Spartan versus Samurai

[Rapax]

Originally posted by sardaukar1510@Mar 27 2005, 11:37 PM
By the same token Rapax, who were the japanese fighting besides the japanese?

Ask the King. I was commenting on the statement that spartans faced many different types of enemies. I never claimed the japanese faced anyone but themselves. You're confusing statements.

k, so i missed the bamboo, sry. katana still loses against metal. Before you jump on me, the reason metal was included in the armor in the later period was because of gunpowder. Iron was still rare in japan and hella expensive, which is why metal wasnt used.

Good, so you gave us the final winning argument for the samurai. They had firearms!

tho u cant deny that its a possiblity

A lot of things are possible and I can deny whatever I want, so.... :cool

[sardaukar1510]

Rapax: about the confusing statements...Touche', musta got a little ahead of myself :happy

as to the firearms...new thread idea..who is the better warrior? samurai or 15 year-old with shotgun?...by your rationale...the 15 year old...the inclusion of the technology shouldnt be a defining factor in the argument.

[B00M]

Number 1...Dal please post in English so I can understand you.
Number 2...Rapax, you do bring up good arguements but I wont respond to everything you said, as their is far to much. I will tell you this though, A spartan is STRONGER...how do I know? It is that I am assuming, but it is true. If a Samurai doesn't have a Iron Katana, then what does he have? A brass Katana? Enlighten me on this! You obviosuly have little clue as to what a Samurai is.


Visit here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Samurai#Weapons


As it says, the Katana was more of a symbol of power then a effective weapon. Get out of your fantasy world of Ninja's...

[Rapax]

Originally posted by sardaukar1510@Mar 27 2005, 11:42 PM
as to the firearms...new thread idea..who is the better warrior? samurai or 15 year-old with shotgun?...by your rationale...the 15 year old...the inclusion of the technology shouldnt be a defining factor in the argument.

I know it's a senseless argument concerning the basis for comparison but I just had to mention it.

@boom:

Rapax, you do bring up good arguements but I wont respond to everything you said, as their is far to much.

How convient for you. I shall write in little parts next time, maybe that won't be too much for you then.

I will tell you this though, A spartan is STRONGER...how do I know? It is that I am assuming, but it is true.

And I'm supposed to take this seriously because...? I wonder how you convinced yourself of it if you can't even give me a single reason for that assumption.

If a Samurai doesn't have a Iron Katana, then what does he have? A brass Katana? Enlighten me on this!

You were the one claiming there was not enough iron in japan for katanas, not me. Bring me source that says there was not enough iron in japan. What I read on that was that a good katana was very expensive to make, hence its quality depended on how much one was willing to spend.

Visit here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Samurai#Weapons

A fascinating link, but what does it tell us about iron and samurais without katanas?

You obviosuly have little clue as to what a Samurai is.

Yes, that is indeed very obvious when discussing with you. How dare I participate? :whistle

any way, i heard a spartan doesnt where armor....well not much......so i think that is kinda of a made up image of their power....maybe jsut arrogance??

During the persian wars they most certainly did wear heavy armor, as one picture here showed. However there was a time when their only protection was a shield and their pylos helmet.

[Axylus]

I think it always differed all the time. If you read the book called 'The gates of fire' (don't know for sure if that's the exact English name) which is about the battle at Thermopylae, it mentiones them wearing armour and helmet.

[King_Azzole]

BOOM:

You are still holding to the belief that the Katana was not used extensively during the Sengoku Jidai period? You can post all the crappy links you want. I learned my History in school and from real History books. The katana was an effective and beautifully engineered weapon, and your argument is not only insulting to those who know the truth, but also insulting to the japanese craftsman and engineers who designed it, and the tempering process. Im done with you, go read a book. :rolleyes

[B00M]

Because Japan was an iron-poor society, making a sword was an intrinsically expensive undertaking; the supply of swords was limited, and so it was in the smiths' interest to make the most of the materials they could afford. Europe also had superlative swordsmiths; Toledo steel swords from Spain are one example of legendary quality swords from outside Japan. However, the greater availability of iron made it practical to produce cheap, low-quality weapons in large quantities. Where Europeans had the choice between expensive good swords and cheap bad swords, Japanese had the choice between expensive good swords or none at all.

from http://www.answers.com/topic/katana


There is no way I can prove to you a Spartan is stronger then a Samurai, but it is a obvious fact. It is asking what is stronger, a Full grown bear or a full grown German Shepard dog? How would you prove it to me? The only way is to bring both of them and see who can bench press more :rolleyes . Even though we all know that a Bear is stronger then a Dog some ignorant people still question it.

