Samurai VS Knight - The ULTIMATE Battle

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!

Copyright: DO NOT translate and re-upload our content on Youtube or other social media.

SIMPLE HISTORY MERCHANDISE

Get the Simple History books on Amazon:

T-Shirts

Simple history gives you the facts, simple!

See the book collection here:

Amazon USA

Amazon UK

Credit:
Show Created by Daniel Turner (B.A. (Hons) in History, University College London)
Script:
Narrator:

Chris Kane

[MrGeekFreek]

Time to bring back The Deadliest Warrior.

[skytrooperss]

7:35
Samurai: "Why won't you die!?"
Knight: "European armor, samurai. It makes me strong against your katana."

[panoptikum]

"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?

[mekingtiger]

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.

[Matze]

Not 10 seconds in this abomination of a video without historical inaccuracies... very hard watch

[jorgebea]

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'

[PeregrinTintenfish]

Another YouTuber, Gesichtsfenster did a reaction video to this.

[randolphtiangco]

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.

[Bradzerker-eddj]

Shadiversity is going to rip this one apart, just so you know.

[TenMillionYearProgram]

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.

[Monkey-dp]

Broadsword? That would be a montante or zweihander

[HIFLY]

What decided the results of the second battle? Pure luck or pity points to the samurai?

[amsrock]

When will a medieval knight come? This is the 16th century. 🤣🤭

[NukeLaLoosh]

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

[somefunnyguy]

Durability: knight
Flexibility: Samurai
Strength: knight (due to the weight of the sword)
Speed: Samurai
Stamina: Samurai
Weapons: knight
Overall: knight

I think it's true for anime weebs out there hardened plate steel and more layering is very effective against slashing weapons and that gives the knight a very good protection meanwhile the samurai got the advantage of flexibility which means that the samurai have a little chance to hit the Knight's weak spots and lastly the strength is very good against these situations speed may lack the knight but one fatal blow will end it all

[viking_skywalker]

from the first second to the last -- just a big Show of bullshit !!

[darkknightbatman]

You should have mentioned the battle of cagayan 60 Spanish conquistador Vs 1000 samurai

[justinvang]

Of course the Samurai will lose to a Knight it's not even a contest. Not only would the Samurai lack the weapons to kill the Knight it also would be ineffective against it. Besides the Samurai were mostly locked onto their small island. And to add the Samurai lacked real experience fighting against other forces and warriors outside of their island. Even the Imjin War in the late 1500s proved it. For anyone not familiar with it? Long story short the Samurai lost the war and failed to beat Korea and China as well.

Besides everyone knows it the Samurai is just overrated.

[aidanmcnary-hickey]

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

[luckytanuki]

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.