Page 5 of 5 FirstFirst 12345
Results 41 to 49 of 49

Thread: Samurai vs Knight

  1. #41
    Senior Member SC-Mann's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Last Online
    Sunday, July 2nd, 2006 @ 03:06 AM
    Subrace
    Nordid
    Country
    Confederate States Confederate States
    Location
    Tampa, Fl
    Gender
    Age
    34
    Posts
    48
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    0
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    0
    Thanked in
    0 Posts

    Post Re: samurai vs knight

    The katana blade was of higher quality and less impurities, but the blade itself was extremely fragile. The hollywood depiction of samurais,ninjas etc deflecting each other's attacks using the frontal portion of the sword as defense is fallacious, they deflected using the back of the sword (if possible) because if the opposing force was strong enough it would shatter the front of the blade. Also, great skill and craftmanship went into European blades, the depiction of medieval armies beating each other to death with steel clubs is once again Hollywood. I feel the original quality of steel in parts of Europe was easily equal to Japan's , but of course the Japanese method to rule out impurities and the specific process made it an exceptional weapon. I mean the sword itself was of amazing sophistication and quality but the razor-edged thinness in the front couldn't of handled a direct blow by a medieval sword, axe, halberd etc.

    Also in kendo and actual sparring practice, i forgot the term for it, but they perform swinging and cycling motions with the blade that goes completely into their philosophy of life, spirituality, etc. and it would of been completely foreign to the fighting style of the european knight. The European fighting style was always progressing, and the tactics and style would of seened completely alien to the Japanese in many ways, and perhaps similar in a few. As for on horseback I know the samurai had a shorter version of the lance, forgot its name also, but I doubt it was as long or well-developed as the European version. The samurai form of horse archery seemed superior to anything in Western Europe, the only equivalent would of been crossbowmen or English longbowmen on foot. A samurai on horseback as an archer could of picked off a knight easily, as was seen with the Mongols in Eastern Europe.

    I tend to go with the knight on this because of additional armor and variety of weapons, but then again the samurai's armor wasnt exactly paper, and their weapon array was numerous as well. Would be a very interesting fight, among two of the finest warriors in military history.
    "If a policy strengthens our people, if it increases the survivability of our people, it is a good policy. If it weakens us or puts us at a disadvantage in the struggle for survival, it is a bad policy. That's all that matters. That's all that we should consider. Racial survival, racial victory in the struggle for life and dominance, must be the goal of every plan, of every policy, of every thought and action. Tribal thinking."
    -WLP

  2. #42
    Senior Member Vanir's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Last Online
    Saturday, July 14th, 2007 @ 10:32 AM
    Gender
    Posts
    814
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    0
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    1
    Thanked in
    1 Post

    Post Re: samurai vs knight

    ROTFL Knight vs Samurai...Ahh dear, OK...
    How could a Samurai of basically ANY skill level defeat Jean Reno in "Les Visiteurs"? now that bloke is thought&action as one personified.

    I know that the Scottish/Irish mercenaries in the 11th or 12th century known as Galloglas preferred wielding pretty large two-handed swords in combat...here's a pic of what I guess they must've looked like.

    http://home.earthlink.net/~rggsibiba/html/galloglas/gallohist.html
    Any sword of those kind've dimension must be getting up around the 10kg mark given the amount of steel in it!
    Maybe in quelling a rabble, or for ritual duelling, perhaps they might have been useful then, but such weapons seem utterly useless to me in a militarily practical sense. Maybe such bodyguards were a status symbol? An Axe seems a far better choice of two handed weaponry, particularly the Norse longtooth lightened ones...you could wave one of them around, smash shields, sever limbs, crush bones, and it's just a lump of steel on a cheap wooden handle!

    Anyway, I'll put my 2 brass razoos on the Knight in Round 3 by TKO

    Though that Branko could kickbox them all to the head

  3. #43
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Last Online
    Tuesday, January 24th, 2006 @ 12:40 AM
    Gender
    Posts
    450
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    0
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    0
    Thanked in
    0 Posts

    Post Re: samurai vs knight

    If we go back to the days of the Celtic Champions like Cu Chulain, then we find men to match the Samurai. The Champions represented their clans in a purely pastoral society, so they were extremely skilled and vicious, as so much more depended on them.

  4. #44
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Last Online
    Thursday, July 28th, 2011 @ 07:35 AM
    Ethnicity
    Scottish (basically)
    Country
    Australia Australia
    Location
    Victoria
    Gender
    Age
    36
    Posts
    1,493
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    0
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    3
    Thanked in
    3 Posts

    Post Re: samurai vs knight

    Quote Originally Posted by Altruist
    Perhaps some Knights had other jobs, but I wouldn't say that most did. Here we have a few services that were provided:
    http://historymedren.about.com/cs/k...a/kl1define.htm
    They had quite the noble aspect. Tournaments, wars and councils.
    Most of them were at least landowners with serfs on their land; I think managing their estates would have required work at a fairly consistent rate.
    Also, war was probably not frequent enough to be a constant profession.

