also, im not sure (the actual viseo feed doesnt work on the computer im at, but if this is the episode you test a samurai lamellar's durability,
i should point out that the sengoku period armour was of a tosi gusoku design, mde up of a series of broad 'lames' essensially it was a laminated cuirass fastened onto the user by a hinge to the side so it was not unlike the roman lorica segmentata.
and though unmentioned in the show there is a time tested strike typically aimed @ the head called a MEN strike... stronger samurai were known to be able to complete this jab like movement and put a katana directly through the shield of an opponent and into the opponent themselves. even if the lead to the discard of the shield samurai carried atleast two swords. leaving the samurai still armed and the viking shieldless.
@TASGTMJR This is not true and impossible the way Viking shields were held and constructed.Please watch my newest Video "Deadliest Warrior Thrand's Spartan Vs. Ninja/Samurai " ? here on youtube. I am Member of Bujinkan and Practice Bujinkan Budo Taijutsu.Most Schools of the Samurai do not use Kanabo ours dose only as a training tool at high levels of training it by no means is a preferred weapon.
@TASGTMJR Watch "Weapons that made Britain the Shield" To see how a historical Viking shield was constructed.It was linden wood covered back and front with two layers of Oxen raw hide.Held by a center boss covered in metal.A Long bow could only barely stick in the surface.A sword would have very little chance of piercing it.A two handed spear might go in to it but I doubt in most cases it would go strait through.The shield is not held in close to the body nor is strapped to the arm.
@ThegnThrand and yet a katana could penetrate through samurai armour... thicker than your shield and better made... and a kanabo.. a 30 pound steel studded club can render a shield broken bent or shattered in one hit. ive seen it done.
@TASGTMJR i made a comment pointing this out to anyone reading, they were never 30 pounds,
i dont think you realise, compared to historical weapons, how ridiculous that weight is
heres a comparison, the biggest two handed german swords made for use on the field as opposed to being just showpieces, weighs 5kg i.e 10lb's and that is humongously heavy for a sword even 190cm long. one example of a battle uissue kanabo is only 4'9" and 4 lb's
theres no record of 30lb weapons used in war ever..
@TASGTMJR by the way, you say it could penetrate armour, what kind of armour are we referring to? are wea talking about early 13th century O yoroi made up of a LOT of smaller lamellar scales, or instead the later tosei gusoku? whoes chestplates were made of a series of horizontal strips, alot like the roman lorica segmentata
As a fan of the deadliest warrior I love the fact that the show opens up friendly discussion on age old warrior questions...
In the spirit of such I have been a Kendo practitioner for over 10 years and a close student of samurai combat tactics with different weapons. And i feel they are grossly misrepresented here. The kanabo against a shield is swung with an over hand fashion and used to crush the bring of the shield to allow the kanabo to break the skull or shoulder of the oponent
and for all those watching this video..kanabo didnt weigh 35 pounds, as far as i know NO single person weapon used in battle was even remotely that heavy.. they were around 5-8pounds 4kg at the heaviest
a 10 pound club would be seen as ridiculously heavy
. the only record and not necessarily a reliable one, is the descriptions of quan yu's guan dao being either 18kg or 48kg depending on which chinese measure you convert from.
I love deadliest warrior loads but remember it's just a show that needs ratings and money to survive. So being really accurate probably wouldn't help their ratings because young people which is more or less the target audience just want to see the cool blood and gore. I'm a young person and I love all the historical facts and all the gore but most people I know aren't so into history but still want to see the gore! We live in a capitalistic world-deal with it.
@elgostine well for me, 5 times further away but what i'm saying is some of the audience (not including me) aren't as into facts and figures as they are watching someone chop 2 pig carcases in half like a random angry person with no skill. and i am NOT saying that the guy who did the katana test wasn't skilled!
great job guys I respect you and the warriors that you are trying to represent and for the ones that are arguing here I got a question for you Did you ever fought against a man that wields shield and sword and you fought with a two hander???If you did you saw how hard is to pass his guard I'm just saying that the samurai only fought with the katana because there were other classes of warriors that fought with a yari or kanabo...you know you don't take your whole arsenal when you go into battle
great job guys I respect you and the warriors that you are trying to represent and for the ones that are arguing here I got a question for you Did you ever fought against a man that wields shield and sword and you fought with a two hander???If you did you saw how hard is to pass his guard I'm just saying that the samurai only fought with the katana because there were other classes of warriors that fought with a yari or kanabo...you know you don't take your whole arsenal when you go into battle..
I watch "Deadliest Warrior" quite a bit. The episode that really got me was "Celts vs Persian Immortals". History tells us that the Greek hoplites destroyed the Persians at Marathon, but a generation after Alexander when the Celts came down through Greece and into Asia Minor, they trashed the Greeks. So, if they beat the Greeks, how did they lose to the Persians?
Because that was a war and this was a skirmish. Celts can win through superior numbers, ambushes, fear, and brutality...but in a one on one fight they don't stand a chance to superior arms, armor, and training. The Persians had better weapons, a better chariot, better armor, and better individual training. Celts were powerful and savage, but a war victory over one group doesn't mean you're undefeatable by another similar group in small-scale combat.
@TheManperson Celts had excellent weapons, invented chain mail, and were ferocious in combat. The Emperor Claudius said the Britons, man for man, were just as good as the legionaires. They tore up Asia Minor for over 20 years before finally being defeated.
And heavy chariots are a joke. Too easy to evade in combat.
1: Chainmail performs poorly against spears. Always has, always will.
2: The Celts from the time period used did not have chain mail.
3: "Excellent Weapons" is a subjective term. Comparing weapons + armor against the Immortals weapons + armor leaves the immortal with an advantage that needs to be met with ferocity that, at the end of the day, was not enough to win the day.
4: The heavy chariot is a mobile firing platform that is dangerous to even get near.
@TheManperson the royal armouries, through a series of tests, concluded that maile is impervious to most weapons of even the medieval era.
decently made maile will save you from a sword thrust even reletively inferior quality riveted maile will survive being torn apart by swords designed to help beat armour
the only thing ive ever seen have a chance of easily attacking maile is the top spike of a poleaxe which is either square or diamond section and designed to maybe go through plate armour
@elgostine Yes Very True Elgostine.The shield was held by a center boss and and the fighting style was very reactive and mobile due to this.I had some explaining how the Samurai did not use shields because a strong samurai could thrust through any shield.This is simply not true.The center grip was covered in metal and the actual shield was covered both sides in Oxen raw hide over 1/4" tapering to 1/5" around the edge.The long bow could barley stick in the surface in many cases.
its one hell of a mystery why the samurai didnt re take up the use of shields.
it was probably a few reasons, tradition and the agreement that everyone would fight the exact same way for several centuries was probably a major one
which made people less likely to adopt other methods.
but i would say that it was the fact samurai began as horse archers who fought alot by exchanging arrows one on one.
they then adopted a two handed sword and used exclusively 2 handed weapons
Deadliest Warrior was one of those ridiculous shows made purely for entertainment - they cared more about cool factor and making their target group of viewers (teenage boys) happy than being accurate.
@TheMysticMage Watch my video "Deadliest Warrior Thrand's Spartan Vs. Ninja/Samurai " I think you will see you are mistaken. I am a member of the Bujinkan and have been for years.The Kanabo I used is fine many historical kanabo were nothing more than what I used and it was a very uncommon weapon almost never used by actual Samurai.The log as you call it used is actual weight of a historical Kanabo.
@ThegnThrand a person on myarmoury . com has photos of a historical kanabo, which weigh around 4 lb'scompared to the roughly and a half lbs for a daneaxe thats 130cm long.
@ThegnThrand Yeah I know it was severely uncommon..for special weapon they should've had wakizashi or yari maybe. But still...a log? Maybe ill go get a butter knife thats as heavy as a tanto to test the cutting power of a tanto huh?
Also, why is it that EVERY SINGLE TIME you get criticized for your fallacies you just tell them to watch that other video? that video proves NOTHING, and i feel bad for giving it a view.
@TheMysticMage I study Japanese History and practice Bujinkan Budo Taijutsu.The Kanabo is not a common weapon and was not used by Samurai in the form Deadliest Warrior used.It may have seen some use well after Samurai hay day when Samurai Armour improved and European pieces were added as well but would have been the tetsubo not Kanabo.This would be in the early firearm era though. A Bandit,cheap mercenary or ninja very well could have used at times but it was not the norm.
The more you say you do it, the less I suspect you actually do. You don't need to repeat "I practice Bujinkan" as if it means something about the discussion, it just makes it look like you're getting defensive and trying to sound superior to other people.
You study Bujinkan, congratulations. Doesn't make you any more of a historian than other people.
