omon

knights can barely move, samurai is much faster, samyrai will find weak, unprotected spot in knights armor, and kill him.

__________________
"Democracy is two wolves and a lamb voting on what to have for lunch. Liberty is a well-armed lamb contesting the vote!" B. Franklin

Skull6

Steel is not mined--iron is mined. Iron is then refined & mixed to make steel.

They either used iron weapons or developed the ability to make steel ones. But they didn't "mine" steel.

__________________
If you know the enemy and yourself you need not fear the results of a hundred battles. - Sun Tzu

Officer of Engineers

By the same token, a samurai would get runned over if he's not fast enough to get out of the way and you can't get out of the way if you have buddies beside you.

__________________
Chimo

zraver

Actually the knight could do somersaults in his armor and had a great deal of flexibility. Full late period Gothic plate only weighs about 60 pounds less than the average US soldier wears today. It also offers massive protection vs hand held slashing and stabbing weapons (other than pole arms) and any missile not equipped with a bodkin point. Japanese style emphasized slashing and with weapons that simply did not have the power to pierce the steel hide.

many knights were also as thoroughly trained in hand to hand as any Spartan warrior having begun military training at ages as young as 7.

You should really watch some of the re-creationist who do live steel or use ratan. They move quick and the attacks are brutal. If you can watch an SCA event like the Pennsic wars or Antir vs the West

omon

i wouldn,t expect anything else from wab armor guys, you are right thou, but you paint samurai as he is a helpless baby.
they too had horses, trained since early age, as well, shoot bows...ect. plus they had other weapons besides sword,
there really no way to prove either, but if i had to bet i,d bet on samurai.

zraver

The Samurai is a finely skilled warrior, but vs a knight in one on one he is like an Iraqi T-72 vs an Abrams. Yes if he finds a ***** in the armor he can win, but while he is looking for that ***** the knight's smashing sheild and heavy broadsword can and will cut through any part of the of the other warriors armor with ease. And if said knight has Toledo steel the Japanese warrior loses even that advantage. European broadswords are not weapons of finesse (although they require great skill) they are edged clubs (most swords had an ax like hone not a knife edge) and the knights blows might well shatter the Japanese weapon due to the differences in style.

Knights not only used thier swords as weapons but like rocket packs- thier blows would lead the body and give momentum and they would step in with the blade and then deal of body check with the shield, follow with a punch (the pommel acting like a pugilists packer expanding and re-enforcing the hand or followed with a armored kick. This type of up close in your face combat where every part of the body and kit that can be used will be used is not a style the Japanese could easily adapt to.

In mounted combat the tables are turned, the Japanese long bow lacks the armor piercing tips but quantity has a quality all its own. As long as the Samurai didn't let the lance connect he would have the edge.

omon

so there is a situation when samurai would have the edge, even in your book.

zraver

Of course, Hattin, Crecy, Agincourt and other battles all show what happens when the Knights cannot deliver thier blow. European knights were a shock weapon and nothing else. Mounted or on foot they were they the best the world has ever seen at what they do. But that specialization comes with a price- ranged combat.

The easiest way to kill a knight on foot is to knock him down and dog pile with superior numbers and run a stilleto through his sallet's eye opening or or under the arm pit.

Officer of Engineers

That's another point. They're not all finely skilled warriors. They ranged from the master to the completely useless just like any other military. In which case, the unity of the knight formation would shatter the individualism of the samurai. It has happened before during the Mongol Invasions. The samurai were at a lost when the Mongols refused to accept individual combat and did a mass charged.

Blademaster

Another case in point. The Native Americans were fine individual warriors. They were excellent in melee combat with axes and in ranged combat with their bows and arrows. Even when the Europeans came on the shores of North America, on an individual basis with bows and arrows against guns, the Indians had an edge, however, the Europeans were better in unit combat than the Indians. As long as the Europeans maintain their unit cohesion and move in unison, they would defeat the Indians every time despite their guns' biggest flaw- very long reloading times.

omon

gen. custer wouldn,t agree.

Officer of Engineers

Gen Custer was out-manned, out-gunned, out-positioned, out-maneuvered, and out-guiled.

Canmoore

A knight would win, because a horse was the same to a knight as the Katana was to the Samurai. A knight and his horse in full battle charge would make even the toughest Samurai piss there pants and run away..

Not to mention, that the European knight was stronger and heavier built than the Japanese. Yes, the Samurai had a superior weapon, however the knight wore armour. The samurai relied on one strike-one kill.

The knight could knock the samurai over with his horse, than either kill him with his sword, or wrestle the Samurai to the death.. killing him with his own hands.

Not to mention, that knights and there horses did not fight alone, but in a group.

Blademaster

That was an exception and it was 80 men against a force of 1000 men.

omon

not quite 80.

Initially, Custer had 208 officers and men under his command, with an additional 142 under Reno and just over a hundred under Benteen. The Indians fielded over 1800 warriors,[23] although historically, the numbers do seem to have been exaggerated to explain Custer's defeat, and again, to exculpate him from his numerous errors before and during the battle. As the troopers were cut down, moreover, the Indians stripped the dead of their firearms and ammunition, with the result that the return fire from the cavalry steadily decreased, while the fire from the Indians steadily increased. With Custer and the survivors shooting the remaining horses to use them as breastworks and making a final stand on the knoll at the north end of the ridge, the Indians closed in for the final attack and killed all in Custer's command.
George Armstrong Custer - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia