"Bishop protects knight" suggests that the knight is on the diagonal of one of its bishops. This simply means that the knight could not be taken without then putting the attacking piece into the bishop's path.
The bishop isn't actually "protecting" the knight, however; if the knight can be legally taken, then the question becomes, "Is my attacking piece worth more or less than the knight?" If, for example, I'm threatening that knight (3 points) with a pawn (1 point), then I don't care if the bishop is protecting it, because even if the bishop takes my pawn after taking that knight, I'll still be 2 points up in material after the exchange.
Arthur Knight - bishop - died in 1939.
Henry Knight - bishop - was born in 1859.
Henry Knight - bishop - died in 1920.
Samuel Knight - bishop - was born in 1868.
Samuel Knight - bishop - died in 1932.
If the knight is placed on a square with different color from the bishop.
If the knight is placed on a square with different color from the bishop.
Arthur Knight - bishop - was born in 1864.
Not with the bishop and knight alone but yes if they are used in conjunction with the king
In a game of chess, a bishop is generally considered to be worth more than a knight.
In chess, to win the exchange is to win a rook (castle) in exchange for either a bishop or knight. Since the value of the rook is considered five, and the knight and bishop about three (with the bishop counted as 3.5 by some, for its ability to checkmate when two are present), the two point win is referred to as 'the exchange'.
Front row: pawns Back row: rook, knight, bishop, queen, king, bishop, knight, and rook