Samurai against knight

**Bill** · 10 Apr 05,, 19:48

Oh it's a real bastard sword alright.

**Thunar** · 11 Apr 05,, 02:37

Okay is it authentic medeviel weapon? if so who authenticated it? did you get at an auction or museum? how much did it cost? like the other gentlemen who recently chimed in I to have taken various martial arts eastern and western and I have faithful reproductions of various blades and none of them are that much in weight and my uncle in Austria was the curator at Forktenstein castle and he was telling me about the weapons in the armory including bastard swords and weapons of the turks and those swords didn't weigh that much.

**~~deadkenny~~** · 11 Apr 05,, 03:58

My wa guess - they kill each other. The Samurai makes a lightning fast downward diagonal slashing blow aimed at the European swordsman's neck / shoulder area. The European makes an equally lightning fast thrust towards the Samurai's heart. The thrust has a slightly shorter distance to go, so the thrust goes home first. However, the Samurai has by that time generated enough momentum to carry the slash home and decapitate the European. That's how I saw it go down anyway.

**Bill** · 11 Apr 05,, 04:11

I have also taken about 10 years of martial arts(Kung Fu, both Northern and Southern flavors), i know my weapons too lad.(My favorite sword is actually the Tai Chi sword- but it requires an extremely high level of training to use it proficiently)

My bastard sword cost the guy that bought it $1000.00. It is a 'faithful reproduction'. It was custom made by a vendor who works at the Pennsylvania rennaisance fair, who is also a master blacksmith, and a good friend of the original owner, hence the low price tag. When the owner 'went away', i inherited about a dozen high quality melee weapons from him.

The sword has a straight, wide blade about 40" long by 6" wide, double-edged, with a blood gutter running down the length of the richly engraved gold inlaid blade. The blade is a good high-carbon steel, with a full tang. The hilt is brass, about 8" long, with an extremely wide brass crossguard, about 10" across. The sword weighs approx. 30lbs. I would never dream of attempting to use it in a fight, it is entirely too unwieldy, but it is the classic 'hand and a half sword'. If you did ever manage to connect with a slash the damage would be catastrophic to the recipient.

I also have a two handed long sword(exact replica of the sword from the movie Conan the Barbarian), an authentic Native American Spear(Apache), two authentic Cherokee Tomahawks, 5 Katanas of varying quality(the best being a WWII Japanese officers sword), about a dozen daggers of various kinds, and a handmade Tai Chi sword of exquisite(by my standards) quality.

**Bill** · 11 Apr 05,, 04:18

DK: A samurai would likely attack from the draw with an upward slash as his first attack. It is an extremely powerful and fast attack. Katanas are also very effective thrusting weapons too though.

That's probably why i like it so much...it has a complete repitiore, it is light enough to use with one hand, but the long hilt allows it to be used with both hands for increased power, if so desired. One could easily thrust a quality Katana clear through an unarmored humans midsection.

**korppi76** · 11 Apr 05,, 09:33

This is always so interresting. I have read about this many times and stil I am not sure which would win. Nowadays I think if everything else is even (skills, fatique, etc) It would go to one who got more lucky. I like samurais better tho but anyway it still could go either way.

Was this posted allready
http://www.thearma.org/essays/knightvs.htm

**Officer of Engineers** · 11 Apr 05,, 12:58

Originally Posted by M21Sniper

DK: A samurai would likely attack from the draw with an upward slash as his first attack. It is an extremely powerful and fast attack. Katanas are also very effective thrusting weapons too though.

You know as I read through this thread. No one mentioned the shield. The Japanese never developed one. Wonder what kind of effect that would have.

**korppi76** · 11 Apr 05,, 13:34

Originally Posted by Officer of Engineers

You know as I read through this thread. No one mentioned the shield. The Japanese never developed one. Wonder what kind of effect that would have.

I think they did fight against opponets with shield but not much.
In Okinava they did have shield (Timbei or Tembe or something else) which was made from the shell of a giant sea turtle.
But this really isnt as good as european shield that knights used.

**Bill** · 11 Apr 05,, 15:45

The Katana is intended as a two handed weapon, so they never felt a need for shields i guess.

**~~deadkenny~~** · 11 Apr 05,, 18:54

Originally Posted by M21Sniper

DK: A samurai would likely attack from the draw with an upward slash as his first attack. It is an extremely powerful and fast attack. Katanas are also very effective thrusting weapons too though.

That's probably why i like it so much...it has a complete repitiore, it is light enough to use with one hand, but the long hilt allows it to be used with both hands for increased power, if so desired. One could easily thrust a quality Katana clear through an unarmored humans midsection.

I was assuming that both weapons were already drawn prior to the fight beginning. If not the I agree with your comment, and in which case the Samurai wins - European scabbards not being known for their 'fast draw' capability.

The Katana may be effective in a thrusting attack, but clearly less so than a weapon designed for thrusting. The blade is curved, and it's designed for 2 hands - clearly not desirable characteristics for a thrusting weapon. Against the 'unknown' I assumed each warrior would play into their own strengths - which is the 2 handed slash aimed at decap for the Samurai and the abdominal pierce for the European.

**Bill** · 11 Apr 05,, 19:18

A two handed thrust is an effective and extremely powerful attack(particularly for piercing armor), and can quickly be transitioned to from a slash. Also, not all Katanas have curved blades.

**~~deadkenny~~** · 11 Apr 05,, 19:51

One handed thrust with a lighter thrusting weapon is both faster and has longer reach. I agree the 2 handed thrust can be powerful, but you have to get in a lot closer to deliver it. I honestly didn't realize that some Katanas were straight - how common were those compared to the curved bladed variety (which is all I've ever seen)? In any case, in terms of biomechanics, the one handed thrust clearly has the advantage, at least in terms of early delivery of the blow (if not force of the blow).

**Bill** · 11 Apr 05,, 20:08

Agreed, a one handed thrust has greater reach, but i really prefer close fighting anyway(most people do not know how to fight when you really crowd in on them). If you transition from a slash to a two handed thrust as you 'burst' in at your opponent it is an extremely powerful attack. It's just a matter of quickly and reflexively identifying when- and when not- to use such an attack.

If you disrupt your opponents center(knock him off balance), or hit him with a good cutting slash a good two handed bursting thrust is a viable option.

The straight bladed Katanas were rumored to have been used by Ninjas, and are referred to as Ninja-To(no known authentic examples have survived into the modern era). They were also referred to as Choku-to(english translation 'straight sword', of which many historical blades still exist, but that period pre-dates the actual existance of Ninjas).
Regardless, they are in effect no more than a straight bladed, single edged Katana, complete with a 2 handed hilt. Choku-To's share the exact same piercing tip as the Tanto(as can be clearly seen in the above image), and are extremely proificient for thrusting as well as slashing attacks. The Choku-To is probably the most powerful thrusting sword ever devised.

They were most commonly used in the Kotu period, in Japan.(approx. 200-700AD).

**~~deadkenny~~** · 11 Apr 05,, 20:29

Wow, fascinating stuff. At least I don't feel quite so stupid for not having heard about a straight bladed Katana. Would this have been used for a one-handed thrust? In other words, was the sword designed for a different fighting style?

**Bill** · 11 Apr 05,, 21:00

I'd imagine it was designed to penetrate contemporary Japanese battle armor of the era, a task which it no doubt was extremely effective at accomplishing.
I know i'd certainly love to get a chance to try some two handed bursting thrusts against good quality euro plate armor with a Choku-To. If any sword can penetrate euro heavy plate, the Choku-To is probably the one.

The fighting style employed with the Choku-TO would be very similar to that of Kenjistu, but with a greater emphasis on powerful thrusting attacks.

Ironicly, the existance of the Choku-To may very well explain why the Japanese never developed better armor. It would be very expensive to make plate armor that could stop a two handed bursting thrust executed by a skilled warrior.

When i said earlier in the thread that the Katana could likley penetrate most Euro plate, the Choku-To was the version of the Katana i was referring to in the first place.

One of my five Katanas is a solid tang short Choku-To(16" blade with an 8" hilt and very small crossguard). I used to carry it in the infantry for up close and personal encounters...it was also great for acting in the role of the machete too.