Originally posted by Symmetric Chaos
Really? That's pretty cool.I still doubt the blades would penetrate Greek armor or shields very easily.
Actually, it'd cut through those bronze shields fairly easily. They could cut through japanese helmets and skulls (which is what they were designed to do). I don't see a problem with cutting through a bronze iron and wooden shield. It'd probably scare the crap out of the Spartan. It should, quite easily, stab right through the bronze and leather armor.
Originally posted by dadudemon
Actually, it'd cut through those bronze shields fairly easily. They could cut through japanese helmets and skulls (which is what they were designed to do). I don't see a problem with cutting through a bronze iron and wooden shield. It'd probably scare the crap out of the Spartan. It should, quite easily, stab right through the bronze and leather armor.
The metal quality in Japan was very poor and their armor quality would probably have reflected that so swords wouldn't have reflected a need to cut through it. I really do doubt their ability to cut through good quality shields (at least) like the Spartans would probably have had.
Originally posted by Symmetric Chaos
The metal quality in Japan was very poor and their armor quality would probably have reflected that so swords wouldn't have reflected a need to cut through it.
I'm not sure what you're talking about. Japan's "steel" was the strongest and hardest in the world (at the time). Some sword makers hammered their swords over 20,000 times, making it absurdly strong and durable, even by today's standards for steel.
Originally posted by Symmetric Chaos
I really do doubt their ability to cut through good quality shields (at least) like the Spartans would probably have had.
I don't doubt it, at all. Even a claymore, with it's crude cutting edge, would cut through one of those shields.
Originally posted by dadudemon
I'm not sure what you're talking about. Japan's "steel" was the strongest and hardest in the world (at the time). Some sword makers hammered their swords over 20,000 times, making it absurdly strong and durable, even by today's standards for steel.
Japanese metal ore is rare and poor in quality. What little armor was available to people other than nobles was not very good because the process of making it more useful was so expensive. Iron helmets certainly wouldn't have been as good as those in the West.
Originally posted by dadudemon
I don't doubt it, at all. Even a claymore, with it's crude cutting edge, would cut through one of those shields.
Huh.
Originally posted by Symmetric Chaos
a) There's no evidence of that. b) You think Japanese people are made of armor?
a.)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5erZqSyiT38
1:20
The Japanese sword is perfectly capable of cutting through iron plates
On another note 5:10
"with no shield to hide behind the swordsman had to rely on reflexes alone"
Also taking 7:25 into consideration a Samurai wouldn't engage a peasent.
etc etc
b.) My main point was that if you are making a blade (like DD already mentioned they showed on Discovery) with the sole intention of cutting through the equipment of your opponent and then through him and then onwards, that puts the sword imo above anything the Spartan is capable of defending himself against.
Originally posted by Utrigita
Based on? If it's a combination of a thin layer of bronze on the outside and then pure Wood the rest of the way, I don't see it hold very well.
Based on fighting tactics. A Katana blade requires a very particular technique to be fully effective. In a duel the Samurai would focus their strengths and energy on only a few strikes. A Samurai wouldn't un-sheath his blade until attack was imminent. There is no way to prove that a Samurai would slive cleanly through a Spartans shield. I really don't see why a Samurai would take this risk, for if his sword didn't slice through the shield he would be vulnerable to being pummeled to the ground by the shield. A stabbing attack at the shield would only put him at greater risk of losing his sword. Instead of using forward motion to give his strikes momentum the Samurai would most likely be on defense until he was able to cause the Spartan to lose his spear and shield. Imo the Spartan definitely has the advantage with his shield and spear.
Originally posted by Samurai100
The Spatans go through the agoge which goes on for around 13 years phisically hardening the spartans meaning they will be so much better than the samurais
The thing is (as I have said before) that a Spartan's training largely focused on fighting as a unit in a phalanx. A Samurai on the other hand devotes hours to one on one combat, so he'd have the advantage in a one on one fight like this.
Originally posted by dadudemon
I'm not sure what you're talking about. Japan's "steel" was the strongest and hardest in the world (at the time). Some sword makers hammered their swords over 20,000 times, making it absurdly strong and durable, even by today's standards for steel.
Originally posted by dadudemon
I don't doubt it, at all. Even a claymore, with it's crude cutting edge, would cut through one of those shields.
In order to cut through a shield of bronze (which I really doubt because bronze is an alloy itself, so it is very hard metal), the swing that the samurai has to do will leave him wide open to any attack. Historically, Spartans fought with many armies with different swords and weapons and they defeated them. Actually, in this forum we can see how people are in my opinion bad informed. For example, Korean soldiers developed a very similar sword (kagum) it is as powerful and fast manageable as the katana, but why it’s no so popular? Because katana belongs to Japan, and Japan it’s a commercial power. Samurai is more a publicity thing than anything; and they never, never in history, a samurai defeated any different army besides another samurai army. In the other hand, Spartans were proven once and many times, that they technique, training, style, or whatever you want to call it was superior to many others, including the Persia Army, and they had horses, arrows, and a huge army. The Spartans fought 3 to 1 (S: 10,000 vs. P: 30,000).