Spartan versus Samurai

[engtjuay]

Originally posted by Rapax@Mar 27 2005, 03:36 PM

And that in the middle is a yari too and it is obviously short enough for close combat. So you kinda nullify that argument yourself.
The point is that a samurai wears light armor and has a quick fighting style. That means that a samurai would be able to move fairly quickly and with ease. A spartan hoplite such as on the picture wears a heavy unflexible bell cuirass, a corinthian helmet and a large shield. That makes him very slow and due to the helmet limiting sight and hearing also somewhat at a loss in a duel. The whole armor protection of a spartan was designed to protect him in phalanx battles. Not to mention that spartans were not known as great swordsmen. Spartans were tough and disciplined, but their strength was the phalanx, not individual combat.

i don't agree with u a spartan is flexible,tough and strong,it would be wrong to say that they are unflexible and slow,besides do u think one slash is enough to bring a spartan down?

[Xiaodun]

Originally posted by engtjuay+Mar 28 2005, 07:19 AM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td> (engtjuay @ Mar 28 2005, 07:19 AM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> <!--QuoteBegin-Rapax@Mar 27 2005, 03:36 PM

And that in the middle is a yari too and it is obviously short enough for close combat. So you kinda nullify that argument yourself.
The point is that a samurai wears light armor and has a quick fighting style. That means that a samurai would be able to move fairly quickly and with ease. A spartan hoplite such as on the picture wears a heavy unflexible bell cuirass, a corinthian helmet and a large shield. That makes him very slow and due to the helmet limiting sight and hearing also somewhat at a loss in a duel. The whole armor protection of a spartan was designed to protect him in phalanx battles. Not to mention that spartans were not known as great swordsmen. Spartans were tough and disciplined, but their strength was the phalanx, not individual combat.

i don&#39;t agree with u a spartan is flexible,tough and strong,it would be wrong to say that they are unflexible and slow,besides do u think one slash is enough to bring a spartan down? [/b][/quote]
You do realize that a spartan is trained for group combat and not individual combat, and without his allies to aid him, he is vulnerable and weak.

If it is group combat remember also that Oda Nobunaga armed his men with 6 meter yari and set his troops in a sort of eastern phalanx formation, and screened his men with musketeers that fired at a regular rate due to their organization

[engtjuay]

Originally posted by deathdoom56+Mar 28 2005, 07:29 AM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td> (deathdoom56 @ Mar 28 2005, 07:29 AM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'>

Originally posted by engtjuay@Mar 28 2005, 07:19 AM
<!--QuoteBegin-Rapax

@Mar 27 2005, 03:36 PM

And that in the middle is a yari too and it is obviously short enough for close combat. So you kinda nullify that argument yourself.
The point is that a samurai wears light armor and has a quick fighting style. That means that a samurai would be able to move fairly quickly and with ease. A spartan hoplite such as on the picture wears a heavy unflexible bell cuirass, a corinthian helmet and a large shield. That makes him very slow and due to the helmet limiting sight and hearing also somewhat at a loss in a duel. The whole armor protection of a spartan was designed to protect him in phalanx battles. Not to mention that spartans were not known as great swordsmen. Spartans were tough and disciplined, but their strength was the phalanx, not individual combat.

i don&#39;t agree with u a spartan is flexible,tough and strong,it would be wrong to say that they are unflexible and slow,besides do u think one slash is enough to bring a spartan down?

You do realize that a spartan is trained for group combat and not individual combat, and without his allies to aid him, he is vulnerable and weak.

If it is group combat remember also that Oda Nobunaga armed his men with 6 meter yari and set his troops in a sort of eastern phalanx formation, and screened his men with musketeers that fired at a regular rate due to their organization [/b][/quote]
we don&#39;t need to know that for the topic is spartan vs samurai not some mustekeer firing crap

[Xiaodun]

Musketeers were a joint of every Sengoku army. Thats like telling the spartans to give up their spears.

If this was individual combat, then the samurai will have a definite advantage over the Spartan spartiaties, and as i said before in group combat 1800 years of advantage gives the Japanese a technological advantage in group combat

[Manji]

Spartans and Sengoku Army? WTF?&#33; The Sengoku Jidai period was rather recent (1500+) while the Spartans were "active" before Christ or BCE.....
Also, Samurai as a caste only appeared during the Nara Period, meaning 800 a.C....when the Spartans were long gone.
Now, comparing a Samurai of the Sengoku Jidai with a Spartan....the samurai would kick spartan ******, wipe the floor with his body and rape the greek women....
Why? let&#39;s see, though the Spartans were trained since childhood to be warrior so were the samurai, therefore we have similar skills....but what about weaponry? Comparing a "spartan" sword and lance to a yari, a naginata or a katana.....not to mention that samurai knew how to fight with the katana, use the bow, ride, and fighting bare-handed.....