Are you in the S.C.A? I fight in the S.c.a as viking persona and I had to show a friend of mine who practices Kendo, Awesome video, I respect the Samurai but this misconception that no other warrior in history is equal has to go.
I would like to see more weapon vs armor in deadliest warrior. The samurai armor was not tested at all in the episode, only the helmet. At least none of it was shown.
I would by far prefer a good old-fashioned shield and a one-handed sword that can slash and stab (like the viking longsword) to a katana any day. Sure, a katana can cut through several pig carcasses, but if you give those pig carcasses, light armor, swords, and shields, the katana would be hard-pressed to get through even one.
I think the Norse expert said it best on the original show when he said "A Viking was fighting to feed his family".....wife and children. A Samurai?.............To test his skill. Personally, I hate gambling, but if I were a betting man, I would put my money on the Viking for motivation alone........
im a swedesh guy that love both samurais and vikings but you can notice that you are a little bit angry about the lost but i personaly think that you can't know ho's gonna win.
@myslimusik Then Check out our new video "Deadliest Warrior Thrand's Spartan Vs. Ninja / Samurai" here on Youtube :P We do the best we can comparing fighting styles due to experience and seeing them in actual application against each other over my years in Bujinkan and SCA :P
I like your analytical approach to the subject, I think the warriors of old would of been the same and compared weapons and tactics all the time, cheers Rob.
the problem with blocking a blow from above with the katana is that if he hits the edge of your sheild the katana will cut though it and the katana could probably stab through the sheild if it wasn't deflected accuratley
The Dane axe was mostly useful for taking down a shield wall, the design of it is simply a 6 or 7 foot pole with a small axe head, the long reach would enable someone to pul down a shield, and a second person to kill the man behind the shield. As to who would win in single combat I have no clue, what I do know is, that the samurai most probably at some point would see his chance to chop off the viking's arm. Or the larger stronger viking would punch the samurai's face in with his shield
@dlord29 very true, I just believe the Viking arms and armor and Style in single combat would have given them an advantage but this could be out weighted due to the individuals compared :P
U just embarrassing yourself you look like a 2 year old running around hitting people with a plastic sword. And your friend isn't a trained Samurai dump ass
@faminmonkeyz please watch the latest video Deadliest Warrior : Thrand's Spartan Vs. Ninja / Samurai here on youtube I am a member of the Bujinkan. These are my opinions based on style of combat not skill of warrior :P
@faminmonkeyz I agree that his friend is not a trained samurai, but they are NOT claiming that he is. He's making the point that a single-edged sword like the katana doesn't work against the Viking's large shield. I am also an SCA member and we use a trick called the Wrap Shot, which is to bring the sword behind the opponent and hit them with the back edge of our double-edged swords. The katana can't be used like, it must be swung front edge first and so is not very useful against a shield.
Even though samurai armor is a little better coverage than viking armor, the vikings had a shield and the samurai NEVER used a shield in melee. The viking's shield helps their vital coverage A LOT. Viking and Samurai culture are my two favorites so I won't say who is better, but, I will say the Vikings got robbed in that TV show because they didn't properly assess any tactics and the match ups between weapons were illogical.
@ThegnThrand That is awesome! The sword was a big hint, but it's good to see a fellow Society member. Loved the video. The people at DW are boneheads. They're doing fantasy characters, like vampires and zombies, for Season Three(from what I have heard). Thank you for posting a response to the disgrace the people at DW did to the Vikings.
The descendants of the Vikings and the descendants of the Samurai did meet and fight. Victory was decisive. The Vikings won. America versus japan, Pacific campaign, World War two.
@Spankmeinheaven That's right. The majority of Americans are descended from The British, Germans and Irish in that order. The people in Britain, Germany and Ireland have Viking blood from the constant battles with and invasions of the Vikings throughout their history. A lot of European cities were founded by the Vikings, e.g. Dublin in Ireland, York in England.
@Spankmeinheaven The Normans (from Normandy in Northern France...hence the name) who conquered Britain in 1066 were a mixture of the Northern French and Vikings. They invaded Ireland under a leader called Strongbow. Consider yourself both educated and owned. (",)
@EvilDarkJackel he seems to elobrated on misrepresented factors of each losing faction of those episodes still see nothing wrong with being baised there
@EvilDarkJackel personally i feel taht all subjects in DW are not represented to their full capacity and i feel he is trying to do so here in the vid i dont see anything biased about this vid very thing he said is a fact about how germanic and vikings used dark age european weaponry which is well documented.
@EvilDarkJackel 1600 – A war began between Toyotomi and Tokugawa. Musashi fought on the side of the Toyotomi's "Army of the West", as the Shinmen clan (to which his family owed allegiance) had allied with them. he was 17, so this would profoundly influence his martial arts.
@EvilDarkJackel "If you hold a sword with both hands, it is difficult to wield it freely to left and right, so my method is to carry the sword in one hand"- Miyamoto Musash.
Miyamoto Musashi (宮本 武蔵 c. 1584-June 13 (Japanese calendar May 19), 1645), prior to adulthood known simply as Takezo Shinmen, as Miyamoto Bennosuke or Miyamoto Musana, was a famous Japanese swordsman. He is believed to have been one of the most skilled swordsmen in history.
@Ulfvaldr2012 The book of the five rings was awesome you have to love Miyamoto Musashi , I like fighting with two long swords one in each hand or katanas and my style is based on his writings :P
@EvilDarkJackel Tell that to Miyamoto Musashi, the greatest samurai who ever lived, in his book of five rings he talks about how foolish it is having two hands on one sword. and your are way wrong the samurai don't have an advantage in equipment, its all depends on money, blacksmith skills and, availability of materials. Th sheid was a very usefull tool, it was used to break necks, and knock warriors off balance. I don't know where your getting your info. the shield was not a peasant weapon.
@EvilDarkJackel Again its all a matter of perspective, the samurai where only equipped all well as money allowed, as for the chain, some was reinforced with leather, some with scale, some may have actually wore plate. comparing these are like apples to oranges. Its a moot point.
@Kaisertoji and why is this relevant to the topic in hand? are you suggesting samurais would have fair better? i don't see the point in this. and by the way what is your source material, where is your proof to this claim?
It never makes sense to argue with people in the SCA who's persona are put on deadliest warrior. As it stands, Any one in the kingdom of the Outlands happily will say, it was an interesting fight, and almost all agree. this is because when you put a new guy with a shield against a knight, Duke or so on with a katana... it's a matter of training. More than that, take in to account that SCA rules are not combat rules, and trying to lanyard a dropped sword in a fight is... iffy at best.
@Hunter1ryu I am also a member of the Bujinkan and have been longer than I have been in the SCA. Please watch my newest video Deadliest Warrior : Thrand's Spartan Vs. Ninja / Samurai. I have had Japanese persona as well and do fight on my on with as you would say no rules as we did in the simulation in this new video. on you tube
Deadliest Warrior : Thrand's Spartan Vs. Ninja / Samurai
do you know niten ichi-ryu style? kenjutsu style developed by Miyamoto Musashi, i think a niten ichi-ryu style samurai can win against viking. but man, that roundshield is so big, can a spear pierce it?
@WinglessAngel6 Whether or not a samurai can beat a viking is more about that fighters particular skill than the weapons. there are good and bad fighters on both sides, and the fighting technics for both are exceptional. In a documentary I seen about Viking weapons, the shields found in Diggs where made in cross sections, like plywood, reproductions where tested and where found pretty much impenetrable. As for "Deadliest warrior", that show is way off base on a lot of points.
@klappspatenkamikaze Yes. That is covered by 1- this video is only part 1 of a 3 part Aftermath. 2- Thrand is responding to the show Deadliest Warrior, where the samurai portrayed was armed with a yumi, naginata, katana and kanabo. In short, yes you're right but that issue is addressed.
@Blutlarve This is based on the Deadliest Warrior Spike TV program. The knight has better armor than the Samurai and the Samurai only had really good armor in the 17th to 18th century but only used shields in their iron age.Vikings did have really good armor available chain shirt with coverage from knee to wrist. Arm and leg splints and almost full helm with gambeson underneath.
@sirus804 The Viking was not brute strength he was just as skill full as the Samurai By all accounts in the Saga's and his arms and armor would have beaten the Japanese picked by Deadliest Warrior. The Sword and shield would have had the Advantage. Please Check out my new Video Deadliest Warrior : Thrand's Spartan Vs. Ninja / Samurai /watch?v=mNj5HiCPx1I here on youtube. I am a member of the Bujinkan and practice 6 styles of the Samurai and 3 of the Ninja this is from my comparison.
@ThegnThrand Well of course you're going to be biased towards vikings then. If you were a Samurai and Viking reenactor for 22 years and chose Viking, then I'd understand. But you aren't educated enough when it comes to Bushido.
@sirus804 I said I am a Bujinkan Member I have done Samurai and Ninja Arts for the Same amount of time :P Watch my new Video " Deadliest Warrior : Thrand's Spartan Vs. Ninja / Samurai "
@sirus804 Maybe you should consider Viking speed ang agility...
Their main weapons were made to be real quick and cut though flesh as well as a japanese sword.
Here is a vid for you to see : look carefully to the attacks the guy is doing... they are too quick for the camera to see (1:23 ; 1:36 [with sword] ; 2:03 ; 3:08 ; 3:20)
He is still a rookie, and in a real fight, he would aim at the head, not play with the shields...
@UnglopedGlopinGloper I have no doubt that Vikings weren't quick.. but Samurai turned their quickness into an art form.. Its scary how fast some of them were. The katana is a scary weapon when wielded correctly. I'm sure Viking weapons were quick.. but not as quick and effective as a katana.
Also, I watched your video and wasn't impressed. I honestly could see the attacks you said were too quick.. They'd be even easier to see when the attacker is facing you.
@sirus804 I think that you idealise the way the samurai were.. as I may do the same with the Vikings, this is true. The point is, samurai survived until not so long ago while Vikings vanished a millennia ago. Thus, the legend of the samurai is still warm in people's imagination, and Vikings have long been considered savage brutes, devils. You mistake is to think that only samurai spent their life improving their combat skills.
@UnglopedGlopinGloper I don't idealize them at all. I just know how good they were. Hell, I'm from Swedish decent.. You would think I'd be biased towards Vikings.. but I'm just not. I know how bad ass Vikings were.. but they weren't on par with the Samurai in terms of discipline and their training.
@sirus804 For the vid : if they were slow attacks, the opponent would have had the time to parry them.
You are right, they are not the fastest attacks a Viking can make : we re-enactors do no intend to injure our comrades, so our attacks brutally slow down once we reach our target, and we can never be at full speed. Nonetheless, you could hardly parry these.
Just to enlighten you : a 12th century text states that Primus Miles had to climb a 10m straight rope in full armour using only their arms
@UnglopedGlopinGloper I didn't say the attacks were slow.. I said that I could see them and that Samurais attacks are quicker. and yes.. they could be parried.
Okay? So they had a lot of strength... Many people can do that.. Strength isn't Speed and Agility though... Not sure why you're telling me this..
@sirus804 My attacks are not slow I fight both ways I am a member of the Bujinkan , SCA and a Viking reenactor. I have compared every style and katana come in all weights 3lbs to 7lbs or so so do European swords do as well. So what I am saying there is no real speed difference they all are based on weapon length weight and balance. A katana can be slow a long sword can be fast are the other way around it is all subjective to weapons there is no set weight Historically.
@sirus804 The Katana used in modern demo's and Tameshigiri are a lot of times much lighter than historical weapons used against armored opponents or in earlier periods when the swords were not as high quality and could not be so light and hold up in a battle field.Please not movie swords are not steel either they move at high speeds and Kendo uses Shinai way lighter than any real viable weapon.
Speaking of the Primus Miles, my point wasn't to argue on their strength, but rather to make you understand that they were warriors dedicated only to getting faster, stronger, deadlier. They were trained, maybe not with the same technics as the samurai, but their training had the same goal : make them the best warriors.
If you want another example I can tell you that these warriors also trained with a very heavy sword in order to be real quick when using their "normal" weapons.
@sirus804 The Samurai and lots of Warriors trained with heavier weapons to become more proficient and get stronger wile using the regular weighted ones. I would dare say almost every culture has done this a t one time or another.
@ThegnThrand All their training had their differences.. Samurai were trained to kill a person in one swipe as quick as possible... Similar to how cowboys saw who could draw the fastest in a duel. Also, it isn't just the warrior.. its also the weapon they wielded. The katana is fast when wielded correctly.. I'm not saying its the fastest sword.. but its certainly fastest than a longsword.
@sirus804 I would say a katana is marginally faster than a one-handed longsword, but the difference is minimal and certainly not enough to compensate for a shield. Who wasn't trained to kill a person as quick as possible?
@Railstarfish Very true :P Most people trained to kill fast as possible back in the day. The Katana may not even be faster by much it just means blade so depending on time period it could weight 3.5 to 6.6 pounds :P
@sirus804 I have yet to see any reason why the samurai would be faster. Every warrior trained in combat techniques, every warrior trained in speed, every warrior trained to be quick.
@Railstarfish Ja!!! very true Weapon weight was the only factor and and armor that make one slower or faster but but the weapon weight and armor make up for it self in protection and weapon damage no one in history was dumb enough to wear extra weight with out ample protection from it or use to heavy a weapon they would not move fast enough in comparison to armor protective ability to kill his enemy.
@skallagrimur Yes, quite. One would guess that the enormous loot from the raid at Lindisfarne must have made the prospect of setting out and raid very tempting.
THe Real power of Sword shiueld, was uised by the Greeks Phalanx, which the roman empier perfected with there tower shield/short sword combination. not to mention the mattial arts that was utilized buy the samurai was a nother factor not really mentiond in the fight. the thing with the Samurai was that there armore was desighned to look scary, in last Samurai they show how well that worked eirly on when they charge inb the forest. like the viking who battle cryed his way to histo the eneamy
@skallagrimur I never said that vikings didn't train, and I resent any suggestion I said that. What I said is if a viking was doing manual labour for food and being stronger for it that would take time away from their combat training. On foot the viking has a solid advantage due to size, strength and his shield. Early samurai would have an advantage on horseback, since early samurai were more cavalry-oriented (and used horse archery). Later samurai get gunpowder and tosei-gusoku armour.
@skallagrimur I never said that vikings didn't train, and I resent any suggestion I said otherwise. What I said is if a viking was doing manual labour for food and being stronger for it that would take time away from their combat training. On foot the viking has a solid advantage due to size, strength and his shield. Early samurai would have an advantage on horseback, since early samurai were more cavalry-oriented (and used horse archery). Later samurai get gunpowder and tosei-gusoku armour.
@skallagrimur I'm not denying that, but they where not any worse than they where before/after the Viking age. I do believe that there was more to it than that. Perhaps they really just realized that Europe was ripe for the taking?
may i point out that there are NO martial art schools for Nosemen fighting techniques... how come? Because we dont have the slightest clue how they REALLY fought and the only things we know comes from books, drawings etc...in essence old and very theoretic without a anyone to teach how it would be done in real. So on second thought the most logic approach to this is to just shut up about Vikings vs Samurai because the only techniques still shown are actually asian... and that for a good reason
@dipidulor They were well documented, the Asian ones and that is the ONLY reason that they outlasted the Norse and some of the European ones. It is not because they were better in any way.
@skallagrimur I actually expect the viking to win - assuming the fight is on foot. And I'm not denying the viking would have a strength advantage. However, you're looking at it from a one-sided perspective, you describe how manual labour increases strength, wouldn't also more combat training increase strength? Also, you cite harsh lands with little food as reasons the vikings would be stronger, but harsh lands with little food may also lead to malnutrition, which would reduce strength.
@skallagrimur But I live here. The agriculture around where the old settlements where is amazing. Sweden and Norway are both rich in fertile land and Denmark is basically mountain-less. The Christian influence didn't really make any progress until the 11th century, around the end of the Viking Age.
@skallagrimur On the other hand, a noble upper class is more able to be full-time warriors since they don't have to put the same work towards acquiring food. I'm not saying that is better or worse (particularly as I think the viking should be a warrior-class as well, otherwise we compare the Japanese best with the Norse average), just that it can go both ways.
@skallagrimur I can understand what you're saying about the Warrior mentality. Spartans and Norsemen had many similarities in their outlook on warfare and pain. But I do believe that Scandinavia was quite a bountiful region during the dark ages. Wasn't the Viking raids increase in popularity in part due to overpopulation?
@skallagrimur That mentality could also be applied to the warrior-class of many cultures, including samurai. I assume you mean the warrior mentality of bravely facing death. That was common from Aztecs to Romans to Franks to Mamluks. Just about any army adopts a fairly similar mentality, I'd say it's more to do with being a warrior than a culture.
Thermopylae was a combined Greek effort, Xerxes was a lousy emperor/general, and Sparta never conquered more than a moderate fraction of Greece.
Have you EVER seen what a well trained warrior ( eg. Bujinkan warrior ) is capable to do with bo stick or yari ?! It is clear that you have some experience with sword and shield and , with all do respect, your opponent has none! If you would find someone with fairly solid trained taijutsu ( body movement ), and gave him a yari, you wouldn't come near 1,5 m of him. That is the point of bo and yari - clear and defend your space ! With all do respect of course.
@ElDule1 I do believe that Thrand has got some experience with Bujikan Taijutsu, as do I. It seems to be a theme among Viking fans for some reason. :P
Or worse, european pollaxes, halberds, lucerne hammers, bec de corbin ect. Those europeans loved their big pointy smashing sticks. Made all kinds of variations, all of them brutally lethal.
@TheScandinavianOne And Asian history, and African history, and South American history, and probably North American history too. I don't think combat is really that different across the world.
@TheScandinavianOne Absolutely. The sheer dizzying variety of equipment from medieval Europe shows how rapid that arms race was. It's also one of the easiest to study. :P I've tried looking into medieval African warriors and the info there is pretty scarce.
@ElDule1 a battlefield wouldnt have space..in one vs one its a different matter though. long range weapons are overrated imo anyway. you only get the first strike, and then if skilled..the man with short weapons will kill you
After looking into it some more, it appears that do-maru typically opened at the back and was unprotected there, meaning an opponent that tripped, grappled, or somehow got behind the wearer could easily sever his spine with a dagger or similar weapon. Also, though I have yet to find a historic citation of it, do-maru is estimated to weigh between 30-40 lbs, generally as heavy as mail.
That quality mail and padding can resist swords, axes, spears, halberd, even the mighty longbow and lances to an extent. Now links can and do fail in the process, but this is true of any armor that absorbs a powerful attack, the point of impact becomes weaker to follow-up hits. While the mail itself does not absorb blunt force well(no armor really does), the padding beneath it does quite well, and in any case I have yet to see weapon tests on lamellar/scale to determine defensive ability.
also, im not sure (the actual viseo feed doesnt work on the computer im at, but if this is the episode you test a samurai lamellar's durability,
i should point out that the sengoku period armour was of a tosi gusoku design, mde up of a series of broad 'lames' essensially it was a laminated cuirass fastened onto the user by a hinge to the side so it was not unlike the roman lorica segmentata.
or late medieval laminated breastplates.
elgostine 1 day ago
and though unmentioned in the show there is a time tested strike typically aimed @ the head called a MEN strike... stronger samurai were known to be able to complete this jab like movement and put a katana directly through the shield of an opponent and into the opponent themselves. even if the lead to the discard of the shield samurai carried atleast two swords. leaving the samurai still armed and the viking shieldless.
TASGTMJR 3 days ago
@TASGTMJR This is not true and impossible the way Viking shields were held and constructed.Please watch my newest Video "Deadliest Warrior Thrand's Spartan Vs. Ninja/Samurai " ? here on youtube. I am Member of Bujinkan and Practice Bujinkan Budo Taijutsu.Most Schools of the Samurai do not use Kanabo ours dose only as a training tool at high levels of training it by no means is a preferred weapon.
ThegnThrand 3 days ago
@TASGTMJR Watch "Weapons that made Britain the Shield" To see how a historical Viking shield was constructed.It was linden wood covered back and front with two layers of Oxen raw hide.Held by a center boss covered in metal.A Long bow could only barely stick in the surface.A sword would have very little chance of piercing it.A two handed spear might go in to it but I doubt in most cases it would go strait through.The shield is not held in close to the body nor is strapped to the arm.
ThegnThrand 3 days ago
@ThegnThrand and yet a katana could penetrate through samurai armour... thicker than your shield and better made... and a kanabo.. a 30 pound steel studded club can render a shield broken bent or shattered in one hit. ive seen it done.
TASGTMJR 2 days ago
@TASGTMJR i made a comment pointing this out to anyone reading, they were never 30 pounds,
i dont think you realise, compared to historical weapons, how ridiculous that weight is
heres a comparison, the biggest two handed german swords made for use on the field as opposed to being just showpieces, weighs 5kg i.e 10lb's and that is humongously heavy for a sword even 190cm long. one example of a battle uissue kanabo is only 4'9" and 4 lb's
theres no record of 30lb weapons used in war ever..
elgostine 1 day ago
@TASGTMJR by the way, you say it could penetrate armour, what kind of armour are we referring to? are wea talking about early 13th century O yoroi made up of a LOT of smaller lamellar scales, or instead the later tosei gusoku? whoes chestplates were made of a series of horizontal strips, alot like the roman lorica segmentata
elgostine 1 day ago
As a fan of the deadliest warrior I love the fact that the show opens up friendly discussion on age old warrior questions...
In the spirit of such I have been a Kendo practitioner for over 10 years and a close student of samurai combat tactics with different weapons. And i feel they are grossly misrepresented here. The kanabo against a shield is swung with an over hand fashion and used to crush the bring of the shield to allow the kanabo to break the skull or shoulder of the oponent
TASGTMJR 3 days ago
@TASGTMJR
and for all those watching this video..kanabo didnt weigh 35 pounds, as far as i know NO single person weapon used in battle was even remotely that heavy.. they were around 5-8pounds 4kg at the heaviest
a 10 pound club would be seen as ridiculously heavy
. the only record and not necessarily a reliable one, is the descriptions of quan yu's guan dao being either 18kg or 48kg depending on which chinese measure you convert from.
even this is likely artistic liscence.
elgostine 3 days ago
I love deadliest warrior loads but remember it's just a show that needs ratings and money to survive. So being really accurate probably wouldn't help their ratings because young people which is more or less the target audience just want to see the cool blood and gore. I'm a young person and I love all the historical facts and all the gore but most people I know aren't so into history but still want to see the gore! We live in a capitalistic world-deal with it.
ROFLWAFFLEAUTHORITAH 5 days ago
@ROFLWAFFLEAUTHORITAH ...not necessarily.
the real things were still terrifyingly powerful,
and they were fine knowing neither a daneaxe or katana could puncture each others armour.
trust me with an actual expert, a sword can and will cut through a pig,
the fans WONT be dissapointed.
as scottbaioisdead points out archery standards would outrange the tests, hitting the eyes even farther away.
tell me that this wouldnt be better to a kid to hit something 5 times further away or more.
elgostine 3 days ago
@elgostine well for me, 5 times further away but what i'm saying is some of the audience (not including me) aren't as into facts and figures as they are watching someone chop 2 pig carcases in half like a random angry person with no skill. and i am NOT saying that the guy who did the katana test wasn't skilled!
ROFLWAFFLEAUTHORITAH 3 days ago
Yeah, the vikings had perfect strategy. Impossible to beat.
tallswede80 3 weeks ago
great job guys I respect you and the warriors that you are trying to represent and for the ones that are arguing here I got a question for you Did you ever fought against a man that wields shield and sword and you fought with a two hander???If you did you saw how hard is to pass his guard I'm just saying that the samurai only fought with the katana because there were other classes of warriors that fought with a yari or kanabo...you know you don't take your whole arsenal when you go into battle
ShagrathVortex 3 weeks ago
great job guys I respect you and the warriors that you are trying to represent and for the ones that are arguing here I got a question for you Did you ever fought against a man that wields shield and sword and you fought with a two hander???If you did you saw how hard is to pass his guard I'm just saying that the samurai only fought with the katana because there were other classes of warriors that fought with a yari or kanabo...you know you don't take your whole arsenal when you go into battle..
ShagrathVortex 3 weeks ago
I watch "Deadliest Warrior" quite a bit. The episode that really got me was "Celts vs Persian Immortals". History tells us that the Greek hoplites destroyed the Persians at Marathon, but a generation after Alexander when the Celts came down through Greece and into Asia Minor, they trashed the Greeks. So, if they beat the Greeks, how did they lose to the Persians?
TheSteveRobinson 3 weeks ago
@TheSteveRobinson
Because that was a war and this was a skirmish. Celts can win through superior numbers, ambushes, fear, and brutality...but in a one on one fight they don't stand a chance to superior arms, armor, and training. The Persians had better weapons, a better chariot, better armor, and better individual training. Celts were powerful and savage, but a war victory over one group doesn't mean you're undefeatable by another similar group in small-scale combat.
TheManperson 3 weeks ago
@TheManperson Celts had excellent weapons, invented chain mail, and were ferocious in combat. The Emperor Claudius said the Britons, man for man, were just as good as the legionaires. They tore up Asia Minor for over 20 years before finally being defeated.
And heavy chariots are a joke. Too easy to evade in combat.
TheSteveRobinson 3 weeks ago
@TheSteveRobinson
1: Chainmail performs poorly against spears. Always has, always will.
2: The Celts from the time period used did not have chain mail.
3: "Excellent Weapons" is a subjective term. Comparing weapons + armor against the Immortals weapons + armor leaves the immortal with an advantage that needs to be met with ferocity that, at the end of the day, was not enough to win the day.
4: The heavy chariot is a mobile firing platform that is dangerous to even get near.
TheManperson 2 weeks ago
@TheManperson 1.Chain armor dose not always preform poorly against a spear.
2.The Celts invented chain armor the Romans give them credit for it and it was indeed riveted and made from bronze even before steel.
3.The Celt normally wore full chain armor and helm and used a coffin style center grip shield not a two handed weapon like Conan or something.
4.Celts always fought from the back of chariots by throwing javelin's first then dismounting very much like Iliad warriors.
ThegnThrand 2 weeks ago
@ThegnThrand
1. It performs poorly against all but the broadest of spearheads, and even then the attack still wounds and can fracture bones or tear muscles.
2. Not all celts used it, so depending on which tribe and what time period, them wearing leather is still valid.
3. Still wouldn't have helped against the immortal, though many Celts fought with just multiple weapons or used both hands for their weapon.
4. Their chariots were vastly inferior in quality and protection.
TheManperson 2 weeks ago
@TheManperson the royal armouries, through a series of tests, concluded that maile is impervious to most weapons of even the medieval era.
decently made maile will save you from a sword thrust even reletively inferior quality riveted maile will survive being torn apart by swords designed to help beat armour
the only thing ive ever seen have a chance of easily attacking maile is the top spike of a poleaxe which is either square or diamond section and designed to maybe go through plate armour
elgostine 3 days ago
@elgostine Yes Very True Elgostine.The shield was held by a center boss and and the fighting style was very reactive and mobile due to this.I had some explaining how the Samurai did not use shields because a strong samurai could thrust through any shield.This is simply not true.The center grip was covered in metal and the actual shield was covered both sides in Oxen raw hide over 1/4" tapering to 1/5" around the edge.The long bow could barley stick in the surface in many cases.
ThegnThrand 3 days ago
@ThegnThrand
its one hell of a mystery why the samurai didnt re take up the use of shields.
it was probably a few reasons, tradition and the agreement that everyone would fight the exact same way for several centuries was probably a major one
which made people less likely to adopt other methods.
but i would say that it was the fact samurai began as horse archers who fought alot by exchanging arrows one on one.
they then adopted a two handed sword and used exclusively 2 handed weapons
elgostine 1 day ago
Deadliest Warrior was one of those ridiculous shows made purely for entertainment - they cared more about cool factor and making their target group of viewers (teenage boys) happy than being accurate.
Loth440 3 weeks ago 3
ooh its these guys who used the tree trunk as an improvised kanabo for their tests.
LOL
theyre just mad that the vikings lost.
TheMysticMage 3 weeks ago
@TheMysticMage Watch my video "Deadliest Warrior Thrand's Spartan Vs. Ninja/Samurai " I think you will see you are mistaken. I am a member of the Bujinkan and have been for years.The Kanabo I used is fine many historical kanabo were nothing more than what I used and it was a very uncommon weapon almost never used by actual Samurai.The log as you call it used is actual weight of a historical Kanabo.
ThegnThrand 3 weeks ago
@ThegnThrand a person on myarmoury . com has photos of a historical kanabo, which weigh around 4 lb'scompared to the roughly and a half lbs for a daneaxe thats 130cm long.
elgostine 3 weeks ago
@ThegnThrand Yeah I know it was severely uncommon..for special weapon they should've had wakizashi or yari maybe. But still...a log? Maybe ill go get a butter knife thats as heavy as a tanto to test the cutting power of a tanto huh?
Also, why is it that EVERY SINGLE TIME you get criticized for your fallacies you just tell them to watch that other video? that video proves NOTHING, and i feel bad for giving it a view.
TheMysticMage 3 weeks ago
@TheMysticMage I study Japanese History and practice Bujinkan Budo Taijutsu.The Kanabo is not a common weapon and was not used by Samurai in the form Deadliest Warrior used.It may have seen some use well after Samurai hay day when Samurai Armour improved and European pieces were added as well but would have been the tetsubo not Kanabo.This would be in the early firearm era though. A Bandit,cheap mercenary or ninja very well could have used at times but it was not the norm.
ThegnThrand 3 weeks ago
@ThegnThrand
The more you say you do it, the less I suspect you actually do. You don't need to repeat "I practice Bujinkan" as if it means something about the discussion, it just makes it look like you're getting defensive and trying to sound superior to other people.
You study Bujinkan, congratulations. Doesn't make you any more of a historian than other people.
TheManperson 3 weeks ago
Are you in the S.C.A? I fight in the S.c.a as viking persona and I had to show a friend of mine who practices Kendo, Awesome video, I respect the Samurai but this misconception that no other warrior in history is equal has to go.
wolfdragga 1 month ago 2
I would like to see more weapon vs armor in deadliest warrior. The samurai armor was not tested at all in the episode, only the helmet. At least none of it was shown.
toreswe 1 month ago
Samurais use Jiu jiutsu right? I've read it in Kenichi.
hatel51 1 month ago
@hatel51 Watch my video Deadliest Warrior Thrand's Spartan Vs. Samurai/Ninja here on youtube :P
ThegnThrand 3 weeks ago
I have to thank you guys for pointing out how wrong that episode was. A Viking would dominate a samurai easily.
SexualBubblegumZX 1 month ago 2
I would by far prefer a good old-fashioned shield and a one-handed sword that can slash and stab (like the viking longsword) to a katana any day. Sure, a katana can cut through several pig carcasses, but if you give those pig carcasses, light armor, swords, and shields, the katana would be hard-pressed to get through even one.
thegameulost 2 months ago
I don't think your assistance's know how to use their weapons, at least not against someone with a different weapon to theirs.
Felscor 2 months ago
I think the Norse expert said it best on the original show when he said "A Viking was fighting to feed his family".....wife and children. A Samurai?.............To test his skill. Personally, I hate gambling, but if I were a betting man, I would put my money on the Viking for motivation alone........
StarlightAU 2 months ago
why use a sword when u got guns?
Selor12 3 months ago
the fact that this video has been made proves that the viking spirit is well alive, and spirit alone can resist, defeat and conquer its foes.
MineIsHuge 3 months ago 7
shield and sword combo whuld not be invincible. europe had their share of 2 handed swords and they learnde how to fight against shields.
gethsoftware 3 months ago
@gethsoftware true but a shield is an extremely useful tool in combat. i would never go without one...
MisantrophSK 2 months ago
im a swedesh guy that love both samurais and vikings but you can notice that you are a little bit angry about the lost but i personaly think that you can't know ho's gonna win.
its all about tactic and skills.
myslimusik 4 months ago
@myslimusik Then Check out our new video "Deadliest Warrior Thrand's Spartan Vs. Ninja / Samurai" here on Youtube :P We do the best we can comparing fighting styles due to experience and seeing them in actual application against each other over my years in Bujinkan and SCA :P
ThegnThrand 4 months ago
Good video. Can't comment much on on content, but it's far better than deadliest warrior.
kdawur 4 months ago
I like your analytical approach to the subject, I think the warriors of old would of been the same and compared weapons and tactics all the time, cheers Rob.
bigrobnz 5 months ago
the problem with blocking a blow from above with the katana is that if he hits the edge of your sheild the katana will cut though it and the katana could probably stab through the sheild if it wasn't deflected accuratley
epic0wnag 5 months ago
@epic0wnag We test that in other videos this is untrue and was covered in heavy oxen raw hide both sides so this is not possible.
ThegnThrand 5 months ago
@epic0wnag Watch the end of this video here on youtube about cutting through shield " Deadliest Warrior : Viking Vs. Samurai Thrand's reply "
ThegnThrand 5 months ago
@epic0wnag in which anime did you see that? that's not posible. heavier weapons can't do that, i don't know who the katana can.
mechupanlamonda 3 months ago
The Dane axe was mostly useful for taking down a shield wall, the design of it is simply a 6 or 7 foot pole with a small axe head, the long reach would enable someone to pul down a shield, and a second person to kill the man behind the shield. As to who would win in single combat I have no clue, what I do know is, that the samurai most probably at some point would see his chance to chop off the viking's arm. Or the larger stronger viking would punch the samurai's face in with his shield
snailmessia 5 months ago
It's impossible to know which warrior group was the better. It all depends on the individual.
dlord29 6 months ago
@dlord29 on the individual warrior that is.
dlord29 6 months ago
@dlord29 very true, I just believe the Viking arms and armor and Style in single combat would have given them an advantage but this could be out weighted due to the individuals compared :P
ThegnThrand 5 months ago
where are you?where are you living
raztin1 6 months ago
U just embarrassing yourself you look like a 2 year old running around hitting people with a plastic sword. And your friend isn't a trained Samurai dump ass
faminmonkeyz 6 months ago
@faminmonkeyz hahaha
JESUSISGREATEST 6 months ago
@faminmonkeyz please watch the latest video Deadliest Warrior : Thrand's Spartan Vs. Ninja / Samurai here on youtube I am a member of the Bujinkan. These are my opinions based on style of combat not skill of warrior :P
ThegnThrand 6 months ago
@faminmonkeyz What makes you an expert in melee combat to make such judgements?
Gratch2222 5 months ago
@faminmonkeyz I agree that his friend is not a trained samurai, but they are NOT claiming that he is. He's making the point that a single-edged sword like the katana doesn't work against the Viking's large shield. I am also an SCA member and we use a trick called the Wrap Shot, which is to bring the sword behind the opponent and hit them with the back edge of our double-edged swords. The katana can't be used like, it must be swung front edge first and so is not very useful against a shield.
LordOwenLongstrider 5 months ago
They should have given the Samurai a Matchlock rifle and seen how much damage that could have done to the Viking.
BrokenBlade345 6 months ago
Even though samurai armor is a little better coverage than viking armor, the vikings had a shield and the samurai NEVER used a shield in melee. The viking's shield helps their vital coverage A LOT. Viking and Samurai culture are my two favorites so I won't say who is better, but, I will say the Vikings got robbed in that TV show because they didn't properly assess any tactics and the match ups between weapons were illogical.
Viktir666 6 months ago
the samurai could attack his feet lol
Zudi95 6 months ago
the sam. Vs. vik. was stupid, Viking wins easy!
Indabaz 6 months ago
I am of Viking decent, but I know little of them. What were Vikings really like, aside from raiders and experienced sailors?
Kursinphists 6 months ago
Save us, oh lord, from the wrath of the Norseman
Spqu 6 months ago
Are you in the SCA?
Fourmalletz 6 months ago
@Fourmalletz Yes :P
ThegnThrand 6 months ago
@ThegnThrand That is awesome! The sword was a big hint, but it's good to see a fellow Society member. Loved the video. The people at DW are boneheads. They're doing fantasy characters, like vampires and zombies, for Season Three(from what I have heard). Thank you for posting a response to the disgrace the people at DW did to the Vikings.
Fourmalletz 6 months ago
The descendants of the Vikings and the descendants of the Samurai did meet and fight. Victory was decisive. The Vikings won. America versus japan, Pacific campaign, World War two.
brasilcork 6 months ago
@brasilcork lolno. Nearly all americans today descended from britain, germany, ireland and italy, idiot.
Spankmeinheaven 6 months ago
@Spankmeinheaven That's right. The majority of Americans are descended from The British, Germans and Irish in that order. The people in Britain, Germany and Ireland have Viking blood from the constant battles with and invasions of the Vikings throughout their history. A lot of European cities were founded by the Vikings, e.g. Dublin in Ireland, York in England.
brasilcork 6 months ago
@Spankmeinheaven The Normans (from Normandy in Northern France...hence the name) who conquered Britain in 1066 were a mixture of the Northern French and Vikings. They invaded Ireland under a leader called Strongbow. Consider yourself both educated and owned. (",)
brasilcork 6 months ago
@brasilcork And how does that prove anything to do with Vikings and Samurai.
BrokenBlade345 6 months ago
@BrokenBlade345 You left out the question mark? It proves everything.
brasilcork 6 months ago
@brasilcork Ok so 2 forces using Rifles, Machineguns and wearing no armor can be used to find the result of the Samurai vs Viking? It can't.
BrokenBlade345 6 months ago
@BrokenBlade345 I disagree!
brasilcork 6 months ago
@EvilDarkJackel he seems to elobrated on misrepresented factors of each losing faction of those episodes still see nothing wrong with being baised there
kaindrg 6 months ago
@EvilDarkJackel u obviously didnt see the word bubble at 0:44
kaindrg 6 months ago
@EvilDarkJackel and why do u seem soo bothered by that.
kaindrg 6 months ago
@EvilDarkJackel personally i feel taht all subjects in DW are not represented to their full capacity and i feel he is trying to do so here in the vid i dont see anything biased about this vid very thing he said is a fact about how germanic and vikings used dark age european weaponry which is well documented.
kaindrg 6 months ago
@EvilDarkJackel you said "trying to get through armor when attacking with one hand is foolishness"
Ulfvaldr2012 6 months ago
@EvilDarkJackel 1600 – A war began between Toyotomi and Tokugawa. Musashi fought on the side of the Toyotomi's "Army of the West", as the Shinmen clan (to which his family owed allegiance) had allied with them. he was 17, so this would profoundly influence his martial arts.
Ulfvaldr2012 6 months ago
@EvilDarkJackel "If you hold a sword with both hands, it is difficult to wield it freely to left and right, so my method is to carry the sword in one hand"- Miyamoto Musash.
Miyamoto Musashi (宮本 武蔵 c. 1584-June 13 (Japanese calendar May 19), 1645), prior to adulthood known simply as Takezo Shinmen, as Miyamoto Bennosuke or Miyamoto Musana, was a famous Japanese swordsman. He is believed to have been one of the most skilled swordsmen in history.
Ulfvaldr2012 6 months ago
@Ulfvaldr2012 The book of the five rings was awesome you have to love Miyamoto Musashi , I like fighting with two long swords one in each hand or katanas and my style is based on his writings :P
ThegnThrand 6 months ago
@EvilDarkJackel Tell that to Miyamoto Musashi, the greatest samurai who ever lived, in his book of five rings he talks about how foolish it is having two hands on one sword. and your are way wrong the samurai don't have an advantage in equipment, its all depends on money, blacksmith skills and, availability of materials. Th sheid was a very usefull tool, it was used to break necks, and knock warriors off balance. I don't know where your getting your info. the shield was not a peasant weapon.
Ulfvaldr2012 6 months ago
@EvilDarkJackel Again its all a matter of perspective, the samurai where only equipped all well as money allowed, as for the chain, some was reinforced with leather, some with scale, some may have actually wore plate. comparing these are like apples to oranges. Its a moot point.
Ulfvaldr2012 6 months ago
dudes Vikings lost to indians
Kaisertoji 6 months ago
@Kaisertoji These were settlers and no they did not lose they were there for years till they abandoned the settlement .
ThegnThrand 6 months ago 3
@ThegnThrand sure thing dude go tell yourself that lol
Kaisertoji 6 months ago
Comment removed
NobleHerold 6 months ago
The VIKINGS didn't lose to the Indians (I assume you mean Indigenous Americans?). Don't mistake all WHITE people for Vikings.
Viktir666 6 months ago
@Kaisertoji LMFAOOOOOO omfg I love you. hahahaaahah
Arekux 5 months ago
@Kaisertoji and why is this relevant to the topic in hand? are you suggesting samurais would have fair better? i don't see the point in this. and by the way what is your source material, where is your proof to this claim?
mechupanlamonda 3 months ago
I always wonder dose Viking use horse back because that would be the only big advantage the samurai have?
pickupaamv 6 months ago
@pickupaamv Yes the Vikings had mounted Warriors as well.
ThegnThrand 6 months ago
@pickupaamv i think they wre called huscarls or somethign like that
kaindrg 6 months ago
It never makes sense to argue with people in the SCA who's persona are put on deadliest warrior. As it stands, Any one in the kingdom of the Outlands happily will say, it was an interesting fight, and almost all agree. this is because when you put a new guy with a shield against a knight, Duke or so on with a katana... it's a matter of training. More than that, take in to account that SCA rules are not combat rules, and trying to lanyard a dropped sword in a fight is... iffy at best.
Hunter1ryu 7 months ago
@Hunter1ryu I am also a member of the Bujinkan and have been longer than I have been in the SCA. Please watch my newest video Deadliest Warrior : Thrand's Spartan Vs. Ninja / Samurai. I have had Japanese persona as well and do fight on my on with as you would say no rules as we did in the simulation in this new video. on you tube
Deadliest Warrior : Thrand's Spartan Vs. Ninja / Samurai
/watch?v=mNj5HiCPx1I
ThegnThrand 6 months ago
do you know niten ichi-ryu style? kenjutsu style developed by Miyamoto Musashi, i think a niten ichi-ryu style samurai can win against viking. but man, that roundshield is so big, can a spear pierce it?
WinglessAngel6 7 months ago
@WinglessAngel6 I love two long swords are two Katana yes it is better than Single katana or hand and half when dealing with shield in my opinion :P
Viking vs. Samurai : Thrand's Fighting and Bonus Video I fight this way in this video two long swords SCA rules
/watch?v=fEEuxzfEmX8
ThegnThrand 6 months ago
@WinglessAngel6 Whether or not a samurai can beat a viking is more about that fighters particular skill than the weapons. there are good and bad fighters on both sides, and the fighting technics for both are exceptional. In a documentary I seen about Viking weapons, the shields found in Diggs where made in cross sections, like plywood, reproductions where tested and where found pretty much impenetrable. As for "Deadliest warrior", that show is way off base on a lot of points.
Ulfvaldr2012 6 months ago
@Ulfvaldr2012 Well said :P
ThegnThrand 6 months ago
NICE VIDEO. hello from croatia
zigio1000 7 months ago
the main weapon of samurai where the yari no the sword -.-
klappspatenkamikaze 7 months ago
@klappspatenkamikaze Yes. That is covered by 1- this video is only part 1 of a 3 part Aftermath. 2- Thrand is responding to the show Deadliest Warrior, where the samurai portrayed was armed with a yumi, naginata, katana and kanabo. In short, yes you're right but that issue is addressed.
Railstarfish 7 months ago 5
the guy with the helmet fight like cant even explane what he fight like ive seen a 11 year old fight better!
pike12345selmo 7 months ago
@pike12345selmo It was demonstration there is no fighting in this video :P Watch our new videos for fighting.
ThegnThrand 7 months ago
haha 02:25 he got own
NewFolder 7 months ago
hmmm funny...
Sword and shield vs two hand sword....it´s funny... a knight have the self problem...
Why you say a samurai... you dont know whats happen when this warrios fight.
But a samurai with his armor don´t need a shield... knight to.
A Viking have not rly good armor what can protect him, that is why he use a shield.
Sry for my very bad english, but hope you know what i mean.
Blutlarve 7 months ago
@Blutlarve This is based on the Deadliest Warrior Spike TV program. The knight has better armor than the Samurai and the Samurai only had really good armor in the 17th to 18th century but only used shields in their iron age.Vikings did have really good armor available chain shirt with coverage from knee to wrist. Arm and leg splints and almost full helm with gambeson underneath.
ThegnThrand 7 months ago
wow, great vid :)
regreegg 7 months ago 2
haha, excellent. you guys are pretty good. I'm starting to dislike deadliest warrior.
ccjccj81 7 months ago
@mustafahotaki I agree with you :P
ThegnThrand 8 months ago
Ya'll just mad that the Samurai won. Speed and agility always win over brute strength.
sirus804 8 months ago
@sirus804 The Viking was not brute strength he was just as skill full as the Samurai By all accounts in the Saga's and his arms and armor would have beaten the Japanese picked by Deadliest Warrior. The Sword and shield would have had the Advantage. Please Check out my new Video Deadliest Warrior : Thrand's Spartan Vs. Ninja / Samurai /watch?v=mNj5HiCPx1I here on youtube. I am a member of the Bujinkan and practice 6 styles of the Samurai and 3 of the Ninja this is from my comparison.
ThegnThrand 8 months ago
@sirus804 I also am a Viking reenactor and have been for 22 years So yes the Viking has the Advantage.
ThegnThrand 8 months ago
@ThegnThrand Well of course you're going to be biased towards vikings then. If you were a Samurai and Viking reenactor for 22 years and chose Viking, then I'd understand. But you aren't educated enough when it comes to Bushido.
sirus804 8 months ago
@sirus804 I said I am a Bujinkan Member I have done Samurai and Ninja Arts for the Same amount of time :P Watch my new Video " Deadliest Warrior : Thrand's Spartan Vs. Ninja / Samurai "
/watch?v=mNj5HiCPx1I
The Directors cut is out too in HD too .
ThegnThrand 8 months ago
@sirus804 So now you should get it if you just go watch it
/watch?v=mNj5HiCPx1I
on Youtube I am speaking from being on both sides of these fights
Check out Deadliest Warrior : Thrand's Spartan Vs. Ninja / Samurai Combat Simulator as well
/watch?v=by6CI2SOp-Q
ThegnThrand 8 months ago 3
@sirus804 Maybe you should consider Viking speed ang agility...
Their main weapons were made to be real quick and cut though flesh as well as a japanese sword.
Here is a vid for you to see : look carefully to the attacks the guy is doing... they are too quick for the camera to see (1:23 ; 1:36 [with sword] ; 2:03 ; 3:08 ; 3:20)
He is still a rookie, and in a real fight, he would aim at the head, not play with the shields...
/watch?v=HLYWayn1HJE
Enjoy !
UnglopedGlopinGloper 7 months ago
@UnglopedGlopinGloper I have no doubt that Vikings weren't quick.. but Samurai turned their quickness into an art form.. Its scary how fast some of them were. The katana is a scary weapon when wielded correctly. I'm sure Viking weapons were quick.. but not as quick and effective as a katana.
Also, I watched your video and wasn't impressed. I honestly could see the attacks you said were too quick.. They'd be even easier to see when the attacker is facing you.
sirus804 7 months ago
@sirus804 I think that you idealise the way the samurai were.. as I may do the same with the Vikings, this is true. The point is, samurai survived until not so long ago while Vikings vanished a millennia ago. Thus, the legend of the samurai is still warm in people's imagination, and Vikings have long been considered savage brutes, devils. You mistake is to think that only samurai spent their life improving their combat skills.
UnglopedGlopinGloper 7 months ago
@UnglopedGlopinGloper I don't idealize them at all. I just know how good they were. Hell, I'm from Swedish decent.. You would think I'd be biased towards Vikings.. but I'm just not. I know how bad ass Vikings were.. but they weren't on par with the Samurai in terms of discipline and their training.
sirus804 7 months ago
@sirus804 For the vid : if they were slow attacks, the opponent would have had the time to parry them.
You are right, they are not the fastest attacks a Viking can make : we re-enactors do no intend to injure our comrades, so our attacks brutally slow down once we reach our target, and we can never be at full speed. Nonetheless, you could hardly parry these.
Just to enlighten you : a 12th century text states that Primus Miles had to climb a 10m straight rope in full armour using only their arms
UnglopedGlopinGloper 7 months ago
@UnglopedGlopinGloper I didn't say the attacks were slow.. I said that I could see them and that Samurais attacks are quicker. and yes.. they could be parried.
Okay? So they had a lot of strength... Many people can do that.. Strength isn't Speed and Agility though... Not sure why you're telling me this..
sirus804 7 months ago
@sirus804 My attacks are not slow I fight both ways I am a member of the Bujinkan , SCA and a Viking reenactor. I have compared every style and katana come in all weights 3lbs to 7lbs or so so do European swords do as well. So what I am saying there is no real speed difference they all are based on weapon length weight and balance. A katana can be slow a long sword can be fast are the other way around it is all subjective to weapons there is no set weight Historically.
ThegnThrand 7 months ago
@sirus804 The Katana used in modern demo's and Tameshigiri are a lot of times much lighter than historical weapons used against armored opponents or in earlier periods when the swords were not as high quality and could not be so light and hold up in a battle field.Please not movie swords are not steel either they move at high speeds and Kendo uses Shinai way lighter than any real viable weapon.
ThegnThrand 7 months ago
@sirus804
Speaking of the Primus Miles, my point wasn't to argue on their strength, but rather to make you understand that they were warriors dedicated only to getting faster, stronger, deadlier. They were trained, maybe not with the same technics as the samurai, but their training had the same goal : make them the best warriors.
If you want another example I can tell you that these warriors also trained with a very heavy sword in order to be real quick when using their "normal" weapons.
UnglopedGlopinGloper 7 months ago
@UnglopedGlopinGloper Not that special.. baseball players do the same thing.. its a common thing to do..
sirus804 7 months ago
@sirus804 The Samurai and lots of Warriors trained with heavier weapons to become more proficient and get stronger wile using the regular weighted ones. I would dare say almost every culture has done this a t one time or another.
ThegnThrand 7 months ago
@ThegnThrand All their training had their differences.. Samurai were trained to kill a person in one swipe as quick as possible... Similar to how cowboys saw who could draw the fastest in a duel. Also, it isn't just the warrior.. its also the weapon they wielded. The katana is fast when wielded correctly.. I'm not saying its the fastest sword.. but its certainly fastest than a longsword.
sirus804 7 months ago
@sirus804 I would say a katana is marginally faster than a one-handed longsword, but the difference is minimal and certainly not enough to compensate for a shield. Who wasn't trained to kill a person as quick as possible?
Railstarfish 7 months ago
@Railstarfish Very true :P Most people trained to kill fast as possible back in the day. The Katana may not even be faster by much it just means blade so depending on time period it could weight 3.5 to 6.6 pounds :P
ThegnThrand 7 months ago
@sirus804 We do test on weapon speed in the Wrap Up you can see it frame by frame here on youtube :P
ThegnThrand 7 months ago
@ThegnThrand A lot of people think that spears can easily pierce mail. How about proving them wrong through a test?
Kingofsomething87 7 months ago
@Kingofsomething87 We will see if can work that into the Wrap Up for new video :P
ThegnThrand 7 months ago
@sirus804 I have yet to see any reason why the samurai would be faster. Every warrior trained in combat techniques, every warrior trained in speed, every warrior trained to be quick.
Railstarfish 7 months ago
@Railstarfish Ja!!! very true Weapon weight was the only factor and and armor that make one slower or faster but but the weapon weight and armor make up for it self in protection and weapon damage no one in history was dumb enough to wear extra weight with out ample protection from it or use to heavy a weapon they would not move fast enough in comparison to armor protective ability to kill his enemy.
ThegnThrand 7 months ago
Ppl find strange that i have my heart out for germanic warriors rather samurais as im asian i refer those ppl to this video
kaindrg 8 months ago 8
@skallagrimur Yes, quite. One would guess that the enormous loot from the raid at Lindisfarne must have made the prospect of setting out and raid very tempting.
TheScandinavianOne 8 months ago
7:26 I have to keep laughing at the mental image of a baby trying to hold the camera up
kardentyrell 8 months ago
THe Real power of Sword shiueld, was uised by the Greeks Phalanx, which the roman empier perfected with there tower shield/short sword combination. not to mention the mattial arts that was utilized buy the samurai was a nother factor not really mentiond in the fight. the thing with the Samurai was that there armore was desighned to look scary, in last Samurai they show how well that worked eirly on when they charge inb the forest. like the viking who battle cryed his way to histo the eneamy
gaberial442 8 months ago
@skallagrimur I never said that vikings didn't train, and I resent any suggestion I said that. What I said is if a viking was doing manual labour for food and being stronger for it that would take time away from their combat training. On foot the viking has a solid advantage due to size, strength and his shield. Early samurai would have an advantage on horseback, since early samurai were more cavalry-oriented (and used horse archery). Later samurai get gunpowder and tosei-gusoku armour.
Railstarfish 8 months ago
@skallagrimur I never said that vikings didn't train, and I resent any suggestion I said otherwise. What I said is if a viking was doing manual labour for food and being stronger for it that would take time away from their combat training. On foot the viking has a solid advantage due to size, strength and his shield. Early samurai would have an advantage on horseback, since early samurai were more cavalry-oriented (and used horse archery). Later samurai get gunpowder and tosei-gusoku armour.
Railstarfish 8 months ago
holy shit, discussion's gettin fierce around here. Better have a shield to protect me from throwable stuff XD
I feel funny when I read how much they have to justify and clarify their actions.
TheRealSlaveZero 8 months ago
@skallagrimur I'm not denying that, but they where not any worse than they where before/after the Viking age. I do believe that there was more to it than that. Perhaps they really just realized that Europe was ripe for the taking?
TheScandinavianOne 8 months ago
may i point out that there are NO martial art schools for Nosemen fighting techniques... how come? Because we dont have the slightest clue how they REALLY fought and the only things we know comes from books, drawings etc...in essence old and very theoretic without a anyone to teach how it would be done in real. So on second thought the most logic approach to this is to just shut up about Vikings vs Samurai because the only techniques still shown are actually asian... and that for a good reason
dipidulor 8 months ago
@dipidulor They were well documented, the Asian ones and that is the ONLY reason that they outlasted the Norse and some of the European ones. It is not because they were better in any way.
TheScandinavianOne 8 months ago
@skallagrimur I actually expect the viking to win - assuming the fight is on foot. And I'm not denying the viking would have a strength advantage. However, you're looking at it from a one-sided perspective, you describe how manual labour increases strength, wouldn't also more combat training increase strength? Also, you cite harsh lands with little food as reasons the vikings would be stronger, but harsh lands with little food may also lead to malnutrition, which would reduce strength.
Railstarfish 8 months ago
@skallagrimur But I live here. The agriculture around where the old settlements where is amazing. Sweden and Norway are both rich in fertile land and Denmark is basically mountain-less. The Christian influence didn't really make any progress until the 11th century, around the end of the Viking Age.
TheScandinavianOne 8 months ago
I don't hate samuri...But my homelands warrior is my favorite(Im swedish)
tzint56 8 months ago
@skallagrimur On the other hand, a noble upper class is more able to be full-time warriors since they don't have to put the same work towards acquiring food. I'm not saying that is better or worse (particularly as I think the viking should be a warrior-class as well, otherwise we compare the Japanese best with the Norse average), just that it can go both ways.
Railstarfish 8 months ago
@skallagrimur I can understand what you're saying about the Warrior mentality. Spartans and Norsemen had many similarities in their outlook on warfare and pain. But I do believe that Scandinavia was quite a bountiful region during the dark ages. Wasn't the Viking raids increase in popularity in part due to overpopulation?
TheScandinavianOne 8 months ago
@skallagrimur That mentality could also be applied to the warrior-class of many cultures, including samurai. I assume you mean the warrior mentality of bravely facing death. That was common from Aztecs to Romans to Franks to Mamluks. Just about any army adopts a fairly similar mentality, I'd say it's more to do with being a warrior than a culture.
Thermopylae was a combined Greek effort, Xerxes was a lousy emperor/general, and Sparta never conquered more than a moderate fraction of Greece.
Railstarfish 8 months ago
@skallagrimur Where do you get the Spartan/Viking parralels from? Also, Spartans were overrated.
Railstarfish 8 months ago
The shield is only so big because you are so tiny. For us nords, it doesnt cover that much.
spigot88 8 months ago
Have you EVER seen what a well trained warrior ( eg. Bujinkan warrior ) is capable to do with bo stick or yari ?! It is clear that you have some experience with sword and shield and , with all do respect, your opponent has none! If you would find someone with fairly solid trained taijutsu ( body movement ), and gave him a yari, you wouldn't come near 1,5 m of him. That is the point of bo and yari - clear and defend your space ! With all do respect of course.
ElDule1 8 months ago
@ElDule1 I do believe that Thrand has got some experience with Bujikan Taijutsu, as do I. It seems to be a theme among Viking fans for some reason. :P
TheScandinavianOne 8 months ago
@ElDule1 Why would a Bujinkan with a yari be any different to a European opponent with a spear?
Railstarfish 8 months ago
@Railstarfish That's also a good point. The spear saw heavy usage all throughout Europe's history.
TheScandinavianOne 8 months ago
@TheScandinavianOne
Or worse, european pollaxes, halberds, lucerne hammers, bec de corbin ect. Those europeans loved their big pointy smashing sticks. Made all kinds of variations, all of them brutally lethal.
WitheringintheDark 8 months ago
@TheScandinavianOne And Asian history, and African history, and South American history, and probably North American history too. I don't think combat is really that different across the world.
Railstarfish 8 months ago
@Railstarfish That's right, although I personally think that the European medieval arms race is among the most interesting ones.
TheScandinavianOne 8 months ago
@TheScandinavianOne Absolutely. The sheer dizzying variety of equipment from medieval Europe shows how rapid that arms race was. It's also one of the easiest to study. :P I've tried looking into medieval African warriors and the info there is pretty scarce.
Railstarfish 8 months ago
@Railstarfish The Africans takes the cake when it comes to weapon names though. I mean how could you beat the "Hunga-Munga"? :P
TheScandinavianOne 8 months ago
@ElDule1 a battlefield wouldnt have space..in one vs one its a different matter though. long range weapons are overrated imo anyway. you only get the first strike, and then if skilled..the man with short weapons will kill you
masedama 8 months ago
What a dipshit.
spigot88 8 months ago
After looking into it some more, it appears that do-maru typically opened at the back and was unprotected there, meaning an opponent that tripped, grappled, or somehow got behind the wearer could easily sever his spine with a dagger or similar weapon. Also, though I have yet to find a historic citation of it, do-maru is estimated to weigh between 30-40 lbs, generally as heavy as mail.
WitheringintheDark 8 months ago
That quality mail and padding can resist swords, axes, spears, halberd, even the mighty longbow and lances to an extent. Now links can and do fail in the process, but this is true of any armor that absorbs a powerful attack, the point of impact becomes weaker to follow-up hits. While the mail itself does not absorb blunt force well(no armor really does), the padding beneath it does quite well, and in any case I have yet to see weapon tests on lamellar/scale to determine defensive ability.
WitheringintheDark 8 months ago