In my campaign a back up character, was a household budyguard for a knight, he is of noble blood but not from Britain, he is from the Norse lands. A seer prophesied that a man from the north would help a Roman Knight, finally overcome his scheming uncle and become true head of his family. The Northman had been exiled but was a mercenary sgt serving Syagrius, in Bayoux in cold blood he murdered a rival and would probably be executed if it was found out. Now the Roman knight arranged for him a new life if he swore service and snuck him out by ship.

Now move on to the battle of Lincoln and this Northman finds himself leading a unit of Ulfius's saxonish warriors as described in the book of armies, when the commander falls in battle. He defeats the German commander and both he and his sponser want him to be knighted for this accomplishment. Now after the battle of lincoln many knights had died, and they are sorely needed for replacements and capable men, so is it possible that Madoc could make this Northman a knight?

If not knight can he be made a squire, or perhaps he can never be knighted, then can they make him an esquire? Even if he isnt of British bloodline he is of a royal bloodline and would be the equivelent of a knight in his culture already. Noone knows of his previous exile or the murder while serving Syagrius. His sponsor is a vassal knight of the Earl, of 5 years.

Tell me what you think so I can decide what is best.

It is rare for a commoner to become a knight, but he is of noble birth so that would help. Saving a lord's life is a big thing, and in this case the question is what is the duke Ulfius going to do afterwards? If the northman is known for his loyalty or honor, maybe he is knighted and made household knight (Ulfius can use such bodyguards. ;)). The question is also what is the position of the sponsor. Aside from being a vassal from Earl Roderick. What is his relationship with Ulfius? Is he known for loyalty and honor?

In le Morte d'Athur of Mallory sir Gareth is also first seen as a commoner, although his demeanor suggested noble blood. Later he is knighted by Lancelot, when Lancelot hears of his noble birth.

I would grant it if:
1) the loyalties or honor of the northman are 16 or higher, and
2) the sponsor is a good friend of Duke Ulfius, or at least the duke has some outstanding favor towards the sponsor.

Of course another option is that the sponsor takes him as a squire for a few years so the northman can show if he is worthy to be a knight. The Duke will knight him then.

I like the squire idea best but is it really ok, for a 24 year old to be a squire, considering that and Esquire who fails at 21 to be a knight forever remains an esquire.

This is the Uther period

The Roman Knight (the sponsor) is Respectable Glory and notable honor and isnt a friend with Ulfius but has spoken with the Earl who has spoken with Ulfius and Madoc. His request was that he be allowed to make him a household knight, Madoc said perhaps he would ask his Father and if so he would knight him, and Ulfius suggested that perhaps he would be better if he took him and put him in his elite vanguard. So what im trying to figure out is if its even appropriate historically. What we decide will be Uther reply to Madoc.

Keep in mind he is a foreigner, he in fact from Skane and again after the commander fell he lead the unit on to victory defeating Eomund the German at the battle of lincoln. sometime after he was wounded near death while fighting with Madoc during a saxon ambush, not alone mind you but one of a dozen knights out raiding with Madoc.

So, he is a battle comrade, with Prince Madoc being an eye-witness to his valor in combat. His bravery, and his loyalty until nigh death. Sounds like he is a better knight than some of the local breed. Depending upon the campaign, but I could very well see him being knighted by someone to belittle someone else's claim to be a great knight. If the knight is willing to speak up upon his honour that this commoner is worthy of knighthood, has the deeds to prove it, then by all means...

Of course, this is rare, but then isn't this the stuff of legends? (and of course, does this squire know his entire geneology? He might very well be a bastard or legitimate son of a noble).

Bob Schroeder

He is not really a commoner, now is he? You said on the first line that he is of noble birth, just a foreigner.

So:
1. He is of noble birth. Foreign birth doesn't disqualify him from this, just see Sir Palomides, etc.
2. Of proven skill, valor and loyalty.
3. I am assuming he has the equipment as well? Horse and armor?

I see no difficulty whatso ever in making him a knight.

Even if he had not been of noble birth, I would not see a problem. Knighthood is still a new thing in Uther's time. The current crop of 'knights' are more akin to warriors than Arthur's Round Table Knights, and their grandfathers' may have been the first 'knights'. That is not long to establish a 'genealogy' of knighthood. If a man is worthy, has the skills and has the tools of the trade, knight him by all means.

I would not worry much about the fact that he is a foreigner. He is at least no t a saxon, is he. He is a Northman. Very different. If you want to stress to the players that this is really a rare occasion and that it is a very great honor to be knighted, then I would stress the oddity later in game by having the northman meet some 'civilized' knights that mock him for being a boorish savage, or some other things that sets him apart from the normal bunch of knights.

