Knights were useless piles of shit why kings even bothered with

>>1802214
Because of the Feudal arrangement of society. As the Feudal structure declined, so did the presence - and even existence - of knights.

For example, knights did not exist in the Byzantine Empire, since there was never a devolution into Feudalism, save for the interregnum following 1204.

>>1802214
>got Mongol'd
It's more like the mongols got BLEACHED.

>>1802231
>knights did not exist in the Byzantine Empire, since there was never a devolution into Feudalism
"serve as cavalry in exchange for land" was a really, really fucking common arrangement in the empire, as was "serve as infantry in exchange for land" or "be the general in this border region in exchange for land, summon X number of men when called."

The theme system was essentially feudal, they just retained a separate, professional corp of soldiers to supplement it all.

>>1802404
The pronoia system was not feudalism. The pronoiars could not force the taxpayers under him into military service; the taxpayers under the pronoiars were not tied to the land, either. The pronoiars were merely tax-collectors, appointed by the Byzantine bureaucrats, and they could keep a portion of the collected taxes as way of their salary. The pronoia contract did not entail military obligations, either, nor was it hereditary.

>>1802453
>give land
>receive service
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Theme_(Byzantine_district)#Organization

>>1802467
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pronoia

And I don't understand what you're trying to say: a person might be awarded a pronoia contract due to service in the military, but one could also achieve a contract through other means. There were even female pronoiars.

It's nothing like feudalism.

>>1802497
And the themes, which are what I actually mentioned, were a military arrangement for the settlers, with land being given in exchange for military service. This isn't hard to understand.

>>1802525
Land wasn't given to solders.

"...and they [the soldiers] did not own the land they worked as it was still controlled by the state."

From the very article you posted about the Thematic system. The soldiers were not given land.

Knight is a fucking social status. Just because person is armored up and looks like a knight doesn't mean it is a knight. That is called man at arms, and there was more of men at arms than fucking knights. And apparently battle of Agnicourt is the only one in the entire war you people know. French rekt the English in almost all other battles of the war

>>1802214

>cites Agincourt, a battle were English knights fought and defeated French knights, as an example of poor knightly intelligence.

>why kings even bothered with
>treats "knight" as a military unit you buy with 200 gold and 6 units of iron in some videogames
>not one of the three major cornerstones of medieval society, militarily, socially and economically

File: 1475009828017.jpg (6KB, 226x249px) Image search: [Google]

6KB, 226x249px

>[insert historical warriors] were shit

Is this really what /his/ is being reduced to?

>>1802214

The primary duty of a knight was to put down peasant rebellions, which they did quite effectively.

>>1803473
>dragging classwar bullshit into feudalism