Knight or Samurai ?

[Steel Accord 6,658]

 

 

Knights and Samurai are always subject to politics in battle. Vikings are happy if they simply die in battle That is a good death to them. And that is just bad ass!

 

Well . . . kind of. Raids were themselves political matters to the Vikings, a king could cement his reign by the kind of loot that was taken by his people. I mean they were not anarchists, they had a system of government and rules, and whenever you have those you're going to have paragons, statesmen, rebels, good citizens, bad citizens, Machiavells, and Belisariuns alike.

 

Likewise, both Knights and Samurai also considered it an honor to die in battle. For knights, it was seen as the unsought but sometimes neccesary cross they had to bear so that others may live. For Samurai, forget battle, if one's honor was ruined they would perform seppuku in a peaceful and candle lit room. All other times, death was expected of the samurai as one did not "retire" from that obligation. Death was the only exit and death in battle was a death met while one was doing their duty, which to the samurai was life. 

[Anneal 2,194]

Wuxia is actually an interesting variant that kind of blends both worlds of the knight the the samurai. Obviously, wuxia are fictitious but have been developed in China for many centuries and are actually based off heroes from the Four Great Classical Novels of China or older scripts. Some see wuxia or something similar to it even as a precedent to samurai bushido (which is uncertain but not unreasonable as Japan did borrow quite some cultural values from China back then).

 

Wuxia are made to be selfless, modest, and truthful like a knight while also being loyal and honorable like a samurai. Obviously that doesn't mean that they're better than the others for having qualities of both (especially since the values of knights and samurai blend themselves as well and hey – they're actual people). They're well trained in the martial arts. and unlike knights or samurai, though, they generally aren't serving a lord or some other figure and aren't nobility or aristocratic.

 

Unfortunately most pre-Republic Chinese wuxia literature (or something similar to it) has been lost due to oppression and book burnings from emperors, so the only reliable source we have of them starts from the 1920s.

[Steel Accord 6,658]

Wuxia is actually an interesting variant that kind of blends both worlds of the knight the the samurai. Obviously, wuxia are fictitious but have been developed in China for many centuries and are actually based off heroes from the Four Great Classical Novels of China or older scripts. Some see wuxia or something similar to it even as a precedent to samurai bushido (which is uncertain but not unreasonable as Japan did borrow quite some cultural values from China back then).

 

Wuxia are made to be selfless, modest, and truthful like a knight while also being loyal and honorable like a samurai. Obviously that doesn't mean that they're better than the others for having qualities of both (especially since the values of knights and samurai blend themselves as well and hey – they're actual people). They're well trained in the martial arts. and unlike knights or samurai, though, they generally aren't serving a lord or some other figure and aren't nobility or aristocratic.

 

Unfortunately most pre-Republic Chinese wuxia literature (or something similar to it) has been lost due to oppression and book burnings from emperors, so the only reliable source we have of them starts from the 1920s.

 

I am Steel Accord, student of Wah Lum Kung Fu, and I approve (of) this message.

Edited February 18, 2016 by Steel Accord

[Spanish In Physician 295]

Well . . . kind of. Raids were themselves political matters to the Vikings, a king could cement his reign by the kind of loot that was taken by his people. I mean they were not anarchists, they had a system of government and rules, and whenever you have those you're going to have paragons, statesmen, rebels, good citizens, bad citizens, Machiavells, and Belisariuns alike.

 

Likewise, both Knights and Samurai also considered it an honor to die in battle. For knights, it was seen as the unsought but sometimes neccesary cross they had to bear so that others may live. For Samurai, forget battle, if one's honor was ruined they would perform seppuku in a peaceful and candle lit room. All other times, death was expected of the samurai as one did not "retire" from that obligation. Death was the only exit and death in battle was a death met while one was doing their duty, which to the samurai was life. 

Well, while unclear as I was half assedly posting as I often times do, I meant the politics of battle. The honor of a knight or samurai dictates a certain code of ethics in combat, especially for the knight, to listen solely to the commands of his officer. The samurai's code prevents them from doing certain things in battle, and what I meant by the vikings being unrestrained to the politics of battle, meant on the battlefield, not at home under reign the king. All three are incredible warriors, but the vikings were fierce savage warriors who used tactics most frown upon, but this was their way. As for the death in battle, I mean it more like this. The samurai commit ritual suicide yes, and knights know it is their cross to bear, but the vikings viewed a death on the battlefield as something else entirely than samurai or knights. To a viking if they felt their time was coming, and they were growing to old to fight, they would go on raids with the sole purpose not to die a death that would bring shame on them in the eyes of their gods. It wasn't their duty as it was the samurai or the knights, but instead the very purpose they believed themselves to exist. Not that the conviction of the other two are anything lesser, I just see the vikings in a different manner. Consider less a historical analogy and more of an opinionated belief of my  own. Although, I must say I tip my hat to you. Some people would bring up baseless points, while I find yours well derived in historical fact. That being said, I am glad to see someone with an eye for history.

