like the Hundred Years' War, fragmented holdings through sales or subdivisions when primogeniture failed to produce viable heirs, further diluting the landed base for self-equipped chivalric forces. In , these pressures fostered the rise of condottieri, professional captains who commanded companies (condotte) for hire among fractious city-states; by the late 14th century, figures like led such forces, supplanting feudal knights with disciplined, paid troops motivated by wages rather than . Similarly, the Swiss Confederacy's pikemen, leveraging dense infantry formations, demonstrated the obsolescence of knightly in battles such as Sempach in 1386, where 1,200 lightly armed foot soldiers defeated 6,000 Austrian knights, prompting rulers to favor cost-effective infantry over aristocratic mounted elites. England's response emphasized contractual professionalization through the system, formalized from the 1360s onward, whereby captains contracted with to supply fixed numbers of armed retainers for set periods and pay, as seen in Edward III's campaigns; this evolved into retinues blending knights with archers and men-at-arms, prioritizing reliability and skill over hereditary status. By the , these developments culminated in proto-standing armies, such as France's compagnies d'ordonnance established by VII in 1445, comprising salaried lances fournies of nobles and professionals maintained year-round, marking a decisive move away from feudal musters toward centralized, permanent forces loyal to the state.

Modern Knighthoods

Hereditary Titles and Baronetcies

The baronetcy, a British hereditary dignity ranking below the but above ordinary knighthoods, was established by King James I through on 22 May 1611 to fund military efforts in by requiring new baronets to lend £1,095 for the support of 30 soldiers for three years. Baronets are entitled to the prefix "" and heraldic augmentation of an escutcheon with the , mirroring aspects of knighthood while passing intact to male heirs, thus serving as a pseudo-hereditary form of knightly status without parliamentary seats or feudal levies. Originally linked to and service, the title's creation emphasized financial contribution over battlefield merit, diverging from medieval knighthood's emphasis on personal prowess. As of September 2017, approximately 1,204 baronetcies remained extant across the Baronetages of , , , , and the , reflecting rarity amid extinctions due to lack of male heirs or . No new creations have occurred since , underscoring the system's stagnation; these lineages persist through , often tied historically to estates but now conferring only social precedence and ceremonial roles, such as precedence after viscounts' younger sons in official listings. Empirical analysis reveals their detachment from function: unlike feudal knights who held fiefs conditional on service, modern baronets hold no obligatory duties, rendering the title a vestige of patrimonial prestige rather than causal contributor to defense or governance. Continental Europe featured analogous hereditary knightly estates, such as the German —self-sustaining manorial holdings granted to (knights) from the medieval period onward, forming a Ritterstand class with tax exemptions and jurisdictional rights under the . These estates, numbering in the thousands by the , declined sharply post-World War II through Soviet-era land expropriations in (affecting over 90% of noble properties by 1949) and West German equalization reforms that eroded economic privileges without abolishing titles. Similar patterns occurred elsewhere, with French revolutionary abolitions in 1790 and Austrian mediatization in 1804 subsuming knightly fiefs into higher , leaving few intact lineages; by the , such titles emphasized ancestral land claims over merit-based validation, often surviving as symbolic rather than substantive.

Honorific Orders and Contemporary Revivals

The , instituted in 1348, persists as the foremost British honorific order, with 21st-century appointments emphasizing , , and cultural contributions over martial feats. Appointments remain non-hereditary and at the sovereign's discretion, limited to approximately 24 companions excluding royals. In April 2023, King Charles III appointed Baroness Ashton of Upholland, former EU High Representative for , as a Lady Companion, recognizing her role in . Further 2024 inductees included Lord Peach, former NATO military chairman, for combined military and advisory service to , alongside figures like the Duchess of for longstanding royal duties. These selections underscore a civic orientation, diverging from the order's medieval origins in battlefield valor. Similarly, the Swedish Royal Order of the , Sweden's highest chivalric distinction since 1748, underwent a policy revival in 2023 to resume awarding to Swedish citizens for exceptional service to the state, previously restricted largely to foreign heads of state and royals. The order prioritizes diplomatic achievements and national contributions, with conferred personally by the ; recent expansions aim to honor civilian merits amid Sweden's modern republican-leaning discourse on honors. This reinstatement reflects broader European trends in sustaining dynastic orders for non-military excellence, though limited to elite circles. Contemporary self-styled revivals, such as the Modern Order of Saint Lazarus, purport continuity with crusader-era hospitaller knights aiding lepers during the 12th-13th centuries but operate without sovereign or ecclesiastical endorsement. Founded in the , these entities focus on and ecumenical charity rather than feudal obligations or , attracting members through private investitures. Critics argue such groups dilute historical knightly rigor, lacking verifiable lineages or state authority, and serve more as fraternal societies than authentic chivalric institutions. Examples include Templar-inspired associations claiming esoteric descent, yet historians dismiss them as pseudo-orders absent from official genealogies of surviving medieval foundations like the Order of Malta. This proliferation highlights a global shift toward symbolic, civic knighthoods, detached from the martial discipline of their antecedents.

