The sound of the Aztec whistle perfectly mimics the sound of their victims ... while being sacrificed alive. It's telling their victims what to expect on the stone altar.
Well at least you’d die knowing that the Aztecs thought highly of you whether because you were the bravest warrior they had seen or the most appealing. They only chose the best to sacrifice in an effort to better please their Gods. It was considered a high honor.
And Unitedstateans and Nazis... he also forgot them... If they don't get the crown, at least an honorable mention in the rundown of fastest adepts of killing.
+Jay Flash vevo "Warrior Cultures in History" I wonder where he magically pulled the concept of ancient from... Perhaps from the same place where he learned how to spell "IDOIT"
In aztec warfare, it was considered clumsy to kill your opponent. Not only were prisoners taken for sacrifice, but taking prisoners was prioritized over killing enemies.
Wrong - Ninjas were not warriors. Their main mission was information gathering & spying. In fact they were taught to avoid conflict because that would mean being discovered & therefore the mission was a failure! Also many Samurai were trained as ninja
The first ninja clans were established by ronins, yes. "Ninja" were the lower ranked contract killers in the clan who truly prefered to use poison or anything that can avoid a fight. Higher ranks were called Shinobi(spy). They are the ones who gather information, do political contracts and etc. They were often infiltrated in samurai families from an early age as a family member and later they were used as spy.
that's half true, ninjas motivation was stealth but they were assassin's first not merely spies, if they were so weak and I'll trained nobunaga oda who was one of the most powerful warlords in feudal japanes history would not have tried to wipe them all out. more research is required on your end. plus yes they liked poison as a preferred weapon but they're are several historical acccounts of them ambushing and slaughtering the samurai
@@AvroBellow he did however use misinformation about the battle of thermopiles, the Spartan's also had about 7000 Greek allies with them along with a number of slaves at the start of the battle.
not to mention how objectively fragile the Katana are. Most other swords didnt need to be as sharp as the katana because they were thick enough and heavy enough to do significantly more damage to both armors and weapons. The katana would lose to a lot of other swords in a sword fight cause of its durability imo.
As mentioned when talking about the romans. Thrusting is more efficient when it comes to armored foes. The katana was mostly used to kill unarmored foes.
I think you misunderstand what a "Warrior Culture" is. Over half of this list is composed of types of warriors or military units. A "Warrior Culture" is an entire society whose main goal or occupation is warfare. These are groups like the Celts, the Mongols or the Spartans. Maybe change the title.
Are you joking? Celtic society revolved around constant warfare both amongst themselves and against Germanic tribes and Rome. The Roman empire deeply respected the combat abilities of the Celts, absorbing their tactics into their own and incorporating many Celtic combat units into the legion. Also, the Irish Celts are the only known society at the time, to effectively kick out the Vikings, once they'd established colonies for themselves (after founding such cities as Dublin and Limerick). Much like the Greeks, and the Norse, the Celts had grand legends of heroic warriors and great battles, won and lost. Much like the samurai, the Celts had high ideals of honor and would offer themselves up as sacrifices to redeem the loss of that honor. As would any Celtic Warriors captured in battle. Many Celts went into battle naked, painted blue with woad, with their hair spiked up with lime to resemble flames and were known to intimidate enemies with their battle erections.If a buffed out naked dude, painted blue, with what appears to be flames on their head, came running at you with a spear and a massive hard-on, how would you feel? They're also thought to be headhunters, displaying the heads of vanquished foes in or in front of their doorway, but recent evidence may suggest that they were actually recovering the heads of their slain comrades. I could go on, but I think I've already answered your query.
Norse paganism isnt "based around war" its polytheism so theres many gods not just war gods, in fact the greek pantheon has more gods of war than the norse.
Actually almost all of the Norse gods and Goddesses were gods and goddesses of war (including Odin and Thor and Freyja) the Æsir and Vanir both had almost all Gods and Goddesses of war and yes even though almost all of the gods and goddesses of both the Æsir and Vanir were gods and goddesses of war each of them have their own purpose other than war (Ik this because my entire family are believers of Asatru and I’ve read the book of Asatru and the Norse Gods ) but yes it wasn’t just about war actually a lot of it is about Kin and honor
It’s not mythology like how disrespectful would it be if I was too say Christian Mythology the whole world would freak tf out and I don’t believe you at all
So on the Norse you have some serious misinformation. They were actually one of the most advanced people of the time. They had courts, and laws. They were so far advanced in their metal work you can't find a blacksmith that can accurately recreate it. Their beliefs we're based in the nine Noble virtues not war. In fact most Norse we're farmers. Additionally they didn't just go to Valhalla, Freya picked the best to join the vanir in folkvangr. Do actual research before doing a video so you don't step all over the history and beliefs of a people.
This guy has a lot wrong... He is hugely confused about the Aztec culture and has the "death whistle" completely wrong... Idk where he got his "facts" but he should have done some serious research before making this video.
He's also missing the reason for those raids in the first place. They were bringing back trade that stopped because of the feudal lords and churchmen kept all goods for themselves so there was no economy. In east Europe the were and still are seen as hero's
Your information about ninjas is false as they weren't assassins in the shadows they were spies and informants in the shadows while still having combat skills in case of discovery and confrontation
Not even in the shadows. That was only at night. They cpuld just be walking on the street like normal people. Also, it seems that you didnt even need combat combat skills.
And the shuriken is a weapon of the samurai. During peaceful times they had to turn to other professions for a living and ninjas was the best option. Even in peace politicians still want to one up each other. And so they use their shuriken in their work which is now associated with ninjas. But the most feared were kunoichi, female ninjas. Since nobody expected a deadly and or spying female among their ranks.
Quick fact! Spartan boys were given no food past the age of ten and had to feed themselves. They were punished if they were caught stealing food, but only because they got caught, as Spartans are supposed to be cunning and resourceful
You forgot about the Zulus. The Zulus have brutal fighting systems placed by king Shaka and conquered all other tribes in the area until stopped by the British in 1879. A lot of people underestimate the Zulus because they don’t have armour but saying that they aren’t good because they don’t have armour is foolish. The Zulus killed more British officers at the battle of Isandhlwana than Napoleon did at the battle of Waterloo. The Zulus looked down on rifles largely so most of their army still had the traditional weapons by 1879 but that was not much of a problem. It was Zulu custom to not take prisoners, which was why only seven British regular soldiers escaped the battle of Isandhlwana. The Zulus were eventually defeated by the British but the fact that a tribe that mostly fought with spears and shields took rifles and Gatling guns to defeat them makes them even more formidable. I can definitely see how the Zulus are more formidable than the ninjas, for example.
@@officialthroughhelldeath8830 Well each person will probably have picked out the inaccuracies of their chosen period of interest, so I can't reel off too many, but since I'm interested in the Mongols, that area leapt out at me. A lot of it frankly is just the amateurish oversimplification of history, such as describing the Mongols as being "led by Genghis Khan". He's their most famous and arguably successful leader, but the Mongols existed before him and remained a significant force after him. In fact, he was strongly invested in ensuring his successors would be suitable for continuing his empire. And then to suggest that they only wanted destruction is absurd. They were considered brutish to more static empires, of course, but they were an empire just like any other - they actually supported some very progressive concepts (alongside horrific attitudes to rape and murder, of course) such as being proponents of diplomatic immunity. They opposed attacks on trade caravans and messengers, and they usually respected surrender if it was quick, such as the day they arrived. Which flags up this idea that they didn't take prisoners. They did. Oh, and as a pretty pedantic point, a lot of these civilisations aren't "ancient". People can use the term a little differently, but if we're considering "ancient civilisation" to be before the "middle ages" (which I think is the most common understanding), half of this list is too recent. Samurai, ninja, Mongols, Aztecs and vikings are all middle ages onwards. That probably doesn't seem a big deal if you're not into history, but it's sort of like saying "10 scariest films" and including five TV shows or "10 best footballers" and including a mixture of American Football and Soccer, and maybe one golfer...
@@SliceOfDog Exactly. And the knights were probably the most dishonorable "warrior" of them all. They would rape, kill and steal from anyone they wanted to...
"They mastered the sharpest sword that has ever been forged, the legendary, the deadly katana." I think I just received a lethal dose of weebness. Brb committing sudoku.
No it was 300 but the allies from athens were waiting on the walls and sparta was just supposed to give athens time to prepare, we learned it in history class so yeah.
