Difference Between Samurai And Knights

The Knights of Europe and the Samurai of Japan shared quite a few similarities; however, they do also share many differences. One such similarity would be that both the Knights and the Samurais were brave, strong, and loyal to their cause, especially due to both of their trainings starting at a very young age. An example of a difference would be the samurais having a much lighter armor than knights. This allowed for a more agile army. They also ascended to their titles at separate ages, with samurais being at a mere 14 years of age, and knights being 21.

Samurai and knights are not identical, they do have a good amount of differences. For instance, after going through training, samurai were awarded their title and responsibilities at the age of fourteen while knights took on their full responsibilities at twenty-one. Document B points out that although loyalty was important to both Japanese and European warriors, “loyalty towards the feudal lord in Japan was hereditary” but it was not in Europe. This means that in Japan “service of a feudal lord went from father to son” so the relationship between the lord and his warrior lasted for generations. Along with that, although both groups wore full body armor, Document D states that “a knight’s armor could weigh forty

Samurai and Knights are warriors fighting and serving for their lord. Samurai and knights are both trained, physically and mentally to fight for their lords, however while in a battle, strategies of both make it hard to distinguish who would win. While both warriors are very similar in many ways, Samurais differences such as their, training, weapons, and armor give them big advantages.

From researching about knights and samurai, I believe that in a battle between a knight and samurai, the knight would have a greater chance in winning. This is because knights focused more on fighting techniques and how to improve them, rather than focusing on spiritual beliefs and traditions as well, which is what the samurai did. The knights also had very strong and good armour which helped a lot in battles, while the samurai’s armour changed a lot but wasn’t ever as effective as the knight’s armour. The knight’s weapons were also more advanced and better then the samurai weapons.

The first reason why the differences are greater than the similarities is because of the social order in feudal Japan and Europe. ”Historians and other scholars use social pyramids to show how societies were structured” (Document A). The samurai owned loyalty and military service to daimyo 's for land or regular payment while on the other hand knights owned loyalty and military service to the lords. Another difference about samurais and knights was the population. Samurai with families took about 10% of Japan 's population and in Europe, there was estimated 12,000 knights in England and Normany France in the 12th century. One more difference is that there are four people above the knight in the social order but only three for samurai.

In all I think that the differences between the knights and samurai's where greater than the similarities between the two. Whether its social classes, fighting style, armor, or even where they originated

The similarities between samurais and knights were greater than the differences due to the similarity in the hierarchy and the armor they used to protect themselves. The Samurai were “warriors who owed loyalty and military service to daimyos for land or regular payment.” They made up about 10% of Japan’s population. Similarly, knights were “warriors who owed loyalty and military service to the lord for land.” (Document A) There were about 12,000 knights in England and Normandy, France in the 12th century. Even though Japan and Europe had no communication or access to each other, both areas placed the warrior classes in the middle of the hierarchy and owed loyalty/military services. This shows that the social order of both Feudal Japan and Feudal

According to documents and history , around 1,000 years ago there were two different societies, in two different parts of the world that had warriors with differences. During these times, there was an emperor and a king ruling their empire/kingdom. They both had warriors they would send out into the felids. These warriors were from Japan and Europe. Japan warriors were called samurai (class warriors in feudal Japan who pledged loyalty to a noble in return for land) and Europe warriors were called knights(a noble warrior who fought on horseback in the Middle Ages). Samurai and Knight are more different than similar in three broad areas, training,armor. and their view of death.

Hey, Have you ever learned about the Samurai and Knights?? Well they had a few big similarities but lots of differences. Also in that era Samurai and Knights they had to be very loyal to their lord. I have a question for you. Were the similarities greater than the differences? No I don't think the similarities are greater than the differences between the Samurai and Knights. So no I think there are more differences than similarities. I’m going to be talking about the Samurai [Japanese Warrior] and Knights [European Warrior] is there Social position, Training and Armor, and Life and death.

The first reason why the knights and the samurai are more different than alike is because of their code of honor. Document E states that there are two different codes of honor. The code of honor of the samurai was called Bushido. In Bushido, samurai are loyal to their family and to friends. They devote themselves to helping others. In chivalry, knights were to be helpful to ladies. They always had to be loyal to the king. People may think that just because they both have codes of honor and they are loyal to others means they are the

For Japan and Europe, it was a time of trouble…Document “In the late 400’s both Europe and Japan created a feudal system in order to keep peace in the land. Lords acquired large estates of land. They granted some of their lands to lesser nobles, whom promised to fight when conflicts arose.” Background Essay DBQ. So where the similarities greater, or were the differences greater? The samurai and knights were more similar than different in three broad areas, social position, training and armor and the code of honor.

Roughly in the years 1000 to 1600 CE there were Samurai and knights. They were two very different but very similar warriors. Samurai were the knights of japan and knights were the samurai of europe. Both made from a lack of army and government, both needing land or payment, and both giving their lives to their master. They look very different, but are they more similar than they seem? Keep reading to find out.

How were knights and samurai similar? In Europe and Japan, there were issues that lead to a samurai and knights. The countries' government was not stable and quickly falling apart and so was the military. There were people invading their land and with an unstable government, they needed help before the invaders took over their way of life. Historians believe knights and samurai were different in their feelings about death, but they are more similar. They were both a warrior class and both showed loyalty to their master.

Samurai and knights always battling out in the battlefield. During this time both knights and samurai were fighting for protection. Both were developing codes such as Chivalry and Bushido. Both had a some sort of leader weather it's a shogun or a pope. Some historians will argue that samurai and knights are more different than similar, but they are more similar than different. The samurai and knights were more similar than different because they had similar armor and they had the same type of social pyramid.

The knights in Europe and the samurai in Japan are extremely similar. The Samurai and Knights have similar ways in their feudal systems. Document A shows us that the warriors are the fourth ones down on the social pyramid. It also says that they both have the same jobs in their society.