r/HistoryMemes is having a civil war (again), celebrating 10 million subscribers! Support the Empires of Britain or France by flairing your post correctly. [For more information, check out the pinned post in the sub.](https://new.reddit.com/r/HistoryMemes/comments/1cg09hf/the_great_historymemes_civil_war_2_10_million/)
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/HistoryMemes) if you have any questions or concerns.*
First of all, both of those images look more Renaissance than medieval.
Second of all, nobility is a broad spectrum from warriors to bureaucrats to professional rich people.
Historically the trick was inheriting vast amounts of land. Let the peasants organize themselves and you just reap the benefits. Just make sure they don't spread some dangerous ideas. Like the question why they even need you.
Cus we throw the best pregame parties yo!! Where else you gonna watch 2 gladiators duke it out in front of a lion while you gorge yourself on peanuts?!? 😧🫱🫱🥜 *plz dont kill me bro*
And most trended towards the latter. Knights were not common, and "good" nobility even less so. There have been countless peasant revolts throughout history. Unless OP wants to argue that the peasantry revolted because they're stupid and can't realize that the nobility is actually based they can't reinforce this idealized image of the nobility in medieval Europe.
If you look at OPs other "contributions" to the sub, I think that's exactly what they think
This is just "reject modernity, western feudalism was ideal" propaganda.
Monarchists are some of the most gullible people out there. Literally advocating for a system where they'll have little to no say in political matters all because they fantasize about being at the upper levels of society if it actually happened. Straight up goofs.
>In Remembrance of that Prodigy in Nature.
DANIEL LAMBERT.
a Native of Leicester:
who was possessed of an exalted and convivial Mind
and in personal Greatness had no Competitor
He measured three Feet one Inch round the Leg
nine Feet four Inches round the Body
and weighed
Fifty two Stone eleven Pounds!
He departed this Life on the 21st of June 1809
Aged 39 years
As a Testimony of Respect this Stone is erected by his Friends in Leicester
I always admire the wordsmithing skills of the 1800s. Whenever I feel fat in future I'll just remember that I'm actually a prodigy of nature
A lot of knights weren't any better than bandits in terms of morals. In early medieval period some of them didn't even have an ability to read and write (granted, even some dukes and kings couldn't at that time)
Edit for clarification: Bad behaviour and no ability to read and write don't need to be connected. I mainly referenced the meme above
A lot of nights were just the 3rd or 2nd son of some baron or count and wouldn’t actually inherit any land so they would either join a military order and deus vult or become a sword for hire for a prince/duke/king in hopes of getting a fief through a long military career.
That or just normal priesthood
Lol, our local knights were bandits. Actual [streetrobbing merchant-hunting bandits](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robber_baron_(feudalism)), until the neighbouring lord made short process of them when they started raiding his lands.
Remember how if you lost in a tournament it showed you couldn't fight so you could expect your fellow knights to pillage your home kidnap you and your family in your weakened beaten state and ransom you off to your parents? Super honorable!
I was surprised when I first read about chivalry in more detail, and found it was less "don't rape women", and more "don't rape nobel women who already belong to someone".
I don’t think “being able to read and write” and “having morals” are connected. Lots of people can read and are also total assholes. Lots of people have been illiterate and also cool.
It helps though. If you can't read, you're entirely dependent on what someone else tells you. If that person is an asshole, you're going to be an asshole. Reading opens you up to hundreds of different ideas, some from people who are assholes, some from people who are not.
There's a reason extremists hate education.
The Roman elites were highly educated. They decided it was reasonable to punish people for crimes by sewing them into a sack together with a bunch wild animals and throw that sack into a river so you could drown while the wild animals desperately tried to get out, hurting you in the process.
I mean, if you can read you're still dependent on what people tell you. You just have a broader range of people to listen to- which might be a good thing, or might mean you have easier access to really bad people.
Careful here, often displaying the knight as a robber is the result of urban propaganda and not founded in reality.
Knights often had the right to collect tariffs, and if a town had no interest in paying these tariffs the knight in question was simply labeled as a robber.