Notable Knights

Exemplars of Martial Prowess

William Marshal (1147–1219), often hailed as the greatest knight of his era, demonstrated unparalleled martial skill through dominance in tournaments and decisive battlefield leadership, as chronicled in the near-contemporary Histoire de Guillaume le Maréchal. Renowned for defeating over 500 opponents in melee combats across Europe without recorded defeat, Marshal's undefeated record in one-on-one engagements exemplified the effectiveness of knightly training in full plate armor for mounted and dismounted fighting with long sword, lance, and shield, practiced through jousting tournaments and melee duels. Marshal transitioned his prowess to warfare, notably sparing the life of Prince Richard (later Richard I) during a skirmish in 1183 despite orders to kill him. In 1217, at age 70, he personally led the royalist charge on horseback with sword in hand at the Battle of Lincoln, routing French-backed rebel forces under Thomas, Count of Perche, and securing victory that stabilized England under young King Henry III, for whom Marshal served as regent from 1216 to 1219. Rodrigo Díaz de Vivar, known as (c. 1043–1099), exemplified knightly conquest during the through strategic campaigns that secured Christian footholds in Muslim-held territories, verified in Arabic and Castilian chronicles. Exiled from Castile in 1081, he entered service with the , fighting neighboring Muslim rulers, before turning to independent operations; his forces captured after a prolonged culminating on 15 June 1094, establishing a he ruled until his death, repelling Almoravid assaults including a major relief effort by in October 1094. El Cid's dual service to Christian kings like Alfonso VI and Muslim taifas earned him respect across lines, with Muslim sources bestowing the title "al-sayyid" (the lord), reflecting empirical acknowledgment of his tactical acumen in sieges and field battles that expanded Castilian influence without reliance on later mythic embellishments. Encounters between European knights and Mamluk forces under (r. 1260–1277) underscored mutual recognition of martial discipline, particularly in defenses by orders like the Templars against ' sieges. In July 1266, Templar knights at Castle withstood intense assaults before negotiating surrender terms that preserved their lives, demonstrating fortified resilience amid ' systematic campaign to dismantle Crusader outposts following victories like Ain Jalut in 1260. Such clashes, documented in Mamluk and Frankish accounts, highlight knightly tenacity in , where and holds delayed Mamluk advances despite ultimate territorial losses, fostering a cross-cultural appreciation for disciplined ethics amid relentless expansionism.

Figures of Controversy and Legacy

, the last Grand Master of the Knights Templar, exemplified the perils of institutional knightly wealth and power drawing royal envy. Arrested on October 13, 1307, by order of , de Molay and other Templars faced charges of , , , homosexual acts, and financial , many extracted under . Historians attribute these accusations primarily to Philip's financial desperation, as the crown owed substantial sums to the order, alongside ambitions to seize Templar assets amassed from banking and . De Molay recanted his coerced confession and was burned at the stake on March 18, 1314, in , highlighting how knightly orders' independence clashed with monarchical consolidation. Bertrand du Guesclin, Constable of France from 1370 until his death in 1380 during the , balanced tactical successes with criticisms of excessive brutality. Rising from Breton nobility, du Guesclin employed and chevauchées—raiding expeditions that devastated English-held territories—but his forces' pillaging and harsh reprisals, including parental rebukes for early ferocity, deviated from chivalric restraint. Notably pragmatic in ransoming captives for profit, a common knightly practice yet one that prioritized personal gain over mercy, his campaigns contributed to French recovery yet fueled cycles of retaliatory violence, underscoring knights' role in prolonging feudal conflicts through self-interested warfare. The controversies surrounding such figures reveal knights as enforcers of feudal stability through military obligation—holding fiefs in exchange for 40 days' annual service—yet prone to abuses that eroded the system's legitimacy. Empirical show knightly ransoms and private feuds imposed heavy economic burdens on peasantry, services to cash payments by the and hastening feudalism's decline amid innovations and centralized armies. While inspiring later military academies' emphasis on , the legacy tempers romanticized views: chivalric ideals often masked causal realities of violence sustaining hierarchical control, with deviations like Templar suppression accelerating the shift from vassalage to state monopolies on force.

