warrior class

[Hanzo04]

Who do you think had the best warrior class. The Roman Empire, The Ancient Greeks, or the Samurai? give me your opinions because i have no clue.

 

[Flatlander]

The best in what way? I think you need to be more specific here. Do you mean the best trained soldiers, the happiest soldiers, the best paid soldiers, the superior tactics?

 

[loki09789]

Who do you think had the best warrior class. The Roman Empire, The Ancient Greeks, or the Samurai? give me your opinions because i have no clue.

On a whole I would say the Roman military, but you have to realize that this was not a 'warrior class' because conscription and recruitment was much like it is today. Common men could enlist, but there was an aristocracy that was born and bread for leadership that was the 'warrior class' of the empire. The problem with any of these comparisons is historical timeline. All of these cultures listed span such long periods of history that an "x" vs "Y" comparison is just not possible.

The Romans at least have documented contact/engagement with LOTS of foreign enemy that supports my opinion and the reason for my choice. The Greek forces were made up of 'militia' formed by each city/state so it isn't so much "Greek" as "Athenian" or "Spartan" or "Thebian"... there really wasn't a "one way" in Greek military formation and make up of any kind until Alexander the Great, and even then each city/state ran differently - they just weren't fighting each other as much . The samurai, though my favorite in terms of mystic, culture and personal connections (being part Japanes/Okinawan) didn't really have a combat resume to speak of accept, like the greeks agains each other in city/state or regional kingdom feudal warfare.

 

[Blindside]

Very quickly because I am in a hurry, I would argue that the Roman military for most of its existance did not have a "warrior class." Its military was undeniably effective, but a warrior class usually denotes high status (huscarls, feudal knights, samurai) within a culture, and I think it is fair to say that the lower members of the legions had fairly low status. In fact, many of the legions (particularly later) were made of conquered peoples whose natives cultures did have warrior classes.

In any case, my vote is for the expansionist Mongols, disciplined, dangerous, adaptable, and one heck of success rate against everybody else in multiple cultures.

Lamont

 

[WLMantisKid]

My vote goes for the raiding Vikings. Terribly brutal, efficient, and could've taken over the world.

 

[Flatlander]

You know, I was going to mention the Vikings. Intercepted by the Mantis Kid. Good game.

Seriously though, what about the North American Native Warrior? Beautiful philosophy, very natural people. And fearless. Ferocious. Loyal. Exceptionally skilled.

 

[WLMantisKid]

Aye flatlander! I forgot about the Native American Warrior. The superstitions and beliefs made them really cool.

 

[Chrono]

There are so many different warrior classes that aren't even mentioned yet, that I don't even know that can be compared to all the ones that have been mentioned.

The Spartans had an interesting history in which I learned from the History Channel. One thing I'll remember is that when a baby boy is born, they'll look at him to see if he looks like a warrior, if he does they'll train him, if not, they'll most likely kill him.

Jon

 

[Randy Strausbaugh]

There are so many different warrior classes that aren't even mentioned yet, that I don't even know that can be compared to all the ones that have been mentioned.

The Spartans had an interesting history in which I learned from the History Channel. One thing I'll remember is that when a baby boy is born, they'll look at him to see if he looks like a warrior, if he does they'll train him, if not, they'll most likely kill him.

Jon

Jon,
If you like info on the Spartans, check out a book called "Gates of Fire". It's fiction, but well researched. It's in paperback, and a pretty good read.

As for warrior classes, don't forget the Huns.

 

[OC Kid]

I dont think there was a "Warrior Class" other than the Sammurai. there were great armies and soldiers. the greeks under Alexander who sort of invented modern matial arts were awesome fighters. As mentioned the Spartans were great soldiers and fighters. Every man raised from birth just to be a warrior. but as far as a "Warrior Class" I thing as I mentioned the only the Sammurai could have that handle.

 

[MichiganTKD]

I agree.
The whole Spartan society was a warrior society. The Samurai were a separate class within Japanese society. You were born a Samurai, but it was a strata within the country as a whole. There were no non-warriors within Sparta. Amazing fighters by the way.

