Share This Post:These icons link to social bookmarking sites where readers can share and discover new web pages.
This entry was posted
on Monday, October 15th, 2007 at 4:00 pm and is filed under Characters.
You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed.
You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.
“I do not understand way many people think that Knights are clumsy, slow, stiff, or even inflexible; the fact is a man with a full suit of armor can do just about any thing a man with no armor!”
Very true… I seen a guy do cart wheels in a full suit of armor!
Yes knights in full suit of armor can move but that said full suit of armor appeared late in middle ages and was heavy with the equipement like chain-mail (cotte de maille). Earlier lighter armor didn’t protect as well. Moreover, the full suit of armor was made for sustain the damage of european weaponry and some of the japonese weaponry uses different weakness on protections. Once I saw a documentary on samurai and the guy show he could slice and pierce sheets of metal with a sabre. I don’t say the samurai would win every time but it’s way cooler to be a samurai. Beside, there are still few real samurai in japan when the knight title is just honorary like “knight of arts and letters” in France.
To star this of; both were very great warriors both trained sense the age of 6 and 7 or even 8.
Both were very disciplined, brave, and loyal!
Both had a warrior code; for the Knight’s and European troops it was Chivalry and Knight Hood! For the Samurai and Japanese’s troops it was the Bushido.
Both impacted are lives to this day. For one of many examples the military salute came from the Knights of Europe.
The Knights and Samurais were one of many great warrior and solders in Human history.
But sadly I have to choose one that would win, and I will have to go with the Knight or Knights!
Japanese’s Swords:
Japanese had the katana. The katana is used with one or two-hands, this is a good sword and has the best in cutting and sharpness; this sword was never made to go against soft or hard armors but to slice flesh and bone, but the katana’s edge is very strong and has a sharp cutting bevel.
Although the katana has a very, very hard edge that was prone to chipping; its blade can break or bend the same as any sword might.
Japanese’s armor:
The Japanese’s armor were manly made up of iron or steel scales and plates or used the lamellar. The Japanese armor was tied together with silk cords, this help to resist the slicing cut of the katanas. But if the silk cords get wet, they will soak up water then the armor will became heavier.
Scale armor and lamellar armor are good armor but far from the best. Sword slash can damage the armors greatly… The scales and lamellar armor has better use at protecting against arrows then swords and other weapons. But there was later improvements were intended be protected against other swordsmen, and also it help lessen the tremendous cutting capacity Japanese and Asian swords. The armor was durable, quite effective and in use had good movement. Would this armor hold up to the stabs of narrowly pointed European swords?
Also the armor used by the Samurai weights about the same as the armor used by the Knight and European infantry.
European armor:
The steel on the armor and some helmets
are “decorated”; the “decorations” is not just for looks but it is a type of support for the steel. This makes the steel stronger then what is should be… Also the “decorations” on the steel can act like a slope this made it less likely to slide into a more vulnerable joints, this also made the weapons more likely to slip off the target.
If you look at European armors they had the first slope armor. Slope armor was re-used in the early 20th century for tanks! But Europeans were using it many centuries before WWII! To this day we still use slope armor for are armored vehicles…
Armors weight and how it works:
I do not understand way many people think that Knights are clumsy, slow, stiff, or even inflexible; the fact is a man with a full suit of armor can do just about any thing a man with no armor! How do you think this is possible? The technology that Europeans had; it was the rivets in the joints that made such flexibility to armors and other things! I have some armor my self! I can run, jump, roll, get up, do jumping jacks, push ups, pull ups, and MORE; just like the history books says! It is very foolish to think that suits of armor are super heavy; THEY ARE NOT! A full suit of armor is about 45lbs to 55lbs, but some can go up to 80lbs the heaviest; but not to bad, modern troops carry about the same and travel for miles! All type of weapons had trouble piecing plate armor; plate armor offered the best in protection. Full plate was so good historians describe the men that worn them as walking tanks! Oh and people, Samurai armor weights the same as the Knight’s armor… To me I think that the west had and has the best armor in all through out history; going back to the Greek and Romans. Just look at the Armors before steel plate, their was the Steel Lorica Segmentata, Chainmail and the Cuirass; they were the best for their day!