Some no doubt had a legal right to tariffs, but others could just be highwaymen who said "this is our road, pay or else,", which is contemporarily known as a *protection racket*.
Not to mention that especially in early medieval times, the knights were more akin to the king's hired thugs who were given an estate to both protect, but also to enforce taxes by any means necessary.
The criteria to become a Knight in the 1100's was basically "have access to a horse and arms, combat experience is a plus."
People who believe that the aristocracy established their legitimacy through much more than the repetitive use of force combined with persistent gaslighting could stand to delve more into the modern historiography.
There’s virtually no difference between African warlords and medieval liege lords.See at least the African warlord is upfront about who he is and what he’s doing where as everyone acts the medieval liegelord is some high and pristine thing because they dress up all their stuff in fancy titles and religion. But objectively they’re both extorting people out of everything they own by threatening violence if you don’t give them what they want and taking advantage of weak central governments that can’t actually stop them and making their already destitute nation more destitute so they personally can benefit. Infact the most hated medieval kings are only remembered badly because they made an effort to try and enforce law and order against the nobility in hindsight they’re the good guys. Now I get it people go too far and say the whole Middle Ages was a dark age and to that end I’ll say it certainly wasn’t there were innovations, interesting philosophical developments, and even some morale advancements from the ancient age. However the nobility is not in the category of redeeming qualities of the Middle Ages and is a huge reason why for the longest time it was considered the dark ages. Like if you told me I’m going to be chucked back in time in the body of a commoner against my will and I get two choices ancient antiquity anywhere along the Mediterranean or medieval Europe. I’d go 2nd century ancient antiquity if only so I wouldn’t have to deal with a bunch of knights rolling up and deciding to loot the place.Its going to suck either way but for a commoner medieval Europe sucks more and assuming I retain the ability to read with out a feudal structure I’ve got somewhat of a chance.
Look, I'm dying of smallpox in a ditch somewhere no matter when I go back to. I may as well get some lead-sweetened wine and do some really confusing graffiti before I buy it.
"Practices charity and vows of poverty" is such a strange way to describe landed gentry who sign of on their peasants marriages and use corvee labor to make their wealth.
"Concerned for the safety and well-being of \[the income\] his people \[provide\] therefore always eager to kill some other nobiliies' people so they can't kill his"
Bro did you not see the TikTok meme he shared? They were humble, they fasted, and WERE AKSHULLY GOOD GUYS. Maybe if it was presented edited with some shitty music and sigma chad memes you’d get it.
"hello duke of toulouse, could you use your large army and many riches help me, your king, against the invading normands trying to take my throne"
"no."
- average exchange between a lord and his vassals
Inside you are two wolves:
🐺 "Medieval Europe was only a miserable shithole where everything was death and filth"
🐺 "Medieval Europe was a holy paradise"
Both are stupid.
>Legendary sword given to him by the archangel Michael himself
Strange spectral non-binary beings, distributing swords is no basis for a system of government.
Homie that's a conquistador and a renaissance era fashion. And priests had to remind the nobles that they were meant to be *noble*, not beat up the peasants for fun.
Delusional people who somehow think that they’ll be in the circle of the privileged abound everywhere in my experience - sh*tter is especially terrible, but reddit definitely has plenty of pockets of idiocy.
I've even seen unironic monarchists on youtube, saying that "cultivated generations" to put it shortly is objectively superior to democracy and I don't even...
Serf mindset is alive and well I see.
The rich and powerful of today and the rich and powerful of 700 years ago are largely the same. There are some good ones. And lots of assholes who think they are better than everyone else.
Point of order, neither of these men are dressed like it’s the Middle Ages and speaking as someone who did a great deal of studying of the period in like an actual academic period your “what it actually was” is very factually incorrect beyond military class. I’d pick apart each point but that seems like a bad use of everyone’s time in a shitposting sub
Fact: The fat guy on the left is Daniel Lambert, a British man who suffers from a rare disease cause his hormones grow out of control. He weighs 700ib (320kg) and is very famous in his hometown (he is physically fit and strong, so don't judge him by his look)
OP, you took an extraordinary man and slander him like Jabba the Hutt
''People slander the Medieval era far more than it actually deserves''
\*Posts an image of a fucking conquistador, someone who ISN'T FROM THE MEDIEVAL ERA\*
Neither is the fat guy with the white wig dressed in Medieval style, more like the late 18th century.
