knight vs samurai.

[Sir Galahad]

View attachment 631773

Samurai wore armor too. @KnightTemplar

 

[Hogey]

Samurai's were gay 's.

"From religious circles, same-sex love spread to the warrior (samurai) class. Where it was customary for a boy in the wakashū age category to undergo training in the martial arts by apprenticing to a more experienced adult man, according to Furukawa the relationship was based on the typically older nenja, who loves, and the typically younger chigo, who is loved.[1] The man was permitted, if the boy agreed, to take the boy as his lover until he came of age; this relationship, often formalized in a "brotherhood contract"[4], was expected to be exclusive, with both partners swearing to take no other (male) lovers.

This practice, along with clerical pederasty, developed into the codified system of age-structured homosexuality known as shudō, abbreviated from wakashūdō, the "way (Tao) of wakashū"[6]. The older partner, in the role of nenja, would teach the chigo martial skills, warrior etiquette, and the samurai code of honor, while his desire to be a good role model for his chigo would lead him to behave more honorably himself; thus a shudō relationship was considered to have a "mutually ennobling effect"[6]. In addition, both parties were expected to be loyal unto death, and to assist the other both in feudal duties and in honor-driven obligations such as duels and vendettas. Although sex between the couple was expected to end when the boy came of age, the relationship would, ideally, develop into a lifelong bond of friendship. At the same time, sexual activity with women was not barred (for either party), and once the boy came of age, both were free to seek other wakashū lovers."
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homosexuality_in_Japan

I mean look at their fan boys weebs are all fucking s

 

[KnightTemplar]

Samurai wore armor too. @KnightTemplar

I'm far from an expert, but wasn't most Samurai armour made out of wood? I doubt it would stand up to the same punishment as plate armour and chainmail. I've seen a video where a Katana simply bounced off a mail shirt during a test.

 

[Sir Galahad]

I'm far from an expert, but wasn't most Samurai armour made out of wood? I doubt it would stand up to the same punishment as plate armour and chainmail. I've seen a video where a Katana simply bounced off a mail shirt during a test.

I believe mostly leather and steel for mobility and speed. The Samurai skill set is second to none. @KnightTemplar @HI SCOTT NEWMAN

 

[Halifax]

Lots of strange responses in this thread.

Typical armor worn by a knight weighed less than a soldier of today carries. On the other hand, plate armor was absolute shit for stopping arrows.

Samurai Katana's would indeed be shit vs plate armor and quite frankly the reach of a longsword and a typical euro size advantage. However Samurai used Katana's as a last resort.

Samurai's were gay 's.

"From religious circles, same-sex love spread to the warrior (samurai) class. Where it was customary for a boy in the wakashū age category to undergo training in the martial arts by apprenticing to a more experienced adult man, according to Furukawa the relationship was based on the typically older nenja, who loves, and the typically younger chigo, who is loved.[1] The man was permitted, if the boy agreed, to take the boy as his lover until he came of age; this relationship, often formalized in a "brotherhood contract"[4], was expected to be exclusive, with both partners swearing to take no other (male) lovers.

This practice, along with clerical pederasty, developed into the codified system of age-structured homosexuality known as shudō, abbreviated from wakashūdō, the "way (Tao) of wakashū"[6]. The older partner, in the role of nenja, would teach the chigo martial skills, warrior etiquette, and the samurai code of honor, while his desire to be a good role model for his chigo would lead him to behave more honorably himself; thus a shudō relationship was considered to have a "mutually ennobling effect"[6]. In addition, both parties were expected to be loyal unto death, and to assist the other both in feudal duties and in honor-driven obligations such as duels and vendettas. Although sex between the couple was expected to end when the boy came of age, the relationship would, ideally, develop into a lifelong bond of friendship. At the same time, sexual activity with women was not barred (for either party), and once the boy came of age, both were free to seek other wakashū lovers."
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homosexuality_in_Japan

Why the hell is the thread heading in this direction? lol

if you look in the microscope, a lot of badass historical figures were s'

Leonidas was one of the most prolific boy fuckers who ever lived.

