European knight vs Japanese Samurai

[bushido_man96]

Wow!!bushido_man96...you really know stuff!!!hehe..

Thanks, Sengra. Although I get to do a little SCA style of fighting, I know that it is not completely representative of true Medieval Combat, and so I do a lot of reading and studying. There are some things that transfer, though.

What I observed the most is that there is a lot of mysticism given to the oriental arts that one might misunderstand the efficacy of non-oriental arts...

I agree. This is one of my pet peeves in the MA world as well.

[bushido_man96]

possibly but would a samurai randomly hit swords with the knight, the samurai actually didnt clash swords over and over again...

Neither did European knights.

Here are some articles that I found online that clear up how Medieval European Knights used their weapons defensively:

1. http://www.thearma.org/essays/edgemyth.htm

2. http://www.thearma.org/essays/parry.htm

3. http://www.thearma.org/essays/parrying.htm

4. http://www.thearma.org/essays/parrying2.htm

5. http://www.thearma.org/essays/parrying3.htm

These articles are written by practitioners who also research how the Medieval European fighters trained and used their weapons. Their research is based off of information from Medieval fighting manuals combined with hands-on applications of sparring with the intent of hitting the opponent--not the sword.

[Sengra]

Say bushido_man96, have you read the book Timeline by Michael Crichton...It has this character Marek, a historian who trains in medieval combat, who would eventually find himself being transported back to the Hundred Years War and confronting real knights.I think it was stated in the book how he saw how marveled at their speed...I wish I was someone like you or him, there are simply no one here in my place who knows these stuff, none that I know off anyway.The closest is fencing, which we know is a hundred years off the period we like.

But oh well, someday soon...

[bushido_man96]

I have seen the movie, Sengra, but the book is probably better.

I have been browsing around, and there are some seminars that I can go to, but I really want to do some more constructive training. I am working on it now.

[Sengra]

I have seen the movie, Sengra, but the book is probably better.

I have been browsing around, and there are some seminars that I can go to, but I really want to do some more constructive training. I am working on it now.

That would be great...

[bushido_man96]

I am currently reading the book Sigmund Ringeck's Knightly Art of the Longsword, written by David Lindholm and Peter Svard.

I highly recommend that any student of swordsmanship, be it Japanese, European, or otherwise, check it out. It will quickly dispell many of the misconceptions of the Medieval European warrior.

[baronbvp]

I don't know, those knights could take a lot of flesh wounds.

What if Ditka was in the fight? Who wins?

Da Bears.

[Comfy Chair]

excellent question and a perfect analogy. the shark in this case would represent the faster and sharper samurai while the crock with its tough skin and powerful jaw would represent the knight. that said, the shark would tear the crock apart in a matter of seconds ( a great white that is) but one false move from the shark and all the crock would need to do is chomp down on the sharks nose and finish him off! i would pay good money to see that fight.

That's not really a good analogy and it's also highly dependant on the aquatic setting. In shallow water the croc would have the advantage, in deep the shark. Not to mention that the Crocodile doesn't equate to the knight as Crocodiles are ambushers not wariors. They'd be more comparative to an assasin, hide, strike once and fast... and if they miss they just head back to the edge of the water to wait for someone else to waltz by.

Furthermore a great white shark is massive, the comparison between them is more like a ninja vs. a giant than anything.

Also if you take away the knights greatest advantages than of course the samurai has a better chance of winning. For example the "no armor" rule... why would the knight be battling without his armor? Does the Knight at least get his shield?

meh.. I've just always found it rather rediculous to compare too things and then take away ones advantages in the claim of fairness. It's like if someone claimed they were smarter than you and set up a test knowing you were great at math and he was spectacular at history and the only thing on the test were history questions.

[bushido_man96]

Also if you take away the knights greatest advantages than of course the samurai has a better chance of winning. For example the "no armor" rule... why would the knight be battling without his armor? Does the Knight at least get his shield?

European soldiers, like any other person, would have different preferences based on what they were comfortable with in a fight. That said, there were a great many number of European warriors that would have been comfortable at attacking and defending with his long sword alone, without heavy armor and a shield.

If the warrior did have a shield, then the Samurai would quickly find out that they would be fighting a man with 2 weapons, and not just one.

Welcome to the Forums, by the way!

[boyo1991]

ninja, there is stealth/wepons/know how involved, all a night has is his sword some "armor" and a horse to get knocked off of...