Editing High Middle Ages (section)

==Notes==
* This is the high point of chivalry as a thing, when the concept of "armored dudes on horseback" had been refined into a truly devastating force. Battles were generally won or lost by the strength of the heavy cavalry that one side could bring to bear. Infantry largely became a secondary concern, used mostly for garrisons and sieges. Major exceptions include Agincourt, Crecy, and Poitiers, where English longbowmen made a mockery of French knights.
* This is the golden age of castles. Any lord of any significance wanted a stone castle to consolidate his position and provide an invulnerable bastion for his household. Castle design advanced from motte-and-bailey to what most people nowadays think of when they hear the word "castle ". They were also very resilient, not only to bombardment by siege engines or attempts to storm them, but often had granaries and water supplies so that they could weather sieges that could last months or even years.
* Warfare in this age was mostly a matter of fairly small parties of knights (in the ballpark of 100) raiding villages and merchants in the other guy's territory, defensive actions against said raids and armies besieging castles and fortified cities. Battles involving mass armies of thousands of men clashing with each other out in the open did happen, but these were the exception rather than the rule. That said, warfare was fairly constant during this period. There were always some squabbling city states, obstinate lordlings making a fuss, armed trade disputes, succession disputes between rival claimants, religious conflicts, blood feuds or fights between a couple of the bigger kingdoms happening somewhere in Europe, as well as a lot of [[bandit|banditry]].
** Notably the Knights Templar managed to be a key pillar of the Crusader States with at most 2,000 knights. They did so through mobility, retreating to very well supplied castles and being very cautious in picking their battles.
* [[Cannon]]s and [[firearm]]s begin to show up in Europe around the late 13th century, though both were crude affairs largely of marginal use compared with more traditional muscle-powered weaponry like longbows.
* While hardly a unique feature to this period, or even Europe, people at this point thought in terms of ''Knowing Their Place''. The role a person had in medieval society was largely determined by birth; if you were the son of a blacksmith or a baker or a fisherman, you were going to inherit that trade from your dad when you grew up. Some people did the telling and the rest did what they were told. Medieval peasants by and large didn't give much of a shit about what the kings and lords were up to unless it directly and overtly affected them in some way. Wars of succession, trade disputes, and religious arguments weren't their business; there were other people out there who knew better than they did about all of these things, and their judgment had God's backing. This was not an absolute mentality, of course; they did have an idea that there were obligations that nobles needed to fulfill to their subjects and if they were pushed or abused too much they would riot. Even so is a major distinction that people should consider when trying to get into the mind of a medieval peasant or lord.
* The common portrayal of everyone and their mother wearing clothes with dour, muted colors is completely inaccurate. Dyeing was a thriving industry, and while natural dyes had a relatively limited color range (red, blue, yellow, brown, indigo, green, pink, and orange were all common) it was still abundant and middle class or higher non-clothing items were generally decorated (clothes were restricted to, at most, simple patterns as the methods of washing clothes weren't delicates friendly). A large portion of this perception comes from the fact that nearly all surviving art from the period has deteriorated over the centuries. The colors have faded due to age and sun exposure and most of these works have accumulated centuries of grime which can't be removed without harming the work in question. This misunderstanding actually applies to many periods of history, but the Middle Ages get hit with it especially hard.
* The standard of living was generally really low, even for those of higher birth. Being wealthy largely meant being able to have proper nutrition, access to primitive healthcare and little more than that. Many scientific concepts that our modern understanding of engineering is built on were still centuries away or had been lost during the decline of the Roman Empire, and this meant that every winter was bad news for everyone. Disease and exposure were constant dangers everyone, no matter their status, had to deal with in some way or form. For all its big walls and pretty banquet halls, a medieval castle was generally a pretty shitty place to live in, being very cold and difficult to reach. There are nuances to this however; for one, hygienic standards were actually ''higher'' than during the Renaissance and Enlightenment periods as the bathing culture of the Romans was one of the few things that survived the turmoil of the Empire's fall. One or even several large public baths were standard inventory in many cities during that period and broadly accessible to the majority of people. The image of the dirty medieval peasant and common city-dweller is therefore something that is to be banished into the realm of myth.
* The low life expectancy of this age was massively exaggerated by pop historians, as the major contributing factor to it was the insanely high child and infant mortality. It wasn't unheard of for many families to give birth to more than ten children, however, only a few often survived into adulthood. If they did survive however, they often had a fairly long life ahead of them. Part of what made the Black Death so feared was exactly because the disease broke the norm of adults surviving most dieases.