Now, if the question was who would win in a Pirate vs Ninja..... :p

[Xiaodun]

You do know that the ninja already lost the moment the pirate knows that hes here

[Manji]

Dammit you got me there mate&#33; What about a ninja pirate? Harrrryah&#33;&#33;

*this is getting spammy*

[wooda]

A better question is who would win, 50 spartans? or 50 samuries?
After all, wars are not fought in 1on1 fights.

[Manji]

50 samurai vs 50 spartans: samurai pepper the spartans with arrows and flank them engaging int oclose combat. Samurai win. We go out partying with hot chicks.

[Dithyrambos]

Wasn&#39;t it Xerxes that said, "if we bring one in here, can he kill ten of us?"

This is a hard fight. If both units were in their prime, I&#39;ll have to go with the Samurai. I like the Spartans more, I think they&#39;re better fighters all-round, but it&#39;s a close call. The Samurai would lose in a mass fight, they would win in individual fighting. The Samurai also have bows with which to shoot at the Spartans, though I&#39;m not sure the Japanese arrows could go through bronze.

If the Samurai foolishly decided to close to katana striking range, they&#39;d be eaten alive. Other than that, the Spartans lose. The Samurai also can use their horses to flank and harry the phalanx.

It&#39;s too much of a technology gap between the two to make a fair call. =&#092;

A better question is who would win, 50 spartans? or 50 samuries?
After all, wars are not fought in 1on1 fights.

50 Spartans? That&#39;s not even a phalanx. If you&#39;re using a thin formation of 7 men across, you can&#39;t even get the standard 8 men deep. That requires 54 men, and you only have 50. Then there&#39;s the issue of no officer, and the Spartans being nearly blind by their Corinthian looking helmets. They can wear the Pilos, but...

I&#39;d say you have to make a pitch battle of atleast 800 vs 800.

[Dan_Grr]

Originally posted by daleio86@Mar 28 2005, 04:44 AM
dan_Grr, japannese has a surpizingly high average height....its just a stereo typical view that they are small

Heres something from my academic classes regarding the Japanese. Take note that the system measurement is the standard european cm (centímeters) and its in Portuguese, although I translated it. The year is 1975. Although people have grown some centimeters in the past decades, Im sure there will be no major and significant higher values (of course we are all taller). Men&#39;s height is as follow:




EDIT: 166 cm (1m66). My mother is 160 cm and shes below my chest. Isnt that short?

[King_Azzole]

What does height and size have to do with anything? Have any of you ever been in a real fight? The two times I got my ****** whupped when I worked as a bouncer were both by small men. Size does not equal power, and size can be a blessing or a curse. Since we are talking about trained soldiers here and not street thugs, I do not think size is an issue...

~Azz

[B00M]

Exactly...he nailed it. Everyone thinks that the Spartan will be so slow, because of all of his equipment, don&#39;t forget that a spartan carries it around all the time...he is use to using it. It seems a bunch of you know very little about the human body. You never get more muscles, they just get bigger, so the bigger you are (as long as your size isn&#39;t because of fat) the stronger you will be. Now say some guy is 5 foot 6 and weighs 180 pounds, and has bearly ANY body fat. Say a guy is 5 foot 4 and weighs 120 pounds and has very little body fat? Do you know who would be stronger? It is a very easy one, just because all of those Jackie Chan movies has him beat a 7 foot tall 400 pound man in arm wrestling doesn&#39;t make it true. If we want this battle to be fair the Samurai must have the average equipment a Samurai would have. Now all of you, DO NOT say he has a bow, yari, katana, and that other short sword with a musket. I hope you all realise that not every samurai is armed like that. So we all need to decide what equipment both of them would have, MAKE IT LOGICAL.


Samurai-A decently made Katana, a yari, and a short sword, along with the armor they wear.
Spartan-A spear, a short sword, a shield, and the spartan armor.