Comparative Warrior Classes

Equivalents in Islamic, Asian, and Other Traditions

In Islamic military traditions, the Mamluks constituted an elite cadre of slave-soldiers, primarily of Turkic, Circassian, and Kipchak origins, purchased and trained from the onward to serve as professional and in Abbasid, Ayyubid, and later their own sultanates. Manumitted upon proving prowess, they supplanted hereditary rulers through coups, establishing the in and from 1250 to 1517, where their merit-based ascent contrasted with the hereditary feudal bonds of European knights. Their tactical superiority, honed by steppe-derived horsemanship and disciplined unit cohesion, peaked at the on September 3, 1260, when approximately 20,000 Mamluks under Sultan and ambushed and routed a Mongol force of similar size, shattering the invaders' aura of invincibility and preserving Islamic heartlands from further conquest. This slave-soldier model, rooted in Central Asian nomadic recruitment via the Eurasian slave trade, prioritized collective loyalty to the regime over personal or familial ties, diverging causally from Europe's agrarian vassalage systems. Ottoman sipahis, active from the 14th to the 19th centuries, functioned as provincial sustained by the system, wherein sultans allocated state-controlled land revenues to warriors in exchange for equipping themselves and mustering contingents—typically 2-3 retainers per basic yielding 3,000-19,999 annually—for campaigns. Comprising timarli sipahis (fief-holders) who formed up to 40,000 strong in the 16th-century field armies, they executed shock charges with composite bows, lances, and swords, their obligations enforced by periodic inspections rather than decentralized feudal oaths. Emerging from Seljuk Turkic pastoralist traditions adapted to imperial administration, this centralized revenue-for-service mechanism avoided the fragmentation of European , though corruption eroded efficacy by the 17th century amid cash-based dominance. In Japanese Asian traditions, samurai arose in the late (circa 1180) as provincial bushi warriors, consolidating into a hereditary military by the (1185–1333), sworn to lords via rice-land stipends and bound by principles of rectitude, courage, and fealty, formalized in Edo-era texts like (1716) despite earlier fluid practices. Numbering around 5-6% of the population by the , they mastered archery and duels, their service evolving under Tokugawa shoguns (1603–1868) into bureaucratic retainership amid peace, with disloyalty punishable by ritual to preserve honor. Unlike knightly chivalric romances blending martial and courtly ideals, 's austere emphasis on stoic obedience stemmed from Japan's insular clan rivalries and imperial abdication to warrior regimes, yielding a rigidified by sumptuary laws rather than dubbing or tourney circuits. Other traditions featured analogous mounted elites with steppe nomadic causal roots, such as the kshatriyas of (8th–18th centuries), who held land grants for service against Mughal incursions, valorized in codes like the for clan-based valor sans centralized knighting. Similarly, Cossack hosts on the Eurasian steppes (15th–19th centuries) operated as elected democracies, sustaining settlements through raiding and tsarist subsidies, their ataman-led charges evoking knightly prowess but anchored in fugitive and Orthodox faith rather than feudal hierarchy. These diverged fundamentally from Indo-European models by integrating tribal mobility and elective leadership over inherited .

References

  1. https://en.wikisource.org/wiki/The_Mediaeval_Mind/Chapter_22
  2. https://en.wikisource.org/wiki/A_Complete_Guide_to_Heraldry/Chapter_29
Add your contribution
Related Hubs
User Avatar
No comments yet.