PS the Steel Lorica Segmentata,is only 15lbs and a very very strong armor!!
European swords:
Europeans have all sorts of different swords like the Zweihanders and Claymore or the long swords like the Sub-type XVIIIb, Sub-type XVa, Sub-type XVa, Oakeshott Type X Via, and more.
Most European long swords are used with one or two-hands, they are not heavy; most were about 2.8 lbs to 3.5 lbs; about the same as the well known respected Katana.
European swords are FAR FROM BULNT RODS; yes like the Katana MOST European swords can slice a men with no armor in half! (ALL SWORDS CAN CUT AND SLICE!) But unlike the Katana European swords are made to against soft and hard armor but there are no sword in the world that can cut through steel or even iron armor; or even shields!
Yes it is true that the Katana is a good sword and has the best cutting in the world. But sharpness isn’t the only factor to take into consideration; all swords can cut a limb off; most can cut a man in half with no armor; and that all you need. European swords can deliver good powerful thrust attacks; also much easier to thrust at weak parts of any armor out there. They can be used like a mace with the handle, can be held/used like a staff which is useful in close quarters, the cross guards were used to ensnare and trap limbs and blades… So this tell you that European swords are a more divers weapons!
Shields:
Shields were very good and were used around the world. The Greeks and Romans used shields like no other one had ever used them before and after. Shields defended the man against arrows, swords, and other weapons. It is not easy to go thought shields. A good number of shields were made out of strong wood with leather over them and with metal rims. But most shields were made out of strong Composite of materials with leather over them and with metal rims! This made the shield stronger and lighter… To think a katana can cute through a shield is foolish.
Zweihanders are only about 7 lbs! This swords are effective against spearmen and Pike-men and very effective against cavalry. But this sword like all swords can fight a man with another sword as well and prove to be very good… The use of the Zweihander is very unique; it is not always used lake other swords…
You may wonder way the Europeans have so many types of swords; it is because they fought so many different enemies…
Some other European weapons
European weapons are not heavy; halberds are about 4.5 to 5.5lbs!
Halberds can deliver a very powerful blow, trip and pull your opponent as well as good thrusting attacks; all in a good reach…
Crossbows and Bows
Alexander the Great army was perhaps the first armies to have a precursor of a Crossbow, the Greeks called it belly weapon; because you set this “Crossbow” looking weapon in front of you on your belly…
But the handheld Crossbows we all know was first invented in China in the BCs. But it is a misconception that Crossbow technology came to Europe in the Medieval age. The handheld Crossbow was use by the Romans around 100 AD and had their own type as well. The Crossbow was perfected by the Medieval Europeans; they invented what’s called the arbalest or arblast. The arbalest is the most powerful Crossbow out their…
The British long bow; they were very powerful bows, perhaps the most powerful bow out there! Composite bows were also used in Europe sense the Romans.
I am going to stop now. There are simply too many weapons to name and talk about. My hole point is that European weapons and armor are not heavy, clumsy, and crud! In fact they were extremely effective weapons and armor!
So this is why I think the Knight or Knights will win, they had a technological benefits over the Samurai or Samurais…
I for got to talk about the tanto and other daggers!
Yes daggers can be very useful of attacking weak parts on any armor…
The tanto will be useful as well as the Knights Dagger. Ummm this I can not truly say who would win on a dagger fight. Both had good fighting styles. But it seems that Ancient Greco Roman/Medieval Wrestling would help very much on this fight. (Through out time people added moves to Wrestling)
But how about the Samurai; what fighting dos he have at this time? Was jujitsu was around at this time?
Jujitsu looks like it can help on this fight, also it looks more or less how Greeks, Romans and other Europeans fought in unarm combat but add boxing and little Kicking to it.
Kicking, Wrestling, and boxing go all the way back to ancient Greece and Rome! It’s perhaps the oldest style of fighting I can fine; they at times put it all as one, this is perhaps made it the first Mixed marshal arts.
