|
Sir Kenyth (is your name Kenneth by any chance?) I dont think anyone doubts your qualifications.
Your knowledge on this subject is most impressive and I'm not going to say I know any more than the average Joe about how well a Plate could withstand a katana blow..
Rather a few things to think about..
I'd imagine that combat issint about exchanging blows, especially between say, a Knight and a Samurai. Its about scoring blows, meaning who gets to hit whom first. A blow by a weaponsmaster, or an expert at the craft of killing will hurt and maim no matter who you are, and how you're armored. A plate will protect you, no doubt, but if it hinders you to a point that a blow to the chest, while not lethal, is enough to topple you, you'd be at a serious disadvantage on your back in less-than-flexible armor against a trained swordsmen with a swift blade. Samurai didnt fence as much as wait for the right moment to take a swift, killing blow before sheathing the blade once more, to my knowledge of Japanese history (limited, I admit)
Also, these two cultures were never engaged in a fullscale engagement of knights vs. samurai, and therefore their martial arts forms and battle gear were NOT engineered to combat against each other. I'm sure that if Japan had to fight a war with medieval Europe, say English or French knights, with Samurai, their battle tactics would be very different. Armor was as much a form of rank and dress as well as battle gear, and, in the European case, was geared to face similarly equiped foes with lance and crossbow. Plate mail itself was only introduced because of the superiority of crossbow and bowmen during the hundred-years war, before that, it was just chainmail.
Nobody can doubt the potency of either Japanese, nor European battlestyle and tactics, because they were all equally adept to killing foes that they were armed and armored specially to face. Its almost like crossing a boxer with say, a judo black-belt. Its just unbalanced!
------------------
Resident Lurker Guy
|