Miscellaneous > The Sallyport
Argument: Templar vs Teutonic Knight
Sir Nate:
--- Quote from: Sir James A on 2014-03-06, 21:22:57 ---
--- Quote from: Sir Aiden on 2014-03-06, 20:16:01 ---Tuetonics also fight for god at all costs. The have won battles that were against greater foes.
--- End quote ---
Just like Templars ;)
Templars had specific rules demanding that they don't leave the field of battle unless outnumbered - I forget specifics but maybe 3 to 1? Also ordered that they don't leave unless the Templar banner has fallen. They are not to be taken prisoner, they are to retreat or die.
--- End quote ---
They also had tactics for winning battles when they were outnumbered.
Remember that little trick bailan does when him and his men at arms are outnumbered protecting the castle.
Templars had tactics like that. But they would also reform so around there banner and fight until ordered to leave.
Another thing they would do is spread there men out and sort of wrap around the enemy forces, enclosing them.
Sir Edward:
--- Quote from: Sir James A on 2014-03-06, 21:22:57 ---Templars had specific rules demanding that they don't leave the field of battle unless outnumbered - I forget specifics but maybe 3 to 1? Also ordered that they don't leave unless the Templar banner has fallen. They are not to be taken prisoner, they are to retreat or die.
--- End quote ---
Yes, 3-to-1 was the requirement before they were permitted to withdraw.
Sir William:
Nate, I wouldn't look to Kingdom of Heaven for examples of Templar cavalry tactics, especially since the double horseshoe move would've been ineffective against that many opposing horsemen, as it was in the movie. I'm assuming you're referring to Kerak, where he hoped to hold off the Muslims long enough for Jerusalem to arrive. He only survived that because Imad knew who he was beforehand. Remember, Balian slew his servant in the desert over a horse- Imad seemed confused when he translated that Balian was the baron of Ibelin (al'huakim Ibelin is the line); Balian could've taken him as a slave but he released him. Imad returned the favor at Kerak.
Much of the depiction of the sequence events at Reynald of Chatillon’s stronghold of Kerak is not true to history. Saladin did besiege Kerak unsuccessfully, but in 1183, well before the time frame of the movie. According to legend, there was a wedding going on during the Muslim bombardment of the walls. Saladin found out which tower the newlyweds were in, and instructed his soldiers not to bombard it. When King Baldwin IV brought his army down from Jerusalem to contest the siege, Saladin withdrew before they arrived. The desperate ploy by Balian and his men-at-arms never occurred during the siege of Kerak and was something of a rare event for that period in time. Muslim commanders tended to avoid such engagements as the heavily armored Western knights were feared for their devastating massed charges.
Sir Nate:
I just got Ninja'd by william.
Ya saladin was very merciful.
Did you know the scene were saladin cuts chatillons throat for drinking the water actually happened?
Wait did you read your second paragraph from something? Its almost word for word with something I read a while back.
Well I still think a Templar would win.
Say there both having a bad day. And they cross paths, and the Teutonic says "excuse me" rudely.... And the Templars says "thats it!" And etc.
Sir Nate:
I feel like this argument is begin to hit a wall.
But honestly on what has been said before so many factor go into 1 on 1 combat, we don't know.
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version