Samurai VS Knight - The ULTIMATE Battle
Вставка
- Опубліковано 15 чер 2024
- Want to watch the uncensored version of this video and our restricted video on the French Revolution totally ad free? Check it out on our Patreon, plus you’ll be supporting our channel: / simplehistory
We recently posed an exciting question in a community post: Who would win in a battle, a Medieval Knight or a Japanese Samurai? The response was incredible, and we couldn’t resist bringing this concept to life in a thrilling video! Dive into this epic clash of legendary warriors and discover who will emerge victorious. Enjoy the showdown, and don't forget to share your thoughts in the comments!
Check out our other Channel: / @simplehistorylive
Discord server: / discord
Become a Simple History member: ua-cam.com/users/simplehistory...
Copyright: DO NOT translate and re-upload our content on UA-cam or other social media.
SIMPLE HISTORY MERCHANDISE
Get the Simple History books on Amazon:
www.amazon.com/Daniel-Turner-...
T-Shirts
teespring.com/stores/simple-h...
Simple history gives you the facts, simple!
See the book collection here:
Amazon USA
www.amazon.com/Daniel-Turner/e...
Amazon UK
www.amazon.co.uk/Daniel-Turner...
/ simple-history-5494376...
/ simplehistoryyt
Credit:
Show Created by Daniel Turner (B.A. (Hons) in History, University College London)
Script:
Narrator:
Chris Kane
vocalforge.com/
Want to watch the uncensored version of this video and our restricted video on the French Revolution totally ad free? Check it out on our Patreon, plus you’ll be supporting our channel: www.patreon.com/join/simplehistory
Like video
So now there's a total of 4 videos now that are essentially paywalled because of animated South Park inspired gore? Can't you at least repost the French revolution on rumble? It's not like anyone's allowed to repost your content even with the context of it being a deleted video...rumble is a considerable platform, not discouraged. Unless you're a liberal labeling the site as right-winged, but this is about history right?
OH CMON YOUR VIDEOS ARE ANIMATED SO ATLEAST IT AIN’T SO GRAPHIC
You said it! They never had Samurai vs Ninja!
UA-cam is taking it too far. I can't afford to subscribe to each youtuber's Patreon.
"European medieval knight" - the guy on the left is 16th century, the knight himself uses a metal shield (not medieval) and a Bidenhänder from the 16th century, and the guy on the right is from the 16th or 17th century. Soooo...where's the medieval knight?
This video is just so ridiculous... when fantasy meets ignorance meets I-do-not-care-about-history.
@@AlexanderBlumenau What is weird is that the armour isn't stereotypical. An ignorant lazy person would just have generic armour. The "fight" is supposed to take place in the 16th century. The odd guy is the actual knight. Although I don't think that they said the shield was metal. A bigger problem is the use of the shield and a great sword together.
@@PeregrinTintenfish The shield in the video is metal, because the "knight" hits his sword against the shield and it creates sparks and a clear "metal on metal" sound. But even if the shield was wood, it would still be unhistorical, shields with that shape were smaller. And while the two guys at the side would fit into the 16th century setting, the guy in the middle does actually have armor that would be medieval, like 14th century, but then he just casually wear the (too large) metal shield and a clearly early modern Zweihander - and as the name says, that's a weapon for two hands anyway and not a knightly weapon in any way.
But I do agree, the armor depictions themselves are actually quite well done. Like the creator didn't look at any dates, but certainly did their research when it comes to how "some" armor looks like. Like the armor at the left is just 1:1 what I know from a 16th century museum in my hometown.
bist wohl auch durch Geschichtsfenster hier 😅
@@Dr_Juju so ist es
Time to bring back The Deadliest Warrior.
#BringBackTheDeadliestWarrior Great show!! Shouldn't have been cancelled after it's 3rd season back in 2011!.
@@romanvillegas7280Yeah. Me too.😢
Slava SAMURAI 🗾
I have the first season on DVD 100% agreed
Took the words right out of my mouth. I truly believe the knight would win. They may not have the acrobatics of a samurai but their plate armor is pretty durable compared to bamboo and in medieval Europe they had less down time compared to the samurai. The samurai just had to walk home after their battle maybe a few miles away from their house. The thing I like about Japan it's like very tiny so there was not a whole lot going on compared to the chaoticness of Europe.
7:35
Samurai: "Why won't you die!?"
Knight: "European armor, samurai. It makes me strong against your katana."
"Plate armor, son. It's hardened steel in response to piercing weapons."
*_"laughs in Kanabo and Tetsubo"_*
Indoenshiyans: hold our Keris 🤯
@@Booz2020 Also Indonesian: "Hold our 'Ilmu Kebal'."
"Standing here, I realize" intensifies
Not 10 seconds in this abomination of a video without historical inaccuracies... very hard watch
My bet is on the knight. And since you've chosen to give the knight a Zwëihander, he might not even need to stab in gaps if he swings that thing hard enough.
That weapon was used for destroying pikes and spear heads if I remember correctly
@@joshgray8377 That was its main use in battle. But I just love how it can also double down as a bludgeon if you're dedicated enough. Versatility, baby. That's what makes it my favorite "medieval" weapon. Yeaaaaaaaah!
Same
@@joshgray8377 yarp, that and a guardsmen weapon (swing it about the place in a big whirly fashion and you can keep a mob at bay/take up a lot of room)
@@BH-rx3uestill my favourite sword no matter what, looks real menacing
Another UA-camr, Gesichtsfenster did a reaction video to this.
Context: Geschichtsfenster (english: history window) is a German historian specialising on medieval history. He reacted to this video in a stream und just recently uploaded the stream as video on youtube. He just shows off the history inaccuracies of this 10 minute video. Geschichtsfenster's video is 43 minutes long. So one can guess the amount of inaccuracies he mentions. And those aren't minor details either
@@byter9819 The length of a reaction video is not a good measure of quality of the original. Andrej also complains about everything. It is very theatrical.
@@PeregrinTintenfish yeah i like his normal information video but when it comes to reactions he is a bit to aggressive and takes everthing to seriously like i get it many of the videos hes watching should have done a better job but it is still entertainment so a little bit of freedom for the design should be there for the creators like the dragon in peasent video he watched where he instantly didnt like it
@@PeregrinTintenfish I agree with both of you (including maybenotavampire). I am no expert for history. Having that in mind, I do feel that his complains are still justified. And they can well be ignored, too by others. He has other standards when watching such a video. He watches them on purpose to spot inaccurracies, while others just watch them to be entertained. What he sells as major flaws, is seen as unimportant by others. In the end he also just takes the role of an entertainer in those reaction videos.
@@byter9819 He is complaining to entertain, and also jumps to conclusions.
When will a medieval knight come? This is the 16th century. 🤣🤭
Whoever gets the first shot off
Actually Spanish Marines defeated a force of Ronin pirates in Cagayan, Philippines, back in 1582. The tactics and discipline of Less than a hundred Spanish Marines prevailed against hundreds of ronin. The Japanese called the Spanish Marines 'Lizards',and today it is still their nickname, 'lagartos'
They don't and you may want to take a closer look at that.
"November 16, 2018
Cagayan Battles of 1582: Debunking the Hoax"
"Samurai Pirates Against the Spanish Empire? By
Ceithernach, Sep 11, 2020"
"¿Tercios vs. samuráis? Mito y realidad sobre los combates de Cagayán"
The matter is about invincible samurais and razor sharp katana cutting through cannon barrels. There was a skirmish between Spanish Marines and armour clad Japanese ronin, and the Spanish prevailed. Not a pitched battle against Tokugawa Ieyasu army, of course,but in hand to hand combat the Spanish prevailed.
@@jorgebea7033that is not the matter that is being discussed. Again you can read what I left there.
@@eagle162 I've already read that. Just an interpretation, not the truth
@@jorgebea7033it is not that, that's going over actual historical facts and looking at the sources which are not aligned with the common popular story.
What decided the results of the second battle? Pure luck or pity points to the samurai?
european muskets had stronger gunpowder and some of their armor was even bulletproof. so it was clearly a pity point.
@@sharkur my thoughts exactly
@@sharkur At that range against a full-sized arequebus, the plate armor wouldn't have stood up to it, but yeah it was a pity point for sure. More likely than not NEITHER of those weapons would have fired. They didn't like to work, not even on a good day.
Broadsword? That would be a montante or zweihander
THANK YOU!
Zweihander was mainly used in latter years by Germanic mercenaries and not usually a stereotypical knight weapon.
Longsword and broadsword are better to go with the knight.
