well for what i know the lords respected the knights but they were above them in the heirarchy. Knights were respected by all even the king and queen because they were the ones who went to fight for them. hope this helps
The king was often the "lord" but when he wasn't he gave titles and lands to lesser nobles. The term "lord" meant "landlord"
The lord gave the knights a little peice of land and a serf to run it. Camra 12years
The lords provided knights with food & land.
The knights promised to fight for the land.
It's hard to pinpoint a narrow anthropological definition of the feudalism system, so for the purpose of this question I'm going to assume you mean the classic definition of the feudalism system, which was in effect in Europe during the Middle Ages. In my opinion, the knights did depend on the lords, but the lords also depended on the knights; it was a mutually beneficial relationship. The knights were given the task of fighting for the lord, whether it be defending the estate or attempting to seize other land. In return for their services, the lord would give them land that they could live on and work. The knights were essential to the lords because the knights offered the lords protection from exterior forces. So yes, the knights did depend on the lords for fief, or land, but the relationship was mutually beneficial if anything.
watch the servants as they worked and had jobs as knights,Barons and lords.
As part of their relationship with the king, the lords always had to provide military support for him. They had to be ready for war.
Lords had to watch over the peasants, ladies had to cook and clean, knights had to protect the lords and peasants had to work for the lords.
Chivalry governed relations between military and lords. Knights were granted land by the kings. In exchange, knights are expected to fight bravely for the king.
no
their all from medieval times
Knights typically served under lords as vassals, swearing loyalty in exchange for land and protection. Lords provided knights with a place to live, resources, and support in exchange for military service and loyalty. This relationship was based on feudal obligations and mutual benefit, reinforcing the hierarchy of the feudal system.
It's hard to pinpoint a narrow anthropological definition of the feudalism system, so for the purpose of this question I'm going to assume you mean the classic definition of the feudalism system, which was in effect in Europe during the Middle Ages. In my opinion, the knights did depend on the lords, but the lords also depended on the knights; it was a mutually beneficial relationship. The knights were given the task of fighting for the lord, whether it be defending the estate or attempting to seize other land. In return for their services, the lord would give them land that they could live on and work. The knights were essential to the lords because the knights offered the lords protection from exterior forces. So yes, the knights did depend on the lords for fief, or land, but the relationship was mutually beneficial if anything.
kings had higher rank but did not really have much power over lords.
Peasants worked for knights, who worked for lords.
They were usually lords, nobles, or knights
the lords give the knights power
Such people were called crusaders.
Knights were sons of their lords whose life-time duty eventually was to serve and fight for them in whatever circumstance.
The lords provided knights with food & land.
The lords provided knights with food & land.