I believe we can all agree that Japanese samurais and European knights are two of the most skilled and famous forms of warriors in history, right? Well both warriors began their trade at a very young age, and went through multiple stages of training throughout their lives. They both had a code of honor basically, but they differed from one another in quite a few ways. The big question is, “Were the similarities greater than the differences?”. Right off the bat I began to ponder the technicalities of the answer to this question. Before I get too scrambled up in the technicalities, let’s discuss some these differences and the similarities and figure out how this plays out. Before we conduct this discussion, let’s review our key terms. A clan is a group of close-knit and interrelated families. Feudalism was a political and economic system that flourished in Europe from the 9th to the 15th century, based on higher classes giving random services and items in exchange for something else. Knights were men who served their lord as a mounted soldier in armor. Samurai’s were members of a powerful military social class in feudal Japan. A shogun was a hereditary commander-in-chief in feudal Japan. Chivalry was the medieval knightly system with its religious, moral, and social code. Bushido was the code of honor and morals developed by the Japanese samurai.
In Document A, we see a very nicely displayed social pyramid. This pyramid attempts to show the reader which classes’ match up as closely as possible with their equivalent counterpart. As you began reading the pyramid for Japan, you see something that may strike you as being odd. This being that the shogun has more power than the emperor, yet the emperor is still higher on the pyramid. Thi...
... middle of paper ...
...e respect, honor, and loyalty make this difference for me, but there is something to be said about the comparison. I find that the knights are very efficient, great warriors, and are very similar to samurai’s in a lot of ways. They both wear armor, they both train from a young age, and both are taught about honor, loyalty, and respect; but samurais are taught more effectively in their training, and the Japanese concepts were better. So to answer the essential question of this essay, I would say that there is certainly a large amount of similarities between the two warriors, but if you would consider the samurai’s skills that are better, or enhanced; to be differences, than I would have to conclude with no. The ‘differences’, are far too great in my opinion to say that the similarities are so great that they are almost the same, because they are very different indeed.
In the book Samurai, Warfare and the State in Early Medieval Japan, Karl Friday focuses on war in early medieval Japan. A central thesis could be the political primacy of the imperial court. (Lamers 2005) This is the tenth through fourteenth centuries, before the samurai became prominent in Japan and were trying to form themselves into more of what we think of them today. Friday focuses on five aspects of war in his book; they are the meaning of war, the organization of war, the tools of war, the science of war, and the culture of war.
In document B written by Catharina Blomberg, it says, “Loyalty toward the feudal lord in Japan was hereditary.” If becoming a samurai was hereditary, then some samurai weren’t chosen to be a samurai because of their abilities, but because they were the son of a samurai. That means that not all samurai are the best fighters. It also says in document E, written by the DBQ project, “To dishonour knighthood was the greatest disgrace.” Part of the code is to always obey your king, so a knight would want to fight harder and not back out.
The question was, who would win in a battle? A samurai? Or a knight? Of Course they both have their advantages and disadvantages but they also both have things in common that they can't do. A samurai warrior was a member of a powerful japanese military. On the other hand a knight warrior was a man of noble birth who after a couple stages, he would be raised to honorable military rank. While knights and samurais have many similarities, in a one on one battle, the advantage would be to the samurai and this can be seen in their armor, beliefs, and their training techniques.
In the ancient Japanese culture, one great aspect was on how they emphasized on the intrinsic themes of loyalty and honor. They had fierce warriors known as samurai’s. A samurai was a traditional warrior who would protect and be loyal to their masters no matter what. They were known to be skilled soldiers, benevolent men, self-sacrifice, sense of shame, along with other major characteristics that embodied them as a samurai. While this class of warrior no longer exist today, the remembrance of a samurai is present in the minds of the characters in the novel, The Samurai’s Garden by Gail Tsukiyama. Tsukiyama does a fascinating piece of work by really elaborating and describing the great attributes that Matsu possess of a true samurai. In the
Document C states that trainees did physical training, poetry, and spiritual discipline in school. They also studied Kendo, the moral code of the samurai, and Zen Buddhism. At age 14, the trainees officially became samurai in a ceremony called genpuku. On the other hand, knights began at age 4 or 5 with learning to ride a pony. Then, he would be sent to serve as a page to his father’s lord at age 7 or 8. There, he practiced with wooden and blunted swords. They also practiced with riding a horse and religious practice. At age 14, they could become a squire. Squires were obligated to fight other men, and help his master knight. If a squire had approval from the knight, they could become a knight themselves. This shows that knights and samurai had a similar training when they were younger. Document E proves that they had to live a similar lifestyle. Samurai followed bushido, which was the way of the samurai. Bushido said that they had to serve their master, be loyal to their friends, and devoting himself to his duty. Knights were obligated to follow chivalry, which said to do no bad deed, be loyal to the king, to give mercy to those who want it, and to be courteous to women. Therefore, samurai and knights both had similar
As learners of Europe and Japan, the question “ who would win a battle-a samurai or knight” is commonly kept in mind. A samurai and knight are similar in many ways. A samurai would mostly win the battle because they have better weapons, armor, and training. While knights and samurai have many similarities, in a one on one battle, the advantage would be to the samurai and this can be seen in weapons, armor, and training.