 

[sloppypie]

Post any evidence showing Mongols had problems with European knights. In the two pitched battles they fight, legnica and mohi, the knights were baited in by the Mongols, surrounded, and crushed.

it's been a while since i studied the mongol campaigns into europe, but i believe the mongols had a lot of difficulty and defeats in their second campaign (or second invasion) of hungary. european leadership learned from their first encounter with the mongols and put a lot of resources into fortifying their strongholds and castles and put more emphasis on heavy cavalry, which had more success fighting against the mongol tactics than the lighter armored counterparts in the first campaign.

the mongol commander (started with a T i think, i don't remember his name) had a pretty crushing defeat in transylvania and on his retreat lost almost all his army in ambushes and attacks.

it's hazy memory on my part and i may go back and reread about the mongol campaigns into europe, they were really interesting. must be like 15 years since college that i studied it.

 

[BB in Crazy!!!!]

Lots of strange responses in this thread.

Typical armor worn by a knight weighed less than a soldier of today carries. On the other hand, plate armor was absolute shit for stopping arrows.

Samurai Katana's would indeed be shit vs plate armor and quite frankly the reach of a longsword and a typical euro size advantage. However Samurai used Katana's as a last resort.

Why the hell is the thread heading in this direction? lol

if you look in the microscope, a lot of badass historical figures were s'

Leonidas was one of the most prolific boy fuckers who ever lived.

Plate armor stopped arrows no problem lol. It was guns armor couldn’t stop. Unless your talking about chain mail.

Also, new question. Who wins in a gay orgy? Knight, Samurai, or Spartan?

 

[KnightTemplar]

I believe mostly leather and steel for mobility and speed. The Samurai skill set is second to none. @KnightTemplar @HI SCOTT NEWMAN

It depends on which time period we're talking about, of course, as Samurai armour evolved over the centuries, as did that of European Knights.

The skill-set of thee Samurai was in no way superior to his European counterpart. Knights began their training as Squires, acting as servants for Knights while being trained. On average it took around five years of constant training to become a Knight in one of the major European Kingdoms. A Knight was expected to master,

- Horsemanship, including using a Lance - the Knight's primary weapon - at full gallop.

- Training to build strength, agility and stamina, including climbing walls etc, while wearing full armour.

- Become highly skilled in the use of secondary weapons including, but not limited to, Sword, Dagger, Mace and single-handed Axe. Two of the most famous warrior kings in British history, Richard the Lionheart and Robert de Bruce, favoured a Mace and a battle Axe respectively during close combat. Partly because they were men of enormous physical strength who could use such impact weapons with brutal efficiency. Bruce, during the Battle of Bannockburn, hit an English Knight so hard that he split the man's helmet and skull with a single blow. In fact, he hit so hard the axe shaft snapped and left the blade imbedded in the Englishman's face.

- Grappling, so that as a last resort they could pin an enemy down long enough finish him with a dagger etc.

 

[Bald1]

it's been a while since i studied the mongol campaigns into europe, but i believe the mongols had a lot of difficulty and defeats in their second campaign (or second invasion) of hungary. european leadership learned from their first encounter with the mongols and put a lot of resources into fortifying their strongholds and castles and put more emphasis on heavy cavalry, which had more success fighting against the mongol tactics than the lighter armored counterparts in the first campaign.

the mongol commander (started with a T i think, i don't remember his name) had a pretty crushing defeat in transylvania and on his retreat lost almost all his army in ambushes and attacks.

it's hazy memory on my part and i may go back and reread about the mongol campaigns into europe, they were really interesting. must be like 15 years since college that i studied it.

This is fairly accurate. Their first campaign was quite successful and according to some accounts (take this with a grain of salt) they killed upwards of 50% of the population. Central Europe (read Kingdom of Hungary) wasn't as fortified as their Western counterparts and they were still a horse culture derived from similar military style as the Mongols themselves. The Khan died and they withdrew to figure out the succession.

Their second go around the Kingdom was prepared with better fortifications and a more unified response. And while it wasn't a one sided affair, the Mongols were repelled. Ironically, the devastation by the Mongols helped prepare the Magyars and much of central Europe for the Ottomans a few centuries later. So in a round about way you can thank them for a better prepared buffer zone between East and West.

As for the topic? Have you guys seen, in-person full plate and arms worn by knights? In close combat it would have been like a T55 vs Abrams battle. Like a raisin vs an Oldsmobile. I'm not familiar, at all, with Japanese bows/arrows so can't comment on ranged combat.

 

[AGGAMEMNON66]

It depends on which time period we're talking about, of course, as Samurai armour evolved over the centuries, as did that of European Knights.

The skill-set of thee Samurai was in no way superior to his European counterpart. Knights began their training as Squires, acting as servants for Knights while being trained. On average it took around five years of constant training to become a Knight in one of the major European Kingdoms. A Knight was expected to master,

- Horsemanship, including using a Lance - the Knight's primary weapon - at full gallop.

- Training to build strength, agility and stamina, including climbing walls etc, while wearing full armour.

- Become highly skilled in the use of secondary weapons including, but not limited to, Sword, Dagger, Mace and single-handed Axe. Two of the most famous warrior kings in British history, Richard the Lionheart and Robert de Bruce, favoured a Mace and a battle Axe respectively during close combat. Partly because they were men of enormous physical strength who could use such impact weapons with brutal efficiency. Bruce, during the Battle of Bannockburn, hit an English Knight so hard that he split the man's helmet and skull with a single blow. In fact, he hit so hard the axe shaft snapped and left the blade imbedded in the Englishman's face.

- Grappling, so that as a last resort they could pin an enemy down long enough finish him with a dagger etc.

HEMA practitioners routinely go up against Katana/Samurai style trained fighters in some tourneys and murk them routinely. The length/balance/weight of the swords usually comes into play there and historical Euro swords win out in that dept.


There’s a lot of myths about the actual skill of Samurai and the lack of skill of European knights that a lot of Youtubers are committed to debunking.

 

[SandisLL]

This is fairly accurate. Their first campaign was quite successful and according to some accounts (take this with a grain of salt) they killed upwards of 50% of the population. Central Europe (read Kingdom of Hungary) wasn't as fortified as their Western counterparts and they were still a horse culture derived from similar military style as the Mongols themselves. The Khan died and they withdrew to figure out the succession.

Their second go around the Kingdom was prepared with better fortifications and a more unified response. And while it wasn't a one sided affair, the Mongols were repelled. Ironically, the devastation by the Mongols helped prepare the Magyars and much of central Europe for the Ottomans a few centuries later. So in a round about way you can thank them for a better prepared buffer zone between East and West.

As for the topic? Have you guys seen, in-person full plate and arms worn by knights? In close combat it would have been like a T55 vs Abrams battle. Like a raisin vs an Oldsmobile. I'm not familiar, at all, with Japanese bows/arrows so can't comment on ranged combat.

I had seen in museums and some replicas made by enhusiasts.
Large shield, i think was 7 or maybe 11 kilograms, armour on knight from 8 till 35 kilograms depending of era and style.

-
Interestingly, after firearms era started seriously, knights in armour were not necessity and not enough mobile.

However pistols in this era were 1 - 2 barreled, not enough trustable and knifes & fencing was kept as self defense and dueling training in Europe till...
trustable revolvers and pistols with multiple cartridges & smokeless powder becomed casual things for middle and higher class mens.
Classical oriented military slowly changed curriculums in many officers training colleges and camps;
fencing, despite lost huge previous self defense role ( was important like nowdays pepper sprays) in 1880 - 1900 ...
still was kept as subject in many officers training colleges till WW1 ( 1914 ) in many european countries, like Switzerland, German lands, Carist Russia, Denmark, Belgium and France etc.
Students liked to man up and fencing was popular in students corporations ...
Between 1920 - 1940 too student fencing clubs existed and only after WW2 ....
We forget OUR history and honour to our previous generation skills.

TV, advertisements, magazines and in 1960 - 1990 majority of consumers were sure, that japanesse knew fencing but WE not...
Instead to keep our heritage, our society started to value dan ranks and .... stranger's skills.

 

[dissectingaorticaneurysm]

Knights and samurai were both overrated cans that mostly just bullied defenseless peasants. The real fighting was done by the disposable lines of infantry while the knights and samurai chased down fleeing cowards. They also both practiced pederasty and molested their squires Larry Nassar style.

Privileged rich boys playing war.

 

[Jack Reacheround]

knights also trained wrestling.

Yeah, but I bet their submission defense and guard game wasn’t even Anthony Pettis level.

 

[BB in Crazy!!!!]

Knights and samurai were both overrated cans that mostly just bullied defenseless peasants. The real fighting was done by the disposable lines of infantry while the knights and samurai chased down fleeing cowards. They also both practiced pederasty and molested their squires Larry Nassar style.

Privileged rich boys playing war.

Real men were the Landsknechts and the Swiss pikemen.

 

[LHWBelt]

where the hell did the belief come from that samurai are the quintisential warrior ?

a knight would absolutely murk a samurai. a knight in full plate armour could walk through katana strikes. hell even the katana was folded so many times because the ore in japan was of particually bad quality.

portuguese knights fought japanese samurai a few times and won. samurais were also known to fully adopt plate armour if they could get it from the portuguese.

Knights pwn samurais. Get enough of them and they'll take the knights tho.

 

[Hog-train]

it's been a while since i studied the mongol campaigns into europe, but i believe the mongols had a lot of difficulty and defeats in their second campaign (or second invasion) of hungary. european leadership learned from their first encounter with the mongols and put a lot of resources into fortifying their strongholds and castles and put more emphasis on heavy cavalry, which had more success fighting against the mongol tactics than the lighter armored counterparts in the first campaign.

the mongol commander (started with a T i think, i don't remember his name) had a pretty crushing defeat in transylvania and on his retreat lost almost all his army in ambushes and attacks.

it's hazy memory on my part and i may go back and reread about the mongol campaigns into europe, they were really interesting. must be like 15 years since college that i studied it.

Pretty good history of Mongol Battles.

 

[Sir Galahad]

It depends on which time period we're talking about, of course, as Samurai armour evolved over the centuries, as did that of European Knights.

The skill-set of thee Samurai was in no way superior to his European counterpart. Knights began their training as Squires, acting as servants for Knights while being trained. On average it took around five years of constant training to become a Knight in one of the major European Kingdoms. A Knight was expected to master,

- Horsemanship, including using a Lance - the Knight's primary weapon - at full gallop.

- Training to build strength, agility and stamina, including climbing walls etc, while wearing full armour.

- Become highly skilled in the use of secondary weapons including, but not limited to, Sword, Dagger, Mace and single-handed Axe. Two of the most famous warrior kings in British history, Richard the Lionheart and Robert de Bruce, favoured a Mace and a battle Axe respectively during close combat. Partly because they were men of enormous physical strength who could use such impact weapons with brutal efficiency. Bruce, during the Battle of Bannockburn, hit an English Knight so hard that he split the man's helmet and skull with a single blow. In fact, he hit so hard the axe shaft snapped and left the blade imbedded in the Englishman's face.

- Grappling, so that as a last resort they could pin an enemy down long enough finish him with a dagger etc.

If the Knight and the Samurai were naked with only a sword the Samurai will win. @KnightTemplar

 

[horc00]

Nicolas Cage was a knight, therefore I will conclude that a knight would be superior in most instances.

You forget the samurais have these 2 guys

 

[horc00]

the mongol commander (started with a T i think, i don't remember his name) had a pretty crushing defeat in transylvania and on his retreat lost almost all his army in ambushes and attacks.

Not even Genghis Khan messes with Dracula.

 

[horc00]

Also, new question. Who wins in a gay orgy? Knight, Samurai, or Spartan?

All of them.