Knightly Essays

[erudito]

Maurice Keen is one of my favourite medieval historians, not least because he takes the knightly class seriously. He is particularly good at building a picture by assembling a series of illustrative cases. Medieval history is somewhat less prone to some of the foibles of modern academic history, as medievalists are much more likely approach the

Comments

[paradigmshifty]

I saw a lovely quote yesterday which, if you haven't seen it before, you may appreciate.

History doesn't repeat. Historians merely repeat each other.

Great

[erudito]

ROFL. No, I hadn't seen it before, thank you :)

[jordan179]

Maintaining public order is the problem of the medieval period, just as religious dispute and public order was the problem in the next two centuries. So it made perfect sense for Charles VII, in recruiting his standing companies, to concentrate on recruiting captains who were of some standing, knights and esquires of noble blood, eschewing the bastards and men of no means who had risen to command from nothing but their strength and the shrewdness of their pillaging (p.17) because folk who had stake in the social order, and were socialised into its mores, were safer bets.

This is an important point, and one easily missed from our modern (patriotic) point of view.

From a modern point of view, loyalty is assumed: the important thing is to put competent officers in charge of one's army. But from the medieval point of view, loyalty could not be assumed; even basic orderliness could not be assumed; what was important was to make sure that the officers were (relatively) loyal and orderly

Quite

[erudito]

Francesco Sforza anyone?