Dbq Differences Between Knights And Samurai
If Knights and Samurai were going to engage in battle, who would win?
Imagine yourself as a Samurai, you are in the middle of defeating the European knights who are covered in plated armor. You begin to worry but then, you win, these are the reasons why a Samurai is better than a knight. Feudalism in Europe and Japan were both very similar. They both has rulers, and they both had rulers who hired nobles, and they both had nobles who hired landowners, and they both had landowners who hired warriors to protect the slaves and their land. If samurai and knights were to have fought against each other the samurai would have won because, they had movable armor and it was easier for them to dodge anything that a knight would slowly lunge at them with. If a Samurai and knights battled the knights would have fallen because, their armor was very defective. A knight's armor wasn’t made for easy movement, this made it more difficult for them to fight, but overall they were well protected(Document B). Their armor did defend them but, a Knight’s armor could easily be penetrated by a soldier …show more content…
Samurai didn’t wear armor or any protection on their right arm so they could easily draw their bow without any trouble(Document C). This made it easier for them to kill a knight or anyone who they were in conflict with. This was also very dangerous because, their arm would be vulnerable to anything that it came in contact with which then you would have one less arm. Their armor created a “shell” that provided both mobility and protection(Document C). A knight’s armor was really heavy to move as quickly, but they were very well protected from anything. This “Shell” like armor that the samurai wore made it easier to move and they were also protected. For these reasons that even though a samurai has good protection and great mobility, doesn’t mean he couldn’t
Imagine yourself as a Samurai, you are in the middle of defeating the European knights who are covered in plated armor. You begin to worry but then, you win, these are the reasons why a Samurai is better than a knight. Feudalism in Europe and Japan were both very similar. They both has rulers, and they both had rulers who hired nobles, and they both had nobles who hired landowners, and they both had landowners who hired warriors to protect the slaves and their land. If samurai and knights were to have fought against each other the samurai would have won because, they had movable armor and it was easier for them to dodge anything that a knight would slowly lunge at them with. If a Samurai and knights battled the knights would have fallen because, their armor was very defective. A knight's armor wasn’t made for easy movement, this made it more difficult for them to fight, but overall they were well protected(Document B). Their armor did defend them but, a Knight’s armor could easily be penetrated by a soldier …show more content…
Samurai didn’t wear armor or any protection on their right arm so they could easily draw their bow without any trouble(Document C). This made it easier for them to kill a knight or anyone who they were in conflict with. This was also very dangerous because, their arm would be vulnerable to anything that it came in contact with which then you would have one less arm. Their armor created a “shell” that provided both mobility and protection(Document C). A knight’s armor was really heavy to move as quickly, but they were very well protected from anything. This “Shell” like armor that the samurai wore made it easier to move and they were also protected. For these reasons that even though a samurai has good protection and great mobility, doesn’t mean he couldn’t