Truth Hits You Like Katana Bricks (from Fail Quotes)

Started by R.E.H.W.R., March 28, 2013, 05:44:27 PM

Previous topic - Next topic
Quote from: Skm1091 on March 30, 2013, 06:28:45 PM
your welcome

Going back to Chinese, what do you guys think of this?

[yt]JvmFAoNJS68&list=PL738C0719C63E043C[/yt]

You hear a lot about japan and Western Europe but you rarely see stuff on Ancient China.

[yt]SYJZ_HJATF0[/yt]

I believe you are talking about the sword of Gou Jian, the ruler of the state of Yue during the warring states period(475-221 B.C)

seen both--very good material, and it shows how ingenious the Chinese can get--not just with the civilian material. what amazes me is that the Chinese have come up with an equally effective, yet different armor style, than what Europeans and middle  easterners used. Specifically, the latter two worked with metal from the get-go, and evolved mail armor as the predominant form of protection throughout much of the last 2,000 years. the Chinese worked with leather and wood initially, only later switching to metal, and they went with lamellar armor for the last 2,000 years--much more consistently than the latter two did with mail.

and yes, it was about the sword of Gou Jian.
"All you guys complaining about the possibility of guy on guy relationships...you're also denying us girl on girl.  Works both ways if you know what I mean"

-Jesse Cox

Quoteseen both--very good material, and it shows how ingenious the Chinese can get--not just with the civilian material. what amazes me is that the Chinese have come up with an equally effective, yet different armor style, than what Europeans and middle  easterners used. Specifically, the latter two worked with metal from the get-go, and evolved mail armor as the predominant form of protection throughout much of the last 2,000 years. the Chinese worked with leather and wood initially, only later switching to metal, and they went with lamellar armor for the last 2,000 years--much more consistently than the latter two did with mail.


Lamellar is actually pretty strong especially ones made from steel. China also had paper armor, which was also very strong. (See video bellow)

[yt]da2trxydCPQ[/yt]

What always puzzled me is that with such advance metallurgy they never made plate armor.

The videos I posted earlier. The playlist about the armor On the first video I think they missed a few things. The armors that the terracotta soldiers wore from about 5:30 to the end on the first video. I  read that some of them were made from bronze and iron. (See article bellow)

http://www.history-of-armor.com/ChineseArmor.html

Quote from: Skm1091 on March 30, 2013, 10:24:10 PM
Lol. Finding good stuff is hard isn't?

Anywhere near as embellished as the Japanese? I don't think so.

They don't seem talk about Ancient Chinese (Zhao, Warring States Qin, Han etc).  They seem to talk more about Shaolin Kung Fu and Wushu these don't come until later. Some argue that Shaolin is where Chinese fighting arts originated, which is absolute bullshit because there are accounts that go back even further.

They don't really talk much about weapons either.

There is embellishment in every culture that has experienced war I suppose. Remember the 300 Spartans at Thermopylae? Herodotus was the one who wrote about this and this guy is said to be wildly inaccurate with his numbers. It is hard to believe that any nation at that time could even field and maintain an army that huge. 

BTW what you think of the videos?

They're good. I wish that there were something about the martial techniques.
Then, again. I always have a hard time finding stuff about how the Japanese really fought.
Usually, all I find is japanphilia.
Realistic stuff about Europe though I can easily find for some reason.
"The more laws and order are made prominent, the more thieves and robbers there will be."
Lao Tzu

QuoteThey're good. I wish that there were something about the martial techniques.
Then, again. I always have a hard time finding stuff about how the Japanese really fought.
Usually, all I find is japanphilia.
Realistic stuff about Europe though I can easily find for some reason.

For martial techniques, I think it is a safe bet to say that they would learn simple/the most effective moves such as basic kicks, punches grapples, chokes etc. Because if you try a fancy flashy kick in air like a Shaolin monk in a real battle. Most likely you would be chopped to pieces.  Heh heh

BTW do you think the Chinese could have made good plate armor? I always wondered since these guys were really good metallurgists, why did they never make any.