But as Bob said. It is the stuff of legends, and we want our PK to feel like heroes. And here we have one with a very interesting background. As a GM I would be glad to have such a character. This gives a lot of inspiration to work with. So I would not worry much whether there is some historic realism to it. Personally I find it more important if a great story is told. And I see a lot of good ingredients here, so I would say go for it.

I am totally with Morien on this.
If I was his player, I would have made more of this previously, and started styling myself as a Huscarle (" it is what we call knights in My lands") and expecting equality from his Knight companions.
Interestingly, the medieval mindset sheds some light on just this kind of thing.
Usamah Ibn Munqidh relates the following conversation betwen him and King Fulk of Jerusalem in his Memoirs
'The king said to me, "by the truth of my religion, I rejoiced yesterday very much indeed." I replied "May Allah always make the King rejoice! What made thee rejoice?" He said, " I was told that thou wert a great knight, but I did not believe previous to that that thou wert a knight" "O my lord," I replied, " I am a knight according to the manner of my race and my people."

Lots of the best knights were foreigners - Lancelot, Palomides, Bors, Lionel, Sagremour.

Plenty of room for a worthy northman.

Thanks guys ;D. Im leaning towards he should be squired for a few years perhaps and then be knighted.

Thanks guys ;D. Im leaning towards he should be squired for a few years perhaps and then be knighted.


Really depends on his skills and Proud. :)

I mean, he sounds like a really proficient warrior. Were I the player, my IC reaction would be the equivalent of 'Stuff that!', only expressed in a more forceful language not allowed in this forum. I am a war hero, a comrade-in-arms to Prince Madog, not some wet-behind-the-ears-whelp, who needs to be told which way to hold a sword and to serve a knight hand and foot like a servant. If my Horsemanship and Lance use might be substandard, fine, I can take lessons from a friendly knight, but as an equal, not as his underling!

This goes double since the character is apparently of noble blood in his own land. So by his cultural standards, he is AT LEAST as good as anyone else. And based on what has been told of his success in battle, he is already head and shoulders above the average knights. Nope, I would not accept a 'demotion' to a squire, no matter what price were dangled in the future. I am a champion warrior, darn it!

Again, I am with Morien.

Someone should knight him, and Quickly, to bind him by ties of loyalty and fealty, before he goes off and takes service with someone who values him for his warcraft and wordfame.

If I was Aelle, I'd send him an offer of Land and Lordright.

And here's a mechanics question for you. Is he gaining Glory?
If so, then he is already accepted De Facto by his peers as a knight.
Squires cannot accumulate glory. It is the province of Knights and Ladies only.

Thanks guys ;D. Im leaning towards he should be squired for a few years perhaps and then be knighted.


Really depends on his skills and Proud. :)

I mean, he sounds like a really proficient warrior. Were I the player, my IC reaction would be the equivalent of 'Stuff that!', only expressed in a more forceful language not allowed in this forum. I am a war hero, a comrade-in-arms to Prince Madog, not some wet-behind-the-ears-whelp, who needs to be told which way to hold a sword and to serve a knight hand and foot like a servant. If my Horsemanship and Lance use might be substandard, fine, I can take lessons from a friendly knight, but as an equal, not as his underling!

This goes double since the character is apparently of noble blood in his own land. So by his cultural standards, he is AT LEAST as good as anyone else. And based on what has been told of his success in battle, he is already head and shoulders above the average knights. Nope, I would not accept a 'demotion' to a squire, no matter what price were dangled in the future. I am a champion warrior, darn it!


My reaction as a lord would be:
So you are a warrior are you? Yes of course you know which end of the sword to use. So you proven yourself in battle. But are you a KNIGHT? Being a knight is more than hacking your opponents to pieces. Even a filthy Saxon barbarian can handle himself in a battle, but I would not make him a knight. No. A true christian knight also has some humility and civilization. Proof to me that you are that as well, than I would think about making you a knight. What you think you are in your own lands is up to you, but here you follow our standards.

Given that this is Utherian times, when might makes right, I suspect the warrior is exactly what the other knights are, too. Sure, I would have no problem with a lord deciding that he is not going to knight the warrior, until the warrior shows that he can act the part of the knight. I might not even get offended by that. But if someone suggests that I (as the warrior) should hang my sword from the wall and learn to shovel dung at the stables and scrape and buff a knight's chainmail for the next few years to 'learn humility'... well, unless my Modest is 16+, it would be 'Thanks, but no thanks.' And like Dan says, go looking for a Lord who appreciates a strong, valorous, loyal warrior when he sees one.