Well I like both the Knights and Samurais. So I think they will just join up and look at each other and say “Hey lets fight the Mongols!” And they will just Conquer the Mongols and free China.
Well I like both the Knights and Samurais. So I think they will just join up and look at each other and say “Hey lets fight the Mongols!” And they will just Conquer the Mongols and free China.
I think you guys need to read up on some books; HISTORY BOOKS that is!
The West in fact has many of it’s own skills, and most of them are older as well…
Read Books like “Knight” Eyewitness books, “Weapon A visuail history or arms and armors”, “The art of Making Armour” Rob Valentine, “Arms & Armor of the Medieval Knight” by Rh Value Publishing, “Knightly Arts of Combat” by David Lindholm and Peter Svard and many more…
You guys need to look up on Youtube to get some ideas: “Medieval wrestling from ARMA”, “Longsword techniques/Hosszúkard technikák”, “Longsword some techniques I”, “hammaborg talhoffer variations for viking shield and sword”, and “Rhett of KEG”.
Knight were far from Stiff, I do not know were you guys get this fales info from; but it is just wrong!
Do any of you have any steel armor? I have some! And I can move just as good… Hell the armor I have is lighter then my football armor… With the same amout of armor as football stuff my armor is lighter!
The conception that Samurais are better then Knights is because most people don’t know what sword handling stile the European counterpart used.
I don’t know any moves except what two kids would use playing with their wood sword replicas.
This is because the Europe evolved much faster then Asia, and switched to gun powder tactics, dumping it’s tradition [and sadly, morality as well…]
Japan treated it’s legacy in sword fighting differently.
Today all people study oriental martial arts without thinking that all nations develop such discipline as it is a logical step in mind kind’s evolution, and as European, we should be proud and conserve our values!
Ok, I figure most people voted for samurai because they’ve seen too much anime. Ok, samurai are ABSOLUTELY nothing like they are potrayede on anime shows. Oh, and martial arts is very difficult with a tin suit. A well-trained knjight can beat a well-trained samurai anyday! The katana was meant to cut through light armor and no armor, on the other hand, the European swords (wow, they actually have more than one, hooray!!) were multi-purpose weapons.
I’ve been researching different samurai stories, so I’m a little biased. However, I feel that even though the equipment provides a difference, the wearer may train to overcome this. In the end, it comes down to a matter of style. The Japanese hold a thorough tradition of superhuman feats, such as Jomyo Meishu, a warrior monk that killed around 38 men during a battle in which he was shot with 63 arrows at the same time. It is stories like these of unmatchable bravery and tenacity that put me in the favor of the samurai.
That said, those stories were also very likely to be highly exagerrated. Rumors and legends build on even already legendary heroes of ancient Japan. The evolution of the European sword lead to lightweight foils, whose speed and dexterity may have overcome the katana. However, bulky, heavy, and primitive longswords would certainly have fallen to, say, the hitotsu-tachi style of Tsukahara Bokuden.
Most longswords were not heavy; they are about 2.3 lbs to 3.5 lbs….
Yes it is true that the Katana is a good sword and has the best cutting in the world. But sharpness isn’t the only factor to take into consideration; all swords can cut a limb off; most can cut a man in half with no armor.
European swords can deliver good powerful thrust attacks; also much easier to thrust at weak parts of any armor out there. They can be used like a mace with the handle, can be held/used like a staff which is useful in close quarters, the cross guards were used to ensnare and trap limbs and blades… So this tell you that European swords are far from primitive…
Also look up on Youtube to get some ideas: “Medieval wrestling from ARMA”, “Longsword techniques/Hosszúkard technikák”, “Longsword some techniques I”, “hammaborg talhoffer variations for viking shield and sword”, and “Rhett of KEG”.
At the one hand it is surpeising that there are many more people voting for the samurai. Since I think the Samurai and the gothic plate armoured knight are evenly mached.
At the other hand, this is quite logical. Certiantly in the light of movies like Kill Bill etc. Becouse Japanese martial arts have a living tradition to this day and European martial arts died before the thunder of the cannon and the musket, people are much more known with the japanese ways of war than the european ones.
It should be known that the martial arts of both cultures were as highly developed. The techniques of the european sword were as veretile and felxible as the japanese counterpart.
As for the equipment, many people tend to overrate the Japanes Katana over the European longsword. Ofcourse, the katana might have a keener edge. But on the other hand the european sword had not problems in cutting either. One should note however that the european sword is much more balanced. Plus, that it has a strong cross guard to fend off stikes. The little round guard on the katana could not be used for parrying, but was merely for preventing the hands slipping on the blade. The fact that the european sword has 2 edges has to count for someting aswell. I am not saying the european longsword is superior. I am just saying that it is better in some ways than the katana, and preforms less at other aspects.
The armour has to account for someting as well. It goes without saying that the european gothic plate armour is much more effective at deflecting blows than the sewn-together japanese version. The point is that they were both made to counter other kinds of weapons. The japanese armour was mainly made to counter pikes. while the european version was more adept at countering cutting blows or the bashing of blunt weaopns. As for the mobility. It is truely a myth that european armour would be cumbersome and restrict your movement so much. Ofcourse, it was not really comfortable and you won’t be able to freestyle streetdance in it, but it was certiantly not any more cumbersome or restricting than the japanese variant. the plate armour was perfected over centuries, as was the japanese armour.
All those who think that the european plate armoured warrior with longsword would shurely lose should perhaps try a suit of gothic plate armour themselves and wield a longsword. You will surprised how flexible your movement is and how precise the longsowrd is.
(11 votes, average: 4.36 out of 5)
Loading …
Samurai no question. Think I’m wrong?
People need to read this…
“I do not understand way many people think that Knights are clumsy, slow, stiff, or even inflexible; the fact is a man with a full suit of armor can do just about any thing a man with no armor!”
Very true… I seen a guy do cart wheels in a full suit of armor!
Yes knights in full suit of armor can move but that said full suit of armor appeared late in middle ages and was heavy with the equipement like chain-mail (cotte de maille). Earlier lighter armor didn’t protect as well. Moreover, the full suit of armor was made for sustain the damage of european weaponry and some of the japonese weaponry uses different weakness on protections. Once I saw a documentary on samurai and the guy show he could slice and pierce sheets of metal with a sabre. I don’t say the samurai would win every time but it’s way cooler to be a samurai. Beside, there are still few real samurai in japan when the knight title is just honorary like “knight of arts and letters” in France.
Samurai indeed.Because they are much faster and they have better technique and very strong and sharp sword.
Western sword arts are far more developed then what most people think…
To star this of; both were very great warriors both trained sense the age of 6 and 7 or even 8.
Both were very disciplined, brave, and loyal!
Both had a warrior code; for the Knight’s and European troops it was Chivalry and Knight Hood! For the Samurai and Japanese’s troops it was the Bushido.
Both impacted are lives to this day. For one of many examples the military salute came from the Knights of Europe.
The Knights and Samurais were one of many great warrior and solders in Human history.
But sadly I have to choose one that would win, and I will have to go with the Knight or Knights!
Japanese’s Swords:
Japanese had the katana. The katana is used with one or two-hands, this is a good sword and has the best in cutting and sharpness; this sword was never made to go against soft or hard armors but to slice flesh and bone, but the katana’s edge is very strong and has a sharp cutting bevel.
Although the katana has a very, very hard edge that was prone to chipping; its blade can break or bend the same as any sword might.
Japanese’s armor:
The Japanese’s armor were manly made up of iron or steel scales and plates or used the lamellar. The Japanese armor was tied together with silk cords, this help to resist the slicing cut of the katanas. But if the silk cords get wet, they will soak up water then the armor will became heavier.
Scale armor and lamellar armor are good armor but far from the best. Sword slash can damage the armors greatly… The scales and lamellar armor has better use at protecting against arrows then swords and other weapons. But there was later improvements were intended be protected against other swordsmen, and also it help lessen the tremendous cutting capacity Japanese and Asian swords. The armor was durable, quite effective and in use had good movement. Would this armor hold up to the stabs of narrowly pointed European swords?
Also the armor used by the Samurai weights about the same as the armor used by the Knight and European infantry.