 

[Hanzo04]

i think i confused everyone with "warrior class". so now try the greatest warriors. these are all good answers though. thanks

 

[loki09789]

I dont think there was a "Warrior Class" other than the Sammurai. there were great armies and soldiers. the greeks under Alexander who sort of invented modern matial arts were awesome fighters. As mentioned the Spartans were great soldiers and fighters. Every man raised from birth just to be a warrior. but as far as a "Warrior Class" I thing as I mentioned the only the Sammurai could have that handle.

The european feudal knights/nobility were also considered a warrior class. Like the samurai, they were awarded priviledge and education that gave them the time to groom young boys on warrior skills. In both the samurai and the feudal noble classes not all those within the warrior class became 'warriors' per say.

The only modern equivalent that I can think of as far as distinction between 'rank' or class is the separation between officers and enlisted in the American military. The officer corps are groomed in leadership and trade, but a lot more on tactical and strategic/administrative flow than the enlisted guys. enlisted guys/girls are the 'doers' of such planning. NCO's make the tactical/conceptual plans of officers a reality...

Obviously the system is different because these 'ranks' aren't breed from different social classes, and are not caste socially. But, the separation/distinctions between officer and enlisted follow the same general model of the old 'conscripted infantry/pikemen' which was generally of the peasant classes and the "chivalier/knight" or 'horse breaker classes' which came from the aristocratic/nobility of the specific culture.

As far as Sparta, I would say that they were more a warrior society than a 'class'.

I still say that the Roman Legions were the greatest considering the outcomes of their contact with foriegn enemies on the battle field. Some may argue the Greeks under Alexander, but I am not talking about the expansion as much as the battlefield. OF course there were peaks and valleys in the history of the Roman army so it is still not an absolute.

 

[theletch1]

Every society has it's own warriors to one extent or another and the effectiveness of those warriors is hard to judge against a society that existed a thousand years apart from one another. One could argue that one of the greatest groups of warriors ever were those that took the beaches at Normandy and pushed all the way to Berlin in the 1940s. The mongols, certainly deserve a nod as well as the ancient Egyptian army in its' heyday.

 

[OC Kid]

Shoot if thats the case then the US Navy SEALs / Spec ops community are the best warriors that have ever lived.

 

[Chrono]

Jon,
If you like info on the Spartans, check out a book called "Gates of Fire". It's fiction, but well researched. It's in paperback, and a pretty good read.

You know, I think the author of that was interviewed on the documentary I saw.

 

[Blindside]

Posted by OC Kid: I dont think there was a "Warrior Class" other than the Sammurai. there were great armies and soldiers. the greeks under Alexander who sort of invented modern matial arts were awesome fighters. As mentioned the Spartans were great soldiers and fighters. Every man raised from birth just to be a warrior. but as far as a "Warrior Class" I thing as I mentioned the only the Sammurai could have that handle.

Why, what is so different about the samurai?

Posted by Hanzo: i think i confused everyone with "warrior class". so now try the greatest warriors.

Actually, I think your original question is far more interesting.

 

[Blindside]

If you like info on the Spartans, check out a book called "Gates of Fire". It's fiction, but well researched. It's in paperback, and a pretty good read.

The author is Steven Pressfield, good book, and he was interviewed on the History Channel for one of their Spartan documentaries. He also wrote "Tides of War" about the Peloponesian wars, good stuff, very historically accurate.

Regarding the Spartan culture, I don't think they really know how the society worked. The spartans did not do alot of recording, we know far more about the Athenians and Thebans than the spartans, just from extant records. Much of the Spartan society in Gates of Fire is the authors conjecture, which I believe he states in the afterword.

Lamont

 

[Zepp]

I think the Mongol hordes deserve more than a nod. In their time, they proved their superiority in warfare to nearly every army of their day. The Mongols' only failed conquests were Japan (largely due to their inability to keep a supply line to the islands) and what today is Viet Nam (but, hey, the U.S. military didn't do that well there either). They definitely get my vote for "Warriors of the Past Three Millenia."

 

[Tgace]

"Quantity has a quality all of its own."