[Axylus]

Originally posted by B00M@Mar 28 2005, 01:02 AM
There is no way I can prove to you a Spartan is stronger then a Samurai, but it is a obvious fact. It is asking what is stronger, a Full grown bear or a full grown German Shepard dog? How would you prove it to me? The only way is to bring both of them and see who can bench press more :rolleyes . Even though we all know that a Bear is stronger then a Dog some ignorant people still question it.

I too can't help but wonder what makes you think this. Perhaps it is true, I don't know, but you will have to give some proof saying it's true. Are you perhaps judging this on the way Spartans used to train, for example pushing each other in the back trying to push down a tree or something? I know a little bit of the Spartan recruitment, and it seems it makes you tough, but I don;'t know if this will make him stronger than the samurai, since I don;t have any specific ideas of how they trained, except for practicing with their weapons.

And even IF they're stronger, it wouldn't make the final outcome. Everyone knows speed, honour, strategy and those kind of things count too, but I guess that's not your real point.

OoOoh, do all topics end like this? Perhaps I should stop viewing posts here since I've been chocking in my food multiple times while I was trying to laugh...

[Rapax]

http://www.answers.com/topic/katana
That is the same link we get from wikipedia when we go to "Katana". And where does it tell us that samurai didn't have swords because there was no iron? You made that statement and now keep twisting around making a lot of statements concerning the cost of a sword.

There is no way I can prove to you a Spartan is stronger then a Samurai, but it is a obvious fact.

It is not an obvious fact, that's why were are discussing.

It is asking what is stronger, a Full grown bear or a full grown German Shepard dog? How would you prove it to me? The only way is to bring both of them and see who can bench press more* :rolleyes . Even though we all know that a Bear is stronger then a Dog some ignorant people still question it.

Fascinating comparison, really. Has absolutely no weight whatsoever, considering you're comparing two different species with each other, but at least you can underline your point. This is getting a little ridiculous you know that?
All I wanted from you is a reason why you think so.

[Crandar]

We now have the option to let the productive discussion of this topic continue. I have split off but preserved all the posts that did not actively contribute to the main topic of this debate

I want to emphasize that a general rule of conduct that applies to all discussion topics is that you must focus on the content of the topic at hand and not resort to insults, digs, flames, or other pokes at the participants in the debate. Calling someone and idiot, or a nerd, or no brained loud mouth only starts a process of escalation and destruction that ruins both the spirit and the value of the discussion topic at hand.

[Dan_Grr]

Noon. 12 o' clock. Even ground. No one around. A Spartan. A Samurai. Spartan wins the match by ramming his large shield against a clever samurai, commiting his balance and losing his life to the next-quick spartan strike with his thrusting spear.

[Rapax]

Noon. 12 o' clock. Even ground. No one around. A Spartan. A Samurai. Spartan tries to ram Samurai with his shield. Samurai takes a sidestep lets the Spartan run past and cuts the hollow of the knee with his sword. Spartan drops to knees, is finished by decapitation.

Point?

[Xiaodun]

Originally posted by Dan_Grr@Mar 27 2005, 08:28 PM
Noon. 12 o' clock. Even ground. No one around. A Spartan. A Samurai. Spartan wins the match by ramming his large shield against a clever samurai, commiting his balance and losing his life to the next-quick spartan strike with his thrusting spear.

I think this is what would happen.

The Spartan using his superior Greek intellect tries to prove that since the samurai rose nearly 1500 years after his time and were centered in japan, on the other side of the earth and unknown by the Greeks, that the samurai is just a figurment of his imagination thus doesnt exist.

The samurai then counters by stating that logically since he came after the Spartan's time, it is more logical that the Spartan is the figurment of his imagination and thus doesnt exist.

The spartan then claims that the Samurai shouldnt know of the Spartan's existance since the first time the Japanese learned western history was after the era of the Samurai and doesnt exist.