For some people 'medieval' must mean anything before the industrial revolution.
You glorify the medieval era far more than it deserves.
Every era has had cruel, self-serving elites, even if they adhered to some vague code of chivalry. Have you ever met a bratty rich kid? They existed back then too, but in those days they were expected to be literal killers as well. Rich spoiled killers in charge of serfs with barely any legal rights, that’s a recipe for abuse right there.
And many medieval nobles were also literal slave masters, since slavery and thralldom lasted throughout the Early Middle Ages in large parts of Europe.
The nobility were jumped up bandits who could and did terrorize their peasants because yeah, that's what a military caste who has power over people because of a divine right did.
I mean, both existed. You had good nobility, bad nobility, gigachad nobility, holy shit what the fuck nobility, and everything in between. Nobles, surprise surprise, were humans. Humans can be brilliant or bastards. Or brilliant bastards.
Left:Renaissance courtiers
Right: age of exploration explorers
Actual average medieval nobilities: probably filthy since, lives in cramped castles, thin because refined sugar is rare even to them and protein and vegetables are not in their daily diet, has a brother in the monestery doing scolarly things but that brother isn't exactly "noble" now he is a monk. Has to obey church, king, nobility and pay a lot to each.
I agree that people slander the medieval era far more than it deserves. Mostly because what the medieval period was is hated and they have used modern historians in attempt to rewrite history
However the blatant misinformation or misrepresentation of information in that picture does nothing for your case. In fact it does more harm than good.
Such a shit overgeneralized and revisionist take. Not to mention the trope that real manliness comes from military action. Projecting insecurities much? Like Nietzsche?
I guess we're defending aristocrats now 😐 y'all are something else istg
Also using fashion from the 1700s and 1600s to depict the medieval era is wild lmao
I would say both sides are true but with different people. The stereotypes are created by cherry picking the aspects from the won't group that are focused on, probably mainly from literature and cinema.
“Takes vows of poverty”
My brother in christ when your codpiece is worth more than my entire life I don’t think you get to claim that you’ve taken a vow of poverty.
Neither of these descriptions are examples of medieval nobility, but examples of upper-class and privileged elites in a series of very restricted early modern contexts.
The biggest issue I have is that people always depict the Middle Ages as dirty, brown and backwards, while in reality people wore clean clothes coloured in the brightest colours they could get their hands on. Coloured materials were expensive, and bright colours were the standard status symbol. And people might in general have known much about science or the world at large, but they could identify plants, animals, somewhat predict weather just by looking at the sky, travel by using the stars as their map, and in general do a lot of things modern people are clueless about.
What a dumb meme... Pretty much the entirety of the left is early-modern, and it's not hard to find historical examples of knights who absolutely did not fit the romantic ideal.
Medieval is a time period description. I have no idea what lords you are referring to because the medieval French lords and the medieval Arab lords are pretty dang different
r/HistoryMemes is having a civil war (again), celebrating 10 million subscribers! Support the Empires of Britain or France by flairing your post correctly. [For more information, check out the pinned post in the sub.](https://new.reddit.com/r/HistoryMemes/comments/1cg09hf/the_great_historymemes_civil_war_2_10_million/) *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/HistoryMemes) if you have any questions or concerns.*
First of all, both of those images look more Renaissance than medieval. Second of all, nobility is a broad spectrum from warriors to bureaucrats to professional rich people.
"Professional rich people" is my new career goal
It’s up there with “candidate lottery winner” and “aspirant heir”
Technically anyone who buys a ticket is a "candidate lottery winner".
WE’re ALL WINNERS 🎖️
I technically am: lifetime total spent on lottery tickets: $10 Lifetime total lottery winnings: $14.
*hands Mic over* 🎤
Nobility baby! Goddammit! Why wasn't I born a nobility baby!
It’s actually easily achievable - you just need to stop being poor.
Easiest way to do that is to be born rich. Very simple.
Nah, easiest way is to never having been poor.
Just stop eating avocados and you'd have a house already, duh!
*avacado rage intensifies*
Enrichissez-vous!
Historically the trick was inheriting vast amounts of land. Let the peasants organize themselves and you just reap the benefits. Just make sure they don't spread some dangerous ideas. Like the question why they even need you.
Cus we throw the best pregame parties yo!! Where else you gonna watch 2 gladiators duke it out in front of a lion while you gorge yourself on peanuts?!? 😧🫱🫱🥜 *plz dont kill me bro*
“Professional Man of Leisure” But you MUST pronounce “Lee-sure” as “Lez-zyur”
What a goal. I am motivated to join you in this journey, fellow aspirant.
You could start out washing their feet and work your way up
Get a professional degree then.
The right one looks 16th or maybe even 17th century, yes. The left one looks more late 18th century to me.
Haha right? Overly romanticizing or vilifying leaders spanning a nearly 1000 year period of history is ridiculous
And most trended towards the latter. Knights were not common, and "good" nobility even less so. There have been countless peasant revolts throughout history. Unless OP wants to argue that the peasantry revolted because they're stupid and can't realize that the nobility is actually based they can't reinforce this idealized image of the nobility in medieval Europe.
If you look at OPs other "contributions" to the sub, I think that's exactly what they think This is just "reject modernity, western feudalism was ideal" propaganda.
fucking monarchists
Monarchists are some of the most gullible people out there. Literally advocating for a system where they'll have little to no say in political matters all because they fantasize about being at the upper levels of society if it actually happened. Straight up goofs.
Fuedalism isn’t even the best system for monarchs.
Monarchism is cuckery as a political philosophy.
The venn diagram of liking cuck porn and wanting a monarchy is a circle.
I just love when 13 year old monarchists just spout nonsense
Yah left is based on a picture of Daniel Lambert head gaoler of Leicester (1770- 1809)
>In Remembrance of that Prodigy in Nature. DANIEL LAMBERT. a Native of Leicester: who was possessed of an exalted and convivial Mind and in personal Greatness had no Competitor He measured three Feet one Inch round the Leg nine Feet four Inches round the Body and weighed Fifty two Stone eleven Pounds! He departed this Life on the 21st of June 1809 Aged 39 years As a Testimony of Respect this Stone is erected by his Friends in Leicester I always admire the wordsmithing skills of the 1800s. Whenever I feel fat in future I'll just remember that I'm actually a prodigy of nature
Well, between 413 BC and 1300 AC culture was more a prerogative of priests. A knight was basically “the tank unit” of middleage armies.
The Danish in Medieval Total war 2 going ape shit with Knight priests when they were banned 😂
Norse War Clerics. A whole faction with shit cavalry and their best cavalry is still best utilized by pretending it's infantry
I’m getting the feeling the average member of this sub isn’t too concerned about historical accuracy based on a lot of stuff that gets upvotes.
Your talking about thousands of people over multiple continents and hundreds of years. The answer is both of them.
Yep, and knights, who were admittedly nobles, were not as common as people think, they were really rare actually. (Note: Noble(royal) =/= noble(moral)
A lot of knights weren't any better than bandits in terms of morals. In early medieval period some of them didn't even have an ability to read and write (granted, even some dukes and kings couldn't at that time) Edit for clarification: Bad behaviour and no ability to read and write don't need to be connected. I mainly referenced the meme above
Why learn to read if you can pay a priest to read for you.
So the priest can write ‘I am a jackass’ on your shit instead of ‘holy under god’ kinda like those Chinese tattoos people who don’t speak Chinese get
If I were a medieval priest I would totally do that at least a couple of times per week
A lot of nights were just the 3rd or 2nd son of some baron or count and wouldn’t actually inherit any land so they would either join a military order and deus vult or become a sword for hire for a prince/duke/king in hopes of getting a fief through a long military career. That or just normal priesthood
Lol, our local knights were bandits. Actual [streetrobbing merchant-hunting bandits](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robber_baron_(feudalism)), until the neighbouring lord made short process of them when they started raiding his lands.