The Spartan, who is use to being Defense because of the Phalanx, waits for the samurai to attack. The Samurai with his attacks with his Yari, he is trying to find a open spot on the Spartan. The Spartan is fully covered with his shield and the Samurai tries to poke at him, tries to make him bite and attack and be left vulnerable. Samurai thinks he has the oppurtunity and goes for a jab, the Spartan knocks away the spear with his shield and starts to close on the Samurai. He thrusts his spear at the Samurai&#39;s thoat and the Samurai dodges it. He pulls out his Katana, while the Spartan starts to become offensive. He starts thrusting his spear at the Samurai while he plays it safe and dodges them. Right after one of his thrusts the Samurai seizes the oppurtunity and slashs at the Spartan, he pulls his shield and hits the sword on a angle, deflecting it to the left. He then plants the spear into the Samurai&#39;s lower neck. Samurai falls to the ground and dies.


I think that is a realistic battle, don&#39;t forget guys...the Katana is very sharp, and probally can go through the shield. But while the Spartan is moving and posistions the shield the right way, the shield will deflect the blow, the Katana has NO weight to it and is only used for cutting. So defectling it will bearly slow him down also.



Edit: Size is power, as long as your size isn&#39;t because of FAT. If you are bigger because of muscle, that means you are stronger. Being strong is a factor to EVERY battle and fight.

[King_Azzole]

Originally posted by B00M@Mar 28 2005, 09:58 AM
Exactly...he nailed it. Everyone thinks that the Spartan will be so slow, because of all of his equipment, don&#39;t forget that a spartan carries it around all the time...he is use to using it. It seems a bunch of you know very little about the human body. You never get more muscles, they just get bigger, so the bigger you are (as long as your size isn&#39;t because of fat) the stronger you will be. Now say some guy is 5 foot 6 and weighs 180 pounds, and has bearly ANY body fat. Say a guy is 5 foot 4 and weighs 120 pounds and has very little body fat? Do you know who would be stronger? It is a very easy one, just because all of those Jackie Chan movies has him beat a 7 foot tall 400 pound man in arm wrestling doesn&#39;t make it true. If we want this battle to be fair the Samurai must have the average equipment a Samurai would have. Now all of you, DO NOT say he has a bow, yari, katana, and that other short sword with a musket. I hope you all realise that not every samurai is armed like that. So we all need to decide what equipment both of them would have, MAKE IT LOGICAL.


Samurai-A decently made Katana, a yari, and a short sword, along with the armor they wear.
Spartan-A spear, a short sword, a shield, and the spartan armor.


The Spartan, who is use to being Defense because of the Phalanx, waits for the samurai to attack. The Samurai with his attacks with his Yari, he is trying to find a open spot on the Spartan. The Spartan is fully covered with his shield and the Samurai tries to poke at him, tries to make him bite and attack and be left vulnerable. Samurai thinks he has the oppurtunity and goes for a jab, the Spartan knocks away the spear with his shield and starts to close on the Samurai. He thrusts his spear at the Samurai&#39;s thoat and the Samurai dodges it. He pulls out his Katana, while the Spartan starts to become offensive. He starts thrusting his spear at the Samurai while he plays it safe and dodges them. Right after one of his thrusts the Samurai seizes the oppurtunity and slashs at the Spartan, he pulls his shield and hits the sword on a angle, deflecting it to the left. He then plants the spear into the Samurai&#39;s lower neck. Samurai falls to the ground and dies.


I think that is a realistic battle, don&#39;t forget guys...the Katana is very sharp, and probally can go through the shield. But while the Spartan is moving and posistions the shield the right way, the shield will deflect the blow, the Katana has NO weight to it and is only used for cutting. So defectling it will bearly slow him down also.

I ask again. Have you ever been in a real fight? Size has nothing to do with professional soldiers in almost all cases. Ill take an extreme case as an example. Bruce Lee. Possibly one of the most powerful people to ever walk the earth. Need I say more? If you really think size has something to do with power or the ability to hurt someone, I advise you rethink and realize the greatest fighters in history were not large men.

Bah I have to go to work. Probobly gonna be 5 more pages when I get back :happy

[Dithyrambos]

Size has nothing to do with professional soldiers in almost all cases.

In the Roman era, the berserkers were big, buff guys. They were good fighters, but they weren&#39;t professional or soldiers.

[B00M]

Wow, you do realise that people such as Bruce Lee aren&#39;t the greatest fighters in the world. Size and power are one of the biggest factors in a fight, that and skill and speed. Have you ever seen UFC? Some of the best fighters in the WORLD are the stronger ones. I have been into a fair share of fights in my life, and not once has someone smaller then me kicked my ******. A very skilled fighter can easily bring down a big one, but not at the extent of which you think. You need to learn something, Martial arts don&#39;t always mean instant victory against big bag thug down the street.