It's "Zweihänder". If you don't have an "ä" key, you can also type "Zweihaender" instead. 🙂
@@tubekulose I speak English and in English that's how we write it. We do not have these letters in our alphabet those are just in the German alphabet
@@user-wx3wx5vy3q That's why I mentioned the alternative spelling.
from the first second to the last -- just a big Show of bullshit !!
Both are friggin awesome, but the more I learn the actual history of these two warriors, the more I realize the samurai would absolutely stand no chance, if we're putting all the woo around samurai aside, and being intellectually honest.
Also, the folding of katana and their ilk weapons, is not some mystical magic steel making technique, but rather a way to make a decent blade with really crummy steel.
Shadiversity is going to rip this one apart, just so you know.
Idk not enough double bladed swords
you'd think by now channels like this would have learnt their lesson. I mean the knight removing armour coz it was too heavy for the horse? worries about flexibility? the naginata being sharper coz its made of folded steel!?
Metatron....
A knight wielding a Zweihänder (two handed-weapon) AND a shield?
@@davidbongni5715 Right, this ain't dark souls.
Sword vs sword: spring steel beats folded steel, longsword/greatsword has better reach than katana/no-daichi. Ranged weapons: musket beats arquebus. Armor: gothic/italian style has more coverage than an o-yoroi. Horseback: lance has better punch and reach than yari/naginata. Horses: a destrier is bigger/stronger than a japanese horse, is armored.
Yeah the part about the horse being too weak to carry a fully armored knight kinda threw me, they bred horses to be strong enough for that task. The term war horse exists for a reason.
@@generalnawaki both the japanese and western knights had warhorses. However, being hit by a 400kg destrier in plate is different from getting hit from a 200-250kg light war horse/pony with no armor.
@@randolphtiangco6239 Like the difference between being hit by a pickup and a train.
@@generalnawaki it matters when you and/or your horse are both armored
@@randolphtiangco6239 I completely agree, and European war horses ridden by knight's often did have barding.
Knight. No contest.
Nah. Samurai armor was comparable to European plate armor in strength and weight. It's going to come down to the person in the armor and how well they are trained. It is essentially, who gets lucky
@@soulknife20wth you sure a paper armor can match a METAL plate?!
@@akali2927 It's leather armor actually, but yes, compare to iron armor, leather armor has more weakness
leather breaks apart from swords or arrows. Steel is steel....
@@soulknife20 sorry dude but no, banded mail is no match for PLATEMAIL when its hardened steel and rounded to deflect piercing weapons. Honestly even European weapons were superior. The Katana is probably the most over blown weapon in history, think on this, why did it have to be folded? because sand iron makes for weak steel so they had to layer it so it wouldn't fold after one hit.
This video is the biggest collection of exemplary nonsense and misinformation I've seen for a long, long time.
This is about as historically accurate as that infamous Game Theory video about For Honor. By which I mean to say not at all. Shame.
The knight would win, he is going to be a larger heavier man, better armor and weapons, and if it comes to grappling well he absolutely gonna have the edge
This reminded me of Deadliest Warrior.
I remember that episode, they gave the samurai a horse and a long bow and had the knight on foot in chainmail, most one sided fight in the shows history.
Knight would win the fight. Only so much finesse would get you so far in that time period. Our Asian friends focus so much on technique(which is valuable to an extent) that they tend to forget what it takes when it comes to a fight. That’s what made Atilla such a badass. Win the fight comes first
Technique is superior boi😂😂
Atilla probably uaed some techniques as well
I mean... Is not like knight had no technique . Historicaly knight where nobles trained for their entire life to fight. War was entirely their job. They even forced small scale war only to have fun working. Not to mention, the very nature of those war was less brutal, giving those knight more chance to gain experience in war. It was pretty common back then to be. War veteran among nobility.
Those noble knight spenders their days thinking and training for war, do you really believe they never created technique?
Just go look at all the manual of war you can find.
@@danlomanalo4161 Not against full plate boy
@@Matze239 implying that knights also don't use techniques?
You know what they say, technique beats strength
Medieval Knight wins all they way
Knight armour was to advance for samurai , even the samurai clone their version of knight armour
very incorrect
I like both but a knight would destroy a samurai even without it's weapons. A katana would break upon impact with a knights armor. Samurai vs Spartan would be more fair. A better comparison would be Knight vs Viking as both have similar technology.
Samuria vs a spartan wouldn't even be remotly fair depending on which time period your using that's a milenia difference in time periods
Knight vs Viking is more fair???? You have been playing too much for Honor
A knight's armor or sword would absolutely shatter a katana. This is what happens when you have to refold your metal so many times for it to even be possible to be a sword.
@@MajesticsTwelvewhat are you taking about???☠️
You think a katana is made of glass? Its not breaking on impact
The knight. Katanas or other Japanese swords are not made to fight armour but arming swords and long swords are. The fairest match between these two in melee combat is if both parts has a blunt weapon and I am still betting on the knight due to superior armour
The samurai at the last match should have chosen a "Kanabou" or "Testsubou" for the fight. This video is for entertainment only so please guys don't take it too seriously.
You mean a blunt weapon?
You should have mentioned the battle of cagayan 60 Spanish conquistador Vs 1000 samurai
Werent those against pirates and not actual samuria
I'm glad this channel's taking a bit from Deadliest Warrior but with a fun twist
As someone who did reenactments of Sekigahara and Kawanakajima (both times my ancestors were involved) with my family i would think the closest to a knight would be the Mongolian Khanate.
I love the Reenactments because my mother and other women of my family had Onna Bugeisha roots.
How is the Samurai riding no handed and dodging a lance charge?
Bro called Montante "Broadsword" lol😅😂
A knight fully encased in plate is the most redoutable warrior in history.
He is basically immune to everything but the heaviest armor piercing blows.
Even armor defeating weapons like bodkin arrows from warbows and heavy crossbows shatter upon heating the chest plate and usually rely on hitting weak spots or hitting the horse a knight is mounted upon where the fall from a horse moving at high speed is enough to break legs and backs.
A samurai needs a very lucky shot to deal with the knight as even heavy Japanese weapons like the kanabo are inferior for dealing with plate than warhammers or poleaxes the knight as access too.
Bodkin arrows also didn't even necessarily counter Knights anyway. You'd need mass fire to do that something a samuria can't do in a duel. Generally just not a fair duel anyway
It would depend on the warriors in the battle. Weapons are merely an extension of the warrior.
Havent watched but knight should win
Kinda hard to get through plate mail with a slashing weapon lol
@@generalnawaki With a naginata yes, unless actively trying to go for gaps. But what the video didn't seem to put forth is the fact that japanese loved using war bats too.
If people remember deadliest warrior does anyone know where i can watch the back for blood specials for ira vs spetsnaz and spartan vs samurai? Its not streamed anywhere and i cant find it anywhere online
Now try Roman Legions vs Samurai Army(pre-Gunpowder Era) or Sun Tzu vs Julius Caesar
The earliest descriptions of ,,Ancient" Samurai come from centuries after the fall of Rome - not to mention, by the time these two would clash, Roman Army would start to experience its downfall (e.g. somewhere in the 3rd Century Crisis).
Yet another factor is Roman Legions based their military superiority on tactics and discipline, not ,,individualistic" martial arts.
1:50 when the samurai flipped off the knight😂
"Parry this you Filthy Casual"
" *Bang* "
Deadliest Warrior sure decided to make their reboot much more well animated
That last fight.
"Standing here, I realize. That you're just like me, trying to make history!"
Until this year i still playing For Honor, Thank you for the Knight VS Samurai video.
This video felt like it was trying not to offend anyone. In a general sense, a European knight would win in MOST situations. Plus that second "fight" with the arquebus wasn't logical at all, you didn't even go into WHY the samurai would win that, nor how the the age of the weapon used mattered at all... Like what was the point of bringing that up. Felt like it was a throw away to not make the Japanese angry that a samurai would GENERALLY not win these types of fights. I thought this was gonna be a real historic and in depth analysis where it was explained exactly WHY a fight would turn out as it would.
There's nothing that would make either samurai or knight, win the majority of the time.
@@eagle162 There absolutely is... Especially if you get to the nitty gritty details like weapon quality, training, experience, technology, will. There are plenty of factors that would decide a fight a majority of the time. For example, medieval knights armor would be difficult for a samurai to deal with because of the poor quality weapons the Japanese had to work with. That means the knight would win a MAJORITY of the time.
@@luckytanuki5449Europeans praise Japanese weapons and weapons (particularly swords) were traded across Asia.
Experience, again there is nothing here, Japanese warriors were again praised by Europeans and even hired as mercenaries. Fighting outside Japan.
Technology okay this is a huge misconception, hyping up European metal working and mistaking later Edo period swords traditions which focus on swords looking cool then practicality, is not the case with the koto era.
Armor, Japanese armor can offer as much protection as a knight or more, both choose how much coverage they wanted,both basically use the same weapons and techniques for armored combat.
Neutron diffraction study on full-shape Japanese sword"
The Investigation of Establishing Time of Zuku-Oshi and Kera-Oshi with Data of Iron Image of Buddha Making Age and Old Document "Kokon-Kajibiko"
Ancient and historic steel in Japan, India and Europe, a non-invasive comparative study using thermal neutron diffraction, F.Grazzi et al, 2011.
The Sword and the Crucible: A History of the Metallurgy of European Swords Up to the 16th Century, A. Williams, 2012
Some Aspects of the Metallurgy and Production of European Armor OCTOBER 18, 2016
Archaeometallurgical Investigation on Historical Sword-Making Techniques in Northern Italy Between the Sixteenth and Seventeenth Centuries, G.Tonelli et al, 2022
November 04, 2019 Japanese Swords "Mythbusting" - Part 1
La question du minerai de fer pour la période médiévale (IXe - XVIe siècle)
Home-made steel: A week at Manabe Sumihira's zuku-oshi tatara
Mineralogical Study of Iron Sand with Different Metallurgical Characteristic to Smelting with Use of Japanese Classic Iron-making Furnace “Tatara”
Micromorphology, chemistry, and mineralogy of bog iron ores from Poland
SOME THOUGHTS ON UTSURI
Posted on 2013/08/22
January 27, 2019
Iron and Steel Technology in Japanese Arms & Armors - Part 3: Bladesmithing
@@eagle162 Just because the Europeans praised the Japanese swords, does not mean they could stand up to traditional armor lol. They are impressive in their own right, but they are brittle and are not ideal for fighting plate armor. Crushing weapons are most effective against plate, not slashing. As for experience, European knights have a longer history of fighting than Japanese samurai, and also adapt more to the situations needed. As for the armor, Japanese Armour was designed more for protection against arrows and spears meaning it is no where near as protective as plate, more mobile sure, but that gets into mobility VS protection debate.
@@luckytanuki5449did you not check out the sources I give none of that is true.
Japanese swords are not brittle. Katanas were used against plate armor, you don't slice through it you aim for the weak points, which is the preferred method of both the knight and a samurai not crushing armor.
Knights do not have any longer history of fighting and again Samurai fought outside Japan or against other foreign forces. Which included Europeans hiring Japanese warriors against other Europeans.
Do you hear yourself, are you saying European armor was not designed to help protect damage from arrows or spears which are common in medieval Europe,spear being such a common weapon for knights.
Both Samurai and knights, make a choice between protection or mobility based on their needs or wants.
Not every knight or Samurai armor was equal to another knight or Samurai armor.
Please do more resarch especially on the arms and armor of both the japanese and especially the europeans before you make a video like this. Seeing the inaccurate bashford 14th century harness being used with a 16th century zweihänder and a oversized heatershield made me nearly cry.
You should be talking about a Renaissance knight cuz that's what was in the 16th century and firearms were come in use during this period like the arquabus if thats how u spell it
However a Jedi or Sith would kick both of their arses
This reminds me of "Deadliest Warrior."
It looks like you made one of the samurai after Honda Tadakatsu. The one in black and with horns.
Knights Templar vs Samurai would be awesome to watch.
It is crazy seeing how much your animation has improved!!! Keep up the great work!!
Knights in early Middle Ages were quite different from those in late Middle Ages. The same can be said about Samurai.
Earlier Samurai were armored horse archers. At the end of the Sengoku Era, more and more (1/3 or more) used guns as the main weapon.
bro bringing back a 30-years old worth argument
Metatron should review this video.
He would cry so much - and then shred this bs completely to pieces!
Knights
The armor in the last fight is armor they would've preferred for archery, not Polearm combat. They had more European style armor as well that would let them deal with polearms and even firearms(Nobunaga prefred a single Breast plate). This was less common mostly because they had a strong Archery pride and history many stuck to. The type of Sword you're showing wouldn't do well against even just Mail, and would mostly required half swaoding to do anything. You're not cutting through any of even lesser armor. And you're not stabbing through any gaps without half swording and grappling. For which, if you are grappling, the European armor is actually has some draw backs For one, you'll have less mobility, and you're probably heating up faster too. In one on one at least, I think it actually goes to the samurai because most armored fights would end up being a grappling match EVEN with polearms. On the battlefield if we give each culture their equvlant, I would then give it to the Europeans. As the grappling increases, so does simple trampling. I don't claim to be an expert I just looked into this a lot , so I'm open to having my mind changed!
My request is Alexander the Great and his Macedonian Army (those who have entered the Persian Empire) vs Hannibal Barca and his Carthaginian Army and the mercenaries in a pitched battle in an open flat battlefield.
Open flat battlefield Alexander is 100% winning
@@RoyalRegimentofScotland assuming Hannibal Barca doesn't bait his army into an ambush.
@@Admiral45-10 In an open field thats almost definitely not going to happen
@RoyalRegimentofScotland Hannibal once pulled such a dirty trick against Romans, baiting them to fight while they were cold, hungry and tired. Of course, Alexander was a skilled commander and it's not that likely he would take the bait - but if he were to, he could have a chance.
The 1582 Cagayan battles were a series of clashes between the forces of the Spanish Philippines and wokou (Japanese pirates made up of rōnin)
Sounds like Legion and Herald against each others
Its not a real fight until both parties shout out their respective super skills and techniques
Despite being newer to firearms, I'd still say the samurai would be almost just as adept as its european counterparts. Take the Shimazu and Oda clans for example. Shimazu were the first in Japan to use them, while Oda Nobunaga alsor ealised its potential, and even came up with the 3-ranked fire system which he would use in his later years.
I'd argue Europeans had more advanced gunpowder tactics - e.g. European fire-by-rank tactic, making it difficult for the enemy to even reload, Swedish Tripple shot, increasing the chance of hit, or a Spanish Pike Square, that turned a single battalion into an impenetrable fortress.
Pov: "Dude just started his own 💀battle arc" like: ua-cam.com/video/_FD6Fyn2s0c/v-deo.html; ua-cam.com/video/7eLLhsGRj-o/v-deo.html it would be interesting to see both @Simple history & @DEATH BATTLE for collaboration 😎👍- looks nice & crazy scare at the same time💀
"No rules, no safety, no mercy. It's a duel to the death to find out who is THE DEADLIEST WARRIOR"
Deadliest Warrior must rise again!!!
Wait....is he saying a blade that has carbon added etc could cut right through steel plates? How would that be possible?
“I’ve been looking forward to this” Star Wars revenge of the Sith
Knight wins. There, I said it.
What kind of knight, against what kind of samurai? And a whooole heap of other variables. The real answer is, whoever you want to :)
@@VikingTeddyThe real answer is the knight wins most of the time for most time periods
@@RoyalRegimentofScotland Even if we strictly go by what kit is shown in the video (we'll overlook the uh, liberties taken), and assume they would duel in a way that makes sense, it still could go either way.
As for time periods, you can literally dream up any kind of fight scenario you want :)
We'd have to know a whole lot more about the fighters to even begin to make guesses.
There's no point in even trying. It'll just devolve in to a pointless argument. -My fighter is stronger! -Yeah, but mine is faster, he'll dodge and stab you. -Nu uh, my guy has armor everywhere! -But my guy is a veteran and has ten years more experience! -Well my guy throws poison in his face and wins! -Mooom! Ducklover7457 isn't playing fair!
@@VikingTeddy It realistically just wouldn't go either way. Late knights were just literally unbeatable in a duel by anyone who didn't have the same equipment , armour was even capable of protecting against certain firearms. Samurias literally adopted European armour even after knights stopped existing. Samurias factually aren't better trained yet to an extent that can just depend on the individual. Even if it's a mounted duel the odds are even worse for Samuria. The knights take literally every single advantage. Yes a samuria can win because it's real life and not an anime and anything could happen but it's like debating if I'd beat a 10 yr old in a fight or if an SAS operative would beat a conscript in a fight yes I or the SAS could potentially lose in a certain circumstance but I'm easily winning 9 out of 10 times.
@@RoyalRegimentofScotland Fair enough. If we're talking full plate vs yoroi in every scenario, then yes, that's an advantage.
Both would have to grapple and poke at gaps, which a full plate has less. Not enough of an advantage to guarantee victory maybe, but definitely enough to put your money on the knight.
But that's a very specific scenario, I was thinking in general, not just kit vs. kit.
Simple history you gotta make a comeback
Lol No Execution Crowd goes crazy 😡😂 8:29
Can't listen to this guys voice. The other guys better
Samurai used a BOW, then a spear LONG before the sword.
Yes and no. You only have so many arrows before running out of ammo or the enemy is getting close. But samurai were known for using bows at least as much as melee weapons in general.
@RonJeremy514 Yes arrows are limited. But the smaruai were not "basic" archers. As a rule, it WAS the primary weapon, then their version of the spear or pike. The sword in combat was a last resort. Liking pulling out a pistol vs rifles. A LAST resort.
@@xxxlonewolf49 Not necessarily. There are accounts of bushi and warriors assimilated to the samurai class using swords as main weapons, mostly in skirmishes, including greatswords, especially Hatamoto bodyguards but it also depends on the era if we talk about various warriors.
Now, if one can wound or kill the enemy before being face to face, that's obviously a big advantage. Spear or pikes were not always the typical field weapon for samurai. There were many types of polearms and field weapons like the war bats (tetsubo, konsaibo), nagamaki (similar to a tachi/katana mounted on a massive hilt, but it wasn't exactly built like that nor always converted into a nagamaki), mallets too. Sometime they used improvised or crafted shields but they didn't seem to use those all that often.
It's a bit complicated because the way we bring this topic like this would mean that they always carried a daisho (katana/tachi + wakizashi + tanto + field weapon + bow... No way a samurai can carry all that at the same time let's be realistic)
Ashigaru peasant troops were most often pikemen and "basic archers" for sure.
@RonJeremy514 TLDR, I have a life. Accounts, one of off stories are NOT the rule, not break or change The Rule.
@@xxxlonewolf49 Except that there is no proof that it was the rule of thumb for the samurai to use pikes and lances. Try again.
It is like I'm a child and my uncle is trying very hard to be a cool uncle while babysitting me
I watched this at1.76 speed and it was still too interminably long.
I approve of this! It makes up for the last "samurai" video.
While the samurai is cool and all, a European knight has plate armor and swords made from richer iron content and a bit heavier. A samurai may have speed with lighter armor but the katana can't pierce plate armor unless they're aiming for the small gaps. Meanwhile a European broad sword/longsword can cut through Japanese armor with enough force.
I'd like to see Mauri vs Celts!
So you take away the samurais most used weapon, the yumi bow
And a knights shield. He just throws it away.
@@Nimori Knights in full plate armor wouldn't use shields. If anything, the equivalent to the yumi for the medieval knight would be his lance. Or in the case of a duel on foot like this probably a poleaxe. But the entire equipment in this video is a joke anyway.
A yumi wouldn't even scrape medieval plate
Last time I was this early we had knights and samurai
Metatron, i call on thee
Wonderful 🔥 🔥 🔥 🔥 🔥
Youd have thought by now you lot would get things a little more accurate. Getting rid of armour on horse back coz its heavy? worries of flexibility? A knight using a zweihander in a one on one and calling it a broadsword?
CALLING THE NAGINATA SHARPER BECAUSE ITS MADE OF FOLDED STEEL!?
Interesting; I’d say the European knight armor would give him an edge. As for fighting arts, I’d say the samurai is better.
European armor is just too good. It will crush the samurai in a cavalry charge. Or outlast the with their tough armor. Even they're weapons have more stomping power.
though do projects revolving around samurai stuff but i don't really do any research on the weapons and what i don't get is that some weebs out there would actually think that samurai would win just bc theyre cool to them.
to me the look is enough to tell that a thin sword made for slicing wouldn't penetrate a thick pure steel fully armored man
Mace smashes clay pot armor Everytime.
A video about the japanese red army or Fusako Shigenobu would be interesting
I thought samurai were also archers, specifically also gifted horse archers.
Yes, but then again, so were knights
@@Aegis--- I have neither heard of knights being gifted horse archers or seen a single depiction of it. I really wonder what you are basing that on? Isn't this part of the reason why the mongol's whooped their butt?
@@skynotaname2229 referring more to archery than to horse archery.
Regardless samurai bows would have no effect on plate armor due to their very low (compartively) draw weight. European longbow were designed to pierce plate with very high draw weights, whereas Japanese bows were designed for use on both horse and foot (although interestingly, the same is done with the mongol bows, however they have very high draw weights due to their smaller sizes)
@@skynotaname2229Knights eventually did incorporate horse archery. And its more that they are trained to do it than actually do it regularly. Its just how roman legionaries were also expert slingers but no body reallt remembers
@skynotaname2229 Matchlock Cavalry in...well, entire Europe and Chasseurs a'Chaval in Napoleonic France (that also had its equivalents everywhere else in Europe).
Winged Hussars in Poland-Lithuania were also armed with them, but didn't use them as much.
Knights would win. 1565 the Portuguese won vs the Matsura Clan at the Battle of Fukuda Bay.
Now do Templar knights vs Viking warriors.
all it took was their techniques even the European knight held something against armoured foes with anti armor techniques the used of Lichneteur and Mordhaus does Japanese Samurai anti armor techniques in their sleeve all it took was a quick slash blow that pour all their strength and refine their blade
Shad and Matt Easton will be tearing this video apart. The match up between firearms is a toss up. It comes down to who shot first, some skill, and luck. Guns at that time were not very accurate. As for the naginata vs greatsword. The Naginata’s average weight roughly 3-7 pounds has quite a bit of overlap with the greatsword’s average weight of 5-10 pounds. It’s speculated that the greatsword served a more defensive role rather than offensive, but it was definitely used offensively as well. The greatsword wielder could simply sit there and deflect incoming thrusts and slashes until he can pin the naginata wielder’s weapon and close in. Overall, Knights and Samurai are pretty even in terms of weapons. However European armor has better engineering behind it. Some suggest that the Japanese favor technique and form, whereas Europeans tend to be more pragmatic.
Unfair fight. Samurai isn't using Kanabo for armored foot fight
with the invention of firearms it was not longer nacesarie to build high end swords..
that does not mean that we did not have them in the time befor...
High-end swords continued to be produced and used in wars far after firearms
Knights would win 7/10. The difference in physical stature, obviously europeans are taller and stronger. Full plate armor compared to japanese armor is superior in metallurgy.
Europeans were not that tall back then, even today the high difference between Japan and the average European is not that different, but regardless of height that's not going to matter much when weapons and armor are involve.
Stronger? That depends on the person.
No it was not Superior in metallurgy. I can give a few sources about this if you want.
@@eagle162 Medieval Europeans were only slightly shorter on average than modern Europeans (the reduction in height happened during the increased urbanisation in Early Modern/Industrial Revolution). The Japanese were much smaller (more so than today). Average height through time is very easy data to find (UA-cam doesn't like outside links)
Larger people tend to be stronger, & that is a huge advantage in physical combat
By the time of plate armour, European metallurgy was considerably better, & had been for some time
Nice! Simple History is making its own Deadliest Warrior Series 😄
Very good job dudes and well done and happy Father's Day!!! Congratulations 996.89% yo throughout the 4th sizzling week of said joyous June y'all. Knight. No contest.
일본의 무사들은 동양의 직업 군인 중에서는 가장 높은 수준을 보여 주지만 서양의 기사들에게는 장비의 질적인 부분에서 크게 열세를 보일 것이라 봅니다.
서양에서는 동방에 대한 환상이 많이 주입된 듯 하지만 실제 동방 문명은 대부분의 동시대의 서방 문명보다 여러모로 열등했습니다.
There still IS a lot fantasy of the east in the west nowadays
More presicely fantasy about Japan
Many people still believe Japan IS a paradise butt when they actually reach Japan they often become dissapointed
you used a fighter ( a guard not a knight, knights dont use the zweihänder) from the mid to late 16th century as thumbnail. the middle ages end in 1500
Interesting, but I think if they both fought un-armored, that the Samurai would win
You can't win with that katana since the knights primarily use spears
I haven't watched a full minute of the video yet, and everything I've been able to see in that short time is utter nonsense. None of that armor is "European, medieval knight armor". Pretty much everything you see here is from the 16th or 17th century, wildly mixed with armor pieces and weapons from different centuries, and none of it really matches. And there were no metal shields in medieval Europe either.
Nothing gets better later in this video either - almost everything that is said about the European Middle Ages is incorrect
Please, if you have no idea about the topic you want to talk about, you shouldn't make videos about it. Or please find experts to show you your numerous mistakes and help you get it right.