View Poll Results: Samurai vs Medieval Knight

Voters
32. You may not vote on this poll
  • Samurai

    20 62.50%
  • Medieval Knight

    12 37.50%
Page 48 of 49 FirstFirst ... 3940414243444546474849 LastLast
Results 706 to 720 of 728

Thread: Samurai against knight

  1. #706
    Senior Contributor Mihais's Avatar
    Join Date
    15 Apr 08
    Location
    Transylvania
    Posts
    5,073
    They had no victories.The Mongols started to lose in Europe 20 years after the great invasion.
    Those who know don't speak
    He said to them, "But now if you have a purse, take it, and also a bag; and if you don't have a sword, sell your cloak and buy one. Luke 22:36

  2. #707
    Military Professional
    Join Date
    06 Aug 03
    Posts
    29,353
    Quote Originally Posted by Mihais View Post
    They had no victories.The Mongols started to lose in Europe 20 years after the great invasion.
    That's because the wars they cared about were a hell of a lot closer to home. Europe was what? A bunch of farms and castles? Rice, gold, silk, silver, spices were not in Europe. Technology and technique, the East was decades ahead of the West. To say the Chinese did not adapt is at the very least horse puckey. The Ming evicted the Mongols out of China with canon fire.
    Last edited by Officer of Engineers; 22 Aug 16, at 14:15.
    Chimo

  3. #708
    Military Professional
    Join Date
    06 Aug 03
    Posts
    29,353
    Europe was saved because Europe got nothing of value; NOT BECAUSE THEY'VE GOT SUPERIOR MILITARY TECHNOLOGIES! Because they don't. The Turks had superior engineers!
    Chimo

  4. #709
    Military Professional
    Join Date
    06 Aug 03
    Posts
    29,353
    But we're getting off topic. Neither the knight nor the samurai were the end-all, be-all of the middle ages, the Mongol horseman was. My entire point was to shut down this debate. And before anyone brings up the Ninja, the could do squat all against a charging wall of falling arrows.
    Chimo

  5. #710
    A Self Important Senior Contributor troung's Avatar
    Join Date
    03 Aug 03
    Posts
    8,018
    Europe was saved because Europe got nothing of value; NOT BECAUSE THEY'VE GOT SUPERIOR MILITARY TECHNOLOGIES! Because they don't. The Turks had superior engineers!
    x2.
    To sit down with these men and deal with them as the representatives of an enlightened and civilized people is to deride ones own dignity and to invite the disaster of their treachery - General Matthew Ridgway

  6. #711
    Senior Contributor
    Join Date
    13 Nov 07
    Posts
    3,530
    Quote Originally Posted by Officer of Engineers View Post
    That's because the wars they cared about were a hell of a lot closer to home. Europe was what? A bunch of farms and castles? Rice, gold, silk, silver, spices were not in Europe. Technology and technique, the East was decades ahead of the West. To say the Chinese did not adapt is at the very least horse puckey. The Ming evicted the Mongols out of China with canon fire.
    Col I still can't figure out the ride it the Ming. How did a gunpowder powered peasant army spring out of no where after 70 years of Mongol occupation? Why couldn't the Mongols adapt?

  7. #712
    Military Professional
    Join Date
    06 Aug 03
    Posts
    29,353
    By that time, the various Khanates couldn't even recognize each other. They were Persian, Arab, or Chinese. Only the Golden Horde remained Mongol. Why would the Persians help a Chinese to reconquer his empire when he got no riches out of it?
    Chimo

  8. #713
    Staff Emeritus
    Military Professional
    Contrary by Nature.
    zraver's Avatar
    Join Date
    22 Oct 06
    Location
    Arkansas
    Posts
    14,499
    Quote Originally Posted by Mihais View Post
    And what sort of troops were those?The troops that conquered Mongolia,China or Khwarzem were 50-70 years old(Subutai was 70 at the time).The troops were equally good .They had the same training and skill and came from the same lifestyle and culture.

    The leaders afterwards were not Genghis or Subutai,but they also faced tougher opposition.The Europeans adapted,fast.The Chinese did not.
    They were not the same. The follow on generations however hard, were softer than the men who carved the empire so explosively. They had wealth and urbanization which are not conducive to hardy and callous soldiers.

  9. #714
    Global Moderator Defense Professional
    Join Date
    30 May 06
    Location
    Australia
    Posts
    2,269
    I'm not so sure you can dismiss later Mongol generations as being soft - after all they still built one of the largest contiguous border land empires the world has ever seen

  10. #715
    Military Professional
    Join Date
    06 Aug 03
    Posts
    29,353
    Quote Originally Posted by zraver View Post
    They were not the same. The follow on generations however hard, were softer than the men who carved the empire so explosively. They had wealth and urbanization which are not conducive to hardy and callous soldiers.
    I'm not sure what you mean by wealth. A foot soldier in both Genghis or Timur's time can't afford to own his own herd of goats. And most certainly, there was no such urbanization with the Golden Horde.
    Chimo

  11. #716
    A Self Important Senior Contributor troung's Avatar
    Join Date
    03 Aug 03
    Posts
    8,018
    I'm not sure what you mean by wealth. A foot soldier in both Genghis or Timur's time can't afford to own his own herd of goats. And most certainly, there was no such urbanization with the Golden Horde.
    To piggy back off that, they continued to war against each other (Qaidu vs. the world) and non-Mongols (Tamerlane, Ghazan, Altan, etc) with all the customary fierceness. Even Babur, who got booted out of Central Asia by the Turko-Mongolian Uzbeks, went south and took Northern India and Afghanistan; relying on the same type of cavalry which his grandson used at Panipat-2.
    To sit down with these men and deal with them as the representatives of an enlightened and civilized people is to deride ones own dignity and to invite the disaster of their treachery - General Matthew Ridgway

  12. #717
    Senior Contributor Mihais's Avatar
    Join Date
    15 Apr 08
    Location
    Transylvania
    Posts
    5,073
    Quote Originally Posted by Officer of Engineers View Post
    Europe was saved because Europe got nothing of value; NOT BECAUSE THEY'VE GOT SUPERIOR MILITARY TECHNOLOGIES! Because they don't. The Turks had superior engineers!
    Europe's estimated GDP had caught up with China by 1200.While these are modern estimates,medieval Europe was not backward or poor.

    Artillery was first used in Europe at the same time as in China.
    Thing is by 1265 the Mongols were no longer winning and by 1280 they were losing.
    Those who know don't speak
    He said to them, "But now if you have a purse, take it, and also a bag; and if you don't have a sword, sell your cloak and buy one. Luke 22:36

  13. #718
    Global Moderator Defense Professional
    Join Date
    30 May 06
    Location
    Australia
    Posts
    2,269
    Quote Originally Posted by Mihais View Post
    Artillery was first used in Europe at the same time as in China.
    I think you'll find that the chinese were using gunpowder artillery 100+ years before europe (General Han Shizhong)

  14. #719
    Military Professional
    Join Date
    06 Aug 03
    Posts
    29,353
    Quote Originally Posted by Mihais View Post
    Europe's estimated GDP had caught up with China by 1200.
    Europe as a whole. Not anyone single entity you can collapse with a few battles.

    Quote Originally Posted by Mihais View Post
    While these are modern estimates,medieval Europe was not backward or poor.
    They already had Jin China and were eyeing the Middle East trade routes which was vastly much richer than Europe. And Song China was the more pressing military adventure.
    Last edited by Officer of Engineers; 25 Aug 16, at 12:28.
    Chimo

  15. #720
    Senior Contributor Doktor's Avatar
    Join Date
    25 Aug 08
    Location
    Skopje, Macedonia
    Posts
    13,668
    Sir,

    Are you saying the Chinese made a strategic mistake by letting Europe alone, seeing it as poor and underdeveloped (to be a threat or worth the fight)?
    No such thing as a good tax - Churchill

    To make mistakes is human. To blame someone else for your mistake, is strategic.

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Similar Threads

  1. Ninjas & Knights
    By Ironside in forum Ancient, Medieval & Early Modern Ages
    Replies: 106
    Last Post: 08 Jan 09,, 13:40
  2. Last Samurai gun question
    By Beaugeste93 in forum Small Arms and Personal Weapons
    Replies: 23
    Last Post: 11 Jul 05,, 00:16

Share this thread with friends:

Share this thread with friends:

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •