|
|
| Author |
Message |
YoungGrasshopper
Yellow Belt
Joined: 04 Apr 2003
Posts: 77
|
 Posted: Tue Aug 26, 2003 8:17 am Post subject: The Medieval European Knight vs. The Feudal Japanese Samurai |
 |
|
WHO WOULD WIN?? MUAHAHAHA!!
(note: forgive my behavior, I am tired and sleepy and this thought just came to my head and it was just mind boggling to me) |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
JerryLove
Black Belt
Joined: 19 Sep 2002
Posts: 1274
Location: Tampa, FL, US
|
| Posted: Tue Aug 26, 2003 9:16 am Post subject: |
|
|
The knight... better equipped.
_________________
www.clearsilat.com |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Bdaze
Orange Belt
Joined: 15 Aug 2003
Posts: 156
Location: Manchester NH, US
Styles: Parker Kempo, Budo taijitsu. Kenjutsu
|
| Posted: Tue Aug 26, 2003 11:02 am Post subject: |
|
|
This subject was suggested on another forum i belong to, and i think im going the have to say Samuria would win.
altough it would probably be extrmely close.
many people suggested that the knight would win because the samuria is held by a code of honor. Save that fortune cookie crap for the story books, when it came down to it, a samurai was just a high ranking foot soldier. they did follow the rules for an honorable engagment, but in a life or death situation they where just as crafty and sneaky as any knight
The Knight has armour suited for his type of combat, just as the samurai had armour suited to his. speed was essential for the samurai, durability was essentail to the knight.
same with weapons. sharp and quick for the samurai, sharp and devistatingly huge, but slow for the knights.
now the question of skill. we'll say both the knight and the samurai are at the same level in their respective arts. who would win? personally i think speed usually beats hulking strength. you can be as strong as you want but if you can't hit your target, it doesnt work. it works the other way too, but since there is a sword involved, strength isn't as important
even a large number of small cuts in certain places can kill someone.
_________________
If in your journey you encounter God, God will be cut
~Hatori Hanso (sonny chiba) |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Tibby
Purple Belt
Joined: 04 Jun 2003
Posts: 597
Location: Jacksonville, Tx
Styles: JuJutsu(Judo), Isshinryu Karate, Boxing, Fencing
|
| Posted: Tue Aug 26, 2003 11:14 am Post subject: |
|
|
What kind of Knight? Samurai are from Japan, but Knights are from all over Europe, and they al have different fighting styles and Armor. A knight on a horse with a lance? A knight in Chain mail was a broad sword? A knight with a breastplate and a saber?
I’m going to assume you mean the fairy tale knight. Shining Plate armor, big ol’ long short, a heater style shield vs. a Samurai. I'd say the knight because he is better equipped.
BTW: Bdaze, the knights had a code of honor, too. Ever heard of “Chivalry”? Just like the Samurai, they mostly ignored it, the Knights had a code as well. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Bdaze
Orange Belt
Joined: 15 Aug 2003
Posts: 156
Location: Manchester NH, US
Styles: Parker Kempo, Budo taijitsu. Kenjutsu
|
| Posted: Tue Aug 26, 2003 11:31 am Post subject: |
|
|
I never said they didn't. but it was comonly understood that both warriors broke the rules when it was necissary.
i am fully aware, infact i was even going to bring up the idea of the knights having a code as well, but i figured it went without saying.
_________________
If in your journey you encounter God, God will be cut
~Hatori Hanso (sonny chiba) |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
JerryLove
Black Belt
Joined: 19 Sep 2002
Posts: 1274
Location: Tampa, FL, US
|
| Posted: Tue Aug 26, 2003 11:48 am Post subject: |
|
|
Hrm.
Both knights and samurai held codes of honor... none of which diminished their fighting ability unless this is a discussion on who would shoot whom in the back they day before our fight. This is a non-starter.
A Samurai was a member of a warrior class; a knight was a member of a warrior elite. In theory, the average knight would be better trained; but it's a hair I'd rather not try to split.
It is simply wrong to say that a knight was slow. It is simply foolish to say that a fast unarmored person with a mdeium sword could take a knight one-on-one but no-one throughout the medieval and renissance periods in Europe ever did it.
The same with weapons... slow weapons would not have hit the enemy, nor would they have done damage (you cannot cut plate, you must hack or bash it). Different knights carried different weapons with different methods of use, though I stand by my statement weather you want a sweedish mercinary with a great-sword or a knight Templar with a flail.
If you believe you can get small cuts on a knight, you certainly don't udnerstand the armor.
And for reference, I presuming a knight in articulated plate with all the appropriate udner-armors... The knight will win because the armor will do its job; they were the tanks of the battlefield, and a samurai brings nothing into the mix which would fundamentally change the situation.
Stick them both naked in a room and see who wins? Will depend on who spent more time with their wrestling/unarmed skills. I would tend to think the Samurai, but am really not sure.
_________________
www.clearsilat.com |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
aznkarateboi
Brown Belt
Joined: 30 Mar 2003
Posts: 627
Styles: shaolin gung fu southern style
|
| Posted: Tue Aug 26, 2003 12:58 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| The Knight would win. In feudal times European blacksmiths were far superior to Japanese smiths. Also, Europeans were (and still are) inherently stronger physically then japanese. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
SaiFightsMS
KF VIP
Joined: 28 Oct 2001
Posts: 6397
Location: Ohio
Styles: Shotokan, Shorin Ryu, Shi-to Ryu
|
| Posted: Tue Aug 26, 2003 3:50 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| This thread does not meet forum guidelines for comparitive arts. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
on the post.
