ModernChivalry.org
Main => The Round Table => Topic started by: Sir Wolf on 2010-09-03, 03:09:27
-
in movies you see old fat knights or man at arms or average joes, in reading old 12th century stories you read about guys going at battle for the entire day against just 1 opponent. how fit do you think the guys of the time were? did they lose it with age and gained wisdom? heehhe
-
I think much like today, you'd see a full spectrum. Someone who is out practicing and competing in tournaments all the time will be in better physical condition, but also probably has a higher chance of having persistent injuries (joints never fully recover, for instance). And there would certainly be older knights who rest on their laurels, so to speak.
I may have to go back and re-read Geffroi de Charny's Book of Knighthood. He ranks different kinds of knights and men at arms based on their worth, determined by what they do. And if I recall correctly, he specifically mentions disdain for those who have allowed themselves to get large in the middle, and start trying to hide it with tight garments. :)
-
Well, we know about the types of conditioning they did. They threw heavy stones for sport, they practiced acrobatics (including walking on their hands), they wrestled, they rode horseback, and in general did a lot more just for fun than the average modern person ever even thinks about doing. That doesn't even get into the fact that they didn't sit at desks all day, didn't have television or the internet, and walked pretty much everywhere because they didn't have a choice.
Further, based on my research into the historical martial arts, the types of things the average fencer was expected to be able to do is pretty damn intense. I'm thinking they were pretty damn fit.
-
Very good points. I think if we were able to go back in time and visit them, they'd think we're all weaklings. :)
-
Very good points. I think if we were able to go back in time and visit them, they'd think we're all weaklings. :)
That is undoubtedly true; then again depending on what type of job you do in our modern times will earn you the same consideration. Men that work day in and day out on the water front in the extreme heat and cold consider guys like me (management and office types) as weak and pampered by readily available AC/Heat and limited physical labor. ;)
I think another aspect to consider is the overall mental toughness of knights and men at arms to not only endure the all the physical hardships but also the pain without the relief of readily available pain medication, after all wine and spirits can only do so much! ;)
-
I think it also matters which period we're discussing. Earlier on, when knighthood was actually an elite warrior class, they probably would have been in top shape, unless injured beyond the capacity to maintain it. By the 16th century, it was evolving into a title of lower nobility, and there were knights who were not warriors in the earlier sense.
-
Probably pretty fit like an athlete who's rather flexible and agile but definitely not musclemen. Got a friend who thinks everyone back then was buff and strong like him, what he fails to realize is having tons of muscles and mass lowers your stamina and makes you less agile. Knights and soldiers HAD to be agile to avoid attacks and swing swords properly. Stamina matters more than strength especially in a heated battle.
-
I agree. I doubt they spent two hours a day lifting weights. Rather, they were doing athletic activities that build stamina and strength, not pure bulk.
-
really great answers all around. i figure there diet had a lot to do with their conditioning as well. in reading you always hear how knights were invited to stay here or there so you know they ate better than the rest of the crowd.
i asked this cause I'm on a life style change of food and exercise. it's not a diet cause i don't wanna stop it hehehe. watching what i'm eating, plenty of water, and running or stomach conditioning each day. I'm tired of being fat and out of shape hehehe
-
That's a good plan. I'm getting pretty sick of my physical condition too. I was exercising and avoiding excess carbs last year, and it was starting to help, and then I slacked off. I really need to get back to it. I'm clearly never going to lead an athletic lifestyle, but at least I can do something more than sit in front of a computer all the time.
-
so far i've managed to to do a mile at least each day. not to bad from a guy that hasn't run at all since high school soccer hahaha
-
I think it is great that you are looking to take more consideration for your health and physical condition. It is far better to do it earlier in life than later when you are in your late forties and fifties!
I had talked about it for a couple of years but wasn’t inspired (or shamed) enough to start until Rosemary and I went to GLMF and met up with a friend I met a couple years back who is also into wearing armor and a lifelong student of chivalry and history. In the two years since I had seen him last he had completely metamorphosed into another person physically. His friends at the fair had aptly dubbed him “Conan”. Since he is only 4 or five years younger than me it was more than enough to inspire and shame me into taking my excess weight seriously and I have successfully adapted my eating habits and mentality towards losing weight and getting into better shape.
In my new lifestyle diet I only eat bread and pasta on very rare occasions. No cereals (except oatmeal), crackers, chips, etc. I eat more proteins, fresh fruits and vegetables. I also manage my portions better and eat smaller meals more frequently. Exercise consists of a vigorous 2.5 mile walk at lunch and some high rep/low weight workouts during my morning and afternoon coffee breaks.
My stomach workouts start in the morning before I leave for work in which I do approximately 100 – 150 stomach crunches on my “AB Scissors” machine. – so my core muscles are very solid, they just have a layer of fat over them! ;)
Good luck and don't give up! When I have a bad day and fall off the program, I start again the next day. I'm still enjoying the good stuff just not as much or as often! :D
-
For me, what was working last year was a combination of mild dietary changes, and some exercise at the gym.
The dietary changes were to reduce needless carbs, which meant cutting out the useless snacking for the most part (with low-calorie snacks being OK, like those little 10-calorie jello snacks), and avoiding potatoes/fries and bread. Instead of pop-tarts for breakfast, I switched to a combination of raisin-bran (for the fiber) and cheerios. I made an effort to eat salads more frequently as well, and allow myself to leave some food left over more frequently. So nothing earth-shattering here.
The exercise that I was doing was to visit a local gym twice a week after work. They had these electronic bikes with an LCD screen that let you race against your own prior runs, while biking through woodlands and other virtual scenic trails. I'd do 25 to 30 minutes on the bike (attempting to always out-do my previous times per virtual lap), then spend 25 to 30 minutes using the various weight and resistance machines. The latter I don't think helped much, since if I really wanted to build strength, I think I'd have had to do a lot more of it. But my endurance improved considerably from the virtual biking.
I managed to lose about 18 pounds at my peak, in about 2 or 3 months. I've since put about 9 of them back on.
Ironically, I think I'm physically stronger now than any other time in my life, despite having the strength of a couch-potato. I was quite a weakling of a teenager, for instance. The endurance I gained while I was using the gym was very beneficial in my historical swordsmanship. I need to regain that.
-
Ironically, I think I'm physically stronger now than any other time in my life, despite having the strength of a couch-potato. I was quite a weakling of a teenager, for instance. The endurance I gained while I was using the gym was very beneficial in my historical swordsmanship. I need to regain that.
That is peculiar since the opposite is typically the case. The friend I mentioned in my earlier posting had commented to me about how much weaker he had grown with age and that he couldn’t even come close to how strong he was when in his twenties (he is 42 now AFAIK). I certainly can’t do what I use to do but I think I am now physically tougher to harsh environmental conditions…of course wearing armor these past few summers probably helped that! :D
-
Yeah, I certainly can't do a lot of what I could when I was in my 20's, but it's more of an endurance thing. I used to bounce back very quickly, and instead these days I can get crushing fatigue. I think my strength, in terms of what I can lift and move, has been pretty consistent for a good 10 years or so, ever since I "bulked up" so to speak. I used to weigh about 65 pounds less in my 20's. (I'm 37, so I only exited my 20's about 8 years ago) :)
...
Dennis: I'm 37. I'm not old.
King Arthur: Well I can't just call you "man".
Dennis: Well you could say "Dennis".
King Arthur: I didn't know you were called Dennis.
-
I'd imagine the younger knights being the more fit, seeing as they would've plied their trade more vigorously in search of land, titles and wealth; followed by the grizzled veterans who were still active- the 'fat old knight' I figure is the one in semi- or full retirement, enjoying the fruits of his labors (and those of his serfs, if applicable). Still, that fat old knight will not have forgotten how to maintain his seat or how to use his sword...he'd still be a formidable opponent in my book.
Seeing as we live a good deal longer than our earlier counterparts, I'd consider a knight less than 60 years of age to still be hale and hearty, youthful even. William the Marshal still led forces when he passed into his 70s, and that was over 800 years ago; what was exceptional for his time could have become the norm if we still lived medievally with regard to knightly pursuits.
For myself, I'm somewhat slower and less agile than I was in my 20s, but am a good deal stronger and more centered; my workout routines have changed over the years, from being upper body centric to a whole body ideal which is present in my current routines. Seeing as my workouts were haphazard at best in my youth, I can understand why I see the strength and endurance gains I'm seeing now. It used to be wearing a 35 lb harness (mail coif and hauberk) would wear me out in about 90 minutes, but this year, my first outing had me in a 3/4 harness weighing about 40lbs for over 4 hours and no subsequent joint or muscle aches of any kind. Sweated alot, but I felt great!
-
Yes, I think by necessity, a lot of older knights would take on more organizational roles rather than front-line combat. Considering some of the writings of the time (such as Charny), there were probably many that started out very fit, but once they had a few achievements under their belt, they'd use their title and position and try to ride on these previous efforts without doing something new, and fall out of shape. Charny mentions this specifically, that a man who performs deeds currently is of more worth than someone whose deeds are well in the past and has allowed himself to languish. However he grants that such men may still be men of worth, just lower worth. (I'm saying "men" here but he usually explicitly mentions both knights and men at arms in this context).
-
And that would make sense as the veterans would have prior experience, so strategy and administration would be right up their alley- although I daresay not all of them led from the rear, so to speak.
As for men and their worth, that is the same attitude adopted by the current military- which makes sense. I posit that men, while past their prime, have lost no worth- what they've lost in youth and agility, they've gained in cunning, tactics and experience.
I won't underestimate a man simply because he's got some grey in his beard, you know.
-
As for men and their worth, that is the same attitude adopted by the current military- which makes sense. I posit that men, while past their prime, have lost no worth- what they've lost in youth and agility, they've gained in cunning, tactics and experience.
I won't underestimate a man simply because he's got some grey in his beard, you know.
Oh absolutely... and technique! A cleanly executed technique doesn't necessarily need a lot of strength. Speed, yes, but often youth try to make up for lack of technique with both speed and power. As you get older, often it's better to just do it right. :)
-
206.2 from 220!
got my mile in at 10 min 22 sec on the treadmill. down from 12 min last week.
goal is 175-185
-
Huzzah! Great job and keep it up! ... er I mean down. :D
I'm not really tracking my weight loss that closely so my best estimate is approximately 15 -18 pounds but I'm exchanging some of that weight for muscle since I'm lifting weights as well. The best indicator of my success thus far is me being able to wear my 34 waist jeans comfortably, that and my belt is still loose even after using the last notch! ;)
My goal is 200 lbs.
-
Great job guys! Man, you're all going to put me to shame.
-
Huh...this weight thing is no joke man...if I ate the way I used to in my 20s, I'd be well over 250lbs by now, just judging by my uncles' physiques. Instead I watch what I eat and exercise 3-4 times a week, light cardio, emphasis on weights, strength and endurance routines mostly. Its helped out quite a bit, especially since I incorporated core and lower body workouts into the routine. Noticed some pain in my lower back, knees and ankles a couple years back after a Ren season.
-
I won't underestimate a man simply because he's got some grey in his beard, you know.
Just play basketball or tennis with an "old Timer" and you'll quickly see how cunning trumps vigor every time!
-
ya they do like to cheat don't they ;)
-
You call it cheating and we call it STRATEGY! ;)
-
I won't underestimate a man simply because he's got some grey in his beard, you know.
Just play basketball or tennis with an "old Timer" and you'll quickly see how cunning trumps vigor every time!
My father and his brothers would go up to Stonybrook U in the summers when I was a kid and EMBARRASS the JV and Varsity college bball players...and after every game, they'd say how they couldn't believe a bunch of old timers made them look like frosh players.
Even when I'd grown up and my Dad and his brothers were in their 50s, they were still starching us youngbucks! It IS strategy...make your opponents work against themselves...my Uncle Mike was good for getting in their heads because he's stolid and seemingly slow-moving and at 5'10" he has the arms of a man 6 inches taller than him. He never shot a jumper, not in all my years anyway. And yet, he'd sink it near every time.
Now that I'm in my mid-30s, when I do play with my younger cousins, I find strategy key to keeping up with those fleet footed fools! lol Like setting myself into the path of one charging-to-the-hole and watch him bounce back after contact. I damn sure can't chase him down! lol
-
news flash. hit 188 today!
-
Huzzah, Sir Wolf! You're nearly to your goal, and in record time to boot. Keep up the good work! Now, if only the holidays weren't right around the corner...
-
hey i made it thru Helloween week! hahahha just a sliver of pumpkin pie and no candy.... yet
-
You're a stronger man than I am in that regard. Ugh, too much candy... I'm going to make myself sick. :)
-
The building management company at my job handed out these lil baggies full of goodies and I must confess to eating ALL the chocolate candies before taking it home so my wife could kill the rest. LOL
Congratulations, Sir Wolf- what's your secret? You've lost nearly 40 lbs in a relatively short amount of time! At this point, you're only 13 lbs over me, and within 3 lbs of the weight class you said you wanted to be in. THAT's what I'm talkin about!
-
Congratulations Sir Wolf! Don’t sweat it if you indulge yourself a little bit over the holidays. One of the great things about choosing a change of eating habits instead of diets or gimmick weight loss fads is the overall resiliency of your weight management regime. You can afford the occasional lapse without suffering any long term repercussions.
-
Just don't lapse for an entire week, ok? lol
-
portion control, no sodas or Gatorade type drinks, portion control, no sweets cakes pies excess foods, portion control ummmmmmmmm
hehe my biggest thing is i eat and drink tea when I'm bored or stressed. ive been drinking mainly only water, less sugar in my tea, barely drink coffees anyways etc.
-
I agree that they would be "fit" in that they would have great stamina, and more towards "cardio" than "bulk". Later period plate armors are decent proof that armored knights weren't overly muscular; if they were, they'd have deeper dished vambraces, wider cuisses, more flared sides to the cuirass, steeper angle gorgets, etc.
We know the weight of a sword wasn't 25 pounds, and we know that armor distributes the weight fairly well over the body. They wouldn't need to be a hulk in order to use the equipment, and low stamina slowing you down on the field would usually mean easier pickings for the opponent.
The host of SCA fighter practice years ago used to always say "Old age and treachery will overcome youth and enthusiasm every time". And he proceed to thrash me on the field. Constantly. Often without breaking a sweat. Then remind me. I can see that experience in commanding a group of soldiers being more valuable than another sword in a line of soldiers.
-
I would posit that later period armors, especially the highly detailed/decorated ones such as we might see in the museum were likely parade or tournament pieces...meant to be worn at the event and then retired. I bet the field armor, which would've been plainer, more utilitarian, was probably stouter given its function. Just my opinion; as I've never handled either I can only speculate and bow to my more-informed brethren.
You all remember the article about the bones of a knight found in the lower part of the ruins of what used to be a castle; in their examination of the bones they noted that the man was likely around 5'7", heavily muscled and his joints showed signs of wear that were consistent w/being in armor and engaging in battle. I don't have all the particulars, but it is in a thread on here somewhere. Of course, that is just one case but it did make sense to me...
One can't help but become stronger, more muscular if you're constantly encased in 50lbs of steel, leather and clothing, riding, walking, eating, sitting, etc.
I wonder if I could get away with wearing mail to work, daily. lol
-
Yeah, the more complex later period tournament armors were exactly that-- tournament armor. Knighthood and warfare in general changed a lot as gunpowder worked its way into more regular use, and so the complex armor tended not to be as useful in battle. However, tournaments were still in full swing (Henry VIII was quite the athlete in his youth, fighting in tournaments).
There would certainly be at least some bulky fighters, since genetically some people put on muscle as easily as the rest of us put on fat. But unless you were to do daily power-lifting, most combat and tournament activities would build muscle tone without an enormous level of bulk.
The skeletal remains can tell a lot though. Recovered remains of longbow archers have shown fused back bones, from the massive amount of work that it took to maintain the strength to use them. It's crazy.
-
I saw a show about gladiator remains once, and they suggested these fighters were not overly muscular, nor overly toned (as the movies suggest). instead, they were "thick" and strong, yet agile (think corn-fed farmboys). The "meat on their bones" gave a little more protection than a zero percent body fat bodybuilder physique would have. Wonder if our boys were the same?
-
Sir Edward, I'd heard the same about longbowmen's bones...crazy. Those guys were the Muscle Beach dudes of the medieval ages; lifting the equivalent of a 200lb man singlehanded a hundred times or more a day will do that. I doubt I could draw an actual longbow (another thing I didn't like about Robin Hood were those flimsy bows they used; and I know none of those actors [possible exception being Kevin Durand] have the requisite strength to draw one, but I wonder if any of them tried) has anyone ever tried it?
I read about a man who can shoot one, think his is rated at 150#, and he was able to put 10 of 12 flights into the target at 200 paces.
Red Knight, that makes a lot of sense to me...as I thought about it, a body does get 'used' to an activity if it is done regularly so these knights would've been some strong men, but may not have looked like it, to a 21st Century eye? I could dig that.
-
I saw a show about gladiator remains once, and they suggested these fighters were not overly muscular, nor overly toned (as the movies suggest). instead, they were "thick" and strong, yet agile (think corn-fed farmboys). The "meat on their bones" gave a little more protection than a zero percent body fat bodybuilder physique would have. Wonder if our boys were the same?
My thoughts exactly.
-
during the 15th century, english men from the ages of 6 to 60 were required by law on the sabbath after church to practice with the bow.
-
Nobility too, or just the peasantry?
-
I saw a show about gladiator remains once, and they suggested these fighters were not overly muscular, nor overly toned (as the movies suggest). instead, they were "thick" and strong, yet agile (think corn-fed farmboys). The "meat on their bones" gave a little more protection than a zero percent body fat bodybuilder physique would have. Wonder if our boys were the same?
That's the same thing I think. Look at some of the world record holders on things, and compare them to the massive bodybuilders at professional competitions; almost every record holder I've seen is quite thick, but doesn't have much cut and definition to their muscles. Mark Henry, Mark Felix, Tony Cardello, Vladimir Bondarenko ... they literally throw around 400 lbs as if it was a small child, and all have the "farm boy" appearance.
-
You know, diet is also going to play a major role in physique. Obviously nobles were at the top of the food chain, but what about the average man-at-arms? Was he getting a fair amount of animal protien, or was it primarily grains?
-
I guess it would depend on how much money he has...the more successful men-at-arms would probably eat meat, and better quality than their poorer compatriots and certainly better than the peasantry ate, by and large. That's just speculative, I haven't read it was either one way or another. I'd imagine a lot of their required nutrition would've come from plant sources too...I've read about 'horsebread' in more than one source and while it does not sound very tasty, it was quite useful for its time as a natural laxative.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Horsebread
-
I'd say "it depends." :) On campaign, it might be harder to have varied founds and a well rounded diet. But at home, most knights would be wealthy enough to pretty much get what they want. The horse is a lot harder to afford than decent food and good equipment.
Most monastic orders had tightly controlled rations, but the Templars, being a military order, actually would often require double rations of meat for their knights. So my feeling is they ate rather well too.
-
The Templars obviously understood the importance of meat and performance as there is a direct correlation. I wonder though, for Henry V for instance...what was his army eating or starving on? How did 5000 men defeat a force 4 times their number that was also well-fed and better equipped? I mean...besides the longbow...makes one wonder, limits of the human ability to withstand adversity of all kinds, physical, mental, emotional, spiritual. Their feats border on the superhuman if you think about it...
-
I would say that our knights would be massively strong, but not big. Harnesses show us that knights weren't beefcakes, but the act of repeated combat will toughen you up. For instance, I don't look impressively strong at all. There are a million football players that make me look small, but I'm stronger than most of them. Also, weightlifting builds muscle and was developed by bodybuilders. It's mostly bulk.
There are guys that can out lift me but they cannot actually do some of the things I can do. Most "weight training" I get is pushing 600lb bales of hay and things that involve no weights. I'm also good at projecting my strength, which means I can hit harder and throw around 150lb friends (or opponents) around like ragdolls, while technically stronger people cannot. I think knights might have been good at this also...
Knights would be very smiler. Not very big, but can project some serious force.
Also, tone is overrated. I beat the kids w/ washboard abs on the crunch machine all day. Studies have shown that having extreme tone is in fact not ideal for activities knights would do. Your body needs something to feed on when your food energy is gone. That's how you lose weight. If you don't have this "buffer" your body will begin to cannibalize itself. Starting with the muscles. So for prolonged extremely strenuous activities (battle) it's actually decremental to be wickedly toned. The only reason modern marathon runners and such do not do this is because they can accurately predict what the activity is going to be, energy used, and eat accordingly. When your armies encamped in enemy territory, and you don't even know if the enemy will give you a chance to get breakfast, you better have some reserve source of energy.
-
bunch of dawg gone Chuck Norris's
-
LMAO
well said, Sirs Nathan and Wolf. Sir Nathan brings up a good point...since science wasn't what it is now, all those knights would've had to go on was experience. As to their size, Nathan's right...you don't have to be big to be strong...unless you're a longbowman in which case you didn't have much choice, you were gonna be big just because of the job you had to do.
-
Yeah, and then you get your back muscles fused together from drawing a 140lb bow all day. :o
Not such a hot sounding job anymore is it? ;)
-
Hey man, Archers got the babes back in the day- and they were accessible to all, not just the noblewomen! lol
-
Quality over quantity ;)
-
Yup; but only England was ever able to field a sizable contingent of archers to complement the army...Henry V's was mostly archers by the time they reached Agincourt.
-
Hey, I was referring to the women! :D
As soldiers, those longbowmen were pretty fierce. Good at putting arrows in the horses of those ingenious Frenchmen charging hedges of stakes... 8)
-
this knight has .8 lbs to his goal. 180.8 this morning. even after Thanksgiving and its many desserts
-
Congratulations Sir Wolf! Well done! I applaud your dedication to achieving your goal! :)
I unfortunately have reached an obstinate plateau @ 220 pounds. I’ve decided to alternate my workouts a little by alternating my weight training with longsword exercises. Surprisingly I work up more of a sweat with the longsword practice than with the weights which is really just building strength more than cardio. :-\
-
i know how that is. i tried to lose weight once before and couldn't' break 200 so i gave up. DON'T GIVE UP.
i need to start hitting the treadmill again or some sort of exercise. all of this weight loose since the baby has been born is just portion control. hehe my tummy is a lil flabby from extra skin ;)
-
this knight has .8 lbs to his goal. 180.8 this morning. even after Thanksgiving and its many desserts
Huzzah, Sir Wolf, on that accomplishment!
I unfortunately have reached an obstinate plateau @ 220 pounds. I’ve decided to alternate my workouts a little by alternating my weight training with longsword exercises. Surprisingly I work up more of a sweat with the longsword practice than with the weights which is really just building strength more than cardio.
Agreed with Sir Wolf. DON'T GIVE UP! I've often found alternating the workout makes a big difference. A mix of weights and cardio works best for me, and I try to mix up the routine every six weeks or so (screws around with muscle memory so the buggers can't get lazy).
-
Agreed with Sir Wolf. DON'T GIVE UP! I've often found alternating the workout makes a big difference. A mix of weights and cardio works best for me, and I try to mix up the routine every six weeks or so (screws around with muscle memory so the buggers can't get lazy).
This is excellent advice. Cardio is excellent for the heart and for lung capacity, as well as general fitness, but it's a little slower on weight loss. Muscle building actually burns fat faster, though in the long run does less for you in terms of general health. Mixing it up will make you much healthier overall. Plus, it helps keep the excercise from getting too boring. :)
I'm lucky in that I have a job which has me constantly moving, and even when I'm not teaching I'm still on my feet, but I still have to do strength training to supplemant it, combined with eating right.
-
Sir Wolf, I have a fatburner trick that's worked wonders for me, maybe it'll work for you. It sounds easy and I guess it is eventually, but it was tough as hell in the beginning.
I use a treadmill, raise the incline as high as it'll go (15 degrees if you can get it) and do a 2.3 mph walk while carrying 10lb handweights...start with 5lbs in each hand then work your way up eventually. It'll take a while to get to that point unless you've been doing similar exercises. Anyway, so you're basically walking uphill...do it for 20 minutes three times a week and watch the fat just melt off. Sounds simple, doesn't it?
The heavy lifters at my gym tried it just once...5 minutes in they dropped the weights, 5 minutes after that they were holding on to the upright bar of the treadmill to avoid falling off! lol
I tried to tell them, it might look like nothing, but it is definitely SOMETHING. Give it a try!