When the majority of the 7,000 Greek soldiers retreated after they were being out flanked by the Persians (due to a dick move by Ephialtes) there were still the 300 Spartans along with 700 Thespians, and 400 Thebans and possibly some others that remained to hold off the Persians. You either were not paying attention or you need a new history teacher.
MrC0MPUT3R probably just the curriculum cos they only mentioned thebans as a brief discussion and no interference with the war so good job america, youve done it again
***** Actually, in real life, Leonidas kicked the Persian in a very deep hole. The Persian said: ,,Xerxes wants water and Land for his Legions'' Leonidas:,,You'll find enough Water and Land down there'' *kicks-Persian-in-hole*
damn, it's like good will hunting all over again, you can learn everything you want through research and self- experience for free but society needs you to work with it or it won't work :(
hahaha it wasn't just 300 Spartans it was more like 300 Spartans backed up by about 5000 other who joined them and a rather large navy mostly commanded by the Athenians and the Spartans were just the elite core of the forces that defended Thermopylae and it wasn't non stop it was just several wave of attacks during the day some night attacks at night and the only time the Spartans fought alone was during the last day to cover the retreat of the other troops that had allied with the Spartans to fight the Persians at Thermopylae and there were between roughly 150,000-500,000 Persians at Thermopylae
no Athenians were the majority of the navy roughly 4000-5000 soldiers from all over Greece all volunteers from almost every city-state of Greece some of the soldiers were Athenian but not many
Exactly . Sometimes I get angry at how easy people are blinded by stupid movies . Also , how about explaining the situation . The 'Spartans' ( more like 5 different Greek tribes and states ) were on a high hill from which it was rather easy to defend .
Also the norse weren't focused on just war. Most war they did was retaliation against other peoples starting war with them or jarls trying to gain more land and wealth against other jarls. The norse were a very peaceful people and interacted peacefully with multiple peoples from other countries. It wasnt until the holy Roman empire moved up north spreading christianity forcefully that the norse went straight on warrior-like in retaliation.
No misconceptions were harmed in the making of this video. Seriously though, I like your content, Thoughty. But this one is a bit too riddled with misconceptions and errors.
the Mongols never really took 'prisoners' because they allowed civilians to live under Mongol rulership, while killing the rulers of the land they were conquering.
Its amazing how many people are still super salty that their favorite warriors didn't make the list. Like you even have people calling him racist for not including their favorite type of warrior.
A few misconceptions in this video. The Mongols were not truly brutish until late in their rule. Ninjas never wore black, they would wear standard civilian clothes. And samurai were, more often than not, extremely brutish to anyone below them in social standing.
fmoa both these replies are true but not exaclty... while its true katanas were not their main weapon thats because swords never really were outside of the European greatsword they used polearms as well as bows... can have an army consisting of only archers after all
Meowser so did james bond... but he was a spy see? And its more how he doesnt seem to do his own research... hes just repeating old false statements for all but a select few of these "warriors" i say warriors in quotes because ninjas were very rarely assassins and had no fighting training meaning they would be useless in a fight
kieran sargeant So buggery from early age on to make you proper man would have been preferable than regular western schools then ? It is problem with all these modern re-imaginations, often based on comic or what not light entertainment, real worlds inconvenient facts are left out. Being and actively practicing homosexuality was compulsory in Sparta.
***** The last part of your comment makes me want to bring up the fact that many people throughout history has been forced to pretend to be heterosexual, even to this day, primarily in the west, because of the Abrahamic religions. There was a time long ago when most people were openly bisexual.
Ninjas weren't a warrior culture. The ninjato didn't exist. Samurai and ninja weren't enemies unless they belonged to other clans. Samurai were a class of people and ninja were a position or job. Many Samurai were indeed ninja. Onto samurai and katanas. Katana weren't that amazing. The same statement of in trained hands they could cut a man in half is true for any sword designed for slicing such as Scimatars, Sabres, Cutlsses, Long Swords and especially Claymores. Metallurgy in ancient Japan was more advanced than that of Europe but that was due to a need for it to be. Metal found in Japan lacks some minerals found else where making the metal more brittle and requiring more work to remain functionable and well crafted. The fact that some call the Katana the best sword of all time is a opinion and honestly is rather in accurate. No sword is better than another (That's not wholly accurate there is a British officers sword that tried to hard to be everything so it just failed) as all swords are good at different things. A rapier is better at stabbing than a long sword. A long sword is better at slicing than a rapier. A Katana is usually better at slicing but worse at defending than a long sword. A gladius is a quicker but shorter thruster then the longer and heavier rapier. The gladius was a war sword and a rapier a dueling one. Which swords are better? The answer remains none. The Spartan 'short sword' was a Spatha.
lol samurai were not ninjas, samurai was a high class in society and ninjas were low farmers who were tired of being treated unfairly and so rebelled against samurai. Being a ninja wasnt a job either, you are very wrong in so many ways it baffles me!
brooklyn6279 Hattori Hanzo were Ninja and Samurai. And their were ninja that lived like farmers in the Iga mountains, but also Ninjas that were Samurai. Ninja is a "job" not a class. An their were treated by Oda Nobunaga, not by every Samurai. They did their job for Daimyos, their clans and for wealthy Samurai.
@@nelofrmokc6086 naah. no sneeze needed. just some spit. also, your ancestors were the least trained, the weaksest phisically and the dumbest of all the warriors talked about in this vid, so you can sit down
Not 7000, more like 1000-2000 and he forgot to mention that they winning for only 3 days because they found a way to surround them. Imagine how desparate was a king with such an army to try to surround an army that it was like 1% of his force..
Less than 5000 greek troops were on Thermopylae, and in the last day, after they realized that tehy were getting surrounded, Leonidas (as army general) ordered only he and his 300 spartans would stay back to halt the Persians. 700 Thespians volunteered and stayed with him to the end. Oh stranger let the other Spartans know that, obeying our laws (/our common ways), here we lie dead "Spartan tomb inscription, Thermopylae"
NInjas werent mostly farmers... they were mostly middle class samurai. And they almost never fought Samurai unless they were in different clans. "Ninjato" didnt exist. Its called a Wakizashi.
@@redrust3 well the tatars , basically same armed force as mongols , were beat to pulp by Winged Hussars, and the always retreated when Hussars showed up on battlefield - Tatars were good army , and good army isn't stupid , they fall back and attack other formations that they ware capable to fight with ... with Hussars they didnt stand a chance and they knew it
Kuba Rzeźnik The Mongol Empire achieved its greatest accomplishments in the 1200s, while Polish Winged Hussars were formed 300 years later. By that time, the original Empire had fracturrd into four warring khanates. You cannot compare the two. During the Mongol’s zenith, their cavalry split up and the diversionary force burned Crakow to the ground. Within 3 days, the main force defeated King Bela of Hungary, and laid waste to his kingdom. At the time, the Poles and the Hungarians were the most powerful armies in Europe. Mongol invasions were only turned back in Egypt, Afghanistan, Vietnam, and Japan. At various times, Poland has been victorious. Other times, they have been defeated by Prussians, Nazi Germany, the Soviet Union, and the Tatars. Very impressive that Poland has survived many invasions and defeats, and survived for 1,000 years! People still speak the Polish language and practice their culture!
Speederzzz but they lost. that was the point. always putting Europeans at the top. that's racist bruh. they say Genghis Kahn was a monster and Alexander is great. why? all conquerors were monsters. nobody conquered by bedding their enemies. i find this video offensive because it's racist.
wolvie041007 i'm on your side. on that front, genghis khan is badass! and i don't like the spartans that much. ithink that the biggest problem with the spartans is the movie 300. which is 1% historically accurate.
wolvie041007 Just to be clear.Each time the spartan infantry stepped into the battlefield (full strength) they won.The spartans never lost a combat but the perioikoi did.Do not compare these two types of soldiers.Spartans's strict policy of choosing a child made them be much less productive in terms of childbirth.So they eventually went out of men.END OF STORY
Hey man, I really appreciate that you stick to creating qualitative, vetted and informative videos, and make the narrative not only crisp but engaging. In a world full of crap content and click bait, you've kept this channel grounded and maintained a dignified, research based approach to creating content.
+Rahul Pasupureddy In an open field, it could go either way (more probably, Samurais could win without too much difficulty). At a field like Thermopylae? I could bet you 100 to 1 that Spartans would win and still rob you!