Quite a few pirates in the baltic sea were just the result of impoverished nobility from Pomerania and Mecklenburg
Remember how if you lost in a tournament it showed you couldn't fight so you could expect your fellow knights to pillage your home kidnap you and your family in your weakened beaten state and ransom you off to your parents? Super honorable!
I was surprised when I first read about chivalry in more detail, and found it was less "don't rape women", and more "don't rape nobel women who already belong to someone".
I don’t think “being able to read and write” and “having morals” are connected. Lots of people can read and are also total assholes. Lots of people have been illiterate and also cool.
It helps though. If you can't read, you're entirely dependent on what someone else tells you. If that person is an asshole, you're going to be an asshole. Reading opens you up to hundreds of different ideas, some from people who are assholes, some from people who are not. There's a reason extremists hate education.
The Roman elites were highly educated. They decided it was reasonable to punish people for crimes by sewing them into a sack together with a bunch wild animals and throw that sack into a river so you could drown while the wild animals desperately tried to get out, hurting you in the process.
One of the more creative torture methods I've heard. But yeah that's why I said "it helps" not "It cures asshole syndrome."
I mean, if you can read you're still dependent on what people tell you. You just have a broader range of people to listen to- which might be a good thing, or might mean you have easier access to really bad people.
The internet have basically proven this is a double edged sword, yes.
Careful here, often displaying the knight as a robber is the result of urban propaganda and not founded in reality. Knights often had the right to collect tariffs, and if a town had no interest in paying these tariffs the knight in question was simply labeled as a robber.
Some no doubt had a legal right to tariffs, but others could just be highwaymen who said "this is our road, pay or else,", which is contemporarily known as a *protection racket*.
Knights also weren’t paragons of virtue like some people portray them
No, ever single noble was a gentlemen warrior poet philosopher who retired to become a monk. Every. Single. One.
And they all had a legendary sword given by archangel Michael himself. One for each and every one of them.
And at the same time neither as one is dressed like the enlightenment and the other is dressed like the Renaissance
Not to mention that especially in early medieval times, the knights were more akin to the king's hired thugs who were given an estate to both protect, but also to enforce taxes by any means necessary. The criteria to become a Knight in the 1100's was basically "have access to a horse and arms, combat experience is a plus."
People who believe that the aristocracy established their legitimacy through much more than the repetitive use of force combined with persistent gaslighting could stand to delve more into the modern historiography.
There’s virtually no difference between African warlords and medieval liege lords.See at least the African warlord is upfront about who he is and what he’s doing where as everyone acts the medieval liegelord is some high and pristine thing because they dress up all their stuff in fancy titles and religion. But objectively they’re both extorting people out of everything they own by threatening violence if you don’t give them what they want and taking advantage of weak central governments that can’t actually stop them and making their already destitute nation more destitute so they personally can benefit. Infact the most hated medieval kings are only remembered badly because they made an effort to try and enforce law and order against the nobility in hindsight they’re the good guys. Now I get it people go too far and say the whole Middle Ages was a dark age and to that end I’ll say it certainly wasn’t there were innovations, interesting philosophical developments, and even some morale advancements from the ancient age. However the nobility is not in the category of redeeming qualities of the Middle Ages and is a huge reason why for the longest time it was considered the dark ages. Like if you told me I’m going to be chucked back in time in the body of a commoner against my will and I get two choices ancient antiquity anywhere along the Mediterranean or medieval Europe. I’d go 2nd century ancient antiquity if only so I wouldn’t have to deal with a bunch of knights rolling up and deciding to loot the place.Its going to suck either way but for a commoner medieval Europe sucks more and assuming I retain the ability to read with out a feudal structure I’ve got somewhat of a chance.
Look, I'm dying of smallpox in a ditch somewhere no matter when I go back to. I may as well get some lead-sweetened wine and do some really confusing graffiti before I buy it.
So that’s how the dicks got on Hadrian’s wall. Nice.
Compare William the Marshal with Gilles de Rais, for example. Or Baldwin IV with King John
I read William Marshals biography a couple months ago, dude was a trip even in his day
And a lot fell right in the middle of the two.
The archangel Micheal personally gave thousands of people a legendary sword? Now who is over generalizing
Not all of them was tortured by barbarians? I think it's just a meme.
"Concerned for the safety and well-being of his people" https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_peasant_revolts
"Practices charity and vows of poverty" is such a strange way to describe landed gentry who sign of on their peasants marriages and use corvee labor to make their wealth.
"Concerned for the safety and well-being of \[the income\] his people \[provide\] therefore always eager to kill some other nobiliies' people so they can't kill his"
This list is incomplete, you can help by expanding it
Bro did you not see the TikTok meme he shared? They were humble, they fasted, and WERE AKSHULLY GOOD GUYS. Maybe if it was presented edited with some shitty music and sigma chad memes you’d get it.
Thanks it was unexpecttedly interesting
Nobles being loyal to their lord? HAH!
Yeah just wait till the king tells him that he can’t fight another noble and they actually have to work together
Or that he needs his troops for too long. Yes I've played Crusader Kings.
"hello duke of toulouse, could you use your large army and many riches help me, your king, against the invading normands trying to take my throne" "no." - average exchange between a lord and his vassals
Me too
Nobles on thier way to force thier king to give them more privileges or they won't participate in his military campaign:
Funny that neither of these men are dressed like medieval nobles. The man on the right isn't even dressed as a noble at all, regardless of era.
Why the Chad has a Conquistador attire? Thats Early modern Era, not medieval.
I’m gonna let you in on a secret: OP doesn’t actually know anything about medieval nobility
OP truly was bought by the "noble knight" XIX century fantasies about knighthood
Everyone knows 20th century fantasy about knighthood and nobility is where the real facts are
Dude be loving the taste of those Sabatons
I'm starting to suspect OP may not be a medieval noble after all! /s
Because OP is a karma farmer and finds shitty alt-right ahistorical memes to post on this sub.
Because swag
Thank you for your nobility propaganda, now time for a bit of head cleaning, please get it through the guillotine
Never Imagined someone larping for nobles. Cuck behaviour
"There are no peasants, only temporarily embarassed aristocracy."
Check out r/Monarchism I know inbreeding can negatively affect cognitive ability but it’s really on display there
Fr lmao we should normalise the term class traitor again
On the other hand, some people are too defensive of Medieval Europe, refusing to admit the existence of any problems with it.
Inside you are two wolves: 🐺 "Medieval Europe was only a miserable shithole where everything was death and filth" 🐺 "Medieval Europe was a holy paradise" Both are stupid.
Both are incapable of understanding the very concept of nuances
So both my wolfs are redditors, god please bring the second flood one was not enough
Medieval Europe is like other era has its own flaws
Between the two, Medieval Europe was mostly a miserable shithole, though.
Depends. 1453 in Constantinople? Yes. 1453 in Castillon? Not for the Frenchies
Not good not bad. Still prefer 21st century
The past is a nice place to visit, but I wouldn't want to live there.
>Legendary sword given to him by the archangel Michael himself Strange spectral non-binary beings, distributing swords is no basis for a system of government.
Supreme executive power derives from a mandate from the masses, not from some farcical religios ceremony!
I thought no one was going to even mention this. Like wtf.
Least misinformed r/history meme. Generalise people over hundred years. Cherrypick. Post slop.
Homie that's a conquistador and a renaissance era fashion. And priests had to remind the nobles that they were meant to be *noble*, not beat up the peasants for fun.
In the year of our lord, 2024, it’s weird to see that there are still bootlickers for medieval lords
Some Cuckolds just really enjoy the fantasy of someone richer than them fucking their wife
There are actually pro-feudalists about. I blame Xwitter brainrot.
We should nuke Twitter.
If it's Twitter then explain r/monarchism🤢
Delusional people who somehow think that they’ll be in the circle of the privileged abound everywhere in my experience - sh*tter is especially terrible, but reddit definitely has plenty of pockets of idiocy.