As can be seen above, European knights and Japanese Samurais shared lots of differences including training, armor, weaponry, true values and rules. This is because they both came from different countries, and have different lifestyles, cultures, and religions, which influenced them to develop
...th wore helmets, armor, and worked for their leader, the shoguns or daimyo for the samurai, and for the knights their lord(s). Lastly, they both had peasants. The peasants both had to pay their taxes and had no power. Feudal Japan and Feudal Europe both had a certain social class order for power and how the people lived and worked.
Many people often see little similarity between the country of Japan and Europe. However, there are actually several similarities between these two countries. In fact, Reischauer and Jansen note that Feudal Japan had departed so far from East Asian norms that it was more similar to medieval Europe than it was to China. Thus, the knight of Europe and the samurai of Japan despite a lack of contact with one another shared several common elements. This was a result of many similarities social and cultural influences experienced by the two distant countries.
Samurais take the #1 spot for their combat adroitness, they were the champions in the fields of battles. Samurais were not only skilled warriors of battle, moreover they were influential leaders for their armies. The only weapons and armor the samurais took into battle were only two swords, leather plated armor, a helmet, and bow with proper training. Unlike other nations, anyone could become a samurai, no one was obligated to stay with families or to continue jobs their parents did. One of the biggest things samurais followed was there code of conduct, called Bushido “the way of the warrior.” Along with other individuals with authority, samurais had much authority as well; They had to keep peasants in check, check up on the harvests, and most importantly, keep their Daimyo(Lord) save from invaders at all costs. When disrespecting or showing cowardness to their Daimyo, it lead to bringing great shame and dishonor to the samurais whole family. When samurais become dishonorable they often end up leaving and becoming a ronin. Ronin’s were mainly mercenaries that carried out assassinations, spy missions, and sabotage. Although samurais have already come to an end, many still worship their fallen ancestors, some still study the basic practices of samurais to always keep a basic understanding of the training they went through. Along with well skilled warriors, some showed their level of skill not on the battlefield, rather on a piece of
Do you know someone in the military? A loved one, a friend, do you know what they go through? I may not, but I do know about the harsh training and war that occurred for the Samurais and Knights. In Europe and Japan the empires were falling and Clans were taking over Japan. The government came up with an idea to create feudalism. There was an agreement in both Europe and Japan that exchanged land for protection. The similarities between Samurai and Knights were greater than the differences. This can be shown by looking at the three most similar areas: social position, training and armor, and life, honor, and death. The Samurai and Knights has their differences, but were the similarities greater than those differences.
This shows how language plays a role in Japan by the maintenance of the hierarchical structure of the society.
European feudalism was based on contract and Japanese feudalism was based on personal relationship with the lord and vassal. This helps prove that the differences between European and Japanese feudalism made limited government more likely to develop in the West because a contract limits what the lords and vassals could do. William, the king of English, said, “I command you [the vassal] to summon all those who are under your charge......and bring ready with you those five knights that you owe me[.]”1 This helps prove that European feudalism was based on contract because when you owe someone something, it implies an agreement. The key terms are I command you and owe. The vassal has to send troops because he has to. He is under the rule of his lord. The lord tells his vassal that “[H]e will perform everything [that] was in [their] agreement [because] [he] submitted himself to him and chose his will.”2 This helps prove that European feudalism was based on a contract because a contract implies an agreement. The vassal chose the lord himself, so therefore, the vassal is under the lord's rule and needs to follow the agreement. On Japan's view of feudalism, their feudalism wasn't based on contract. On page 122 and 124 of The Tale of Heike, it implies personal relationships with the lord and vassal. “Despite his predicament, [the lord] still thought of [his vassal].”3 When the lord dies, the vassal kills himself saying, “For whom do I have to fight now?”4 This helps prove that Japanese feudalism was based on a personal relationship with lord and vassal because the lord and vassal actually cared for each other. Even through major problems, the lord and vassal's actions showed how close their relationship was with each other. Also on page 5...
The samurai of Tokugawa Japan, the yangban of Choson Korea, and the gentry of Ming China were three very powerful and elite groups of East Asia. These groups consisted of high ranking government officials with judicial power and influence. Although the groups were located in the same region they had their similarities and differences in how they obtained power and how they used their power. Japanese samurai were military nobility who had almost as much power as the emperor, but were not the highest ranking officials whereas the yangban officials of Korea were the highest ranking rulers. The gentry of the Ming period of China were once high ranking rulers; however, the gentry were defined as retired Chinese bureaucrats. Socially, all of these groups, at one point or another, were high ranking officials with power in office. The elite groups ruled in different areas of Asia, but they had similarities as well as differences in sources of power, functions as officials, and the problems they faced as elite groups in Asia.
There are many historical aspects of the Japanese, but the most interesting is the history of the Samurai. In Japans history war played a large role in the country. Controlling clans fought for parts of the land and overall control of the country. These clans were powerful families that resided in the country and who all wanted power and control of Japan for themselves. The families that would be in control were known as Shoguns. These shoguns would have warriors that fought for them if any of the other clan families would try to attack him in order to overthrow him and take his power from him. The Samurai followed a code that developed from Chinese beliefs when in battle. The Samurais code was known as the Bushido. This code was also known as “The Way of The Warrior” which was the main belief s...