MaegnasMw But one main advantage I think is Samurai use horses (movie evidence: Last Samurai), while Spartans don't (I might be wrong, it was depicted like that in 300). Horse warfare was one of the main reason Genghis Khan (Mongols) could easily conquer most of Asia and come up till the doorsteps of Europe. But still this would make up for an epic battle!!
Rahul Pasupureddy You are correct, Spartans were practically all infantry (perhaps the heaviest infantry the classical world had seen but still, infantry). Horses, if present, were meant only for kings/generals and maybe as labor animals. Spartans greatest advantage was their reputation, most armies never dared to face them. In the case of the Persian wars, at Thermopylae they chose the field and at Plataea they had the numbers and superior equipment (Persian armor was, for most troops, wicker shields, wooden spears and copper or bronze swords while Spartans equipped bronze body armor and shields and had iron swords and spears).
+Rahul Pasupureddy Pretty much noone had that many horseman at the time,we fought at our wars mostly on foot,only years later the macedonians have adapted better tactics for infantry,and for horsemen.
i really hope u study more on your subject before talking about it, the mongols goals werent just killing like you stated, it just seemed that way because we killed alot, our goal or rather chingis khans goal was to unite nomad empires such as khwarezemia, but when we send our people to make peace and unite middle eastern countries they killed those people and because of that chingis khan was voilent (i mean who wouldnt b pissed) but i know it doesnt excuse them being killers but so what? they killed just like any other warriors on this list. i just wanted to point out that our golas wasnt to "kill everything" thats just absurd
+AngryBear360 well... look at the crusades, when the crusaders conquered Jerusalem, they just killed everyone left standing including children and (after they raped them) women. You see, that's just war and it's the same for nearly every war throughout history.
+Ondřej Volejník exactly, back then if some one opposed you dont dont just say, well whatever..., u kill them :p regardless of who they r thats just war
What do you mean the Vikings did some good? They were practically paragons of virtue in comparison to most of the other European cultures, they were some of the longest to preserve their Pagan ways, they created very cultural and brave countries, weakened the Kingdoms of England for King Arthur, they were some of the first to treat women as equals and allow them into battle and they were good at trade, surprisingly.
Loki Ragnarok Vikings refer to the pirates from Scandinavia, not the actual Scandinavian people. Those Vikings have received the reputation a millennium after their deeds by historians looking at them with rose tinted glasses. The fact is those pirates gained their warrior reputation and infamy not from fighting standing armies in battle but from attacking defenceless villages and cities and fleeing before an actual armed response could be mobilized. During those raids they were known to indiscriminately kill men, women and children, capture slaves, rape and gratuitously torture people.
Anndgrim One, for the Norse being a Viking was both a job and a lifestyle, true they did raid defenceless villages but you exclude all their most famous battles: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Svolder www.englandandenglishhistory.com/anglo-saxon-history/the-viking-invasions-of-england-793-ad-to-900-ad- militaryhistory.about.com/od/battleswarsto1000/p/Viking-Invasions-Battle-Of-Maldon.htm en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Edington Those are just a few of the many battles where the Vikings fought actual armies, note, the armies weren't made of defenceless women and children. Also, the Great Heathen ARMY was an army of Vikings, therefore Vikings are soldiers for the Pagan Scandinavian countries.
sigh... there were 7000 assisting Hoplites.. not just 300 spartans.. secondly its been proven that Samurai were not that Honourable. as to test their new swords they would kill random people on the street etc etc etc (Hence le ninja) sounds like you've just looked at movies and taken them as the truth..
It is not so much movies where people get this modern notion of samurai. But its derived from the tokugawa period where there was a sizeable warrior caste that had no reason to be. So they got together and made up this nonsense Honor above all and honor over death stuff we see now, where they seppuku at just about anything and never surrender and crap. The fact that there are records of samurai forces fleeing from battle and doing what we would consider 'cowardly' actions does not matter. in the mid and late 1800s when European showed up and Japan started their "we need to get modern' The samurai caste who was 100% ignorant of the codes that were written was just romanticized whimsy were believed to be HOW they were supposed to operate, so the Germans in Japan that were teaching the Emperor's army to use guns and modern tactics saw they last and deluded generation of samurai doing what they do and what we as humans just for the most part accept as how the samurai always were.
Harry McNicholas A warlike culture doesn't mean they liked to conquer, Spartiates didn't felt well getting out of their country, you can see it in Thucydides book , The History of Pelopponesian Wars in cap 1, when the Corinthians affirmed the lack of experience going out of the country of all Greeks.
MrTibbentings More like it's because your just as ignorant as the the researchers of this video. As if every other so called warrior culture featured in this video did not get "steamrolled" by the next.
MrTibbentings A whole tribe? do you even know what you are talking about?. You must be referring to when the Zulu's turned up at a British fort with spears and lost to the British who had guns, as if there is any glory in the clear advantage in weaponry. Had that've been a hand to hand fight i think we all know who would have won.
+wunademones not the fault of the british that the Zulus had spears and shit shoulda used all the time they had developing better shit, no one cares about African warriors because by the time they entered the world stage thier tech was so far behind they were (and still are to a point) irrelevant
The haka peruperu is only a single variation of the haka, there is actually hundreds of variations, and the haka is used for most weddings and funerals in the modern day as well, not just for rugby, the hakas are not only about war but also the world, life, and theaking of new zealand
This is soooooo wrong 10. Aztekts did not conuqor land in the way we think of, war for theam was more ritualistic thean about counquring 9. Mongols did take captives 8.hakka war dance is awsome 7. The ninjas worked for THE SAMMURIAS, there were even sammurias who were ninjas, they were also fercliy loayal to there masters (most of the time) becuse if they did not they would be wiped out. 6.Havent researched it, but sound fairly legit 5. romans did slash 4. Oh boy... have to make a sub list here a. The katana was not the sharpest sword ever made, in fact its not really that good for cutting, its mainly for slashing. b. The katana was not the main battel weapon for the samuria, they woulde perfer the naginata or the bow. They always brougth the katana with theam thougth but as a back up weapon c. The Sammurie were just as backstabby as the Knigths of western europ. 3. I would arguee that there were no such things as a viking, yes theire were raiders from the north that gained a reputation for being scary, but thiere effectiveness was exaggerated by medieval monks. 2. chivilry code was not really followed by medieval knigths, the hade no problem killing poor peasants and raping thiere wifes. 1.Good god i hate the spartans. a. Spartans were not much better than the athians, if they were they would have counqured athens b. Thermopaly...... They lost that battel and they were about 7000 of theam. And during theier retreat were the famous 300 were theire was also about 1100 more greeks theier to back theam up c. they got destroyed by other greek factions i know my spelling is horrible
+lordofdarkdudes Spartans were better than the athenians actually. In sparta(Σπάρτη) the only thing that someone could be is a warrior. In thermopiles there were ONLY 300 spartans, and 700 soldiers of another city-country(greece wasn't united back then). I don't remember which was their city, but i know that spartans told them that if they wanted to leave, they could. Spartans had no problem with it.
+lordofdarkdudes Spartans did conquer the capital of Athens, but were forced to return to their own settlements to suppress revolts inspired by the Athenians, which let the Athenians recover.