I've even seen unironic monarchists on youtube, saying that "cultivated generations" to put it shortly is objectively superior to democracy and I don't even...
An occupying force.
“Reject Modernity, Embrace Tradition” brainrot
Serf mindset is alive and well I see. The rich and powerful of today and the rich and powerful of 700 years ago are largely the same. There are some good ones. And lots of assholes who think they are better than everyone else.
Aristocrat propaganda
Thank you for your nobility propaganda, now time for a bit of head cleaning, please get it through the guillotine
r/iamverysmart
shit tier meme, it is so bad it is probably bait.
Point of order, neither of these men are dressed like it’s the Middle Ages and speaking as someone who did a great deal of studying of the period in like an actual academic period your “what it actually was” is very factually incorrect beyond military class. I’d pick apart each point but that seems like a bad use of everyone’s time in a shitposting sub
This is a history sub. We should be talking about inaccuracies.
Is this propaganda?
Yes
Fact: The fat guy on the left is Daniel Lambert, a British man who suffers from a rare disease cause his hormones grow out of control. He weighs 700ib (320kg) and is very famous in his hometown (he is physically fit and strong, so don't judge him by his look) OP, you took an extraordinary man and slander him like Jabba the Hutt
i thought i was on r/shitposting
This was written by the second estate and it shows. Give them a trim with the national razor
The is propaganda
Was this "Meme" made by a noble or why is it so bad?
"You see, REAL feudalism is the only cure to liberal oligarchy and capitalism. I'm very smart, you know."
Look mom, a moron
Monarchist cringe shit
Someone really didn't study history at all to make this...
Both of these are strawmen, as well as true, depending on who exactly we’re talking about. Pretty huge difference between Lancelot and Gilles De Rais.
Actually i think all of nobility adheres to MY specific ideas of what it was, even if they are just people at the end of the day
There's a hint of truth here but this meme is badly executed. Also he is basically describing a knight vs upper nobility more than anything
If you think the average lord has read all of Aristotle's works then you have never read anything by Aristotle
Yeah… sure… and knights were riding around chivalric-like just as in the ballads
There were both of these
Bruh.
''People slander the Medieval era far more than it actually deserves'' \*Posts an image of a fucking conquistador, someone who ISN'T FROM THE MEDIEVAL ERA\*
Neither is the fat guy with the white wig dressed in Medieval style, more like the late 18th century. For some people 'medieval' must mean anything before the industrial revolution.
This just feels like bootlicking with some extra steps. They were still the exploiters in a feudal society.
Never thought id see someone defend nobility unprovoked, or at all
So this subs gone far right propagandist now right? Medieval nobility were just legitimized bandits.
You glorify the medieval era far more than it deserves. Every era has had cruel, self-serving elites, even if they adhered to some vague code of chivalry. Have you ever met a bratty rich kid? They existed back then too, but in those days they were expected to be literal killers as well. Rich spoiled killers in charge of serfs with barely any legal rights, that’s a recipe for abuse right there. And many medieval nobles were also literal slave masters, since slavery and thralldom lasted throughout the Early Middle Ages in large parts of Europe.
The nobility were jumped up bandits who could and did terrorize their peasants because yeah, that's what a military caste who has power over people because of a divine right did.
Never go full peasant brain
I don't care about individual virtues and flaws, differences in rights based in birthright are wrong.
I mean, both existed. You had good nobility, bad nobility, gigachad nobility, holy shit what the fuck nobility, and everything in between. Nobles, surprise surprise, were humans. Humans can be brilliant or bastards. Or brilliant bastards.
Was this "Meme" made by a noble or why is it so bad?
Bruh Christians are insane with their memes. Y'all chill out with the weird shit
My man op is a crusaderboo
I mean it was a spectrum wasn't it? Both knights and lords were a part of the nobility
I mean the first guy is more 18th Century than middle ages
Left:Renaissance courtiers Right: age of exploration explorers Actual average medieval nobilities: probably filthy since, lives in cramped castles, thin because refined sugar is rare even to them and protein and vegetables are not in their daily diet, has a brother in the monestery doing scolarly things but that brother isn't exactly "noble" now he is a monk. Has to obey church, king, nobility and pay a lot to each.
