Knights without Knighthood

[TheMirrorMage]

I wasn't entirely sure which forum to put this thread in, please excuse me if it's in the wrong place.

In my WIP, the capital city has been taken by the enemy, and no-one knows whether the king is dead or alive. In other parts of the kingdom, the regional lords have granted privileges to some skilled soldiers (amounting to a knighthood but without the privileges granted by a king). If the king were present, they would be knighted in traditional fashion. However, without the king they can't be called "knights".

I know I'll probably refer to them as Knights without Knighthood, but it's not a "job title" - too long for quick reference in a conversation, like "knight", "lord" and "master" are. I was looking at possibly using prefixes, and these are the ones with meanings which seemed most appropriate; (and sticking them in front of knight)

meaning: "less than";
hemi-, semi-, demi- (taken from demigod / French)

meaning: before;
ante-,

Of those, I think anteknight and demiknight are the best, though both represent pronunciation issues (the 'k' would/might be pronounced rather than remaining silent). Alternatively, I could put a hyphen between the two components (ante-knight, demi-knight), perhaps that might help with keeping the 'k' silent.

I might need a title to put before their name, as in "Sir", but I'm unsure at the moment.

Any thoughts/feedback?

 

[Gurkhal]

I was actually unaware that you needed the actual king to make someone a knight. I thought that any knight could make a person into a knight. So to be honest I would just go with them being knights and have a knighthood even if the king himself hasn't given it to them.

 

[skip.knox]

If you're following European medieval tradition, knighthood can be gained without the need for a king. There also were plenty of soldiers who did not have a Sir in front of their name. They were called men-at-arms, sergeants, or simply milites. Since this is your world, you can of course have knighthood be entirely dependent upon royal favor, but you might mention the fact directly in the story, so you don't throw the reader.

This is just personal preference, but I find the ante-, demi-, construction ungainly.

You might look at other languages. Knight comes from the German Knecht, which literally means servant. The German word for a knight is Ritter (rider). That's they way most languages identified knights, as horsemen: caballero, chevalier, cavaliere. IMO, calling them Rider has a nice sound to it, provided they all are mounted warriors.

 

[psychotick]

Hi,

I agree with the others, knights aren't purely able to be created by kings. There are a vast range of different sorts of knights both in history and fiction. Some are appointed by kings and other nobles (knights of the round table). Some are appointed by various organisations eg churches eg Knights Templar and Hospitaler (St Johns). These holy knights are often called paladins. Some are sort of more inhouse - a brotherhood that raises its own members to the status of knighthood (some said that that was what happened to the knights Templar and the reason the pope had them excommunicated. He'd lost control so to speak and they were becoming a power in their own right).

It's your story I'd suggest that you simply decide what sort of knights you have and how you want them to be appointed. And if you have different groups, different nobilities, different faiths, give your knights different names accordingly.

Cheers, Greg.

 

[Dragev]

I agree with the above; a person can be made a knight by most people bearing a title (not sure if knights could ennoble, though).

However, if only the King can ennoble someone, you could call them Freeriders, or as skip.knox suggested, men-at-arms.
You also have the real example of "Edle" Edler - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia which can obviously be adapted to fit your story.

 

[Abbas-Al-Morim]

I have to disagree with most people here. In medieval Europe, a knight could not knight another person. The act of knighting was a prerogative of the king, which he could expedite to his vassals as part of their legal rights and duties under feudal law. A notable exception are the chivalric orders but a knight templar is not a knight of the realm. They are not bound to a lord, they are bound to the church and the church has given these orders the right to knight individuals. A knight templar could be a knight of the realm, as certain knights templar (or knights of other orders) ruled fiefs in the kingdoms of Jerusalem, Acre, Tripoli, Antioch etc. They ruled those fiefs in the name of a feudal sovereign (the king) and as such they were both knights of the realm and of the church.

What is true is that dukes and earls were oft given the right to ennoble people by their king. But their right still stems from the king's prerogative. Not all dukes had that right. Knights never had (perhaps you could find some exceptions as feudal law is very complex and there's an abundance of loopholes, exceptions and ad hoc structures).

You could perhaps name these knights "Knights Errant". It's a term used for young knights looking to prove themselves. The term comes from Romantic literature and was never used in feudal law. Though you could probably find it as a rank in some of our contemporary chivalric orders. I suppose you could mold the term to fit your purpose, as those knights are in fact new members of the peerage and as such still have to prove themselves/be formally knighted.

 

[TheMirrorMage]

Thanks guys for all the responses

Personally I always considered a knight only being knighted by a monarch, although potentially a lord. Never by another knight, though.

Freeriders would be horseback combatants who didn't fight for any lord in particular. Riders would be the "recruits" of the Lord's cavalry, and recite the first section of the Oath of Fealty (as part of a larger group). Fully trained armsmen would be the bulk of the Lord's Cavalry, and would have to recite the second section of the Fealty. A Lord would then choose the best of his Armsmen and promote them. They would become Lesser Knights or Lord's High Vassals (Knight-Errants) and complete their Oath of Fealty to the Lord himself. Annually, the King would host a series of tournaments to decide which of the Lesser Knights were worthy of carrying the full title, and be knighted by the King himself (in the traditional way). These would be known as the Knights of the Crown, and there would be a set number created each year (Each Lord would present his Lesser Knights, they would joust each other and the victor of each tournament would be pronounced Knight).

I'd have something like the ranking below:

Freerider -> Rider -> Armsman (another word for man-at-arms) -> Lesser Knight / [Lord's] High Vassal -> Knight of the Crown (complete with the Sir title)

Edler's would be the title for lesser nobles I'm looking for, fitting rich merchants and businessmen. I'm also thinking of introducing some type of Order into my world.

Any feedback?

 

[Abbas-Al-Morim]

You mean a chivalric order? There are a lot of interesting chivalric orders you could draw inspiration from. You've got the famous ones like the Knights Templar and the Knights Hospitaller. You've got the Teutonic Order, which was arguably the most powerful order (when they had holdings in Eastern Europe). The Knights of Malta have an interesting history as well. And there's plenty of chivalric orders which are not religious in nature, such as the Order of the Golden Fleece.

Lesser nobles (and later when the administrative and judiciary power of the noble class waned, landowners) were sometimes referred to as the landed gentry. It's a term that could be used for your Edlers though it's more of a renaissance term than a medieval one.

 

[Malik]

I love the idea of knights calling each other "Rider" as a brotherhood thing, the way that Rangers in the modern Army nod and say "Ranger," as they pass. I may appropriate this.

 

[TheMirrorMage]

My world hasn't got any religions (but one does work it's way in as part of the plot), so an Order would be similar to the Golden Fleece. It may tie in with the disappearance of the King (since the Order of the Golden Fleece was formed by a king and some knights), perhaps one of the members turns up with news of the King's location and, with the rest of the "good guys", hatch a plan to rescue him. Would make for an interesting plot, thanks!

Raising their visors with one hand, placing the other in a clenched fist on their chests, and saying "Brother/Rider/Companion".

 

[skip.knox]

They could use it as a title as well. They could be introduced to ordinary folk as "Rider Malik" or "Rider Knox", but when passing each other, as peers, it would just be "Rider" *nod* "Rider"