This is going to have to be a detailed answer… Bear with me.
Knight Analysis:
Advantages:
The knight, and the knight only, has the advantages of armour, size, and strength.
His armour, which we shall assume to be solid Gothic plate, is from 1453, backed by a full-body mail suit as well as much leather padding. Despite modern urban legend, the armour is, while slightly heavier than heavy Norman mail, is still manoeuvrable and balanced, allowing him to travel at, with adrenaline, 15 km/h should he need to.
He is the son of a rich lord, part Frank, part Norman in ancestry, with dark blonde hair; he's approximately 6' 6" in Roman feet (or roughly 6'1" in normal feet; pardon for any errors in conversion). He weighs approximately 250 imperial pounds unarmored.
Training:
His training begins from 5 years old, but at that point, consisted of running and strength exercises. At 6, he would pick up his first weighted, balanced wooden sword, and would have fairly loosely disciplined exercises just to get the feel for it and configure his style. A few months afterward, he would begin to train in unarmored fighting. This education would take up only about half of his time at this point, the other half devoted to education, the learning of manners, and play.
At 7, he would learn to ride and, in a pinch, care for a horse. He would spend much more of his time in the yard learning unarmored fighting, and would begin to use weights for training; also, he would begin learning to tilt with a quintain. This routine would continue until the lad was 11-12, or even as young as 10.
Once he began to enter puberty, he would enter a back-breaking regime for both endurance and strength, upgrading his weapon, which has so far been fairly neutral, to either a one-handed sword or a two-handed greatsword. An alternative would also be war hammers, maces, and axes. His life now was somewhat like a training montage. He would wake up before dawn and run, before the morning meal and training. He would get a little more education at this time, but it would be solely for managing the castle in case of siege, dividing resources, and basic tactics. The rest of the time would be spent in the yard. At this point, if he was a rich lord's son, he would have his own suit of plate crafted, and he would train for almost ten hours, only stopped by the midday meal.
He would learn how to fight multiple, heavily-armored men; how to stand in a shield wall and shove and thrust; how to balance on his horse wielding a bulky, 2.5 kg greatsword or blunt weapon; and, should he show talent, he would train with a swordmaster, who would educate him on many specific techniques made for fighting men of various sizes, temperaments, armaments, and armours. He would eat like a horse on eggs, meat, and vegetables; he needed the energy, but more than that he needed the proteins and vitamins.
When the lad reached 14-15, he might choose to continue his training, or to become a squire (a baron's son might well be able to attain knighthood right off the bat). After that, he would follow the knight in battle, help armor him, and fight tag-team with him. Here, he would continue his training, but would also get his first taste of battle, as well as how to care for his provisions should he become a knight. He could be knighted within a year, if he proved himself worth (or rich), or he might not. Some squires stayed squires their entire lives, usually disgracing their families by their lack of progress.
When he became a knight, the rest was up to him. But as son of a lord, he would have the riches and power to do one thing: continue his training. If he chose, he could well drive himself as hard as the Spartiates, just as it was when he entered puberty.
Weaponry:
He has weapons that are made for either solid impact or strong thrusts, ideal for fighting against heavy armour. He has trained with these specific weapons since he was about 11-12, perhaps younger; with the bastard sword, he has trained since he was about 6.
Temperament:
By training, he would be hard, and unwilling to show pain. Furthermore, he would be intrinsically motivated, determined to be the best, and to distinguish himself.
Disadvantages:
He's not exactly reckless, but he can be headstrong… he's not going to disobey orders, but he's also very eager to charge at people. Whilst he's not slow and cumbersome, the armour is still heavy, and so he'll be a little slower than the rest. His horse is the best there is in a melee fight and in a charge, but it isn't exactly made for speed, nor for minute controls needed for Parthian shots. His weapons, unlike common myth, are not slow and cumbersome, but he's not just going to be able to swing them around like a knife.
Next fighter would be...
Spartiate Analysis:
Advantages:
Shield and Discipline.
Weapons: 8-ft long doru spear, yard-wide shield, and 2-ft long kopis sword.
Armor: Bronze cuirass, greaves, and vambraces; leather kilt.
Training: 5-7 domestic training regime with father; 7-15, standard, hellish Agoge education, which teaches discipline, courage, survival skills, military history, and weapons skills; 15-20, specialised training; 20-30, army service; 30+, reservist, periodic training.
Temperament: Insane discipline, great courage, not very reckless, knowledgable in tactics.
Disadvantages:
He lacks his buddies, whose unity in the phalanx are what makes them famous. He has no ranged weapons, and his equipment is heavy.
Next fighter...
Samurai Analysis:
Advantages:
The Samurai has the advantage of his bow, and his willingness to do suicidal actions if there could be a greater payoff.
His bow is the only true long-ranged weapon in the entire fight. It has an long reach, a moderately quick capability to reload, and a reasonable power upon impact. The question is, what can the rest do? The Spartan's and Centurion's shields will be able to take the impact, but their armour just isn't thick enough. As for the knight, he is known for declining a shield… because his plate armour is thick enough to withstand the impact, and is fiendishly designed so as to allow anything but a direct hit glance off with a screech.
Weaponry:
He does, of course, have the bow. Moreover, he has a wakizashi short-sword and a long katana, but he can choose to ditch both for a nodachi. He has a long, thin lance, about 11-12 feet long, which, while longer than the Spartan's dour, is too long to be effective outside of a formation, or in a cavalry charge. These are weapons that are made for spectacular duels, as well as fighting peasant rebellions. As in, a horde of small people carrying rakes and hoes.
Armor: He is wearing the late-period, pre-gunpowder armour, which is made of lacquered bamboo. It is designed for deflecting glancing arrow shots and sword slashes, but isn't exactly made for direct thrusts or hammering blows.
Size/Genetics:
His father was a Samurai, as was his father before him, and all in his family ever since Japan first rose out of the waters. The body ideal for Samurai was a short, stocky, and muscular frame, capable of quick and powerful slashes at the torso or belly. He is 5'11" in Roman feet, or 5'4" by today's standards.
Training:
A daily regime, beginning at about seven. A boy would learn from his father how to duel with wooden swords, but before that, he would learn to ride and shoot. His training is not nearly as complex as the knight's, or the modern student's Kindergarten-College education, but was still tough and tried-and-true. He would learn how to wield the spear from horseback; how to single out opponents in a fight and duel them correctly; and how to fire that bow from horseback.
He would also learn bushido, the strict Samurai code of honour.
(Apologies, I don't know as much about Eastern warfare and training as much as I do about that of the West, even though I am Asian myself.)
Temperament:
Bushido is a code of utter honour. Like in DragonBall Z, the Samurai would be inclined and expected to be utterly respectful and loyal to their lord, and to single out opponents in a ritualised version of battle. This means he was actually trained for an environment similar to what we're plugging him into… but he's in for a rude awakening.
Disadvantages:
His weapons are made for, at best, dealing with medium-level armour. They're designed for dealing horrific, clean slash wounds, but thrusting is clearly not as efficient with those curved swords. Bushido will keep him from playing a little dirty… though he was educated along the lines of Sun Tzu's Art of War, and is not above psychological warfare. And his bow, while incredibly efficient, lacks the power to make heavy infantry/cavalry obsolete. Above all, he's a glory hound, and aims for him, and him alone, to truly be distinguished from the rest.
Next fighter...
Centurion Analysis:
Advantages:
Arguably, the most experienced commander among these; massive shield; unstoppable morale.
Disadvantages:
He's alone, without supporting artillery or men to command. He's trained as a group fighter, not a solo duelist.
Training: A year in legionary training; about 9-10 years of warfare.
Weapons: 7-ft long pilum, 2-foot long gladius, 3x5 ft^2 oaken shield with metal on the rim.
Size: He's about 5'8", or 6'2" in Roman feet; he weighs about 180 lbs.
Temperament: Hard, cruel, and insanely disciplined, with patriotism for Rome and great courage.
Mutual advantages:
The Knight has German steel, which is very well-made and from a source of excellent steel, while the Samurai has Japanese steel, which is extremely well-made, but from a source of bad steel. Both have weapons of equal quality. Both are also mounted.
The Spartiate and the Centurion both share immense discipline, and a big shield. Not to mention, they're dismounted.
Fight time:
Samurai vs Spartiate:
Both are harshly trained. The Samurai is mounted, with a long, thin spear, but the Spartiate possesses a stout infantry spear, the bane of cavalry, and also has enough morale to negate the dread in a cavalry charge. On foot, the Samurai has a great advantage in terms of skill… but the Spartiate is patient and tough, capable of allowing the Samurai to continually pummel him and exhaust himself while he slowly withdraws. Moreover, the Spartiate has a shield, which makes a great difference against the slashing of Japanese swords. Also, the Samurai's bamboo armour is slightly weaker than the Spartiate's. Finally, the Spartan is willing to fight dirty.
Winner: Spartan
Centurion vs Spartiate:
The centurion has a ranged javelin, the Spartiate has an long spear. The centurion's thrusts are more effective than the Greek's slashes against their contemporary armour, and the Spartiate is an excellent wrestler. The Roman has experience, the Spartiate has training. However, the Spartiate has been through much harder training. His shield is smaller, but easier to wield in formation. Lastly, he knows how to treat minor injuries (e.g. cuts, sprains, bruises, superficial gashes) within seconds, and then return to combat.
Winner: Spartan
Knight vs Spartan:
The Spartan's spear is shorter than the 13-ft lance of a knight, not to mention thinner. The knight's warhorse is armoured, and is able to take even good thrusts by a spearman. The knight is more heavily armoured, and is trained in a similar style of wrestling. Lastly, the knight is much bigger and stronger than the Spartiate, and his weapons are designed for dealing with heavy armour.
Winner: Knight
Samurai vs Centurion:
The Samurai's slashes can easily be negated by the Centurion's shield, as can the cavalry charge. The pilum can bring down the horse as well. The samurai, though, can bring down the centurion by hitting him repeatedly with arrows. The key, then, would be to keep his distance, stay out of javelin range, and continue to circle until the Roman is too tired to keep on turning to face him. However, the arrows will run out before the Roman's endurance, and then a close-up fight will begin. The shield is the single greatest obstacle to the Samurai; without it, the centurion would get cut down quickly. However, the Samurai would and could get close enough to wrestle with the Roman. Should he throw the Roman, it'll ultimately be a ground fight with daggers, or a shieldless, one-sword against one-sword duel. The Roman, probably a former street-fighter (partisan), would win the first. The Samurai would win the second. However, that's all if the Samurai gets to throw the Roman. If the Roman keeps his distance from the Samurai, allowing a pummelling on his shield, eventually he would be able to stab the Samurai after the Japanese had exhausted himself. Even then, his armour would be better suited against slashes than the Samurai's.
Winner: Centurion
Samurai vs Knight:
A cavalry charge occurs, lance on lance. The knight's lance, longer and thicker, would impact first and would do fatal damage. Even if both lances collided, one is adapted to taking cavalry charges with their bodies, the other isn't. Should the knight be mounted and the Samurai dismounted, the Samurai could dodge the lance and bring down the horse with nodachi… and then both he and the knight would end up hammering at each other with their two-handed weapons. The knight's armour is far better for taking that hammering, as is his training and brute strength. Lastly, the Knight's greatsword is much better at thrusting than a curved nodachi or katana, while his blunt weapons would crush the Samurai's armour. If the knight was dismounted and the Samurai mounted, the knight would, though, have a hard time against Parthian shots from the Samurai. The Samurai, though, would probably not have enough arrows to pierce all that armour and kill the knight. And then, he gets up close, and has to charge the knight; that, or risk a vulnerable trot to circle around the Franco-German. Unless the Samurai can bring enough arrows to the field, the Knight's winning this fight.
Winner: Knight
Knight against Centurion:
The Knight's armour would be able to take anything but a lucky hit from the pilum. Up close, the knight is better at wrestling, is much stronger, and is fully armoured, capable of taking any of the Roman's thrusts while hammering down or stabbing around/through that shield. A cavalry charge might even be able to smash through the shield and kill the centurion in a single hit.
Winner: Knight
So the evidence seems to say Knight seems to be reigning supreme in terms of individual quality.
However, it can be assumed:
If there was a competition on who could kill lightly armoured enemies the fastest, the Samurai would win, with his sharp swords and vicious slashes.
If there was a full scale battle, the Centurion could work together with his artillery and his troops to bring down the rest… not to mention he had the biggest army and empire.
And if you needed a bunch of troops to hold a line against a cavalry charge without doing anything stupid, the Spartiate reigns supreme.
As for the original rules of the fight, which asked for no armour…
There's no way to discern that kind of fight very well. Thanks to whitecracka23 for creating this thread, but these men were first and foremost warriors, who trained mostly with weapons and their own fighting styles, which was almost entirely based off equipment. We don't have enough data in terms of everyone's fighting styles to know what would happen in an unarmored fight, as none of these would show up naked in a fight. They simply never trained to be without equipment utterly. If I had to go with what I had, though:
The knight is superior in strike-knockout, due to his massive strength and longer reach.
The Spartiate is trained to bring his opponents to the ground, while Samurai martial arts are more for leaving them vulnerable, wherever that might be. So, Spartiate wins with grappling-submission/knockout.
The Knight wins with striking again, provided he keeps them at range.
And with weapons, the knight wins, with the longest sword, spear, and arm length. It's possible to get around them, but if a single thrust counts as a win, then the Knight's range and strength should be able to get at least one thrust in before the opponent comes within range.
The Samurai, though, would be able to equal the knight if everyone was naked and without shields.
The results depend on the conditions of the fight. And, this last part, as I said, is almost impossible to prove through history.
Thanks.
Log in to comment