March 31, 2013, 05:48:52 AM #19 Last Edit: March 31, 2013, 12:52:49 PM by R.E.H.W.R.
Quote from: Skm1091 on March 31, 2013, 03:16:07 AM
For martial techniques, I think it is a safe bet to say that they would learn simple/the most effective moves such as basic kicks, punches grapples, chokes etc. Because if you try a fancy flashy kick in air like a Shaolin monk in a real battle. Most likely you would be chopped to pieces.  Heh heh

BTW do you think the Chinese could have made good plate armor? I always wondered since these guys were really good metallurgists, why did they never make any.

I meant in weapon usage, like the katana was kinda used in lateral cuts. while the European longsword was used in a kind of wagon wheel movement.
[yt]Vp9xjkOlM4o[/yt]
As with the Plate armor, Maybe? Either the Chinese never thought of it, the climate wasn't good for it, they never encountered the stuff,
The Europeans encountered a form from the Romans, who encountered it from the Greeks or they government so regulated the army that nobody could experiment with it. The Chinese were a very regular army while the European armies, most soldiers brought their own stuff.

The whole thing about plate not being good for cavalry is out because at least a good portion of the army used crossbows.
"The more laws and order are made prominent, the more thieves and robbers there will be."
Lao Tzu

Quote from: R.E.H.W.R. on March 31, 2013, 05:48:52 AM
I meant in weapon usage, like the katana was kinda used in lateral cuts. while the European longsword was used in a kind of wagon wheel movement.
[yt]Vp9xjkOlM4o[/yt]

I am stuck on that one. I can only assume that it would be a more simplified version of Chinese sword play today. Look at the video bellow and try to imagine this without all the flashy and fancy stuff and more oriented toward practical things like parrying blows, Striking gaps in armor, attacking vital points etc.

[yt]k3kY32TuJEY[/yt]

QuoteAs with the Plate armor, Maybe? Either the Chinese never thought of it, the climate wasn't good for it, they never encountered the stuff,
The Europeans encountered a form from the Romans, who encountered it from the Greeks or they government so regulated the army that nobody could experiment with it. The Chinese were a very regular army while the European armies, most soldiers brought their own stuff.

Hmm I guess.

You mean this right? (Image Bellow)



I thought most of Europe had standardized equipment during the late medieval period.

Quote from: Skm1091 on March 31, 2013, 08:21:16 PM
I thought most of Europe had standardized equipment during the late medieval period.


Sometimes, usually not, archers usually made or brought their own bows and sidearms, but the lord did supply arrows.
Men at arms usually carried what they could afford, every thing from swords to poleaxes.
Knights were the elite and carried what suited them best on the battlefield.

Battles would get really diverse, You might see someone with a Falchion against someone with a mace.
"The more laws and order are made prominent, the more thieves and robbers there will be."
Lao Tzu

Quote from: Skm1091 on March 30, 2013, 11:55:38 PM

Lamellar is actually pretty strong especially ones made from steel. China also had paper armor, which was also very strong. (See video bellow)

don't get me wrong--I agree. I was just commenting on how different the preferences were.



Quote from: Skm1091 on March 30, 2013, 11:55:38 PMWhat always puzzled me is that with such advance metallurgy they never made plate armor.

The videos I posted earlier. The playlist about the armor On the first video I think they missed a few things. The armors that the terracotta soldiers wore from about 5:30 to the end on the first video. I  read that some of them were made from bronze and iron. (See article bellow)

http://www.history-of-armor.com/ChineseArmor.html

could be the Chinese' strong bureaucratic tradition: judging from what I've seen, they mass-produced armor and weapons for hundreds of thousands of men (even millions) in state run factories, so any dramatic change in the main type of armor is less likely compared to in Europe or the Near and Middle east. that and when issuing armor to hundreds of thousands, the armor type is actually more economical: you don't have to worry as much about tailoring the armor to the user (as was the case--ideally--for plate). similar logic explains why maille, while used, was never as popular: it's time consuming to make compared to lamellar or scale (involving tens of thousands of rings), and isn't as effective at halting blunt damage (which in Europe and the near east was rectified by wearing padding underneath).

QuoteI thought most of Europe had standardized equipment during the late medieval period.

well, not really: France and Spain heavily regulated what the soldiers could bring to battle, as did the private Landesknecht companies and the Swiss, but the soldiers (or increasingly, the captains and colonels) typically still had to buy the equipment themselves from private sources, sometimes as recently as the late 18th century or beyond (for officers for instance). So there could be a bit of variation in the appearance and specific items the soldiers went to battle with.