    There were varying ranks of knight, in fact I think all the Mediaeval nobility were knights, from the regional rulers (such as earls and the leaders of "hundreds" in England) and kings, down to the knights in villages who presumably held their land as tenants of the chief knight of the village; in turn this knight held his land as a tenant of a higher noble, such as the "hundred" leader etc.
    So I would think the lower knights (who would have been more numerous) probably had their own jobs to do even though the Councils, Tournaments and war no doubt was a very significant part of their life.
    Last edited by Rhydderch; Wednesday, March 23rd, 2005 at 07:58 AM.

  5. #45
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Last Online
    Thursday, August 20th, 2009 @ 01:11 AM
    Ethnicity
    Slavic
    Subrace
    Uralic/Alpine/Pontid mixed
    Country
    United States United States
    Location
    USA
    Gender
    Posts
    3,309
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    0
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    2
    Thanked in
    2 Posts

    Post Re: samurai vs knight

    Knight vs. Samurai??? Well it would heavily depend on the circumstances of the fight. Both had their strengths and weaknesses. Although I'd propably put my money on the Knight.

  6. #46
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Last Online
    Thursday, August 20th, 2009 @ 01:11 AM
    Ethnicity
    Slavic
    Subrace
    Uralic/Alpine/Pontid mixed
    Country
    United States United States
    Location
    USA
    Gender
    Posts
    3,309
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    0
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    2
    Thanked in
    2 Posts

    Post Re: samurai vs knight

    Concerning the Third Crusades, I do believe the Turks by that time were much more settled a people, so they werent entirely nomadic by that time.

  7. #47
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Last Online
    Thursday, July 28th, 2011 @ 07:35 AM
    Ethnicity
    Scottish (basically)
    Country
    Australia Australia
    Location
    Victoria
    Gender
    Age
    36
    Posts
    1,493
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    0
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    3
    Thanked in
    3 Posts

    Post Re: samurai vs knight

    Perhaps some Knights had other jobs, but I wouldn't say that most did. Here we have a few services that were provided:
    http://historymedren.about.com/cs/k...a/kl1define.htm
    They had quite the noble aspect. Tournaments, wars and councils.
    Another thing is the evidence from thanes/thegns. These were the pre-Norman English equivalent of the post-Conquest knight.

    Now, a merchant who had crossed the sea three times at his own expense was entitled to the "weregild" of a thane, and if his descendants retained that wealth to the third generation, they became thanes (and as such, they were to serve as warriors). A man also became a thane if he'd owned a certain amount of land for three generations.
    So it appears that the non-noble knights or thanes were basically just men who were wealthy enough to afford relatively expensive weaponry, and to afford to be absent from their ordinary profession for a specified number of days each year, when they served their lord in battle or something related to it.
    In early English and in Celtic society, all freemen were entitled to bear arms, and were trained in war, but the less wealthy, non-warrior freemen were more like reserves, and were only called upon in times of greater necessity. Their weaponry was probably of a more simple, unsophisticated style.

  8. #48
    Senior Member Ravenrune's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2018
    Last Online
    9 Hours Ago @ 04:14 AM
    Ethnicity
    Anglo-Saxon-Celt
    Ancestry
    Irish, English, Scottish, German, French, Mi'kmaq
    Country
    Canada Canada
    Gender
    Zodiac Sign
    Scorpio
    Family
    Single adult
    Occupation
    maker of things
    Politics
    non-corruption for the people
    Religion
    Pantheism / Norse pagan / Taoism
    Posts
    540
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    78
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    591
    Thanked in
    297 Posts
    I remember reading about some European battle (ah yes, Battle of Agincourt) where the French knights had a hard time with the muddy terrain. If they fell in the mud, their armour could even cause a suction effect with the mud making it even harder to get back up.


    So I'd say the Samurai should lead the knight into a muddy area as a first tactic

  9. #49
    Senior Member Astragoth's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2018
    Last Online
    9 Hours Ago @ 04:22 AM
    Ethnicity
    Anglo-American
    Country
    United States United States
    State
    New York New York
    Gender
    Posts
    843
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    864
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    820
    Thanked in
    448 Posts
    The samurai had mounted archers. This would help. The problem was a knight in metal armor would laugh at
    one of those katana's. Most of the samurai weapons would bounce off a knights armor.

Page 5 of 5 FirstFirst 12345

Similar Threads

  1. Saigo Takamori - the Last Samurai
    By Thusnelda in forum Anthropological Taxonomy
    Replies: 10
    Last Post: Thursday, September 1st, 2016, 05:24 PM
  2. Replies: 10
    Last Post: Tuesday, December 18th, 2007, 11:29 PM
  3. William Adams, the First Foreign Samurai
    By Cnooc in forum Modern Age & Contemporary History
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: Sunday, October 16th, 2005, 04:13 AM
  4. 'The Last Samurai' reviewed by Troy Southgate
    By Siegfried in forum Film, TV, & Performing Arts
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: Wednesday, September 28th, 2005, 11:47 PM

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •