Medival European Knights

>>2526668
Frogs and Anglos when they captured each other would treat each other the same as anyone else, because of the brotherhood of chivalry. This is how Enguerrand de Coucy who was sent to England as a hostage was able to become son in law to the King.

Germans had a reputation as keeping their captives in chains and not feeding them in order to increase the ransom payments.

>>2526668

> Which knightly order is the coolest?

The Hospitaller obviously.

They rek'd so many Turkish anuses even the primary sources are at a loss;

"In 1279, 200 horsemen from the garrison of Margat used this tactic against the 5000 Muslims who were trying to prevent them from ravaging the neighborhood of Crac des Chevaliers. The Hospitallers, knowing it would be suicidal for them to confront this force in the open, therefore allowed themselves to be chased until they had almost reached Margat itself before turning on the Muslims and routing them with the loss of only one mounted sergeant." - Unknown Crusader Castles, page 72, Kristian Molin

bump for interest

>>2526668
Objectively the Hospitallers, that's why they were still relevant into the 16th century and even made it to the New World.

>>2526668
Teutonic, because they embraced the Reformation

>>2527004
>>2527320

I am a Malta Member and its p nice, have this Cards to access the building using magnetic shit etc. Feels p futuristic

>>2526696
>Germans had a reputation as keeping their captives in chains and not feeding them in order to increase the ransom payments.
[citation needed]

File: 264r.jpg (484KB, 1261x1886px) Image search: [Google]

484KB, 1261x1886px

>>2526668
>Were they just clubs for nobility to pretend to be important and manly?
Joining a knightly order was often an option for sons who were excluded from inheritance (either that or becoming clergy). It was by no means just about pretending to be important and manly since the orders all had worldly ambitions (and often that didn't end well for them).

>If knights got captured in battle and awaited ransom, were they treated well by their captors or were they just tossed in the dungeon?
That heavily depended on who they were and what their relations were like with their captors. In general knights were entitled to chivalric treatment and a captor would have brought shame upon himself if he treated his captives badly. The High Medieval Leonese Count Rodrigo Martinez for example was recorded in a chronicle as treating captive knights in an unbecoming fashion:

>Count Rodrigo captured other knights. He sent some of these to prison until they surrendered all their possessions to him. He made others serve him for several days without any compensation. Those who had been insulting him he yoked with oxen to plow and feed on grass like cattle. He also made them eat straw from a manger. After he had stripped them of all their riches, he allowed the pathetic prisoners to go their way.

The fact that this was recorded should tell us that at least in medieval Spain, it was expected of a captor to treat his captives in a dignified fashion. This wasn't much different in other countries with chivalric traditions, e.g. the French, English or German lands, well possibly extending through Bohemia into Eastern Europe.

There are plenty of examples of ill-treatment of prisoners, e.g. Englishmen executing French knights during the hundred years war or examples of extraordinary treatment, e.g. Count Ulrich von Wuerttemberg being invited to a feast after he lost the Battle of Seckenheim by Frederick the Victorious.

>>2529650
>This wasn't much different in other countries with chivalric traditions, e.g. the French, English or German lands, well possibly extending through Bohemia into Eastern Europe.
And Italy too of course, given how Heavy Cavalry from Lombardy was pretty much a constant on the medieval battlefields of Europe.