Now lets see... Im far from a history expert but i know this: * The Mogols didnt raid with the sole intention to destroy everything, rather to build up a reputation of what happend to those who opposed the horde. This in the end led to fewer casualties because more forces surrendered. * The Ninja was not a silent shadow of death, skilled in all types of various combat techniques and mystic powers (Of witch you didnt mention, but is commonly associated with the Ninja). Instead Ninja means Spy. So they were spies. Most spies are not death incarnate, but rather any simple bugger who either are good at hearing things he/she shouldnt, or just happened to and offered the information to the highest bidder. There were Ninja "Clans", at least according to historians of the time, but that information is mudded with mythology, elitism and all kinds of rubbisjh making it hard to tell what was realy truth. But basicly, they were spies. The more propper word for an assassin (And please correct me if im wrong here, im a viking, not a samurai afterall) would be Hitokiri. Side note: Only "Real" evidence of the Kasurigma, as cool as it is, is taht Musashi supposedly fought one with that weapon. But that opponent is also the least likely person of Musashis opponents to exist. Another sidenote: There is no such thing as the Ninjato. *The immortals were highly skilled with the bow. This is simple logic. They were not a militia, but a professional army. That means that their livelihood, for that matter their entire professional lives circled around training for combat, and combat itself. They were not expected to be great poets, singers, craftsmen (unless you count warfare as a craft) or any such things. Instead they trained brutaly in using the tools of their trade. So here is the simple logic. If you spend (and im just pulling these numbers out of my bass) 40h a week training, and only a 10th of that training is with bow (But it would probably have been more), in a year you still have over 200 hours of bow training per year. As a refference note, the RAF had about 200 flight hours as a requirement before they sent their pilots into battle in WW2. Would you say that the RAF werent "perticularly skilled with planes"? * The roman legion was not "masters of the shield and spear", that would possibly be the greeks. Let me also point out that shield and spear are the backbone of almost every historical military fighting force. They were masters of Formation fighting though, where they would employ the Gladius rather than the classical spear, because it was less clumsy, more agile, faster and a lot easier to manouver with. Most of their "spears" were javelins, that was thrown. * The Katana (Despite whatever i wrote above, here is were the war begins. Fight gently, people) is not the sharpest sword that was ever created. Hard thing to judge, but i would say Damascus blades take that role. At least as a conceptual swrod, rather than comparing item for item. I will say this though: Katana is an exelent sword, especially since they were made from crap metal. Japan has a rather poor reserve of metal, and what metal they have is of rather shady quality. So it is very likely the Sharpest sword ever created... In Japan and by japanese metal. The Katana could not easily slice right a man. They did test the blades like that according to legend and shoddy historians, but it was with a few special things added, like a longer (about half a meter to a meter) handel to get more force out of it. The Samurai was not the most "fearless warrior that ever lived". In fact it is basic military etiqette (Maybe not the rigt word) to die for causes out of honor, religous beliefs, social standings and other such things. The Vikings thought they went to paradise if they died in battle. Do you think that made them less willing to face death on the battlefield? What marks a warrior? Someone who lives to fight. What marks a soldier? Someone who lives to die for a cause. So the Samurai were soldiers. Just like the vikings, immortals, roman legionaries (At least when rome was strong and had propper roman legions and not mercinaries) *The battleaxe was not the weapon of choise for the Viking. It was the spear. Everyone uses spears. rich vikings had swords, poor vikings had axes. All had spears. (i way all, but obviously not like 100% of every fighting viking had spears, but it is so common a weapon throughout history you could say that everyone uses spears) *The Vikings were not violent savages. They were raiders and farmers and traders. More farmers and traders realy, but such things dont end up as the most interesting headlines. "The feared Vikings, ruthlessly traveling accross europe to plow the land and sell their craft with murderous intent!" * ... the entire medieval world. Do you mean Europe? And do you mean somewere between year 800-1500? Are you sure? What about the Mongols? Or the Ottomans? *Knights were not the Upholder of Peace, enforced with a strict code of honor. Knight were an oppressing force when at home or a semi-professional military force when at campaign. Their Code of Honor is, if anything, a handbook of how not let people get above their station, how to punish people who do not bow low enough and loose rules to get away with being as brutal and opressing as they could be. *Knights were not bound by the law to accept any duel. They accepted duels from other knights, but only when they could not murder the bastard without getting bad rep for it. Realy, knights were an elitistic warrior class that handed out their own judgement and was often driven with religious intent. People of that description, no matter what title or name you give them, are generally propper bastards. *Spartans were indeed elite fighting men who devoted their lives to the art of combat. Just like the samurai, the Immortals and so on. They were Soldiers, not Warriors or Fighters. * 300 spartans did stand up to around 70.000 to 200.000 persians, but they were not alone. They also had about 5000 other greek forces with them. Still bad odds, but better than the legends. dear Thoughty, please dont stop making videos. I enjoy your videos. But if your making videos about history, research more than just the DVD shelf. Your description of the Ninja is just as valid as TMNT, and i dare say few concider that a documentary. With love from Sweden, Kami.
I have read about it and I am greek by the way and I know exactly what happened spartans had help but they were not 8000, I don't want to play it smart I just let you know
no it means exactly what Adam said. I don't get the confusion, it's pretty self explanatory. dead men were brought back on their shields. It's like asking "was my husband shot in the front or in the back?" (in the back = he was running away.) without his shield = he dropped his shield and ran off, rather than fighting to the death with it.
H TAN H ΕΠΙ ΤΑΣ in capital letters is the famous phrase. ἢ τὰν ἢ ἐπὶ τᾶς in small ones. which means i (the spartan female talking, either mother or wife) will expect you to come back either dead or alive. also theres no such thing as a "martyr" in ancient greek life or philosophy.that kind of thinking is made for fanatics.the true meaning of the phrase (reading between the lines as english say) is : whether you come back alive or dead, do not come back as a coward. (without the shield). keep in mind that it was utter contempt in greek city states for a man-citizen to drop his shield in the face of the enemy
suprised that no one mentioned cossacks - warrior culture, that led victorious fights against ottoman, polish, mongolian and japanese empires, and have created Russia bigger than its todays territory
Barbarossa Can a couple of undisciplined drunks successfully siege and plunder the capital of the Ottoman Empire? Apparently they can, four times actually, later on the Cossacks also became the primary shock cavalry of the Russian Empire. Before that they managed to set up their own autonomous state within the Zaporozhnie Oblast in Ukraine.
A fellow patriot mate, Cossacks didn't do anything like that. They were in Russian army. Don't talk stupid. Russians didn't siege Istanbul ever. They just arrived at the gates of it :) l guess u are a big ignorant.
Barbarossa the sieges of Istanbul were executed by the Zaporozhian host which was an independent Cossack state. The Cossacks you're thinking of would be the Don and Kuban Cossacks who were integrated into the Russian Empire after Catherine the Great.
A fellow patriot no nation in history captured capital of Ottoman Empire until 1918. Cossacks just fought against vassal of Ottomans, Crimean khanate. They never came close to Ottoman Empire's capital with their own name. The only power who came near to Istanbul was Russians. How can you say that they sacked the capital 4 times? Where did you get that idea from :D wtf.
I do not think the Cossacks fought the Mongolians. They also did not fight the Japanese. Both Russian and Ukrainian Cossacks were used to protect the southern frontier against the Muslims.
Yes, they were spies, mostly. There is barely any records what so ever of actual "ninjas" that used "ninjutsu" or anything of the sort, there never was a way of the ninja, or a clan of ninjas. The version of the ninja as we know it is entirely fictional, brought to the world somewhere around the 20th century? The ones we call ninjas wore normal clothing, most of them pretended to be monks and they barely ever killed people, to killed people. I mean, not saying assassination attempts didnt happen, they did. BUT IT WASNT 1 PERSON. More like, a fucking army. or well... A unit of sorts.... I should probably go to sleep.
YOU'VE been watching too many movies -- Ninja WERE real and existed during the Sengoku era, but I think it's important to know that the popular image of the ninja as black-clad assassins is mostly myth. The head-to-toe black outfit comes from Japanese theater. In Japanese theater, it's accepted that someone dressed in all black is invisible (similar to how audiences accept that a painted backdrop represent a forest or whatever). So when portray the stealthy ninjas, they used those costumes to represent them on stage. There were of course spies and assassins in feudal Japan, but little is known about them (like intelligence agencies of our age, they were secretive). Most "ninja" weapons actually stems from the period of time when the Japanese government banned ownership of weapons. Those who wanted to carry weapons had to disguise them (so the e.g. the kama is a modified agricultural tool). So they weren't ninja weapons per se. There is a lot of mystery and exoticism surrounding ninjas and their secret arts. This is not by accident. One of the ninja's greatest advantages was that no one knew anything about them and they had no idea how they managed to accomplish amazing feats. Sometimes people would hear of their accomplishments and really embellish the story. Other times the ninja communities themselves would spread insane rumors. This was obviously great for business. Also not everyone could be a Ninja. It's important to note that some Samurai were ALSO Ninja.
+david yang There is a story of great battle between them and English . English had guns and win but their myth was born there and then . Cos they run into bullets and menage to reach English line or something . Check wiki you will get more info for 3 minutes with Google then you will get in that whole video
You also forgot about the Celts... They were fearsome warriors, and excellent swordsman. I'm surprised a lot of these lists hardly, if ever include them. The Romans employed them as mercenaries, or guides. They didn't fear the Legion, nor the Saxons.
