How did knights and shit train their bodies back in the middle ages...

How did knights and shit train their bodies back in the middle ages? Can't imagine they headed down to Ye Olde Gym and lifted some barbells.

More importantly, what did their diets look like?

Attached: fechtertraining.jpg (573x282, 26K)

Other urls found in this thread:

youtu.be/Ertx8fZiuxA
theguardian.com/uk/2004/jul/15/highereducation.artsandhumanities
twitter.com/NSFWRedditImage

>And now he began to test himself by jumping onto a courser in full armor. At other times he would run or hike for a long way on foot, to train himself not to get out of breath and to endure long efforts. At other times he would strike with an axe or hammer for a long time to be able to hold out well in armor, and so his arms and hands would endure striking for a long time, and train himself to nimbly lift his arms. By these means he trained himself so well that at that time you couldn't find another gentleman in equal physical condition. He would do a somersault armed in all his armor except his bascinet, and dance armed in a mail shirt...

>When he was at his lodgings he would never ceased to test himself with the other squires at throwing the lance or other tests of war.

You could probably go to /his/ for this information but they're disgustingly left leaning so expect a lot of misinformation and low-key shilling for AOC

>The King our sovereign lord, calling to his most noble and gracious remembrance, that by the feat and exercise of the subjects of this his realm in shooting of long bows there hath continually grown and been within the same great number and multitude of good archers which hath not only defended this realm and the subjects thereof against the cruel malice and danger of their outward enemies in time heretofore passed. . . and albeit that diverse good and profitable statutes in the time of his noble progenitors and predecessors kings of this land for the maintenance of archery and longbows heretofore have been made, amongst which the right famous king of noble memory Henry VII, father to our said sovereign lord by authority of diverse parliaments caused good and noble acts and statutes to be established and made. . . yet nevertheless archery and shooting in longbows is right little used but daily diminishes, decays, and abates more and more. . . And also by means and occasion of customable usage of tennis-play, bowles [lawn-bowling], classhe [skittles], and other unlawful games, prohibited by many good and beneficial estates by authority of parliament in that behalf provided and made, great impoverishment hath ensued. And many heinous murders, robberies, and felonies be committed and done. And also the divine [service] by such misdoers on holy and festival days not heard or solemnized to the high displeasure of the Almighty God.

>backflipping havels were REAL
are you kidding me FROM

>Wherefor the King. . . hath ordained, enacted, and established that the Statute of Winchester for archers be put in due execution. And moreover that every man being the King’s subject not lame, decrepit, or maimed, nor having any other lawful or reasonable cause or impediment, being within 60 years, (except those men, spiritual men, justices of one bench or of the other, justices of the assize and barons of the exchequer) do use and exercise shooting in longbows, and also to have a bow and arrows ready continually in his house to use himself, and do use himself in shooting. And also that the father, governors, and rulers of such as be of tender age do teach and bring upon them the knowledge of the same shooting. And that every man having a man child or men children in his house shall provide, ordain, and have in his house for every man child being of the age of seven years and above till he shall come to the age of seventeen years, a bow and two shafts to induce and learn them and bring them up in shooting and shall deliver all the same bow and arrows to the same young men to use and occupy. And if the same young men be servants that then their masters shall abate the money that they shall pay for the same bows and arrows of their wages. And after all such young men shall come to the age of seventeen years every of them shall provide and have a bow and four arrows continually for - authority to commit every such offender to ward [jail], there to remain without bail to such time he or they so offending be bound by obligation to the king’s use in such sum of money as by the discretion of the said justices, mayors, bailiffs, or other head officers shall be thought reasonable that they nor any of them shall not from thence forth use any unlawful games. And that every bower [bow-maker] within this realm always make for every bow of ewe that he maketh to sell at least two bows of elm or other wood of mean [moderate] price.

>When the boy turned 15, he became a squire. In a religious ceremony, the new squire swore on a sword consecrated by a bishop or priest, and attended to assigned duties in his lord's household. During this time the squires continued training in combat and were allowed to own armour (rather than borrowing it).
David I of Scotland knighting a squire

>Squires were required to master the “seven points of agilities” – riding, swimming and diving, shooting different types of weapons, climbing, participation in tournaments, wrestling, fencing, long jumping, and dancing – the prerequisite skills for knighthood. All of these were even performed while wearing armour.

>...involved a specific work out - climbing a ladder propped up against a wall from underneath, climbing a steep wall, and all while armoured. It also involved the horse a great deal, such as vaulting onto the side of a horse, and even simply running - all while in armour. Wearing a full harness of the late 14th century, these exercises were exceedingly difficult

>THE story of ancient athletics is the story of Greek athletics. The Greeks, as far as we know, were the only truly athletic nation of antiquity. To them we owe the word ‘athlete’ and the ideal that it expresses. This does not mean that the Greeks were the inventors of the various sports and games that we describe as athletic. The love of play is universal in all young things. Running, jumping, throwing various objects, fighting are common to children of all races and all times. But play is not athletics, though the instinct of play is undoubtedly one of their motives, and recreation is an important element therein. The child plays till he is tired and then leaves off. The competitor in a race goes on after he is tired, goes on to the point of absolute exhaustion; he even trains himself painfully in order to be capable of greater and more prolonged effort and of exhausting himself more completely. Why does he do this? Why does he take pleasure in what is naturally painful ?

>The idea of effort is the very essence of athletics as the Greeks understood the term and as we understand it ; it is indeed inherent in the word itself. For the Greek word from which athlete is derived has two forms, a masculine form ( θλoς), usually meaning a contest, and a neuter form (θλoν), usually denoting the prize of the contest. Of these two meanings there can be no doubt that the idea of contest is the earlier and root-meaning, for it determines the meaning of the words derived from it. The word is used by Homer to describe the ten years’ struggle of the Trojan War; it is used of the labours of Heracles. This meaning of the word is clearest in the adjective ( θλιoς) formed from it, which from meaning ‘struggling’, ‘contesting’ comes to mean ‘miserable’, ‘wretched’. We find this same feeling in Homer when he describes boxing and wrestling as ‘grievous’ (λεγεινóς), an epithet which he also uses of war and battle. Yet the Homeric warrior delights in these grievous contests, and Pindar describes the athlete as one ‘who delights in the toil and the cost’.1 We too have the same feelings. The game that appeals to every true athlete, the game that he delights in, one that he remembers when his playing days are over, is ‘the hard game’, the game that puts to the utmost test all his physical powers and all his skill.

>But why does the athlete delight in the grievous contest? Why do we enjoy a hard game ? The athlete is one who competes for something, but it is certainly not the material value of the prize that attracts him. The prize may be an ox, or a woman skilled in fair handicraft, a tripod, or a cup, but the most coveted prize in the Greek world was the wreath of wild olive which was the only prize at the Olympic Games. The real prize is the honour of victory. The motive that turns his effort into joy is the desire to put to the test his physical powers, the desire to excel. It is not every people any more than every individual that feels this joy in the contest, in the effort. The athletic spirit cannot exist where conditions of life are too soft and luxurious; it cannot exist where conditions are too hard and where all the physical energies are exhausted in a constant struggle with the forces of man or nature. It is found only in physically vigorous and virile nations that put a high value on physical excellence: it arises naturally in those societies where the power is in the hands of an aristocracy which depends on military skill and physical strength to maintain itself. Here are developed the love of fighting and the love of glory, and here we find the beginnings of athletics in wrestling, boxing, and other forms of combat which are the training of the young and the recreation of the warriors. Such were the conditions among the Homeric Achaeans, and probably among many of the tribes of central Europe. But for the tradition which the Greeks inherited from the Achaeans the later development of Greek athletics would have been impossible. And we may doubt whether the modern athletic movement would ever have taken place but for the spirit handed down to us by our Anglo-Saxon ancestors.

>While the ordinary man was engaged in exhausting farming and trades with less time for military expertise, evidence shows that the primary training of the feudal classes consisted of riding, jousting, wrestling, strength training by lifting large stones, and later calisthenics and even gymnastics. A chronicle from the year 1075, the Annales Lamberti, complained of a lack of physical fitness among laboring peasants which discouraged nobles from pressing them into military service as foot soldiers. In contrast, the warrior class accepted that their leisure time often made them soft while their role in society demanded peak physical performance. One Victorian historian observed at the turn of the century, "The first professional fighters were the aristocracy, who spent their time almost entirely in the daily practice of arms, and kept themselves in perfect training by constant exercise…And this superiority they gradually supplemented by means of armour…"

Attached: 300px-Ms.XIX.17-3_13v.png (300x449, 234K)

>All of these were even performed while wearing armour.
Imagine swimming in 25kg of armor, fuck.

>Yet, a knight's training clearly emphasized physical conditioning and self-discipline as well as martial skills. During the Age of Chivalry physical education was revived as a complex military education and strenuous training was required of knights and men at arms. Ancient Germanic and Celtic customs of initiation into manhood and military service also played a part in the later rituals of knighthood. Training produced not just physical skill but discipline. The historian of physical education Earle Ziegler noted that the aim of physical education during the feudal and manorial period served a practical objective of producing a man possessing all the necessary physical and psychological attributes for skill in hand-to-hand combat arts.

>One description of knightly martial training comes to us from a 14th century ballad on knighthood by Deschamps who wrote how knights had gained hardiness through long apprenticeship and training, ridden long journeys, practiced wrestling and throwing the stone, scaling forts, and combating with shield and sword. Offering a 14th century view of "ancient" training, Deschamps' expressed that following from custom they "In times of peace" would not doubt "To practice acts of chivalry" in "Jousts, tournaments, wrestling, and throwing rocks [and] fencing."

Attached: f_fechtertraining.jpg (168x213, 6K)

The historian E. Prestage once described how in 14th century France, the armiger, or young squire, whose training in the mesnée was the subject of numerous reflections in the Chansons de Geste, "grew up in the martial traditions of an athletic community, that valued prowess above all things. He was taught the management of horses, the care and use of arms, fencing (which developed the lungs and made one "fitter and more erect and much straighter for it")..." Prestage also noted the squire "had to undergo a strenuous course of exercises calculated to increase his strength and dexterity." The necessity for accurate control over the movements of a horse in battle also led to special exercises known as voltige, consisting of jumping into and out of a saddle or onto a table. Later actual wooden horses were used to practice this. By the 11th century vaulting in this way became an art in itself and continued well into the 18th century where it became the source of today's gymnastic pommel horse.

>Why does he do this? Why does he take pleasure in what is naturally painful ?

Attached: 749.jpg (1383x1600, 358K)

>Aegidius Romanus in the early 14th century wrote that a military leader needed to be attentive to exercitatio, or individual drill, noting that, "having arms unaccustomed to striking and limbs untrained for fighting" was useless for soldiers. He also stressed the importance of practice as toughening to endure hardship as well as "hardness of body". Medieval texts also describe young knights training with weapons of double weight in order to develop strength. Here we might recall the instructions of the Roman military writer Vegetius's (widely read in the age) describing the traditional training of soldiers. Vegetius told how young legionnaire recruits were given double-weight swords and shields to train hard by striking at posts. In this way, when the recruit took up real and lighter weapons, "as if freed from the heavier weight, he will fight in greater safety and speed."

>Petrus Vergerius in the early 1400s similarly wrote how in war skills alone were useless without the strength and endurance needed to bear the rigors of campaigning. Equally, Alberti Battista in the mid 1400s advocated: "In all training no end may be preferred to that of physical soundness" saying "Games which require dexterity, endurance, strength, qualities of eye and nerve, such as fencing…" were to be preferred. A number of other 15th century humanist writers on physical education also repeatedly stressed the importance of muscular strength and conditioning. We might recall the various images of weight-training in Medieval artwork showing heavy stone lifting or throwing by fencers (similar perhaps to the modern "medicine ball" exercise tool) as well as the use of heavy sticks equivalent to later "Indian club" exercise tools.

Attached: exercise.jpg (249x429, 54K)

youtu.be/Ertx8fZiuxA

Definitely worth to watch the whole series

This is all good shit, man, thanks for dumping.

this was a good read, thank you user

>The first professional fighters were the aristocracy, who spent their time almost entirely in the daily practice of arms, and kept themselves in perfect training by constant exercise
kind of reminds me of how today's aristocrat actors and instagram millionares are all fit as fuck because they have all day to spend on it and unlimited resources

>t. Posting on Jow Forums instead of getting fit
I guarantee big actors have less free time than you also

nazifags and commieshits fuck off.

Attached: his 1.png (2301x1617, 900K)

That's ancient, he asked about medieval times. That's 1000 years apart.

I'm posting here in between sets at my home gym, as I always do

Plate armor was super heavy, just saying. Its like permanent farmers walks and squats.

youtube.com/watch?v=tFDatf-VZtg&t=2m22s

I would love to go back in time and see some real historical battles, I bet that shit looked fucking awesome

fuck those kids are annoying

I'd love to see it, but fuck participating in it. Sword wounds are no joke.

>not miring yourself for test boost

NGMI

yea reading old accounts of battles they were pretty fucking brutal and gory. but at the same time casualty rates were much lower than modern battles, very few people actually ended up getting wounded or killed.
kind of funny though, people really do have a pretty high tolerance for insane levels of violence deep down. that shit is just hidden by modern society.

I can’t speak to exercise, but your diet in the Middle Ages was largely dependent on your class. Virtually everyone ate bread and beer, but only the nobility could afford to consistently eat meat. In general, it looked something like this:
>peasant: 2,900 calories per day
>soldiers: 3,500 calories per day
>nobility: 4,000-5,000 calories per day
>monks: 6,000 calories per day

It’s worth noting that monks led completely sedentary lives, so many of them were severely obese and had significant joint problems. Even when fasting they had around 4,500 calories per day.

source?

hell no, that shit is so far from being correct

>that shit is just hidden by modern society
I broadcast that shit every day, but never act on it, and remain calm always. Funny how I never have problems any more. People can sense it when you're ready to push their faces in at a moments notice.

sometimes when I can't sleep I imagine violently killing people and it calms me down enough to fall asleep

it would be cool to see from a distance but the sheer horror on the faces and the voices of people facing violent death would overwhelm me

>Dyer, C. (2000). “Everyday life in medieval England”, Continuum International Publishing Group
>Hicks, M. A., (2001). “Revolution and consumption in late medieval England”, Boydell & Brewer
>Verlaan, J. J. (2007). "Diffuse idiopathic skeletal hyperostosis in ancient clergymen". Eur Spine J. 16 (8): 1129–35.

Not really we watch horror movies and gore videos so much in todays world. Whereas in Medieval times it was fairly rare to actually have a battle etc and see violence against a human being for yourself.

Why the fuck would monks bulk like that?

nah, I dont believe you. there's no fucking way monks were eating 6k calories per day. fuck off.

le baséd

Attached: chadstantine.jpg (538x858, 179K)

yeah but back then it would be fairly normal to see hanging corpses, impaled criminals, brutal public lashings etc which is even more horrible.

Consider that you either drank beer/wine or nothing at all during a majority of times.

Depends on the monastery but often monks were fit as fuck. Most of the combat manuals at the time were written (its believed) by warriors that retired to the monk lyfe.

Monks in some monasteries did essentially bodybuilding a gymnastics there's man stories.

historical beer and wine were nothing at all like modern beer and wine and were mostly water.
it's also not true that they drank it a majority of the time.
and there's no fucking way monks were eating 6k calories, fuck off.

Not really. These are stories from cities which at that time consisted of a small part of the population and the instances of caged corpses on cathedrals etc were worth writing about so assumably fairly rare.

theguardian.com/uk/2004/jul/15/highereducation.artsandhumanities

it depended on the area and time period but plenty of monks were fat fucks, as were aristocrats

even now thieves are getting their hands lopped off on the regular in shitholes in the desert. i'm sure it must have been common - maybe not as commonplace as your morning starbucks but not so rare that it's worth spending an hour writing about every time you see it

Obviously he's pulling that out of his ass, but it's funny as fuck so I believe it.

absolutely based

Not like they had anything better to do.

Lmao this is just lies but it's fun to imagine

Not sure but I saw some footage of WWI British physical training and they would do a lot of ass to grass jumping, push-ups, and marching wearing full gear (~100lbs)

>"4,500 [calories] even when they were fasting."

Impressive.

>/his/ tranny trying to get some traffic on his paltry board
LOL

>fatlogic existed even in the middle ages
based. imagine eating 4500 calories a day and telling people you were fasting.

Here’s another article written with simpletons like you in mind. Never question me again.
theguardian.com/uk/2004/jul/15/highereducation.artsandhumanities

>historical beer and wine were nothing at all like modern beer and wine and were mostly water
t. Wesleyan

Also, medieval knights really fucking cared about what their peers thought of them. Being battle-ready and courageous at all times was a necessity to avoid losing your reputation, getting shit talked behind your back and never getting invited to the fun parties.

If they'd had social media they'd totally have been snapping gym selfies all day and calling each other out on Twitter.

In important confrontations like battles or sieges, you'd literally have heralds watching the action and taking notes like fucking sports commentators and if you fucked up or pussied out of a fight, you'd bet that word would get around quickly.

also there were accounts of women basically sitting in bleachers watching battles, imagine that shit lmao

Modern infantry carry more weight than a knight in full plate did.

That shit happened as late as the beginning of the American Civil War. Idle rich basically had picnics on the sidelines while watching the carnage.

Attached: Spectators at Manassas Watch Marching Troops Landscape.jpg (1120x630, 171K)

based

ever heard of manual labour OP?

I would definitely spend a few rounds just shooting the rich

what's stopping the yanks and confederates from just blasting richfags with muskets and cannons?

Suicide yourself shemale.