@ R.E.H.W.R.: I doubt weather was a factor: iron armor in general rusts in the humid climate of southern china easily--including the iron versions of the lamellar and scale armors popular in the region.

besides, judging from surviving artifacts, they had the technology to at least retard rusting. And they could make large sheets of high quality material, so I doubt the thought didn't cross their minds
"All you guys complaining about the possibility of guy on guy relationships...you're also denying us girl on girl.  Works both ways if you know what I mean"

-Jesse Cox

Quote from: Ibrahim90 on April 01, 2013, 12:20:20 AM
@ R.E.H.W.R.: I doubt weather was a factor: iron armor in general rusts in the humid climate of southern china easily--including the iron versions of the lamellar and scale armors popular in the region.

besides, judging from surviving artifacts, they had the technology to at least retard rusting. And they could make large sheets of high quality material, so I doubt the thought didn't cross their minds

Again that was a "maybe" answer.
History, as much I love history, is a bitch to find to real answers.
"The more laws and order are made prominent, the more thieves and robbers there will be."
Lao Tzu

Quote from: R.E.H.W.R. on April 01, 2013, 12:30:29 AM
Again that was a "maybe" answer.
History, as much I love history, is a bitch to find to real answers.

It and Paleontology: but that's what makes it fun for me and you (I presume): there is no end to the questions, mysteries to solve or at least take a stab at.
"All you guys complaining about the possibility of guy on guy relationships...you're also denying us girl on girl.  Works both ways if you know what I mean"

-Jesse Cox

Quote from: Ibrahim90 on April 01, 2013, 12:36:22 AM
It and Paleontology: but that's what makes it fun for me and you (I presume): there is no end to the questions, mysteries to solve or at least take a stab at.

Grammar dude!
You and I.

I wish I had a Pirillo video for this.
Lol.  ;D
"The more laws and order are made prominent, the more thieves and robbers there will be."
Lao Tzu

Quote from: R.E.H.W.R. on April 01, 2013, 03:30:17 AM
Grammar dude!
You and I.

I wish I had a Pirillo video for this.
Lol.  ;D

Actually, I'm pretty sure he's right and you're wrong.  The way to test is to use each pronoun individually and see if the grammar is still correct.  'Me' is the correct pronoun in that position, 'I' is not.

Quote from: R.E.H.W.R. on April 01, 2013, 12:30:29 AM
Again that was a "maybe" answer.
History, as much I love history, is a bitch to find to real answers.

Europeans developed plate armor in response to changing weapons and techniques for using them that required large, rigid plates over heavy padding for protection (which, of course, led to the development of new weapons and techniques to defeat the plate armors developed, leading to more sophisticated plate armors, etc., etc.).

Part of the reason for this is likely the sheer volume of warfare in Europe through the medieval period, which was more or less constant (although generally on a remarkably small scale as viewed from a modern perspective).  With constantly shifting alliances, and numerous enemies and rivals ready to pounce if they saw a big enough advantage, there was an enormous drive for those with resources (which meant those with the armies, such as they were) to develop new weapons and fighting techniques, and new defenses so give them the edge on the battlefield that might make the difference between winning and dieing.

China was politically unified for most of the same time period with limit internal strife and little cause for development of new weapons, techniques, and defenses in the military.  The previous era, the Warring States Period, did see huge advances in weapons, combat techniques, and defenses, for exactly the reasons Europe had them later.  Europe, however, had time for the advances of the Warring States Period to percolate westwards and form part of the basis of European warfare technology, along the Silk Road trade routes (in the form of the arms and equipment of the caravan guards, if nothing else).  (The Silk Road is known to have been operating during Roman times, and the Romans were well aware of the existence of the Kingdom of Ch'in, if a little fuzzy about the exact location and other details.)


Quote from: MrBogosity on April 01, 2013, 09:37:37 AM
No, objective case. "Me" is correct.

Whoops.
Proof you should always listen to your mother reading over your shoulder.
"The more laws and order are made prominent, the more thieves and robbers there will be."
Lao Tzu