Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Samurai Helmets

news.kynosarges.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

71–80 of 91 posts

Re: Samurai Helmets

#71

Post by scottie_m »

DavidAdams wrote: post #51
zentropia wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

George Lucas was inspired by samurai films. This film are called jidai seki (period films). From jidai --> jedi. Also C3PO and R2D2 are inspired by the couple of mongrels in Hidden Fortress.

This is also why the Jedi (at least in the earlier films) use two hands to hold their lightsabers. It's the Japanese style. Of course, Samurai swords were two-handed because they were heavy, due to the poor quality of steel available. A light saber "blade" would presumably weigh nothing, so it would make more sense to hold it one handed like a, well, saber. A master of the more technologically advanced European saber…

You might enjoy some Scholagladitoria videos covering just such topics. As with most things the question of “what wins” between various swords is rarely straightforward, and always involves a lot of context. A shitty katana vs a splendid saber wouldn’t be interesting, but there were plenty of garbage pieces of both, along with lots of masterworks. Given even quality swords and equal skill, the determining factors seem to be the kind of fight. In a 1-1 unarmoured duel a rapier is hard to beat; no surprise since it evolved for just that reason. You’d hate to use a rapier on an armored opponent, one on horseback, or multiple foes though. A katana has less reach, is better at cutting and worse at thrusting, and is weighted more towards the blade. That’s a plus in some regards, and a minus in others. A saber is a very fine cutting weapon, but terrible in the thrust; it excels on horseback and on the ground. A saber will generally have the benefit of more protection for the hand and forearm, while the tsuba on a katana is pretty minimal. However a saber vs. armor is a disaster, while the katana can punch through some plate in the thrust. For thick armor you’d really want a longsword with a bodkin point, or a bludgeon.

It just depends on context and skill.

Re: Samurai Helmets

#72

Post by kevin_thibedeau »

herewulf wrote: post #43
Causality1 wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Nope, it's due to the fact these come from the period after the samurai had changed from soldiers to aristocratic bureaucrats. It's doubtful any of these saw a single battle.

I'm under the impression that samurai only wore armor in real battles and never for ceremony (preferring other, equally elaborate garments for that). This is in contrast with medieval Europe where there are many examples of elaborate, ceremonial-only armor (such as full suits for children of royalty, etc). Can anyone confirm?

These weren't worn. They were primarily gifts and a means to maintain skilled artisans.

Re: Samurai Helmets

#73

Post by kazinator »

username223 wrote: post #13
Lowkeyloki wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You have to at least give credit that the bot was apparently written in lisp.

Scheme, actually, since it uses "define" instead of "defun." I formatted it reasonably, but it still looked like a pain to untangle.

The original Lisp also used DEFINE. See the LISP 1 Programmer's Manual, Mac Carthy et al. 1960, P. 23.

Re: Samurai Helmets

#74

Post by failrate »

zentropia wrote: post #26
ereyes01 wrote: post #7

After looking at pictures of a bunch of samurai helmets, I came to a realization that Darth Vader's helmet is more or less the shape of a samurai helmet. Maybe this should have been obvious to me (especially being a fan of the Hidden Fortress film), but it was a cool discovery for me.

George Lucas was inspired by samurai films. This film are called jidai seki (period films). From jidai --> jedi. Also C3PO and R2D2 are inspired by the couple of mongrels in Hidden Fortress.

To be fair, much of Episode 4 was inspired by Hidden Fortress.

Re: Samurai Helmets

#75

Post by chewz »

ender7 wrote: post #67

While beautiful, most of these pieces are primarily ceremonial or intended for generals who would rarely involve themselves on the battlefield†. Almost all of these pieces date from after the unification of Japan under the Tokugawa shogunate (c. 1600). From 1600 to 1850 Japan experienced a stable period marked by very little real armed conflict. During this time, the samurai transitioned from soldiers to what were ef…

> and the occasional mortal duel.

Duels under Tokugawa were forbidden and punishable by death of both opponents. The only fighting that samurai could see was terrorizing of unarmed peasants.

Samurai were not warriors in European sense but more of a mob enforcers. Good for terrorizing peasants not really fit for fighting in any military sense.

During Meiji when peasants got professional military training and leadership samurai became toothless.

[BUSHIDO: WAY OF TOTAL BULLSHIT] https://www.tofugu.com/japan/bushido/

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Siege_of_Kumamoto_Castle

[2] https://www.historynet.com/satsuma-rebellion-satsuma-clan-sa...

Re: Samurai Helmets

#76

Post by robotresearcher »

benj111 wrote: post #61
krapp wrote: post #58

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>I got the impression 2 handed swords/no shield was an honour thing, rather than a tactically advantageous thing, I'm in no way an expert on such things though. I am not an expert either but as I understand it, Samurai were nobles and fought on horseback with their primary weapons being spears and bows, and they considered swords a backup weapon.[0] The mythologizing of the Samurai, their honor-above-reason mentality…

"The mythologizing of the Samurai, their honor-above-reason mentality" Agreed, I was focussing more on the not tactically advantageous, rather than ascribing an honour code per se. It is generally a good idea to agree weapons beforehand, it helps keep the battlefield survivable. The 20th century wasn't known for it's 'honour' but WW2 combatants did refrain from using chemical weapons for example, and nukes were never…

More like fear of reprisal than honor. Chemical and nuclear weapons are very hard to defend your civilian population from. Mutual Assured Destruction has worked so far but I wouldn’t call it an honor code.

Re: Samurai Helmets

#77

Post by lainga »

benj111 wrote: post #48
lainga wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I tried one on once at a hole-in-the-wall samurai museum in Tokyo. It was pretty hefty but very well-supported - my head didn't feel wobbly or strained.

"hole-in-the-wall.... museum" My interest is piqued. I'm inferring that they're just very small museums? Do they have any essential characteristics? Google isn't being very helpful.

https://www.timeout.com/tokyo/museums/samurai-museum

It's one man's work of passion. When I went, it was quiet enough that an attendant guided us around the entire first floor personally. It's not exactly tiny, but it's just two narrow floors behind an unassuming frontage, and so a big change from the other (public) museums in Tokyo.

Re: Samurai Helmets

#78

Post by blahedo »

benj111 wrote: post #56
DavidAdams wrote: post #51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is also why the Jedi (at least in the earlier films) use two hands to hold their lightsabers. It's the Japanese style. Of course, Samurai swords were two-handed because they were heavy, due to the poor quality of steel available. A light saber "blade" would presumably weigh nothing, so it would make more sense to hold it one handed like a, well, saber. A master of the more technologically advanced European saber…

I've been mulling the cause and effect mentioned in your comment. Poor quality steel -> heavy -> 2 handed. I don't ever recall seeing a 2 handed bronze sword, and if the steel is worse than bronze, why didn't they go back to that? Which kind of suggests that it isn't. I'm assuming low quality steel is overly soft rather than overly brittle. If it were overly soft wouldn't that favour shorter blades? You'd either get…

> I don't ever recall seeing a 2 handed bronze sword, and if the steel is worse than bronze, why didn't they go back to that?

Bronze fell out of use not because iron/steel was better but because tin was rare and hard to come by. So, I'm not sure of the exact answer to your question but I suspect it's some version of "because they couldn't".

Re: Samurai Helmets

#79

Post by z3phyr »

chewz wrote: post #75
ender7 wrote: post #67

While beautiful, most of these pieces are primarily ceremonial or intended for generals who would rarely involve themselves on the battlefield†. Almost all of these pieces date from after the unification of Japan under the Tokugawa shogunate (c. 1600). From 1600 to 1850 Japan experienced a stable period marked by very little real armed conflict. During this time, the samurai transitioned from soldiers to what were ef…

> and the occasional mortal duel. Duels under Tokugawa were forbidden and punishable by death of both opponents. The only fighting that samurai could see was terrorizing of unarmed peasants. Samurai were not warriors in European sense but more of a mob enforcers. Good for terrorizing peasants not really fit for fighting in any military sense. During Meiji when peasants got professional military training and leadershi…

That is during the Shogunate. Before the unification, The samurai were involved with actual on field battles.

Re: Samurai Helmets

#80

Post by markandrewj »

ereyes01 wrote: post #7

After looking at pictures of a bunch of samurai helmets, I came to a realization that Darth Vader's helmet is more or less the shape of a samurai helmet. Maybe this should have been obvious to me (especially being a fan of the Hidden Fortress film), but it was a cool discovery for me.

George Lucas was influenced by Akira Kurosawa. Most closely by Hidden Fortress (although he puts it lowest on his list), but by other Kurosawa movies too. He talks about it some of his interviews.

https://youtu.be/E9V2T1ONA2I

Post reply on HN