European knight vs Japanese Samurai

[bushido_man96]

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...

It isn't as easy as you might think to de-horse a knight. And that armour will do its job well, too.

Edited April 22, 2008 by bushido_man96

[Menjo]

Hey there, sorry i didnt reply sooner, however I just found this post.

So heres my explanation for my message. I apologize for not having a good follow up on what my first post had implyed.

Below the qoute is what I actually had meant:

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.

Alright, for one, I want to rid of the possibility that i think the Knights would smash swords together over and over.

In fact, my statement had a more sarcastic message and actually stated the quite opposite. Heres the qoute i was responding to:

european knite their swords are a lot stronger than katanas athough heavier if they are skilled the katana would break in one hit if hit hard enough

Seeing that this was some time ago, I'm not surprised I rudely insulted someone elses view of a stiuation and mocked a scenario creating one that seemed worse to me at the time. Sorry.

My post meant that in his situation, the samurai and the knight would have to clash swords deliberatly, I assumed more than once, and got the idea that for a properly crafted katana to break, it would have to take more than one direct for it to break...if it all.

Hopefully thats a better explanation than before...

[bushido_man96]

My post meant that in his situation, the samurai and the knight would have to clash swords deliberatly, I assumed more than once, and got the idea that for a properly crafted katana to break, it would have to take more than one direct for it to break...if it all.

Hopefully thats a better explanation than before...

Hey, Menjo. That all makes sense, now. Thanks for clarifying. I wasn't really offended by the post. I just feel that there are many people out there who think that the Japanese Samurai is the end-all, be-all of the combative swordsman, and that no other warrior class in history can compare to them. Many people don't have a clear idea of what the European Medieval warrior was like; their training, skill level, etc. So, I took it upon myself to try to break up some of the old stereotypes of the European Medieval warrior.

[Rainbow_Warrior]

This is and old post , but I see it now cuz its on the first page.

Some man said here that , samurais where trained to dont be afraid of the death...that may be true....but for a knight , dont you think that the will to survive is an advantadge ?

I agree , that many people see the eastern arts as superior to western..and that isnt true.

And by the way..if a knight have a proper techinique and an important weight and size (ussually a fact , due the ethnic background), dont you think that a good technique + power could beat some good technique with a weaker and small body (generally) ?

Knights dont train often ??? That is not true....and in some cases ( ie: Crusaders) their training was the constant ,dayly WAR.

I put my money on the knight , if we are talking about a ´´standard´´ -if it is possible- knight and a ´´standard ´´ samurai. I mean , average...not a champ.

But I M SURE , that some samurais could win to some knights....

BTW : I like these kinds of questions....I used to wonder in battles featuring King Kong and godzila

or Who would win , a Macedonian spear man or a medieval pikeman ?

[a_ninja]

I would say samurai because they are also trained in jujitsu, but i think you dont have to be trained in an art to be good at fighting. the samurai sword would also be easier to handle and sharper, but i think the knight would be stronger because of the time he grew up in. But that would be a very interesting fight, and it might come to were the samurai didnt win fast enough and then think he lost and commited haru kari, im not sure if i spelled that right but it means suicide. It would be a pretty tough battle.

[bushido_man96]

I would say samurai because they are also trained in jujitsu, but i think you dont have to be trained in an art to be good at fighting.

European knights also trained in hand-to-hand combat. They were well-versed in coming to grips with an opponent, if need be, and new just as much about manipulating an opponent, and using leverage against them.

the samurai sword would also be easier to handle and sharper...

This is another common assumption when it comes to the katana/long sword comparison. The long sword of the European knight was just as easy to handle, well-balanced, and easily controllable. The noticible differences are in the curvature of the katana, and the fact that the katana only had one edge.

[Kajukenbopr]

the knight would be dead before he could swing his sword.... first swing... knight loses his arms, second, the head

[Rainbow_Warrior]

the knight would be dead before he could swing his sword.... first swing... knight loses his arms, second, the head

Nonono .....THe samurai would kill the knight with ´´ chi optic rays ´´ from his eyes , from 1 mile away.

[bushido_man96]

the knight would be dead before he could swing his sword.... first swing... knight loses his arms, second, the head

How do you justify this statement? What makes you so sure that a Knight could not land a hit on a Samurai? A sword is a sword, no matter where you go in the world; even at that time. I think that you seriously misjudge the skill and ability of the Medieval European swordsman.

[lordtariel]

I believe he's referring to someone who practices Iaijutsu/Iaido. From a weapons sheathed starting point, I believe the Iaijutsu practitioner might have an advantage since I don't know if there was a counterpart in western sword fighting. If there isn't, the knight might not be as likely to be expecting a strong technique right out of the sheath.