+- RomanArmyTalk (https://www.romanarmytalk.com/rat)
+-- Forum: Recreational Arena (https://www.romanarmytalk.com/rat/forumdisplay.php?fid=6)
+--- Forum: Off-Topic (https://www.romanarmytalk.com/rat/forumdisplay.php?fid=18)
+--- Thread: Rome vs Japan (/showthread.php?tid=6276)
Re: Rome vs Japan - tlclark - 08-13-2006
Quote:oh yes..... and a Samurai was much more able to move in his armour than any european counterpart knight for that matter!
You can only say this because the European knights had all disappeared by the 17th C. because of muskets, cannons and pikemen!. If the european tradition had survived into the 19th (like the samurai) we'd have a much greater appreciation for them (and we'd see a lot less eastern martial arts in movies too!)
Don't confuse the accidental survival with truth :wink:
Travis
Re: Rome vs Japan - Magnus - 08-13-2006
I've actually heard that medieval full plate was easier to move around in than normally thought...but was still slightly cumbersome. I've also heard that no surviving battle armour has remained, it's all been ceremonial stuff or very elaborate suits.
Re: Rome vs Japan - Tarbicus - 08-13-2006
Quote:I've actually heard that medieval full plate was easier to move around in than normally thought...but was still slightly cumbersome.I've seen a man literally do cartwheels, again and again, in full medieval plate armour.
Re: Rome vs Japan - MARCvSVIBIvSMAvRINvS - 08-13-2006
same here, however a lot of movements needed to use and wield the Katana, tachi and naginata/yari are not possible using medieval armor.
So I am only speaking about the difference in armor between roman, european medieval armour compared to that of the Japanese.
M.VIbM.
Re: Rome vs Japan - FAVENTIANVS - 08-14-2006
Probably, I'm not the 1st in this long thread to say so but, to do it fair, we should balance the comparison in the same time period, so that Japanese armor should be compared with an European armor of the 16th or 17th century, or viceversa, the Roman soldier with a Japanese soldier of the 1st century.
Otherwise, we can try to compare the effectivity of the pilum with an AK-47 Kalashnikov! :wink:
![[Image: 10496.jpg]](http://www.adzstock.com/Upload/Stock/Previews/10496.jpg)
![[Image: Parts%20of%20a%20gusoku.jpg]](http://www.wholesaleknives.co.uk/Parts%20of%20a%20gusoku.jpg)
![[Image: 1.jpg]](http://www.reliks.com/products/bin/1958/thumbs/1.jpg)
Re: Rome vs Japan - Magnus - 08-14-2006
Quote:Quote:I've actually heard that medieval full plate was easier to move around in than normally thought...but was still slightly cumbersome.I've seen a man literally do cartwheels, again and again, in full medieval plate armour.
Dude, I want to see the video of that! Just for the entertainment value alone...lol.
Faventianus, if we compared the samurai vs the medieval kniggot, then we wouldn't be able to discuss it on a this roman forum!
Re: Rome vs Japan - tlclark - 08-14-2006
Quote:Tarbicus:1rvofq3f Wrote:Quote:I've actually heard that medieval full plate was easier to move around in than normally thought...but was still slightly cumbersome.I've seen a man literally do cartwheels, again and again, in full medieval plate armour.
Dude, I want to see the video of that! Just for the entertainment value alone...lol.
Faventianus, if we compared the samurai vs the medieval kniggot, then we wouldn't be able to discuss it on a this roman forum!
Hellllooooo! Byzantines are Romans too!
They called themselves Romanoi!! Come'on!!
I've only been arguing it for a samuraii vs byzantine knight match up for 8 pages now!
hock: :lol: :roll: besides, this is OT. If we wanted to we could match up a samurai with a clone trooper.
(I'd pick the samurai in that one!)
Re: Rome vs Japan - FAVENTIANVS - 08-14-2006
Quote:Faventianus, if we compared the samurai vs the medieval kniggot, then we wouldn't be able to discuss it on a this roman forum!
Then, we should get a 1st century Japanese soldier. :wink:
Re: Rome vs Japan - Legionare Vibius Atimoniu - 08-14-2006
I would like to go with the Roman but fr certain reasons i would have to say the samuri would win. One being sword length which has been mentioned. Also some may disagree but i think the roman soldiers were not individual fighters they were trained to work together in big units protecting each other with their shields and other stuff. They were like a well oiled machine each soldier knew exactly what to do and everyone knew their place. Like a machine though if you take it apart it will not work the Roman would probably last quite awhile but the samuri has more flexibility and won't get tired as quick plus the longer weapon i think the roman would eventually lose. Now if it was a whole roman army against a samuri army the Romans would win hands down.
Re: Rome vs Japan - Tarbicus - 08-14-2006
Quote:i think the roman soldiers were not individual fighters they were trained to work together in big units protecting each other with their shields and other stuff.Sure they were, but they also prided themselves on being warriors. Single combat was not that uncommon, particularly during the Republic.
Rome was initially, and for a very long period, a martial state that made it a matter of course to go to war every year, and if a legitimate war could not be found then any excuse would be used to make one happen.
Re: Rome vs Japan - Legionare Vibius Atimoniu - 08-14-2006
Don't you think the samuri would be better at one on one combat since that is really all they trained in maybe i'm wrong, but the romans seemed to work a lot better when in a group than alone. If you've seen the movie sparticus that kinda shows it although a lot of those movies aren't accurate.
Re: Rome vs Japan - Tarbicus - 08-14-2006
Read the thread and you'll see exactly where I stand on this whhhhooooole issue.
Re: Rome vs Japan - Legionare Vibius Atimoniu - 08-14-2006
LOL sorry if i seemed rude. I was wondering I know they could stab some but what was the stabbing capabilities of the samuri swords? Were they only good for chopping and slicing?
Re: Rome vs Japan - Tiberius Claudius Vindex - 08-15-2006
I'm wondering if a spear wielding auxillary infantryman would aquit himself better than a legionarry would. His primary weapon is longer and has a good six foot reach, plus if he's got a spatha it means that if he's going with swords he has the advatage of a weapon with equal reach to the samurai's sword, but with a shield to provide cover from which he can launch attacks.
Re: Rome vs Japan - Legionare Vibius Atimoniu - 08-15-2006
Hmm I would think it would depend on how long the spear was if it was too long it would be hard to manuver and the swordsmen could get around it and stab you. But if it wasn't to long it would be ok i guess. I myself would rather have a sword and spatha more manuverable.