Recreation Knight vs. Samurai

Firstly, I have seen Rurouni Kenshin but my explanation would be given by anyone who's studied battles. A typical battle lasts only a few seconds, not 10 minutes like some of the movies show.

Secondly, on the physical attributes, a samurai is smaller so he is faster. A knight is bigger so it makes him stronger. There are just too many variables to take in account in a fight like this without acting one out with two very capable and experienced fighters. It will always be an opinion.

 

I think someone said that we were going to exclude a shield from this match. And while it could sometimes be hard to push the knight down, any decent warrior can do it if they put their mind to it. It's not like you can simply tap them and they'll fall down, but it's not like you need a bulldozer to knock them down either. Also, dodging the first blow is easier than most people think. If you stay calm and stay in the same place, you can easily expect how the opponent is gonna attack. Most attacks can be dodged simply by jumping to the side or backwards while bending down close to the ground keeping your weapon alittle bit above the ground with one hand and using your free hand to keep your head from falling on the ground.

Yes, they would. But regardless of how strong you are, the joints don't allow any movement after a certain point. But with a lot of training, a knight can get pretty good at getting past a lot of the problems the armor causes. But you can't get past all of them, and by the time you can get past most of them you're gonna start to get kinda old.

One other thing you should know is that their armor wasn't actually that affective. If you slashed at it, it would probably leave a dent but if you charged forward and stabbed you'd most likely get through and could land a fatal blow on them.

I still say we get two people to out it out.

 

But before the people can go at it,they would need wood weapons equal to the weight of the real weapons. I just had a thought,there are,or were millions of samurai and knights back then,and all at a diffrent skill level. So then you can never know who would win cause its all a matter of skill.Like someone said earlier,its all a matter of skill.

 

I said when i started the thread, full plate armour, full armour includes a shield.

 

if i might interject a small comment.

There are, simply too many variables to accuratly tell who might win.

first, you have to pick a time period. Obviously for a realistic match you would have to pick on time period for both sides.

This firstly would mean two things, firstly that the parties at this point in time may not be evenly matched. Simply put, if this were a time of peace in one culture but war in the other, the one at war will have superior skills.
secondly, Life evolves as time moves forward. Thus you have to look at who has evolved more at this time period.

Second, you have to pick a class of warrior. There are going to be many different types of warriors. There are castle gaurds, low ranking warriors, battlefield warriors, "generals" and other ranks of warriors and again one may be stronger than the other depending on the time period.

Third, there is obviously training. Both the Knight and the Samurai were warriors who trained for battle. but the questions remains who would have had more practice? as i have little knowledge of the Knight i will put forth my knowledge on the samurai.

The samurai spent their lives training. They were warriors by profession, seeking nothing but their training. They had no other purpose but to fight and to die for their lord. Especially during the time of the Sengoku Jidai (again with the differing time period) the warriors spent their life on an endless battlefield. Everyday was a fight, survival meant being stronger, faster, and smarter than your opponent.
The samurai fought with death in their hearts. They considered themselves already dead, thus they fought. Nothing had meaning but their duty to their lord. death came for them when it came, and they forgot their lives. they fought to kill not to live. This, i think, is a much different approach to life than what most people think of. To die in battle was the highest honor they could place forth for their lord.

Forth, is armor. What can we say but that it exists and its hard to say what kind of advantage or disadvantage it would place upon a person. Both European and Japanese Armor has its strengths and its weakness and its impossible to say what was more effective because both types were created to defend against what threatened the man wearing it, not a hypothetical battle placed by modern minds.

Fifth you must consider terrain. A unarmored samurai in a rock outcropping will be FAR more effective than a knight in full armor below him. Reversed of course is a Armored knight riding on horseback against an unarmored samurai. Terrain means a lot. After training for 10 years in the Samurai arts, i can personally say that terrain means everything. holding your balance is one of the most important thing in ANY martial art, whether it be European or Asian. How you can hold your balance is most important especially in a life or death duel. How you hold your footing is vastly important, especially when moving quickly. Where you fight can make all the difference. Standing in a open field and fighting in a forest are vastly different terrains and one technique may prove more effective than another. For instance the Shinsengumi who fought during the Bakumatsu (1854-1868) used a style of swordsmenship known as Tennen Rishin Ryuu which was based largly around stabbing techniques which was extremely effective in tight hallways and alleyways were they patrolled.

Sixth, weaponry. Both the Samurai and the Knight used a wide range of weaponry, from swords to bows, to polearms. Weapons are made to be used in certain situations. a short sword is most effective in a small hallway like a Polearm is extremely effective in an area where there is room to move. What weapon would be used? well it depends again on time period, terrain, training capablilities and warrior class. And it might be added that there are the unorthadox weaponry of the shinobi. They used a wide array of weaponry such as blinding powder to digging tools like Kunai. as a note, Samurai did often times serve as shinobi as well, there are many cases of this.

Ultamitly when it comes to the actual battle. there are a HUGE number of variables that cannot even be measured. Again returning to my training, i can say that ive lost duels with the slightest margin just because my stroke was brought back just a hair farther than normal creating a slight gap in the timing of my stroke. Perhaps you slip ever so much and your blade slows down as your correct it. Maybe your opponent's blade is a bit lighter then yours. Maybe he is wearing armor, then how do you strike? Perhaps your opponent has a bit more experience and gets you into a position where he knows he can defeat you. You may go watch as many movies and anime as you want, but duels are settled in mere seconds with lighting fast moves and deadly results, not drawn out battles lasting hours. even the slightest misjudgment is lethal. Also we must also remember ones conviction about fighting. one who dislikes fighting is going to be, no matter how good they are, weaker than their opponent because they will hold back subconciously. I refer to a teaching i once heard about Suemonogiri (cutting stationary targets) "When you bring your sword down to make a cut you subconciously slow the blade, this is because you dont want to cut the platform underneath your target, BUT your cut will be fouled by this, thus you must intend to cut platform beneath your target and thus your cut will be clean."

 

That pretty much somes it up. And the longest duel I have ever had was at least 47 seconds long,mabye a minute at the most.And I have lost alot of duels,probally around 23/42 or somthing like that. But I totally agree with everything Gensai just said.

 

I lost count of how many I've had, won, lost, etc. Anyways, what Gensai just said sums up just about any point we could make. Any other questions?

 

it sums up samurai's -.-
Knights were the same in a way, i will post what i know on knights aswell l8r cos im in college at the moment.

 

Ive purposely taken a very neutral stance about my post, as all those things matter in both cultures and both have great meaning in a battle. All of what ive said is true to both the Knight and the Samurai, and i assure you that there is little to say which one would win. Considering all the things ive presented here, i have to say that no matter what your arguement is, that it is impossible to tell who would win. There are simply far too many variables that cannot be measured in a duel.

Quite simply, There are too many small details that change in a moments notice that are impossible to tell without actually stepping into the field of battle and fighting. And even now, its impossible to do so, because to decide a suitable outcome it must be a fight to the death. It cannot simply be a sparring match because of the many variables that exist.

many thing have to be considered that i think would be impossible using modern fencing and kendo techniques. Both martial arts have lost much of their former usage and now are sports and sports are used with the intention to beat your opponent where as a thousand years ago their purpose was to kill. So, therefore, can we say one would be the victor? no. There exists a world of battle that one who HASNT been in cannot fathom. Yes there are fencing matches, and kendo tournaments and even LARP like Amtgard, but these in no way match the life or death struggle in a duel. So, we, as modern thinkers in a world where this no longer applies to our lives, cannot decide a victor.

There is still more to compare as well, not on a level of which is better, but on mental preperation. When you enter a duel, any duel, you have to center your mind, you cannot be thinking of anything thats going on around BUT the duel. no matter what culture your in this is the way of battle. Your body must respond without thought, moving to block your opponents sword with lightning speed.

You must also be prepared to take another persons life. This is a duel to the death, a fight in which only one will walk away. Can you take another persons life? can you raise your sword at the critical moment and kill them? All people, are living beings and a worthy of living, no matter who they are or what they have done. Life is precious, a fleeting moment in time, who are we to deny them the right to live? When you enter a duel no matter who your fighting, are you prepared to cut someone's life short? When they come to you in a duel, they are seeking your death, can you fight on with the will and state of mind to kill them?

i dont want to hear people going "oh yes i can.... of course i can" because honestly, thats bull**** there is MUCH more to it than simply saying it.

 

You are entirely correct.

 

There is one ultamate truth that we can ultamatly come to in this debate. and that is that there is no victor.

Even if we somehow leveled the playing field so that both parties were completely equal in skill and strength of arms, weaponry, training, and terrain, we could still not come to a conclusion. No matter how level the playing field is, there are still things that happen in a duel that we CANNOT meaure without being in it. Even I, after 10 years of training in the Samurai Arts, cannot measure. I can tell you that IN those 10 years ive seen countless battles go by and while they are far from the life and death struggle of the ancient world, you still can start to grasp the inner depths of a duel to the death. Things happen in this moment that cannot be measured.... it cannot be taken into account.

 

I agree with you Gensai,I have not been training as long as you nor have I seen as many duels as you,but I to have begun to see the depths of a duel to the life and death also.Perhaps not as well as you,but little by little I to am begining to see it,and just how tense it must have been,but I will never know what it was truly like.