The samurai then states that by the Spartan's own logic he doesnt exist

The spartan was being persuaded by the samurai's logic and was about to disappear when realizes that he can barely read and doesnt have the famed greek intellect, so just gives up intellectual debate and stabs the samurai who wasnt expecting the sudden move because they didnt do they proper war rituals.

[Eric]

you guys are all forgetting one essential fact about the spartan phalanx it's a Lacedaemon phalanx the spartans are all tightly packed in with short spears witch they wield overhand so theoretically the phalnx offers no great advantage as the spear is so short is wouldn't hold the samurai very far away so scratch the phalanx advantage

[Xiaodun]

Originally posted by Eric@Mar 27 2005, 09:47 PM
you guys are all forgetting one essential fact about the spartan phalanx it's a Lacedaemon phalanx the spartans are all tightly packed in with short spears witch they wield overhand so theoretically the phalnx offers no great advantage as the spear is so short is wouldn't hold the samurai very far away so scratch the phalanx advantage

I think this thread was suppose to mean individual combat. Which i dont get because you are pitting a Spartan man who is dependant on group tactics and the phalanx against the Samurai who is trained years for individual combat.

Besides if it was group combat the spartan phalanx will just be overrun with Japanese arrows.

[Ó Cathasaigh]

The time gap between the classical Spartan warrior and a senogoku jidai period Samurai is roughly 2000 years, so on what basis do you claim Spartans to be taller and stronger?

perhaps an assumption, but the fact that, Europeans have tended to be larger and usualy better built, also Spartans, and greeks, found phisical fitness to be the key to warfare, i know of no such Japanese beleif.

this is a bit of a stretch, at Thermopalyae, there were fewer than 300 survivors, i'd reckon more like 150 if that when the Persians loosed possibly thousands upon thousands of arrows. In this scenario, the Spartans and Samurai would be similar in number.

[Xiaodun]

Originally posted by Corporal_Hicks@Mar 27 2005, 09:56 PM

The time gap between the classical Spartan warrior and a senogoku jidai period Samurai is roughly 2000 years, so on what basis do you claim Spartans to be taller and stronger?

perhaps an assumption, but the fact that, Europeans have tended to be larger and usualy better built, also Spartans, and greeks, found phisical fitness to be the key to warfare, i know of no such Japanese beleif.

Actually, Europeans used to be quite short even during the middle ages and renecance, and the taller Europeans are mostly Germanic. The Germans ate lots of meat, the greeks and romans didnt (there was once incident where Caesar records that he ran out of grain so they were forced to eat meat)

[Eric]

Originally posted by deathdoom56@Mar 27 2005, 09:49 PM
I think this thread was suppose to mean individual combat. Which i dont get because you are pitting a Spartan man who is dependant on group tactics and the phalanx against the Samurai who is trained years for individual combat.

Besides if it was group combat the spartan phalanx will just be overrun with Japanese arrows.

I was adressing the people who were guessing how a group battle between spartans and samurai whould turn out

[King_Azzole]

Originally posted by Eric@Mar 27 2005, 08:47 PM
you guys are all forgetting one essential fact about the spartan phalanx it's a Lacedaemon phalanx the spartans are all tightly packed in with short spears witch they wield overhand so theoretically the phalnx offers no great advantage as the spear is so short is wouldn't hold the samurai very far away so scratch the phalanx advantage

How would that "scratch the phalanx advantage?" Even with short spears, they could easily use the hoplon shield wall of the front phalanx to push and run over a group of samurai. It would be bloody.. but regardless, the samurais lack of shield would be its major disadvantage here. But knowing the Japanese, they would quickly come up with a way to counter the Phalanx, such as providing their samurai with throwing darts which can be aimed at the upper head area and legs of the phalanx before charge, or even learn to use polearms or shields themselves.

[Xiaodun]

Originally posted by Eric+Mar 27 2005, 10:00 PM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td> (Eric @ Mar 27 2005, 10:00 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> <!--QuoteBegin-deathdoom56@Mar 27 2005, 09:49 PM
I think this thread was suppose to mean individual combat. Which i dont get because you are pitting a Spartan man who is dependant on group tactics and the phalanx against the Samurai who is trained years for individual combat.

Besides if it was group combat the spartan phalanx will just be overrun with Japanese arrows.

I was adressing the people who were guessing how a group battle between spartans and samurai whould turn out [/b][/quote]
Still the Samurai were very skilled archers and the Spartans had lost to ranged warriors before