What was chivalry all about when it came to warfare?

>>1642660
"Don't be a dick to defeated opponents. Hell don't be a dick to your opponents, you're fucking aristocracy, not emotional peasants."

>>1642660
Morals for the slave caste, a disaster when a ruler falls for it tho, warfare is based on deception

>>1642673
Chivalry was FOR THE RULING caste, nigger.

File: Sir_Frank_Dicksee_-_The_Two_Crowns_-_Google_Art_Project.jpg (3MB, 1696x2136px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 1696x2136px

>>1642660
Fucking amazing painting, one of my favorites.

Chivalry was basically don't kill the other nobles, ransom them for $$$$ and when you lose they grant you the same thing, they get cash you get your life. It was a genetelmans deal, fuck the peasants lmao

>>1642678
i am saying chivalry does not work for a KING, even bravery, a soldier must march foward no matter what, he has to subjugate his fears, but a commander, he cannot think like that, he must be able to retreat and to deceive. in the end chivalry was another invention of the immorals, to dominate the SLAVES, the natural slaves

>>1642687
M8 Chivalry is nothing more than Pre-Modern European Geneva/Hague conventions on war.

>>1642683
Literally this.

It was a buyers guide for captured Knights that essentially meant that any enemies with any sense would go out of their way not to kill them on the battlefield as if their armour didn't make Knights invulnerable enough.

It was alot deeper than that ofcourse it had it's religious connotations and the Knightly ideals that fill King Arthur stories do take their root there but largely it was the former.

Almost nothing do with Women until Victorian revisionary stories.

>>1642683
Pretty much this.

Also I hate it when retards claim in medieval times there was an honourable and a dishonourable way of fighting. This bullshit probably comes from D&D.

Neckbeards seem to think that knights would never backstab or hit someone in the groin.

>>1642697
How invulnerable were armored knights through the ages? I would imagine not much around 1066, then gradually more impenetrable until artillery made armor trivial.

File: S5730-920-1.jpg (48KB, 920x520px) Image search: [Google]

48KB, 920x520px

>>1642776
Depends on what was used against them, sword cutting didn't do much to armour, but thrusting it thought the gaps of the armour such as arm pits did the job. also war hammers were excellent in producing blunt force trauma

>>1642843
I can see why many armies elected for capture and ransom then.

But how do you capture an armored guy swinging a sword about?

>>1642890

Not him, but a lot of the time, it was "Catch him while he was running fleeing the field because the battle's lost".

Much easier than grabbing a guy who is fighting back with hundreds of other dudes with him.

>>1642890
>But how do you capture an armored guy swinging a sword about
Wrestle the fuck to the ground and get a dagger to his throat. He's only human.

>>1642916
of corse that if you were poor you would get the dagger, but if rich there will be benefit in ransom, this chivalry crap was only useful to the ruling class but again its just another piece of shit coming from the ass of Christianity (evil disguissed as good), that at its core separates the two castes, the rich that burn in hell and poor in paradise, the rich rule the world and reality and have an excuse to behave like devils. Still can't find a more evil religion then christfaggotry even its nicety its a poison served on a fine plate

basically geneva treaties of the medieval. don't treat your opponents like shit and maybe they won't treat you like shit.

>>1642776
Once you get to the point of full suits of mail+great helm, you have to go out of your way to actually kill them.

As in disable them and murder them after the battle. The odds of the weapons of the day actually killing them outright were low, and this never really changed.

>>1642890
Put him on the ground or in some other untenable position.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G4k-vjdeZO4

Here's a video of how dickheads in armor fought.

Lots of chances to tell your opponent you quit in there.

That, or isolate him. Nothing was seen as wrong with surrendering if you were facing ten men alone.

>>1642660
Ask the Germans

>>1643592
Did ransom become more popular once full plate became more prevalent in the battlefield?

I imagine this was entirely how Italian companies funded themselves.

>>1644081
Ransom was popular before that.

>>1642660
If I win, Ill capture the enemy. If I lose, I will be captured by the enemy. The most important thing is to have a fun, dying is for plebs.

>>1644103
I mean especially popular.

>>1642957
>tips

>>1644081
The opposite.

>>1642660
>chivalry
literally how knights rationalized getting cucked by wealthier aristocrats

>>1644151
Yes.

>>1644441
Also this. Bad war got the name for a reason.