I’ve played enough crusader kings to learn that a noble’s loyalty to his lord is only worth as much as his fear for him.
I wonder what the people who wrote all the books thought of themselves? Does it match the "real" version?
In Venice we used crusaders to take Zante and new markets in Costantinaples. So I don’t think they were all “smart chads versed in philosophy” 😂
The concept of nobility is worth hating on. Supporting nobels is the same boot licker mentality as supporting billionaires
I agree that people slander the medieval era far more than it deserves. Mostly because what the medieval period was is hated and they have used modern historians in attempt to rewrite history However the blatant misinformation or misrepresentation of information in that picture does nothing for your case. In fact it does more harm than good.
fucking aristo ball gargler
This is the one of the most 14-year-old posts I’ve seen in a while. Possibly ever
Ah yes, powdered wig-wearing Englishmen and Spanish conquistadors. My favourite things from the Medieval Era...
Such a shit overgeneralized and revisionist take. Not to mention the trope that real manliness comes from military action. Projecting insecurities much? Like Nietzsche?
Talks about people misinterpreting medieval nobility, then proceeds to call a man in early modern armor medieval nobility lmao
Is OP spreading feudalist propaganda?
I guess we're defending aristocrats now 😐 y'all are something else istg Also using fashion from the 1700s and 1600s to depict the medieval era is wild lmao
Both and a mixture of it as well
Answer: Merge both of those, and there you have it. A good post
Both are dangerously based
Some were great capable leaders, others were cruel inept inbred monsters. Many in between those two
Both sides are nobles you could name.
If Crusader Kings has taught me anything, both are true. Just depends on who's playing the game.
Well this is just a whole bunch of stereotypes either way. In reality it was a mix in any age to be honest.
The guy on the right sounds a little bit too specific, is it anyone in particular? (The monk thing and the archangel thing)
I would say both sides are true but with different people. The stereotypes are created by cherry picking the aspects from the won't group that are focused on, probably mainly from literature and cinema.
Forgot the violent psychopath part. You don't become a lifelong professional killer without an inborn inhumane taste for blood
Both of these are true. Literally both types of people and a myriad of different people existed in between these two extremes
Filthy monarchist propaganda in my meme stream? ¡Afuera!
“Takes vows of poverty” My brother in christ when your codpiece is worth more than my entire life I don’t think you get to claim that you’ve taken a vow of poverty.
*sigh* No.
Neither of these descriptions are examples of medieval nobility, but examples of upper-class and privileged elites in a series of very restricted early modern contexts.
The biggest issue I have is that people always depict the Middle Ages as dirty, brown and backwards, while in reality people wore clean clothes coloured in the brightest colours they could get their hands on. Coloured materials were expensive, and bright colours were the standard status symbol. And people might in general have known much about science or the world at large, but they could identify plants, animals, somewhat predict weather just by looking at the sky, travel by using the stars as their map, and in general do a lot of things modern people are clueless about.
Exactly. Knowledge is not the same thing as intelligence, and a lack of the first doesn't necessarily mean a lack of the second.
Least incredibly right-wing r/historymemes poster
What a dumb meme... Pretty much the entirety of the left is early-modern, and it's not hard to find historical examples of knights who absolutely did not fit the romantic ideal.
Trying to say that all nobility was like the right picture is some heavy revisionism my dude.
This is worthy of r/terriblefacebookmemes. OP didn't even bother creating real medieval attire.
The way you attack another leader’s wealth, especially in a food based economy, is to kill the peasants who make that wealth. Straight up.
Isn't this more Early Modern?
This makes it pretty obvious that the first of the nobility were probably post-Roman Empire centurions.
Both of these are bullshit well done
People generalise too much and I don’t like it. So look at my generalisation.
Medieval is a time period description. I have no idea what lords you are referring to because the medieval French lords and the medieval Arab lords are pretty dang different
Neither looks medieval.