AHC: Real Medieval *Bronn*

Those familiar with ASOIAF know about Bronn -- a low-born sellsword who saved and served a high lord, and subsequently rose in status, eventually marrying into a (lower) noble house. My question is, could (or did?) something like that happen in OTL's middle ages? To be clear what I'm looking for:

*a man of common or foreign birth makes his living by sword (so mercenary, bodyguard, bandit, what have you)...
*then, by happenstance, enters the service of a person of high family (eg a Duke's son or daughter)...
*is eventually made a knight for his service, and...
*marries the daughter of a well off Baron (lower noble)...
*who, in turn, happens to be related to an Earl/Count, and is in the line of succession for said title.

Bonus points if:
*said riser becomes Earl/Count, and...
*has a child who marries one of the children of the Sovereign...
*putting his grandchildren in line of succession to the throne.

It goes without saying that such a chain of events is highly unlikely, but given that I'd still like them to be a plausible as possible.
 
I'm sure I read somewhere about a commoner who ended up becoming a knight and possibly a count (or maybe a Baron) due to his own badassery. Became one of the most valuable commanders of the English.

Cannot for the life of me remember who it was though. I probably misremembered too, it's been a while.
 
Seems to be the archetype

Would not say the illegitimate son of a noble counts as "low-born".

I'm sure I read somewhere about a commoner who ended up becoming a knight and possibly a count (or maybe a Baron) due to his own badassery. Became one of the most valuable commanders of the English.

Cannot for the life of me remember who it was though. I probably misremembered too, it's been a while.

If you can, he sounds exactly like the kind of guy I'm thinking of.
 
Cannot for the life of me remember who it was though. I probably misremembered too, it's been a while.
Probably William Marshal, who nearly ticks most of the boxes.

*Not common birth, but younger son of a minor nobleman; makes his living from tournaments (1/2)
*Enters service of a great magnate deliberately (1/2)
*Made a knight for his service, but probably would have been made one eventually (1/2)
*Marries the daughter of an earl (1/2, not a lower noble)
*who inherits the title. (1)
*becomes Earl of Pembroke (1; recreated for him thanks to his wife)
*William, 2nd Earl of Pembroke marries a daughter of King John and Gilbert, 4th Earl of Pembroke marries a daughter of William I of Scotland (2- double royalty bonus)
*Neither of them have children. (0)

I'd give that 6 out of 8, though some might disagree with the scoring.
 
Last edited:
Probably William Marshal, who nearly ticks most of the boxes.

*Not common birth, but younger son of a minor nobleman; makes his living from tournaments (1/2)
*Enters service of a great magnate deliberately (1/2)
*Made a knight for his service, but probably would have been made one eventually (1/2)
*Marries the daughter of an earl (1/2, not a lower noble)
*who inherits the title. (1)
*becomes Earl of Pembroke (1; recreated for him thanks to his wife)
*William, 2nd Earl of Pembroke marries a daughter of King John and Gilbert, 4th Earl of Pembroke marries a daughter of William I of Scotland (2- double royalty bonus)
*Neither of them have children. (0)

I'd give that 6 out of 8, though some might disagree with the scoring.

That was the guy. I knew I had some details wrong.
 
*Not common birth, but younger son of a minor nobleman; makes his living from tournaments (1/2)
His father (John Marshal) wasn't exactly a minor nobleman himself. He was related to royal family, and his name appeared on royal documents as witness.
William did inherited his marshal dignity from him.

*Enters service of a great magnate deliberately (1/2)
*Made a knight for his service, but probably would have been made one eventually (1/2)
That's actually the same thing. Noble (or anoblished) men entering to the direct service of another nobles were knights. The distinction between knights and unlanded vavassals didn't really existed before the XIVth.
 
Ok, here's an idea for setting -- a young man (teenager or 20's) of the OP criteria saves a major noble during the Hundred Years War (if not Lancaster, maybe Warwick, Suffolk, or Salisbury) and is knighted for service during the Battle of Poitiers.) As OTL, the Duke of Lancaster marries his daughter to the son of the King, and dies shortly after; meanwhile, our protagonist marries into a Baron's family meeting criteria.

How's this sound so far? Because if this passes for plausible, and assuming he becomes Earl, it sets up a scenario where a man of no birth can have a daughter who has the connections to eventually marry one Henry Bolingbroke, or conversely a son to marry one of his sisters.
 
If Marshal doesnt count, then John Hawkwood then has no doubts about the fact he was an illiterate peasant that simply decided to get really good with a sword.

-Common birth? Check. Son of a tanner.
-Joined the English army during the Hundred Years War as a common soldier.
-Knighted by the Black Prince
-Became a freelancer after the war. Fought in Burgundy and Italy. Elected Commander of the White Company.
-Married a daughter of the Visconti family of Milan.
-An illegitimate daughter technically, but the dowry and mercenary paycheck let him buy his own lands and castles. Which means that he was out of the line of succession, but he spent a good portion of his military career fighting against Milan/his wife's family anyways so he probably would have been disqualified even if he was.
-Technically never enobled, but became extremely popular in Italian and English court circles, in addition to command of mercenary company and his own fortune. Definitely a status upgrade from a tanner's son. He was also considered the national hero of Florence, which again technically isn't nobility, but they practically treated him like such for saving their city (bonus points for Battle of the Blackwater analogy?)
 
Last edited:
If they don't have to be in Western Europe, you might want to look at the history of the Catalan Company and Navarrese Company in the Balkans.

I'm not familiar enough with the details to say for sure, but someone like Pedro de San Superano might fit the bill: coming from obscure origins, lieutenant of a mercenary company which is originally in service to the Prince of Achaea/Titular Latin Emperor; married to the daughter of a baron; by playing other rulers, claimants and clergy off against each other, rises to Prince of Achaea; dies, leaving an infant son who also dies, and his title passes to his wife's family.
 
His father (John Marshal) wasn't exactly a minor nobleman himself.
I gave him half a point for this because William is technically noble, but he inherits no land and at one point is so poor he has to sell his clothes to buy a horse. There were undoubtedly vast numbers of such younger sons who, less skilled and fortunate, dropped back into the ranks of the peasantry.

The distinction between knights and unlanded vavassals didn't really existed before the XIVth.
True, and later in the period he might never have bothered getting knighted at all. Again, I gave him half points because the statements were really designed for someone who enters service at a lower status and rises to the dignity of knight rather than someone who would probably have been dubbed out of courtesy provided he didn't majorly blot his copybook as a squire.

I think what the examples given have shown is that it is plausible for someone to rise a significant way up the social spectrum in the Middle Ages. However, it'll need the cards to be dealt exactly right to get them all the way through commoner - minor noble - line of succession rather than just from one stage to the next.
 
I gave him half a point for this because William is technically noble, but he inherits no land and at one point is so poor he has to sell his clothes to buy a horse. There were undoubtedly vast numbers of such younger sons who, less skilled and fortunate, dropped back into the ranks of the peasantry.
Indeed, but there's an important difference between such lesser nobility (that is more current on the continent than in England, due to their extremly limited demographies) and impoverished unlanded nobility (that because it's unlanded, have more trouble going back to a semi-peasantry life).

Basically, kings and great feudal lords preferred to use such unlanded vassals (most generally knights) because they were more directly and personally dependent.
About the horse story (I didn't found myself mention of this story, could you be kind enough to copy/past part of it from your source?).
They were hugely expensives (critically horses trained for fight), and I wonder how much expensives were these clothes. I suppose it was part of the benefits (in the feudal sense) issued from royal service.
 
About the horse story (I didn't found myself mention of this story, could you be kind enough to copy/past part of it from your source?).
It's from the Oxford Dictionary of National Biography, which is copyright. Immediately after his knighting and the skirmish at Neufchatel-en-Bray, William de Tancarville refuses to offer him further maintenance. As I understand it, he wasn't buying a warhorse but just something to ride, which is why he could afford one by selling his clothes. Tancarville later gives him a reprieve when he decides to take his household to a tournament in Maine, and from then on the money starts rolling in.
 
In his case it was wits at least as much as "badassery", but you might want to consider Sir Edward Brampton too. The wikipedia article (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Edward_Brampton) is far, far too brief...


And then there were the De La Pole family _ The merchant William de la Pole (of Hull) became the main financier to King Edward III of England after relations with the Italian banks broke down, and was knighted.
William's oldest son Michael was taken into Edward III's household, earned knighthood during the Hundred Years War (while his younger brother Edmund became, at one stage, Captain of Calais), became Lord Chancellor to Edward’s grandson Richard II in 1383, was created Earl of Suffolk two years later on (already having been the 1st Baron De la Pole for a while before that), but had to flee into exile — and was stripped of his titles after a trial in absentia — at a time when Richard had lost power to the ‘Lords Appellant’ .
Michael's oldest son was another Michael who supported Henry IV against Richard, was restored to the Earldom when Henry became king, and died at the siege of Harfleur during Henry V’s invasion of France:
That second Michael's elder son, yet another Michael, was recognised as the 3rd Earl after his father;'s death but himself died only a few years later… KIA at Agincourt.
The earldom then passed to William, younger son of the 2nd Earl, whose career was too complex for me to summarise easily here and who was promoted to Duke.
And then William’s son John, the 2nd Duke, married Elizabeth of York who was a daughter of Duke Richard of York and two of whose brothers subsequently became kings as Edward IV and Richard III... and the sons of John & Elizabeth were leading Yorkist contenders after Richard III’s death….
 
What about Ibelins in Levant? Just to quote wikipedia:

The family claimed to be descended from the Le Puiset viscounts of Chartres, but this appears to be a later fabrication. They were more probably from Pisa Italy, the name 'Barisan' being found in Tuscany and Liguria related to Azzopardi family. Its first known member Barisan was apparently a knight in service of the Count of Jaffa and in the 1110s became constable of Jaffa. As reward for his capable and loyal service, around 1122 he married Helvis, heiress of the nearby lordship of Ramla. Barisan was given the castle of Ibelin in 1141 by King Fulk as a reward for his loyalty during the revolt of his then master Hugh II of Le Puiset, Count of Jaffa, in 1134. Ibelin was part of County of Jaffa, which was annexed to the royal domain after Hugh's unsuccessful revolt. Barisan's marriage with Helvis produced Hugh, Baldwin, Barisan, Ermengarde, and Stephanie. The younger Barisan came to be known as Balian. Along with Ibelin, the family then held Ramla (inherited from Helvis), and the youngest son Balian received the lordship of Nablus when he married Maria Comnena, the Dowager Queen. Balian was the last to hold these territories as they all fell to Saladin in 1187.


The family underwent a remarkable rise in status in only two generations.
 
A foreigner enlists in the French army, rises through the ranks and (....) ends up ruling France and marrying an Emperor's daughter.

Hey, how's that?

OK, so not mediæval at all, and the'...' includes the French Revolution.
 
Last edited:
Top