#Asian medieval weapons full#

And the katana could inflict quite a bit of damage against it. The Yari spear could punch straight through it. Japanese weapkns could also defeat japanese armour.

#Asian medieval weapons full#

Whatever combination they used and how it was designed on the body meant it was very good against arrows and allowed almost full mobility. Japanese armour has chainmail in it but a bunch of other stuff even plates. Medieval Europe also dropped shields however much later. It was still pretty heavy duty stuff not much lighter than medieval plate armour. Japanese armour is actually rather effective at blocking or severly reducing the damage of arrows. While the Japanese fighting style, on 1 to 1 might be superior with it's finesse it just wouldn't be brutal enough. Where European was a simple mass of brutal force. This, also Japanese, or Samurai culture was to duel 1 on 1, even on the battlefield. The training of knights and soldiery should not be underestimated either on the European side European warfare was much more advanced, and the way they crafted their armor and especially weapons were just so much ahead compared to the Japanese ones. The true and undeniable answer would be, no, they couldn't. I mean, sure they had a warrior culture and tradition but they weren't the only warrior culture in the world that began military training at an early age as a way of life either, I just can't see anything going for the japanese besides the 'coolness factor' of samurai. On top of that their armor looks fairly light but I doubt it could stand against european medieval plate armor either. Originally posted by Voidian:Just wondering, I'm not a history buff and I don't know much about real, practical warfare so correct me if I'm wrong.īut I read that the japanese used shields long ago and decided to retire them in favor of the kinds of weapons they used, whatever the reasons may be I can't imagine a situation in which having a shielded front line wouldn't be useful to any culture, even if they had some 2h warriors those shouldn't be leading the charge taking arrows to their face before they even got to combat. In fact, the Japanese used it at waist height also against infantry but still pretty much let the opponent impale himself. It is also said that the Greeks, who used up to 26 ft long polearms, got a fair amount of arrow protection just fram having the spare ranks in the rear aim them up over the front rows heads. Instead, they bore it overhead with both hands or at waist height with the pole basically straight as a stabby weapon. Early combined arms doctrine! Interestingly, or oddly, the sort of very long spear the Greeks are famous for wasn't used this way. In both cultures, these weapons were used to protect archers, and later musketmen, who would pick off those struglling amongst the spears. A 3 or 4 deep wall of these is much more damaging to mounted troops than a sheild but was also more or less like wading through barbed wire for infantry.

A yari/pike would/could be placed with the blunt end in the ground, usually with the wielders foot on it, and then angled forward at 30 degrees or so. This is pretty much what the european armies did when they switched to pikes but much later in history.

Well, I believe the Japanses gave up on sheilds in favor of the Yari which is a long spear.