[JonasDarkmane 19,777]

 

 

That pony from Jonasdark's post was obliviously a dovakin pony.

 

 

The whole dovahkin thing is just a ripoff of vikings. 

 

Vikings are the real bad asses (still totally not biased <3 <3) 

[Stormlight 1,371]

Knights are more in my interests than a Samurai. I've always loved and researched about the famous knights, as well as choose to be an armored knight in several RPGs.

[Steel Accord 6,658]

 

 

The whole dovahkin thing is just a ripoff of vikings. 

 

Vikings are the real bad asses (still totally not biased <3 <3) 

 

 

Well the dovakhin was whatever you wanted them to be, they could just as much be a knight or roman legionary in the game's setting. Still, don't you think the Nords and their culture are more an honoring homage to Viking culture than a "ripoff." I mean that terminology implies that the developers had no affection for Viking culture and Skyrim treats them like heroes.

[Gestum 2,493]

The obvious answer is the vikings. Not only were they extremely good fighters, they were also extremely good traders. Also they traveled to America something that the knights or the samurai couldn't do.

[JonasDarkmane 19,777]

Well the dovakhin was whatever you wanted them to be, they could just as much be a knight or roman legionary in the game's setting. Still, don't you think the Nords and their culture are more an honoring homage to Viking culture than a "ripoff." I mean that terminology implies that the developers had no affection for Viking culture and Skyrim treats them like heroes.

Sure they do them well in Skyrim and they depict a little bit of the Nordic culture, however, they are still just some video game people, rather than people that actually existed. A lot of people tend to forget that Vikings were actually a real thing, and if people have been playing a lot of Elder Scrolls, they will refer them to dovakhins, which is just wrong (I have even heard some say that the vikings are actually the ones ripping off dovakhins...... >:T) 

 

 

The obvious answer is the vikings. Not only were they extremely good fighters, they were also extremely good traders. Also they traveled to America something that the knights or the samurai couldn't do.

Yay . Leifur Eiríksson (an Icelander, but the Norwegians like to dispute that) finds North America long before Cristopher Colombus ever does :3. 

[VengefulStrudel 1,486]

I was always a fan of Knights, especially Black Knights with badass-looking armor. Never was that big on Samurais, though I still like 'em too. But now that you mention Vikings...I'd prioritize 'em like this: Knights > Vikings > Samurais.

[cmarston1 5,951]

Knights because it sure as heck wasn't samurai training that allowed Connie to be able to quickly and efficiently destroy gem fusion monsters.

[Wraith Stalker 55]

Black Knight=Best Knight

[Steel Accord 6,658]

 

 

Sure they do them well in Skyrim and they depict a little bit of the Nordic culture, however, they are still just some video game people, rather than people that actually existed. A lot of people tend to forget that Vikings were actually a real thing, and if people have been playing a lot of Elder Scrolls, they will refer them to dovakhins, which is just wrong (I have even heard some say that the vikings are actually the ones ripping off dovakhins...... >:T) 

 

Who in the world is stupid enough to think Viking didn't exist as a culture? I've never in my life found someone who thought that. Misunderstandings aplenty but not outright lack or denial of the existence as a people. 

 

Also you keep referring to the Nords as "dovakhins" the dovakhin was one character and a Messiah figure not to mention player customizable so as I said in the first place, there's a more than likely chance the Dovakhin to some players is not a Viking at all.

 

Lastly, don't dismiss the power of fiction. Cultural representation through metaphor can be a powerful thing and serve to represent the actual culture the fictional one is based on if the creator pays them their due respect. I mean hear in the States, the First Nations people went from "savage" to almost a form of positive discrimination from media depictions of them as heroes.

I was always a fan of Knights, especially Black Knights with badass-looking armor. Never was that big on Samurais, though I still like 'em too. But now that you mention Vikings...I'd prioritize 'em like this: Knights > Vikings > Samurais.

 

Fun fact: black knights have their fearsome reputation because one would paint their armor and weapons black to obfuscate what lord they served, so they could strike against that lord's enemies without fear of retaliation from political rivals. This gave black knights the reputation of figures that cast a sinister presence, behind their hidden allegiance (if they have one to begin with) and obscuring helmets, their motivations and wrath cannot be anticipated.

[Shift 4,271]

@@Steel Accord,

 

oh baby it's anime and a movie, thanks, you're a godsend

 

The second one actually sounds really interesting, if I have some time off i'll definitely watch that. Same with the first; I can probably find the first one easier because of the wide array of anime sites. And it doesn't look too long.

 

Or nevermind, because the first selection I got when searching the 'Seven Samurai' was a 3 hour long youtube video that has the whole movie. Looks like I have something to do after I get some stuff out of the way. Looks to be a very interesting watch, if the google images of the main character say anything.

