Who would win in a one on one fight? A dismounted knight from the first crusade or a housecarl, such as one from Hastings?
Crusader, because of better armor and weapons. Might want to specify when though, since there were crusading organizations into the 19th century if you count the St. John.
Crusader, because of better armor and weapons. Might want to specify when though, since there were crusading organizations into the 19th century if you count the St. John.
Crusader, 9 time out of ten, rides the lone Huscarl down. The Huscarl lunges at the horse, the horse shies away from shiny death, sword comes down from above into the shoulder, technology wins.
The remainign one time out of ten the horse doesn't shy early enough, is hit by the axe, stumbles down and throws the rider, who, if he doesn't break his neck at once, gets finished off.
(Seriously - as fearsome as say, the Varangian guard and related formations in Byzantine service were, the Normans beat them over and over and over again. That's the closest you'll find to a direct comparison. Horses are nimbler and tougher than one might think, that gives a lone horseman a strong edge over a lone footman.)
Did you miss the part of the OP where he said "Dismounted".
Corrected that
At that point it's a bit of pure guesswork, since both could be said to overlap in timeframe and the equipment (long infantry shields, versatile mid-length swords, armour etc.) are near-identical.
The axe may end up beeing a deciding factor since that is far more effective against the chainmail worn by most knights than the sword.
Please stop spamming these X vs. Y threads.Who would win in a one on one fight? A dismounted knight from the first crusade or a housecarl, such as one from Hastings?