Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Could a Peasant Defeat a Knight in Battle?

medievalists.net

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 326 posts

Re: Could a Peasant Defeat a Knight in Battle?

#61

Post by [deleted] »

Beached wrote: post #56
ynac wrote: post #42

It makes one wonder how the modern equals would do? Yes, we have street fights / protests between "soldiers" and pedestrians. Each equipped with their standard tools - lopsided as they may be. The question becomes more of a matter of context for a modern battle. What is a modern knight and what is a modern peasant in 2020 and also, what locale? (We could also use a booklist for this discussion - I keep bringing back…

modern night would be a standard equiped military soldier from a first world country. modern peasant would be an average civilian from a third world country?

[deleted]

Re: Could a Peasant Defeat a Knight in Battle?

#63

Post by willcipriano »

throwaway0a5e wrote: post #15
Forge36 wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Was this the battle historians put a lot of blame on the "steel boots"? Peasants had cloth boots which didn't get stuck into the mud as much so they didn't get as tired.

>Was this the battle historians put a lot of blame on the "steel boots"? Among other things. It takes more than shoes to get such a one sided outcome.

> It takes more than shoes to get such a one sided outcome.

If you make them out of cardboard and try to cross the Carpathian Mountains perhaps not.

https://ww1blog.osborneink.com/?p=5961

Re: Could a Peasant Defeat a Knight in Battle?

#64

Post by damnencryption »

ynac wrote: post #42

It makes one wonder how the modern equals would do? Yes, we have street fights / protests between "soldiers" and pedestrians. Each equipped with their standard tools - lopsided as they may be. The question becomes more of a matter of context for a modern battle. What is a modern knight and what is a modern peasant in 2020 and also, what locale? (We could also use a booklist for this discussion - I keep bringing back…

I wonder if modern peasants can fight and win against the knights.

You can't own a knife in many countries without a license let alone a gun. It's all tracked. There are targeted missiles, drones, autonomous guns, surveillance, radar, bombs, tear gas, tasers, tanks, bullet and knife proof clothing, exoskeleton, etc available to the knights. Knights are many times more organized than they have ever been in history.

Recent incident in Nigeria where military massacred the protestors: https://www.bbc.com/news/world-africa-54630592

How do you protect yourself as a peasant against the Knights?

Re: Could a Peasant Defeat a Knight in Battle?

#65

Post by jacobwilliamroy »

A few ideas for how peasants can defeat a knight:

1) Use disguises to approach in circumstances where a knight is vulnerable

2) Surprise arson in the middle of the night

3) Pit trap

4) Deadfall trap

With outside resources from wealthy parties interested in influencing the land in which the peasants live, a guerilla war can be sustained for several years.

Re: Could a Peasant Defeat a Knight in Battle?

#66

Post by medium_burrito »

HarryHirsch wrote: post #36
User23 wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's a solid analogy, because medieval armor was very effective against the weapons of the time[1]. [1] https://old.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/2z7t3k/plate...

Yet at Morgarten the Swiss massacred a Habsburg force. Armoured knights need an open battlefield to be effective, in crowded terrain a force made up of peasant fighters equipped with polearms is clearly superior.

Peut-etre fondue et racelette est la vraie potion magique?

Re: Could a Peasant Defeat a Knight in Battle?

#67

Post by lostlogin »

barry-cotter wrote: post #57
dodobirdlord wrote: post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Nutrition in childhood, especially early childhood, is extremely critical to development. The average person historically was remarkably short, generally because of childhood malnourishment. Simply being properly nourished in childhood would have led to a huge height and weight advantage (also probably considerable advantages in brain development). Even into the 18th century the average height of an officer in the Br…

> The average person historically was remarkably short, generally because of childhood malnourishment. I believe the average member of the House of Commons was visibly shorter than the members of the House of Lords at least through WWII. Certainly Americans were obviously taller than Europeans until after WWII. Even American slaves were taller and children were generally malnourished until about seven when they becam…

This checks out - thanks.

The below article makes mention of a fact that may complicate things though - big strong slaves were worth more. Presumably slave owners had this in mind so had an ulterior motive for feeding slaves better.

It’s one bleak subject.

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/11718681_The_Height...

Re: Could a Peasant Defeat a Knight in Battle?

#68

Post by megameter »

derefr wrote: post #31
recuter wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Nope, there were a lot of fat and/or incompetent knights. I assure you.

Fat, certainly, but being fat doesn't imply you can't swing a sword on a horse. You can have a lot of core strength and good arms, but if you eat a lot of puddings, the muscle will be covered in enough mass that you'll just look fat. (Especially in a portrait you're just sitting for, rather than flexing for.) As for incompetent knights, I'm genuinely confused: how did they survive in the role for any length of time?…

An incompetent knight can survive for a long period on bluster alone. Think of modern bosses who have no acumen at technical or logistical concerns but are successful in bullying underlings. The business does not fail instantly in most such circumstances, rather it just falls into a gradual decline.

The villagers, on the other hand, are used to invaders coming through. Their condition is likely to remain poor either way: The knight is more likely to come through after something happened, rather than preventing it from happening. Most of the daily decision making is up to the community.

The knight's recruitment efforts can always come with the promise of gaining wealth and status, which will always encourage some young folks, even if the knight is a bad boss who plans no real rewards. Records that uncover his lies are hard to acquire and most of what you learn will come from rumor instead.

Re: Could a Peasant Defeat a Knight in Battle?

#69

Post by dimitrios1 »

bilbo0s wrote: post #52
dimitrios1 wrote: post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Wouldn't a more apt comparison be someone armed with a 9mm pistol trying to take on a trained soldier with advanced anti-ballstic armor and plating, and an accurate rifle?

Knights were mounted. Oftentimes on a mount that itself was armored. The armored vehicle analogy is apt.

The mount was not as heavily armored, however, as modern armor vehicles are, and extremely vulnerable to pikemen (as many other commenters here have brought up: the landsknechts).

Back to the analogy, a peasant (in the modern sense) is unlikely going to be as able to obtain an anti-tank or armor piercing rounds as easily as a peasant (medieval sense) could pick up a pike.

Post reply on HN