Samurai against knight - Page 24

entropy · 03-03-2008, 13:15 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Big K

what about martial arts?

Which ones?

Italian condottiere captains, and certain Prussian and British swordsmen had techniques that by far surpassed Eastern styles. Less flashy, more pragmatic, efficient and combat-oriented.

zraver · 03-03-2008, 15:18 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by entropy

Which ones?

Italian condottiere captains, and certain Prussian and British swordsmen had techniques that by far surpassed Eastern styles. Less flashy, more pragmatic, efficient and combat-oriented.

Fighting up close and personal with edged or blunt weapons in addiction to kicks and punches is martial arts.

Personally, I think the samurai would be trying to figure how to get past the kite shield when he would suddenly lose several teeth from it followed by a plunging thrust through the gut while he was on the ground spitting blood and bits of teeth. The Japanese did not fight with them so conceiving of the shield as an offensive tool and not just protection is to much of a leap for me to buy.

entropy · 03-03-2008, 15:45 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by zraver

Fighting up close and personal with edged or blunt weapons in addiction to kicks and punches is martial arts.

Personally, I think the samurai would be trying to figure how to get past the kite shield when he would suddenly lose several teeth from it followed by a plunging thrust through the gut while he was on the ground spitting blood and bits of teeth. The Japanese did not fight with them so conceiving of the shield as an offensive tool and not just protection is to much of a leap for me to buy.

The Japanese did not use shields?

Their cavalry did.

zraver · 03-03-2008, 16:11 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by entropy

The Japanese did not use shields?

Their cavalry did.

source? Only thing I see is a small wicker/laguered bamboo device that is obviously not intended for use as a weapon.

entropy · 03-03-2008, 16:28 PM

Quote:

The mon was worn on three places. Traditionally, a samurai or general would not use a shield in a classical 'western' sense, instead using the large yumi (war bow), the two sword style of dai-sho (katana and wakazashi) or occasionally a two-handed dai-katana or polearm. If a shield was used, it was a large tower shield that was stood in front of the samurai and used as a defensive position whilst he fired arrows from behind it. In addition, a large mon was worn upon the back of the warrior, and the design is replicated in miniature upon each breast in front. Some samurai and generals would travel into battle with a flag attached to their backs, emblazoned with the mon. In the event that armor was not worn, the mon would be displayed in the above pattern on a ceremonial daimon, suo or kataginu.

An Essay on Mons

Used by archers.

You're right. I must have been mistaken by the plates of the armor.

Do you know the reason for not using them?

zraver · 03-03-2008, 19:33 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by entropy

An Essay on Mons

Used by archers.

You're right. I must have been mistaken by the plates of the armor.

Do you know the reason for not using them?

Ritual and tradition would be my guess, they (Japan in general) knew what they were in concept via the Mongols and Koreans, although I do not know if either of them took the shield offensively. I think the average samurai put up against the average knight will go down quick with a shield bash.

**Officer of Engineers** · 03-03-2008, 23:04 PM

For the very same simple reason their armour is not up to par, lack of proper materials to build good shields.

**astralis** · 03-03-2008, 23:51 PM

hm, the lightly-armored muslims did pretty well against the knights during the crusades, right? how did they pull that off??

Quote:

Oh lord, another one of those East is The Warrior Way of Life shouters.

you should have seen it when "fearless" came out in asia- i think every chinese nationalist fanboy thought himself the Master of All Martial Arts.

YouTube - Jet Li's Fearless (2006) - Huo Yuan Jia v. Foreign Experts

**Parihaka** · 03-04-2008, 00:39 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by astralis

hm, the lightly-armored muslims did pretty well against the knights during the crusades, right? how did they pull that off??

We're talking one on one and you're talking campaigns but in answer to your question, logistics.

**Officer of Engineers** · 03-04-2008, 00:58 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by astralis

hm, the lightly-armored muslims did pretty well against the knights during the crusades,

Lightly armoured muslims?

They have chain mailed on par with the crusaders.

Quote:

Originally Posted by astralis

you should have seen it when "fearless" came out in asia- i think every chinese nationalist fanboy thought himself the Master of All Martial Arts.

Two words - Boxer Rebellion

troung · 03-04-2008, 02:50 AM

Quote:

hm, the lightly-armored muslims did pretty well against the knights during the crusades, right? how did they pull that

The Muslim heavy cavalry would be pretty well equipped. Elite units wouldn't have been too much different from the Knights.

Turkic/Steppe armies (Mamlukes/Seljuks) fought different then the samurai would so their successes wouldn't be duplicated in such a way by a Samurai army. Feigned retreats, arrow barrages and combining heavy and light cavalry worked well against European knights.

The Samurai weren't thinking that way.

entropy · 03-04-2008, 07:57 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Officer of Engineers

For the very same simple reason their armour is not up to par, lack of proper materials to build good shields.

I guess wood was available in Japan?

**Officer of Engineers** · 03-04-2008, 09:59 AM

Not enough hardwood.

tankie · 03-04-2008, 10:01 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Big K

what about martial arts?

What about a 7.62 through the head, as in raiders of the lost ark , his sword was crap wasnt it .

ahh but i digress ,, i think the knights would be superior for most reasons already mentioned .

Big K · 03-05-2008, 04:13 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by tankie

What about a 7.62 through the head, as in raiders of the lost ark , his sword was crap wasnt it .

ahh but i digress ,, i think the knights would be superior for most reasons already mentioned .

i prefer 9mm??

hehe yes i see the arguments but i still disagree

View Poll Results: Samurai vs Medieval Knight
Samurai	20	62.50%
Medieval Knight	12	37.50%
Voters: 32. You may not vote on this poll

03-03-2008, 23:04 PM	#352 (permalink)
Officer of Engineers *Military Professional* Moderator Scotch taster Join Date: 08-06-03 Posts: 15,918 Country:	For the very same simple reason their armour is not up to par, lack of proper materials to build good shields. __________________ Chimo

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes	Rate This Thread
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode	Rate This Thread:

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Ninjas & Knights	Ironside	The Early Modern & Imperial Ages	98	07-23-2008 08:14 AM
Last Samurai gun question	Beaugeste93	Small Arms and Personal Weapons	23	07-10-2005 19:16 PM

03-04-2008, 09:59 AM	#358 (permalink)
Officer of Engineers *Military Professional* Moderator Scotch taster Join Date: 08-06-03 Posts: 15,918 Country:	Not enough hardwood.

Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)