European armor:
The steel on the armor and some helmets
are “decorated”; the “decorations” is not just for looks but it is a type of support for the steel. This makes the steel stronger then what is should be… Also the “decorations” on the steel can act like a slope this made it less likely to slide into a more vulnerable joints, this also made the weapons more likely to slip off the target.
If you look at European armors they had the first slope armor. Slope armor was re-used in the early 20th century for tanks! But Europeans were using it many centuries before WWII! To this day we still use slope armor for are armored vehicles…
Armors weight and how it works:
I do not understand way many people think that Knights are clumsy, slow, stiff, or even inflexible; the fact is a man with a full suit of armor can do just about any thing a man with no armor! How do you think this is possible? The technology that Europeans had; it was the rivets in the joints that made such flexibility to armors and other things! I have some armor my self! I can run, jump, roll, get up, do jumping jacks, push ups, pull ups, and MORE; just like the history books says! It is very foolish to think that suits of armor are super heavy; THEY ARE NOT! A full suit of armor is about 45lbs to 55lbs, but some can go up to 80lbs the heaviest; but not to bad, modern troops carry about the same and travel for miles! All type of weapons had trouble piecing plate armor; plate armor offered the best in protection. Full plate was so good historians describe the men that worn them as walking tanks! Oh and people, Samurai armor weights the same as the Knight’s armor… To me I think that the west had and has the best armor in all through out history; going back to the Greek and Romans. Just look at the Armors before steel plate, their was the Steel Lorica Segmentata, Chainmail and the Cuirass; they were the best for their day!
PS the Steel Lorica Segmentata,is only 15lbs and a very very strong armor!!
European swords:
Europeans have all sorts of different swords like the Zweihanders and Claymore or the long swords like the Sub-type XVIIIb, Sub-type XVa, Sub-type XVa, Oakeshott Type X Via, and more.
Most European long swords are used with one or two-hands, they are not heavy; most were about 2.8 lbs to 3.5 lbs; about the same as the well known respected Katana.
European swords are FAR FROM BULNT RODS; yes like the Katana MOST European swords can slice a men with no armor in half! (ALL SWORDS CAN CUT AND SLICE!) But unlike the Katana European swords are made to against soft and hard armor but there are no sword in the world that can cut through steel or even iron armor; or even shields!
Yes it is true that the Katana is a good sword and has the best cutting in the world. But sharpness isn’t the only factor to take into consideration; all swords can cut a limb off; most can cut a man in half with no armor; and that all you need. European swords can deliver good powerful thrust attacks; also much easier to thrust at weak parts of any armor out there. They can be used like a mace with the handle, can be held/used like a staff which is useful in close quarters, the cross guards were used to ensnare and trap limbs and blades… So this tell you that European swords are a more divers weapons!
Shields:
Shields were very good and were used around the world. The Greeks and Romans used shields like no other one had ever used them before and after. Shields defended the man against arrows, swords, and other weapons. It is not easy to go thought shields. A good number of shields were made out of strong wood with leather over them and with metal rims. But most shields were made out of strong Composite of materials with leather over them and with metal rims! This made the shield stronger and lighter… To think a katana can cute through a shield is foolish.
Zweihanders are only about 7 lbs! This swords are effective against spearmen and Pike-men and very effective against cavalry. But this sword like all swords can fight a man with another sword as well and prove to be very good… The use of the Zweihander is very unique; it is not always used lake other swords…
You may wonder way the Europeans have so many types of swords; it is because they fought so many different enemies…
Some other European weapons
European weapons are not heavy; halberds are about 4.5 to 5.5lbs!
Halberds can deliver a very powerful blow, trip and pull your opponent as well as good thrusting attacks; all in a good reach…
Crossbows and Bows
Alexander the Great army was perhaps the first armies to have a precursor of a Crossbow, the Greeks called it belly weapon; because you set this “Crossbow” looking weapon in front of you on your belly…
But the handheld Crossbows we all know was first invented in China in the BCs. But it is a misconception that Crossbow technology came to Europe in the Medieval age. The handheld Crossbow was use by the Romans around 100 AD and had their own type as well. The Crossbow was perfected by the Medieval Europeans; they invented what’s called the arbalest or arblast. The arbalest is the most powerful Crossbow out their…
The British long bow; they were very powerful bows, perhaps the most powerful bow out there! Composite bows were also used in Europe sense the Romans.
I am going to stop now. There are simply too many weapons to name and talk about. My hole point is that European weapons and armor are not heavy, clumsy, and crud! In fact they were extremely effective weapons and armor!
So this is why I think the Knight or Knights will win, they had a technological benefits over the Samurai or Samurais…
Wow. That is a really insightful look at the Knight and Samurai.
What about fighting styles and and the Samurai’s tanto which could be used to punch through armor?
I for got to talk about the tanto and other daggers!
Yes daggers can be very useful of attacking weak parts on any armor…
The tanto will be useful as well as the Knights Dagger. Ummm this I can not truly say who would win on a dagger fight. Both had good fighting styles. But it seems that Ancient Greco Roman/Medieval Wrestling would help very much on this fight. (Through out time people added moves to Wrestling)
But how about the Samurai; what fighting dos he have at this time? Was jujitsu was around at this time?
Jujitsu looks like it can help on this fight, also it looks more or less how Greeks, Romans and other Europeans fought in unarm combat but add boxing and little Kicking to it.
Kicking, Wrestling, and boxing go all the way back to ancient Greece and Rome! It’s perhaps the oldest style of fighting I can fine; they at times put it all as one, this is perhaps made it the first Mixed marshal arts.
Well I like both the Knights and Samurais. So I think they will just join up and look at each other and say “Hey lets fight the Mongols!” And they will just Conquer the Mongols and free China.
Well I like both the Knights and Samurais. So I think they will just join up and look at each other and say “Hey lets fight the Mongols!” And they will just Conquer the Mongols and free China.
ClintJCL posted: Samurai! Knights were too unwieldy.
WOW wow wow wow bayaniboulder and Star ClintJCL.
I think you guys need to read up on some books; HISTORY BOOKS that is!
The West in fact has many of it’s own skills, and most of them are older as well…
Read Books like “Knight” Eyewitness books, “Weapon A visuail history or arms and armors”, “The art of Making Armour” Rob Valentine, “Arms & Armor of the Medieval Knight” by Rh Value Publishing, “Knightly Arts of Combat” by David Lindholm and Peter Svard and many more…
You guys need to look up on Youtube to get some ideas: “Medieval wrestling from ARMA”, “Longsword techniques/Hosszúkard technikák”, “Longsword some techniques I”, “hammaborg talhoffer variations for viking shield and sword”, and “Rhett of KEG”.
Knight were far from Stiff, I do not know were you guys get this fales info from; but it is just wrong!
Do any of you have any steel armor? I have some! And I can move just as good… Hell the armor I have is lighter then my football armor… With the same amout of armor as football stuff my armor is lighter!
bayaniboulder posted: i’d put bets on samurai, they’ve got mad asian skills, knights are too stiff in their clanky suits
Samuria armor is about the same weight!!!!
Historicly the samurai was no more agile than the knight; except in most Japanese anime of course…
Samurai Armor looks a bit boxy, and the armor look like it hangs rather loosey… Also the Samurai helmets seams to be over adorned…
In fact most European Knights were required to perform a full gymnastic while wearing their armor…
European full plate is in fact very flexible, much more stronger, and less bulky then most Asian Armors…
The conception that Samurais are better then Knights is because most people don’t know what sword handling stile the European counterpart used.
I don’t know any moves except what two kids would use playing with their wood sword replicas.
This is because the Europe evolved much faster then Asia, and switched to gun powder tactics, dumping it’s tradition [and sadly, morality as well…]
Japan treated it’s legacy in sword fighting differently.
Today all people study oriental martial arts without thinking that all nations develop such discipline as it is a logical step in mind kind’s evolution, and as European, we should be proud and conserve our values!