Edited February 18, 2016 by Shift

[Sekr Gray 520]

Originally I was going to pick Knights, due to my interest in H.E.M.A. and medieval literature, but now that Vikings are an option, I'm going with their crew. Everything from the warfare, the material culture (trade routes from Greenland to Russia), and poetry/language is just fascinating

 

 

 

And a pox on your kind, . As much as I love me some Vikings, I have never once thought of looking up the crossovers with Ponies. i know know what I'm looking up for the next 2.7 hours

 

 

[Astro Mambo 52]

This is a stupid question.

I prefer knights, the pop culture over hype around Samurais kind of destroyed their image for me.

How about a Highwayman?

If I lived in olden times I'd ambush travelers and high ranking officials along a road and rob them. It would be such a thrill.

 

I'd rather duel wield pistols or crossbows and wear a long duster coat instead of swinging a sword around in heavy armor any-day.

Edited February 18, 2016 by Astro Mambo

[Ra1nbowCrasH 271]

Knights all the way, they don't have to kill themselves if they lose a battle.

[Steel Accord 6,658]

@@Steel Accord,

 

oh baby it's anime and a movie, thanks, you're a godsend

 

The second one actually sounds really interesting, if I have some time off i'll definitely watch that. Same with the first; I can probably find the first one easier because of the wide array of anime sites. And it doesn't look too long.

 

Or nevermind, because the first selection I got when searching the 'Seven Samurai' was a 3 hour long youtube video that has the whole movie. Looks like I have something to do after I get some stuff out of the way. Looks to be a very interesting watch, if the google images of the main character say anything.

 

No problem, as a writer and all around cinephile, I feel it as a duty to direct people to quality viewing. Ruroni Kenshin is actually on Netflix and really the first couple episodes are enough if just plain different is all you are looking for. The movie is indeed something of a slog, it's old school filmmaking with a lot of build up and character establishment, then followed by everything going to Hell in the climax, but given the setup that really is the best way to tell that story.

[White 189]

The most over the top overrepresented romanticized ancient warrior so far to me is the Roman Centurion, Roman soldiers what have you.

 

Asterix and Obelix approve this.

 

How about a Highwayman?

 

Nah, I'm saving it for the highwayman vs pirate vs ninja thread.

Edited February 19, 2016 by White

[JonasDarkmane 19,777]

 

 

Who in the world is stupid enough to think Viking didn't exist as a culture? I've never in my life found someone who thought that. Misunderstandings aplenty but not outright lack or denial of the existence as a people.    Also you keep referring to the Nords as "dovakhins" the dovakhin was one character and a Messiah figure not to mention player customizable so as I said in the first place, there's a more than likely chance the Dovakhin to some players is not a Viking at all.   Lastly, don't dismiss the power of fiction. Cultural representation through metaphor can be a powerful thing and serve to represent the actual culture the fictional one is based on if the creator pays them their due respect. I mean hear in the States, the First Nations people went from "savage" to almost a form of positive discrimination from media depictions of them as heroes.

 

I would not go so far as to call it stupidity. You are not stupid because you don't know something  . It can depend on what form of education is considered to be priority and when it comes to history, whether foreign history, their own history or limited history is considered to be important. 

 

I never referred the Nords as "dovakhins".  I said that "Sure they do them well in Skyrim", talking about the depiction of Nordic culture. I was not talking about dovakhins. However, the fact is, that many players (or people who seem to have played the game), often say that vikings are the ripoff of dovakhins. I am only referring to what I have heard people say to me directly, as I don't play the Elder Scrolls, but rather have watched other people play it. 

 

Never dismissed it, but I don't think it was overly well done nor that it was really meant to serve well to represent my people's ancient culture. 

[cider float 2,535]

I guess that depends on your media perception because I know what the OP is talking about in that samurai almost seem to have a pop culture cult surrounding them, their abilities, and their signature weapon.

Can you tell me where this cult is at? 

Edited February 19, 2016 by cider float

[Steve Piranha 28,778]

Vikings didnt have horns on their helmets, picture is a fail.

 

 

As for the question, Knights interest me more due to the idea of proper chivalry in battle.

 

Perhaps in duels, but knights were also dirty pragmatist during wars. I dunno, samurai image are so over the top that they seem ridiculous to me nowadays, so, I pick knights. I do prefer special forces though, I'd never downgrade from a gun to a sword

[cider float 2,535]

I think gladiators are possibly the most admirable warriors. 

[deathpioupiou 103]

knight because of the knights of the round table in kaamelott (french series)

[Wax n' Wane 103]

Aesthetically speaking, I love the Samurai.  What's not to like about the style and the craftsmanship found in it?  Physically speaking, I like Knights more.  Knights can take a little more punishment in a fight due to their incredible armor.  Samurai, while they have armor too, can only dodge and parry attacks; Samurai armor can do little more than deflect errant spear thrusts and some arrows.  Knights can already dodge (if at least to a lesser extent) and parry attacks.  The only thing that the Samurai have in comparison is speed. Knights have heavy, heavy armor, whereas Samurai armor is very light in comparison, allowing for better control and manueverability.  Of course, this is assuming you're comparing Knights in full field plate armor to post Sengoku Jidai Samurai.

Edited February 19, 2016 by Wax n' Wane