No matter HOW skilled the Samurai is, the size and power of the Spartan will be a factor.


Edit: Dithy, excellent comparision&#33;

[Coh I Nerv Reenactor]

Thinking about it now, a Spartan might be able to take a Samurai in single combat if he ditched his spear and kept on the offensive with his falcatta. Basicly he&#39;d keep his hoplon out front and keep moving in steadily on the Samurai, giving him little room to use his katana and forcing him to stay on the defensive. Eventually he&#39;d be able to get a good blow or stab with the falcatta, and it&#39;d be all over for the samurai. However this could still go either way.

For the record, regarding armor the average Samurai didn&#39;t have armor, he made due with a kimono.

[B00M]

"First, while typical samurai warriors were highly trained soldiers, the average samurai was not an expert swordsman, perhaps only 5% or so were its been suggested. Of this 5%, maybe 5% of those were "master" level swordsmen."


From http://www.thearma.org/essays/katanavs.htm



So I hope you all know, that the Katana, wouldn&#39;t be the best weapon for the Samurai. As I have showed you before, many Samurai didn&#39;t have well made Katana&#39;s, and now here it says most Samurai weren&#39;t experts with the Katana.

[Vash_the_stampede]

Imho the Samurai would win in an even one on one match.
I say this because I compared all possible aspects of the two:

Morale: Neither the Spartan, nor the Samurai have any big advantages here. I don&#39;t think the mad over-drilled and disciplined Spartan would run away and neither would the honor-driven, overdrilled and disciplined Samurai.

Equipment: Debating around that the Samurai has a bow, a spear, 3 different kinds of katanas, a dagger and maybe a microwave oven with him don&#39;t help us. When we take the stereotype, the spartan has his hard, round shield, his spear, his helmet and a short sword for close combat. The Samurai has his Katana, a short dagger perhaps and that&#39;s about it.
The discussion about armour is very tiredsome. Samurai armour developed over time and so did the Spartan (and not to forget that the latter are often shown as fighting without armour). We can just say both wear their traditional armour but both armours don&#39;t make one of them invulnerable against the enemies&#39; attacks.
Also, I do think the Spartan could fight a Samurai better without any armour.
I also don&#39;t think there is a big advantage to either side here. I do not believe in swords that chop shields apart with a single blow nor in shields who are so tough that the Katana breaks if parried once.

Body Strength: To say one of them was stronger is justy wrong. Every man has a different strength of muscle. What builds up muscles more? Thrusting a spear in front of you and wearing a shield or fighting with all kinds of weapons, riding horses, etc.? I can&#39;t find an answer to this, I&#39;d say both are tough and strong guys. They&#39;re professional warriors, after all.

Fighting Style: This is, imho, the deciding factor for the battle.
The Samurai was an individual fighter, made for middle to short distance, agile and skilled in dodging.
The Spartans fought by holding the enemy on a long distance, which, eventually, triggered them almost invulnerable against solid regiment formations.
One hopefully now agrees to me that the Spartan traditional way of fighting is inferior in this situation to the fighting style of the Samurai. I&#39;m not saying that the Spartans couldn&#39;t fight individually well, but the Samurai excelled in this way of fighting.
To sum it up, it is sufficient for the more cumbersome Spartan to miss the Samurai once with his spear to let him come close towards him. What does the hoplite do? Throw away his spear and fight on with his sword? Possible. But that gives the total advantage to the long Katana. Run away to get distance? Don&#39;t make me laugh.
Also, the Samurai was skilled in martial arts, so he was skilled to i.e. kick away the legs of the spartan while he defends against the Katana&#39;s blows.
I could continue this argumentation on and on, but I think you get the idea. A specialized duelist such as the Samurai beats a warrior, who excells in fighting together with his group in this particular one on one situation.

[Ó Cathasaigh]

A samurai was always taught to constantly be seeking to improve both mind and body so i think that a samurai, especially one who lived in an era where skill with the sword brought either death or glory would be fit

I&#39;m not saying they would not be fit, i&#39;m saying they&#39;d be fit in a different way, their muscles would be longer and less bunched up, much like a boxer, and the Spartans would be shorter and more boxed up, like a wrestler, perhaps because they did wrestle quite a bit.

And like someone before said, the japanese diet consisted of Rice, Fish, and that&#39;s all i know about. While the Spartans could eat, grapes, cheese, some meat from sheep and cattle, and olives.