Ok, I figure most people voted for samurai because they’ve seen too much anime. Ok, samurai are ABSOLUTELY nothing like they are potrayede on anime shows. Oh, and martial arts is very difficult with a tin suit. A well-trained knjight can beat a well-trained samurai anyday! The katana was meant to cut through light armor and no armor, on the other hand, the European swords (wow, they actually have more than one, hooray!!) were multi-purpose weapons.
I’ve been researching different samurai stories, so I’m a little biased. However, I feel that even though the equipment provides a difference, the wearer may train to overcome this. In the end, it comes down to a matter of style. The Japanese hold a thorough tradition of superhuman feats, such as Jomyo Meishu, a warrior monk that killed around 38 men during a battle in which he was shot with 63 arrows at the same time. It is stories like these of unmatchable bravery and tenacity that put me in the favor of the samurai.
That said, those stories were also very likely to be highly exagerrated. Rumors and legends build on even already legendary heroes of ancient Japan. The evolution of the European sword lead to lightweight foils, whose speed and dexterity may have overcome the katana. However, bulky, heavy, and primitive longswords would certainly have fallen to, say, the hitotsu-tachi style of Tsukahara Bokuden.
Most longswords were not heavy; they are about 2.3 lbs to 3.5 lbs….
Yes it is true that the Katana is a good sword and has the best cutting in the world. But sharpness isn’t the only factor to take into consideration; all swords can cut a limb off; most can cut a man in half with no armor.
European swords can deliver good powerful thrust attacks; also much easier to thrust at weak parts of any armor out there. They can be used like a mace with the handle, can be held/used like a staff which is useful in close quarters, the cross guards were used to ensnare and trap limbs and blades… So this tell you that European swords are far from primitive…
Also look up on Youtube to get some ideas: “Medieval wrestling from ARMA”, “Longsword techniques/Hosszúkard technikák”, “Longsword some techniques I”, “hammaborg talhoffer variations for viking shield and sword”, and “Rhett of KEG”.
At the one hand it is surpeising that there are many more people voting for the samurai. Since I think the Samurai and the gothic plate armoured knight are evenly mached.
At the other hand, this is quite logical. Certiantly in the light of movies like Kill Bill etc. Becouse Japanese martial arts have a living tradition to this day and European martial arts died before the thunder of the cannon and the musket, people are much more known with the japanese ways of war than the european ones.
It should be known that the martial arts of both cultures were as highly developed. The techniques of the european sword were as veretile and felxible as the japanese counterpart.
As for the equipment, many people tend to overrate the Japanes Katana over the European longsword. Ofcourse, the katana might have a keener edge. But on the other hand the european sword had not problems in cutting either. One should note however that the european sword is much more balanced. Plus, that it has a strong cross guard to fend off stikes. The little round guard on the katana could not be used for parrying, but was merely for preventing the hands slipping on the blade. The fact that the european sword has 2 edges has to count for someting aswell. I am not saying the european longsword is superior. I am just saying that it is better in some ways than the katana, and preforms less at other aspects.
The armour has to account for someting as well. It goes without saying that the european gothic plate armour is much more effective at deflecting blows than the sewn-together japanese version. The point is that they were both made to counter other kinds of weapons. The japanese armour was mainly made to counter pikes. while the european version was more adept at countering cutting blows or the bashing of blunt weaopns. As for the mobility. It is truely a myth that european armour would be cumbersome and restrict your movement so much. Ofcourse, it was not really comfortable and you won’t be able to freestyle streetdance in it, but it was certiantly not any more cumbersome or restricting than the japanese variant. the plate armour was perfected over centuries, as was the japanese armour.
All those who think that the european plate armoured warrior with longsword would shurely lose should perhaps try a suit of gothic plate armour themselves and wield a longsword. You will surprised how flexible your movement is and how precise the longsowrd is.
[…] Samurai vs Knight (226 […]
knights totally rock!
US Army Ranger trumps all.
With out Europe there will be no USA… US infantry man- “OH CRAP I think I killed my Great grand dad!”
There was no USA in 1455 AD my friend, so no; not even.
Not to mention it took the would to stop Germany two times…
And we have a hard time in third world nations…
Stop your silly arrogance.