20mikemike
Airman
- 10
- Feb 11, 2009
If both the knight and samurai are mounted, the samurai with bow and spear and the knight with lance and sword, both with armor at around the year 1350, I would have to estimate that the victor is going to be whoever plays smarter. Neither party is going to know his enemy's strengths or weaknesses, and making any assumptions could cost them dearly. If the samurai fires his arrows at the knight too far out, he will either miss, or his arrows will be ineffective. We also have to take into consideration the arrowhead used by the samurai - this is out of my area of experteise, but in Europe, the arrowhead that could punch through armor close in was known as the "bodkin" head. The bodkin looks nothing like a typical arrowhead, but instead was needle-like, putting all of the impact pressure on a very small point. Wider heads were not as effective against armor, even in 1350. Making a bad estimate about this while closing could put a lance through the samurai's neck, or through his horse.
On the other hand, the knight does have to be wary of getting his horse shot out from under him. Although horse armor did exist in 1350, just like the armor of the knight riding it, it was not as advanced, resiliant, or well-covering as later horse armor. I can think of a couple instances in later fechtbucher where the ideal target against a rider is his steed. In the event that the knight's horse is taken down while he is closing, it is very likely that the knight will be killed falling at high-speed and breaking his neck or skull, or if not killed outright, likely taking sufficient enough wounds/broken bones to put him out of the fight, just like the French knights at Crecy.
In the event that the samurai exhausts his arrow ammunition, and it goes spear against lance, I'd give the advantage to the knight based upon range. Both the knight and samurai were highly trained in the use of spear weaponry, the knight especially so on horseback, but the same could be said for the samurai as well. Knightly lances could be 12 or more feet in length, and the primary targets of lance strikes were the neck or the head. If the knight assumes, however, that the samurai isn't going to try to get out of the way, (as would happen at times during the Crusades, a Muslim rider would evade by sliding down on the side of his horse) there's a good chance he'll miss, and the samurai's own spear could find its target. On the other hand, if the knight were to play it safe and aim instead at the samurai's horse, he's got a bit more range, and at least could put the samurai on the ground.
If somehow all weapons were exhausted it would get very interesting. Knightly combat could include grappling on horseback and examples of this type of combat can be found in Talhoffer's fechtbuch of 1467 and Wallhausen's fechtbuch of 1616 (this one also includes targeting horse), and although outside our time of combat (1350), the advanced techniques shown therein seem to have been well known for a while (I'll need to check some of the other fechtbucher for more examples.) THAT would be a sight to see (though quite gruesome as well!)
--ON FOOT CONSIDERATION--
On foot, I would give the advantage to the knight, as I've said before, but with the question of what are the knight and samurai armed with? Does the knight have a halberd or maybe poleax complementing his sword? Or is he using a sword and shield, or perhaps bearded axe and shield? What is the samurai using as his weaponry, and how often has he faced a shielded opponent? Both the knight and the samurai were amazing martial artists, both used strikes and wrestling often (most accounts of single knightly armored combat end up with wrestling, then a dagger to the face of whoever lost). The key differentiating factor that I give to the knight is his armor. That said, who would REALLY win is whoever is the smarter fighter, and also, whoever has luck on his side.
On the other hand, the knight does have to be wary of getting his horse shot out from under him. Although horse armor did exist in 1350, just like the armor of the knight riding it, it was not as advanced, resiliant, or well-covering as later horse armor. I can think of a couple instances in later fechtbucher where the ideal target against a rider is his steed. In the event that the knight's horse is taken down while he is closing, it is very likely that the knight will be killed falling at high-speed and breaking his neck or skull, or if not killed outright, likely taking sufficient enough wounds/broken bones to put him out of the fight, just like the French knights at Crecy.
In the event that the samurai exhausts his arrow ammunition, and it goes spear against lance, I'd give the advantage to the knight based upon range. Both the knight and samurai were highly trained in the use of spear weaponry, the knight especially so on horseback, but the same could be said for the samurai as well. Knightly lances could be 12 or more feet in length, and the primary targets of lance strikes were the neck or the head. If the knight assumes, however, that the samurai isn't going to try to get out of the way, (as would happen at times during the Crusades, a Muslim rider would evade by sliding down on the side of his horse) there's a good chance he'll miss, and the samurai's own spear could find its target. On the other hand, if the knight were to play it safe and aim instead at the samurai's horse, he's got a bit more range, and at least could put the samurai on the ground.
If somehow all weapons were exhausted it would get very interesting. Knightly combat could include grappling on horseback and examples of this type of combat can be found in Talhoffer's fechtbuch of 1467 and Wallhausen's fechtbuch of 1616 (this one also includes targeting horse), and although outside our time of combat (1350), the advanced techniques shown therein seem to have been well known for a while (I'll need to check some of the other fechtbucher for more examples.) THAT would be a sight to see (though quite gruesome as well!)
--ON FOOT CONSIDERATION--
On foot, I would give the advantage to the knight, as I've said before, but with the question of what are the knight and samurai armed with? Does the knight have a halberd or maybe poleax complementing his sword? Or is he using a sword and shield, or perhaps bearded axe and shield? What is the samurai using as his weaponry, and how often has he faced a shielded opponent? Both the knight and the samurai were amazing martial artists, both used strikes and wrestling often (most accounts of single knightly armored combat end up with wrestling, then a dagger to the face of whoever lost). The key differentiating factor that I give to the knight is his armor. That said, who would REALLY win is whoever is the smarter fighter, and also, whoever has luck on his side.