There were 60.000 persians at thermopylae.... And 7.000 greeks 300 spartans(Right on that) 700 thebieans And 6.000 greeks Thats what historians say, im not judging you thoughty2
66_greenrunner_77 Why so sure? Were you there, or how do you know? We cant know it for sure, ever. And it didnt happen like that "because historians say"
The persian empire was large enough to have one million soldiers but was very unlikely as the slave soldiers would want to fight the persians for killing their friends and family
66_greenrunner_77 No what Thoughty meant was after all those troops left 300 Spartan soldiers stayed vs many Persians, learn history before you start talking BS.
+DeathsHood it's by no means a bad list and I support just about all of these but I am just making an observation, there is no clear basis for his numerator and based simply on military prowess there were others that made larger impacts. I understand that this is an opinion video and I like most of the content creator's works
***** Incoming wall of text. The list itself is lacking in substance based solely off what it was titled to be: That of warrior *cultures*. Knights, Immortals, The Legion, Ninja, and Samurai being warriors *in* a culture, as opposed to the culture itself, and not belonging on this list. However, to be a warrior *culture* military prowess isn't as important as the role *of* the military, or combat, in the culture. Spartans, for instance, were at one point in their history, known primarily for their art and artisans. They then made a rather sudden and immediate change into a militaristic society where literally every capable male child became a warrior. Battle and battle prowess was all and everything from childhood to death, for a Spartan. They were the embodiment of a 'warrior culture'. Vikings, however, were primarily non-combatants; traders, farmers, artisans, etc... The primary reason they deserve a spot on the list, however, is their view of combat and its role in their religion. To a 'Viking' a glorious and honorable death in battle reserved you a place at the side of Odin, their chief deity. It was, therefore, a rather pivotal focus of old Norse culture. When making the decision as to who should be on any list of warrior *cultures*, factor in what combat meant to them, and what role it played in their society. The Turks, as an example, were less focused on their warriors in terms of cultural significance, and more on the maintenance and expansion of their empire. They had great warriors, and were militarily rather successful for some time, but war and warriors were not their main focus, culturally speaking. The Rajput were a sect *of* warriors within a greater culture with other, more pressing focuses. India is one of the oldest centers of both learning and industry on the planet, after all. The Byzantines, in the same vein as the British much later, utilized war and their warriors more as tools; extensions of the will of the empire, there only to further its economic and political goals. They were good at waging war, but it was a tool. I don't know enough about the Huns to make a statement of their culture. I apologize for the rant, but it seemed pertinent to note the differences in what the list was intended to be, and the warriors you mentioned earlier. I agree. however, that the list could be better researched, and that there are warrior cultures better suited to positions on it. I just misinterpreted your first comment to be the typical "My favorite warriors weren't here therefore he is wrong" argument. There's a *huge* amount of them in the comment section.
+DeathsHood perfectly understandable, I feel the same way about the idiots that make UA-cam a painful experience. Thankfully there are the knowledgeable ones as well.
Where are the Sikhs? Ever heard of the battle of chamkaur where 40 Sikhs fought around 2 million mughals? Battle of Saragahri where 21 Sikhs defeated 10,000 Afghans. And numerous amounts of battles where the Sikhs were out numbered by the Mughals and still ended up defeating the mughals.
40 Sikhs vs 2 million Mughals? What are you shitting me, they would have been slaughtered without the vast majority of the army even knowing it had happened. this shit is wack.
Nic Rage The Sikhs did get killed but the Sikhs put up a great fight. We're talking about Warrior culture in this video and 40 Sikhs going against 2 million mughals shows bravery and not being afraid of death which two attributes a real Warrior should possess.
Three things. 1) European, Mid East, and pan asian fencing / other swordplay have some advantages over the Katana. Every Samurai was different, but as a weapon the katana is over-specialized for cutting over piercing, and their popularity is just because they look incredible, and downright beautiful. 2) Ninjas were usually the peasantry and serf's response to Samurai persecution. Feudal combat is less honorable, more people with swords oppressing those without. A "Ninja" peasant caught with a katana would probably be executed, as these weren't weapons for them. That's why so many of their weapons are improvised. 3) Vikings were kinda like the huns with boats. They were really just shock troops with a distinct advantage (vikings had boats, huns were great horsemen). Just like China and Rome, when Europe adapted to the Viking's tactics, they were better able to defend against them. Shit, christianity arguable did the most of anyone to fuck over the vikings, not actual armed resistance. Now, then...LET THE FLAME WARS BEGIN!
Mike Zilla 1) The katana is actually just as varied in design as European swords. The hilt length, blade length, curvature, width, depth, point, etc... all vary for different purposes. A katana with minimal curvature, thin spine and a stabbing point is just as effective at armor penetration as any other blade. You still don't want to stab a heavily armored opponent *anyways* because you'll have a hell of a time getting your blade out again, lol. 2) Although they weren't called 'vikings', the Norse cultures people apply the name to weren't just specialized with boats. They were well trained, skilled martial fighters, and defeated military forces from one end of the known world to the other. 'Viking' berserkers were commonly sought after as personal guards and mercenaries all the way into Persia.
***** Wrong on the katana/stabbing part. Katanas were brittle and you always wanted to stabb an armored opponent because its the only way you will kill him with a sword. A stab through the chain mail at the joints. Right on the Vikings though. Warrior culture through and through, complete with a death-cult and the works. Every man was a fighting man and they were trained since childbirth. Hell the law said every man must own an axe, a shield and a spear. Compared to say the Samurai and the Knights where only the upper classes were real fighting men.
Pasan Etternavn Not wrong. You want to stab weaknesses, not armor. Joints such as the neck, armpits, elbows, hips, knees, visor, etc... are all viable points to stab an armored opponent. You *NEVER* want to stab through heavy armor because your weapon *will* get stuck. Another way to defeat an armored opponent is to use heavy, blunt weapons such as a mace, flail, or hammer to crush the armor or cause a concussion.
Um in a full plate there were no open places save for the visor. The joints were covered in chainmail which you can stab through. Hence the development of the long stabbing swords. they were meant to pierce through that chainmail. Or you could go the easy way and use a poleaxe.
the best warriors in the world are Mongols and Turks.put your lies to an end.you know it.The Mongols and the Turks ruled more than 120 states alone.Genghis khan,Atilla,Sultan Suleiman,Conqueror Sultan Mehmed,Baibars,Ghaznes Mahmut,Ogeday,Timur,Bumin Kagan,Mete Khan etc.
Because they are not a warrior culture? I mean Vikings, Spartans and Mongols especially had every male as a warrior thus a warrior culture as per the list. Hussars are a part of the Russian culture that separates alike the nobles not like a culture etc
they never fought vikings tho...... and if you are talking about swedes, if anything it was the winged hussars doing the "wrecking", along with essentially anyone else that they faced
Woah Biang ninjas were not assassins, and they did not have known specialized weapons they also were not required to learn martial arts in any compacity
The Pure Healer Ninjas didn't only assassinate but they definitely did, you would think someone who is trained in stealth weren't be hired as assassins? Also ninjas were trained to fight but did it as rarely as possible
Woah Biang no they werent trained to fight and yes they did rarely assasinate but in general no they were not assassins just like james bond is not an assassin hes a spy... also "trained in stealth" is an odd way of putting it... its not like they vanished from thin air using a forgotten magic they just spied on people
Ιωάννης Στυλιαράς vikecah Ok I guess I can see it that way. Vikecah bro common no internet trolling. I have a right to state an opinion. ( that was very valid I might add)
gre894 You do know if we were scientifically and technically speaking Macedonia was a huge nation above Greece. To my knowledge, they had a different religion and society than Greece. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Macedonia_(ancient_kingdom). If you think of Greece when you say Alexander the Great then you are ignorant to a certain degree.
Native American warriors were pretty effective and deserve to be on any appropriate warriors list. I mean they did kill enough Vikings to force them to leave America.
+brasil HUE no, this event of the battle has been misunderstood in the mass colture. At the beginning of the fight there was a greek army (composed by soldiers came from different parts of Greece including spartans and athenees ecc) that defended the pass. This army was composed by some thousands of soldiers. The epic part of this history is the final: the persian army found a pass on the mountains that conducted behind the greeks. The soldiers were demoralized and almost defeated; there was no way they could resist; so the general Leonides and 300 other spartan soldiers decided to sacriface themselves covering the greeks while they came back. an heroic sacriface that demonstrated the world how they had big giant balls, i mean, courage.
the tide for top 1 that is. I doubt a battle line of 300 spartans are able to withstand 300 winged hussars. My doubt is doubled if Joakim starts singing while they fight.
I cringed when he praised katana for being ''the sharpest sword of all time.'' Come on, do some research, the katanas were not anything too spectacular compared to other swords of the time... And also there were about 20,000 spartans in the goddamn battle against the persians (exact number is not known for sure) .
Lauri Uuniemi Well based on Historical logistics, recruitment pool, available resources and so on - it has estimated that the Persian army was about a 100,000 to 120,000 strong. So the Greeks face them with a 1 to 10 odds and they had the better tactical ground and they didn't kill as many Persian troops as they claimed since the Persians waged a far longer war and considering the numbers of troops they returned home after losing the war.
Mirrorwarrior and to add it lasted long, when defeat was inevitable, the 300 Spartans stayed to "hold off" ? the Persians. While the rest went back to warn of the impending march to Greece...
Nort10 The Spartans and some Greeks stayed there since it becomes really hard to hold a position when flanked by such a large force without sufficient numbers ATLEAST until the invention of guns.
@@alexanderm3504 The Māori are _Polynesian_ - which means, according to DNA evidence, their ancestry comes from Melanesia, South East Asian Islands, Taiwan - entirely the other side of the Pacific Ocean from the Americas. Their closest relationship to the Aztecs is that both ethnic groups - like all other humans on the planet - ultimately came from Africa at some point in the distant past.
their armour is not that good, they didnt wear armour as good as the other people Samurai armour is leather with very little metal on it, and with bad patterns feet and hands were completely open, most armours didnt even have front neck protection
Aztecs were pretty intimidating as well. They were painted mostly black, had bone piercing trough several body parts. Their lack of swords wouldn't have been a setback either. There are Spanish conquistadors who describe warriors being able to chop off a horses head in one swing with their axe-swords. Their volcanic glass was actually sharper then a katana. It was weaker then iron but the japanese their iron wasn't that great either. Pigs iron as its called. A Damascus steel blade would have sliced a katana in half in combat.
*I would prefer that Māori's would be number one as greatest warrior's because they would do anything to Kill their enemies, Even if they are badly injured or bruised. **#MāoriPride**.*
Which countries did they conquer? The only ones that should matter are the ones who conquered countries. Alexander the Great matters because he went out an conquered The Spartans never conquered anything.
I agree. Maori never got outside New Zealand. A warrior culture is one that must face many different opponents and win. Maybe not all but most. You must be able to hold the land
@Harry McNicholas when it comes to a great warrior conquering isn’t anything to do with it, it’s bravery, flexibility, adaptiveness and how well one can overcome adversity. Considering the Maori Warrior using weapons comparable to Stone Age tech was able to best a well trained British Redcoat armed with a gun the most feared soldier during this time period I believe this earns them high merits. If we use your concept of Greatest warriors it would put the British Redcoats in first place considering they where one of the main reasons the largest empire to have existed grew to the size it was.
War for New Zealand lasted 10 years and the maori werent defeated, in the end the British sued for a peace treaty to trade goods for temporary inhabitance of the land, apon agreement the maori tricked. The morale of the story is the maori lasted 10 years and weren’t conquered but rather betrayed. That definitely makes them warriors. Plus Alexander only did so well because of the work his father put in before hand in the end he became greedy with power and thristed to conquer more, that’s not a warrior that’s greed and selfishness from power. Nevertheless Alexander the Great is still a conqueror
+R700LimiT namekians are a peaceful nomadic race they had only 1 true warrior and a few elders who could fight. piccolo doesnt count he grew up on earth
Oh yeah, society as we know it will crumble if a youtuber makes a top 10 video about modern military powers. I can only imagine the immense destruction that would ensue as a result of that video.
***** incorrect, being a warrior has nothing to do with technological age, it has to do with attitude as well as skill in relation to the technological age. Example: Nazi Germany was building a warrior culture which had high emphasis on military within the realm of their social engineering (this is probably the only example in modern times besides Japan... there may be some smaller nations though).
The sound of the Aztec whistle perfectly mimics the sound of their victims ... while being sacrificed alive. It's telling their victims what to expect on the stone altar.
Well at least you’d die knowing that the Aztecs thought highly of you whether because you were the bravest warrior they had seen or the most appealing. They only chose the best to sacrifice in an effort to better please their Gods. It was considered a high honor.
It's also the sound I make after going up a flight of stairs. :)
@@frankowalker4662 lol same my friend same!
Fr I don’t know why we don’t use more psychological warfare in modern times
The Death Whistle scared the shit out of me
Xel3 Thunder same
would be great for halloween tho
Xel3 Thunder I would run away from the battlefield in a second if i hear a ton of those.. i don't want to be ear raped.
The sound it made is very unnerving. I can understand why it would give the Aztecs a psychological advantage against all that stood against them.
Xel3 Thunder true that
You forgot about the keyboard warriors and feminists.
don't you ever bring that up again it was a cold cold war one that was never forgotten
And Unitedstateans and Nazis... he also forgot them... If they don't get the crown, at least an honorable mention in the rundown of fastest adepts of killing.
+Jay Flash vevo "Warrior Cultures in History" I wonder where he magically pulled the concept of ancient from...
Perhaps from the same place where he learned how to spell "IDOIT"
lol
Haha
In aztec warfare, it was considered clumsy to kill your opponent. Not only were prisoners taken for sacrifice, but taking prisoners was prioritized over killing enemies.
Reminds me of moana
@@carolyncolebeck981 how so?
@@th3nightlion624 final fight with te ka
@@carolyncolebeck981 however, nobody was taken prisoner or sacrificed to gods of fertility and crop.
@Jordan Michael a good priority
I need that Aztec whistle ;)
Halloween and April fools, WAIT FOR ME
Dead ass I feel you on this, bruh haunted house I'll make bank lol
It's also used as an instrument. Personally I find it a strange beauty.
Same. Lol
Haha. Death whistle.
I want a death whistle also!
In new zealand we just call it the haka
Chur farnu
Yeah cuzz
ay cuz
Aiden Blanckenberg ye bro
Yeah cuz
Wrong - Ninjas were not warriors. Their main mission was information gathering & spying. In fact they were taught to avoid conflict because that would mean being discovered & therefore the mission was a failure! Also many Samurai were trained as ninja
The first ninja clans were established by ronins, yes. "Ninja" were the lower ranked contract killers in the clan who truly prefered to use poison or anything that can avoid a fight. Higher ranks were called Shinobi(spy). They are the ones who gather information, do political contracts and etc. They were often infiltrated in samurai families from an early age as a family member and later they were used as spy.
ninjas avoid conflict cause they will get their asses handed. hahaha
that's half true, ninjas motivation was stealth but they were assassin's first not merely spies, if they were so weak and I'll trained nobunaga oda who was one of the most powerful warlords in feudal japanes history would not have tried to wipe them all out. more research is required on your end. plus yes they liked poison as a preferred weapon but they're are several historical acccounts of them ambushing and slaughtering the samurai
u would know
All of you are wrong..... They are ninjas they are shinobi....
Over half of this video is based on popular fiction and misinterpretations.
As is all of his videos..
12:40 sums up his knowledge of historical fact's...
He was pretty accurate about the Spartans though. He just forgot about the javelin.
@@AvroBellow he did however use misinformation about the battle of thermopiles, the Spartan's also had about 7000 Greek allies with them along with a number of slaves at the start of the battle.
What did you expect from Bugs Bunny?
The fact that he said the katana is sharpest sword in history, kinda points out some of the misinformation
not to mention how objectively fragile the Katana are. Most other swords didnt need to be as sharp as the katana because they were thick enough and heavy enough to do significantly more damage to both armors and weapons. The katana would lose to a lot of other swords in a sword fight cause of its durability imo.
He was joking
Actually, it's very flexible. It's so flexible, you could bend it and it wouldn't break. A good katana bends
Damascus steel katanas were very good and shard if well made.
As mentioned when talking about the romans. Thrusting is more efficient when it comes to armored foes. The katana was mostly used to kill unarmored foes.
I think you misunderstand what a "Warrior Culture" is. Over half of this list is composed of types of warriors or military units. A "Warrior Culture" is an entire society whose main goal or occupation is warfare. These are groups like the Celts, the Mongols or the Spartans. Maybe change the title.
thank you.
wait Mongols we society whose main goal was warfare?
Rose The B warfare was a huge part of their culture
Rupert SansPédes
Celts? Are you sure?
Are you joking? Celtic society revolved around constant warfare both amongst themselves and against Germanic tribes and Rome. The Roman empire deeply respected the combat abilities of the Celts, absorbing their tactics into their own and incorporating many Celtic combat units into the legion. Also, the Irish Celts are the only known society at the time, to effectively kick out the Vikings, once they'd established colonies for themselves (after founding such cities as Dublin and Limerick). Much like the Greeks, and the Norse, the Celts had grand legends of heroic warriors and great battles, won and lost. Much like the samurai, the Celts had high ideals of honor and would offer themselves up as sacrifices to redeem the loss of that honor. As would any Celtic Warriors captured in battle. Many Celts went into battle naked, painted blue with woad, with their hair spiked up with lime to resemble flames and were known to intimidate enemies with their battle erections.If a buffed out naked dude, painted blue, with what appears to be flames on their head, came running at you with a spear and a massive hard-on, how would you feel? They're also thought to be headhunters, displaying the heads of vanquished foes in or in front of their doorway, but recent evidence may suggest that they were actually recovering the heads of their slain comrades. I could go on, but I think I've already answered your query.
Norse paganism isnt "based around war" its polytheism so theres many gods not just war gods, in fact the greek pantheon has more gods of war than the norse.
Travis Roberts-True.
Actually almost all of the Norse gods and Goddesses were gods and goddesses of war (including Odin and Thor and Freyja) the Æsir and Vanir both had almost all Gods and Goddesses of war and yes even though almost all of the gods and goddesses of both the Æsir and Vanir were gods and goddesses of war each of them have their own purpose other than war (Ik this because my entire family are believers of Asatru and I’ve read the book of Asatru and the Norse Gods ) but yes it wasn’t just about war actually a lot of it is about Kin and honor
I would prefer you don’t call it Mythology and it’s not a copy of anything that “statement” you made is very inaccurate
That is very true
It’s not mythology like how disrespectful would it be if I was too say Christian Mythology the whole world would freak tf out and I don’t believe you at all
So on the Norse you have some serious misinformation. They were actually one of the most advanced people of the time. They had courts, and laws. They were so far advanced in their metal work you can't find a blacksmith that can accurately recreate it. Their beliefs we're based in the nine Noble virtues not war. In fact most Norse we're farmers. Additionally they didn't just go to Valhalla, Freya picked the best to join the vanir in folkvangr. Do actual research before doing a video so you don't step all over the history and beliefs of a people.
This guy has a lot wrong... He is hugely confused about the Aztec culture and has the "death whistle" completely wrong... Idk where he got his "facts" but he should have done some serious research before making this video.
He's also missing the reason for those raids in the first place. They were bringing back trade that stopped because of the feudal lords and churchmen kept all goods for themselves so there was no economy. In east Europe the were and still are seen as hero's
Don’t forget the fact that when the Danes invaded England, their frequent bathing made them popular among the wives of the English.
RockerKitty couldn’t agree more
Also the most common and precious Vking weapon was theyr swords which were passed from father to son.
you forgot about the ancient Canadian Warriors with their armored attack beavers
+Playinglikea meng You forgot about the deadly Moose chargers
anshul sringeri and the maple syrup bombs..
+Playinglikea meng theyre too kind to be on the list
he didn't forget them
History has never seen a weapon as powerfull as the Beaver.
Your information about ninjas is false as they weren't assassins in the shadows they were spies and informants in the shadows while still having combat skills in case of discovery and confrontation
Not even in the shadows.
That was only at night. They cpuld just be walking on the street like normal people.
Also, it seems that you didnt even need combat combat skills.
And the shuriken is a weapon of the samurai. During peaceful times they had to turn to other professions for a living and ninjas was the best option. Even in peace politicians still want to one up each other. And so they use their shuriken in their work which is now associated with ninjas.
But the most feared were kunoichi, female ninjas. Since nobody expected a deadly and or spying female among their ranks.
Quick fact! Spartan boys were given no food past the age of ten and had to feed themselves. They were punished if they were caught stealing food, but only because they got caught, as Spartans are supposed to be cunning and resourceful
He mentioned the agoge
The Spartans made the saying "if you're not caught you're not guilty"
"In just two days, tomorrow will be yesterday." Thats also from the spartans
+Dylan Chew ah yes, the old Hilary Clinton philosophy
You forgot about the Zulus. The Zulus have brutal fighting systems placed by king Shaka and conquered all other tribes in the area until stopped by the British in 1879. A lot of people underestimate the Zulus because they don’t have armour but saying that they aren’t good because they don’t have armour is foolish. The Zulus killed more British officers at the battle of Isandhlwana than Napoleon did at the battle of Waterloo.
The Zulus looked down on rifles largely so most of their army still had the traditional weapons by 1879 but that was not much of a problem. It was Zulu custom to not take prisoners, which was why only seven British regular soldiers escaped the battle of Isandhlwana. The Zulus were eventually defeated by the British but the fact that a tribe that mostly fought with spears and shields took rifles and Gatling guns to defeat them makes them even more formidable.
I can definitely see how the Zulus are more formidable than the ninjas, for example.
Who cares about some spearchugging blacks xD
Zulus are dirty and disgusting and not even really human, a more ape-like species. Why consider them on a list of HUMAN warriors? HUH!?
The amount of false information in this video is too damn high
Not really
@@Syndixal Yes really
Which ones are false then?
@@officialthroughhelldeath8830 Well each person will probably have picked out the inaccuracies of their chosen period of interest, so I can't reel off too many, but since I'm interested in the Mongols, that area leapt out at me. A lot of it frankly is just the amateurish oversimplification of history, such as describing the Mongols as being "led by Genghis Khan". He's their most famous and arguably successful leader, but the Mongols existed before him and remained a significant force after him. In fact, he was strongly invested in ensuring his successors would be suitable for continuing his empire. And then to suggest that they only wanted destruction is absurd. They were considered brutish to more static empires, of course, but they were an empire just like any other - they actually supported some very progressive concepts (alongside horrific attitudes to rape and murder, of course) such as being proponents of diplomatic immunity. They opposed attacks on trade caravans and messengers, and they usually respected surrender if it was quick, such as the day they arrived. Which flags up this idea that they didn't take prisoners. They did.
Oh, and as a pretty pedantic point, a lot of these civilisations aren't "ancient". People can use the term a little differently, but if we're considering "ancient civilisation" to be before the "middle ages" (which I think is the most common understanding), half of this list is too recent. Samurai, ninja, Mongols, Aztecs and vikings are all middle ages onwards. That probably doesn't seem a big deal if you're not into history, but it's sort of like saying "10 scariest films" and including five TV shows or "10 best footballers" and including a mixture of American Football and Soccer, and maybe one golfer...
@@SliceOfDog Exactly. And the knights were probably the most dishonorable "warrior" of them all. They would rape, kill and steal from anyone they wanted to...
"They mastered the sharpest sword that has ever been forged, the legendary, the deadly katana." I think I just received a lethal dose of weebness. Brb committing sudoku.
*Seppuku idiot
Dylan Chew
:^)
I think he did that on purpose, lel.
PorkNotBeef I *really* hope so.
+Dylan Chew 'Twas a joke, idiot
It wasn't only 300 Spartans. They had allies in the battle too.
No it was 300 but the allies from athens were waiting on the walls and sparta was just supposed to give athens time to prepare, we learned it in history class so yeah.
When the majority of the 7,000 Greek soldiers retreated after they were being out flanked by the Persians (due to a dick move by Ephialtes) there were still the 300 Spartans along with 700 Thespians, and 400 Thebans and possibly some others that remained to hold off the Persians. You either were not paying attention or you need a new history teacher.
MrC0MPUT3R probably just the curriculum cos they only mentioned thebans as a brief discussion and no interference with the war so good job america, youve done it again
SteveSwagGaming Indeed. I'm surprised they even cover anything that isn't American history.
MrC0MPUT3R well they do that next year in civics
The spartans didnt even had walls. When they asked a spartan:" Where are your walls ?" He pointed at his fellow spartans:" There are our walls".
Who told you this? Your fruity father? Huh?
This is SPARTAAAAAAAAAAAA!!!!!!!!!
*kicks the Persian*
Ezichim99 N YEAH!
***** Actually, in real life, Leonidas kicked the Persian in a very deep hole.
The Persian said: ,,Xerxes wants water and Land for his Legions''
Leonidas:,,You'll find enough Water and Land down there''
*kicks-Persian-in-hole*
oh so that's where that meme came from.
exactly....
***** Shut up and just learn to be a Spartan and not a fuckin Nerd wide mouth.
You don't need college , It needs you!
Lol
Very true if you all didn't go collage wouldn't exist
Basically
damn, it's like good will hunting all over again, you can learn everything you want through research and self- experience for free but society needs you to work with it or it won't work :(
Thanks for 112 Likes Damn! I look at his channel every day for a new video. If there is I feel exited!! Like if you agree
hahaha it wasn't just 300 Spartans it was more like 300 Spartans backed up by about 5000 other who joined them and a rather large navy mostly commanded by the Athenians and the Spartans were just the elite core of the forces that defended Thermopylae and it wasn't non stop it was just several wave of attacks during the day some night attacks at night and the only time the Spartans fought alone was during the last day to cover the retreat of the other troops that had allied with the Spartans to fight the Persians at Thermopylae and there were between roughly 150,000-500,000 Persians at Thermopylae
+bacon Bliss actually, the Athenians refused to help, and there were 1.600 Ally troops. But you were correct for the most part-yes.
no Athenians were the majority of the navy roughly 4000-5000 soldiers from all over Greece all volunteers from almost every city-state of Greece some of the soldiers were Athenian but not many
Exactly . Sometimes I get angry at how easy people are blinded by stupid movies . Also , how about explaining the situation . The 'Spartans' ( more like 5 different Greek tribes and states ) were on a high hill from which it was rather easy to defend .
+bacon Bliss There was no naval battle at thermopylae
GOD NO ! there was not an naval battle there. you are right chris...
The Vikings didn't have horns on their helmets
yea he said that
Also the norse weren't focused on just war. Most war they did was retaliation against other peoples starting war with them or jarls trying to gain more land and wealth against other jarls. The norse were a very peaceful people and interacted peacefully with multiple peoples from other countries. It wasnt until the holy Roman empire moved up north spreading christianity forcefully that the norse went straight on warrior-like in retaliation.
@@jays.5227 Most of them were just normal farmers
The_ realone they do in Skyrim! lol
Ninjas were mostly spies.
No misconceptions were harmed in the making of this video.
Seriously though, I like your content, Thoughty. But this one is a bit too riddled with misconceptions and errors.
Holy shit last time I checked your sub count, it was at 40k, now it's at 400k! Congrats man!
Wtf I haven't noticed that either
Same! it's so good to see him get the recognition he deserves!
EliteZ129 People are suckers for all kinds of lists and bite-sized info. And this young gentleman produces alot of fun ones.
Well that's odd, my socialblade comment is missing... now I'm kinda suspicious :/
EliteZ129 WTF last time i checked he had 70k dafuq
the Mongols never really took 'prisoners' because they allowed civilians to live under Mongol rulership, while killing the rulers of the land they were conquering.
do your research better, thank you.
Larinda Brunson they did take prisoners tho. they would release them later. no way this information could be true
Most of the cities the mongols conquered wasent sluaghtered most of them concidied long before the mongols ever sat fot in the city itself
mardu general not Baghdad
Simmekakibackup2 Koujo poor Baghdad...
"They were just like tanks, tanks that can stab things. " - best quotes.
Its amazing how many people are still super salty that their favorite warriors didn't make the list. Like you even have people calling him racist for not including their favorite type of warrior.
TotallyCluelessGamer ikr
Anyone that's white can be called a rascist these days. It's the cool thing to do 😂
he's just uneducated and making things up lol.... the facts he given on those on the list are false and bent.
this video does have a huge bias towards what westerners mostly know about. Its not racist but bias
😂😂😂
A few misconceptions in this video. The Mongols were not truly brutish until late in their rule. Ninjas never wore black, they would wear standard civilian clothes. And samurai were, more often than not, extremely brutish to anyone below them in social standing.
Also Spartan boys were regularly sodomized throughout their training.
Paragon Atlas It put hair on their chests.
Lol
Paragon Atlas Well who wasn't
+Paragon Atlas Ninja and Samurai are a lot different than most people think, most people mostly know them through fiction or altered history.
Kinda tired of people calling the Katana "The sharpest sword ever".
fmoa
The katana was a symbolic weapon and badge to a Samurai Warrior. It was usually forged by monks unlike bows.
fmoa both these replies are true but not exaclty... while its true katanas were not their main weapon thats because swords never really were outside of the European greatsword they used polearms as well as bows... can have an army consisting of only archers after all
It was likely the sharpest of its time.
Harry McNicholas no it wasn't
That is a matter of opinion.
5 seconds in :"to the silent ninja assassins of Japan" you already know it's gonna be some pseudo-scientific pop-culture bullshit lmao
Cringe
"To the silent ninja assassins of japan" *instantly leaves as you lose all credibility*
I mean they did do some assassinations sometimes.
Meowser so did james bond... but he was a spy see? And its more how he doesnt seem to do his own research... hes just repeating old false statements for all but a select few of these "warriors" i say warriors in quotes because ninjas were very rarely assassins and had no fighting training meaning they would be useless in a fight
Meowser well... useless asuming they dont have the experiance from some other feild
Yes they did assassinate people and used poison.
Harry McNicholas they did not have any specialized poison and they almost never assassinated anyone nor did they have any fighting prowess whatsoever
When I was a kid I wanted to be a spartan
kieran sargeant Well if buggery from early age on is your thing...
I don't want to be a spartan now, but from what I'd heard about the schools they were more appealing to me than the one I went to
kieran sargeant So buggery from early age on to make you proper man would have been preferable than regular western schools then ?
It is problem with all these modern re-imaginations, often based on comic or what not light entertainment, real worlds inconvenient facts are left out.
Being and actively practicing homosexuality was compulsory in Sparta.
I chose my words wrong. I didn't wish to grow up and be a spartan. I just thought it would be awesome to be like Leonidas in 300
*****
The last part of your comment makes me want to bring up the fact that many people throughout history has been forced to pretend to be heterosexual, even to this day, primarily in the west, because of the Abrahamic religions.
There was a time long ago when most people were openly bisexual.
Ninjas weren't a warrior culture. The ninjato didn't exist. Samurai and ninja weren't enemies unless they belonged to other clans. Samurai were a class of people and ninja were a position or job. Many Samurai were indeed ninja. Onto samurai and katanas. Katana weren't that amazing. The same statement of in trained hands they could cut a man in half is true for any sword designed for slicing such as Scimatars, Sabres, Cutlsses, Long Swords and especially Claymores. Metallurgy in ancient Japan was more advanced than that of Europe but that was due to a need for it to be. Metal found in Japan lacks some minerals found else where making the metal more brittle and requiring more work to remain functionable and well crafted. The fact that some call the Katana the best sword of all time is a opinion and honestly is rather in accurate. No sword is better than another (That's not wholly accurate there is a British officers sword that tried to hard to be everything so it just failed) as all swords are good at different things. A rapier is better at stabbing than a long sword. A long sword is better at slicing than a rapier. A Katana is usually better at slicing but worse at defending than a long sword. A gladius is a quicker but shorter thruster then the longer and heavier rapier. The gladius was a war sword and a rapier a dueling one. Which swords are better? The answer remains none. The Spartan 'short sword' was a Spatha.
lol samurai were not ninjas, samurai was a high class in society and ninjas were low farmers who were tired of being treated unfairly and so rebelled against samurai. Being a ninja wasnt a job either, you are very wrong in so many ways it baffles me!
oh and ninjas and samurai did fight they had a whole civil war in japan, about ninjas fighting samurai
brooklyn6279 Hattori Hanzo were Ninja and Samurai. And their were ninja that lived like farmers in the Iga mountains, but also Ninjas that were Samurai. Ninja is a "job" not a class. An their were treated by Oda Nobunaga, not by every Samurai. They did their job for Daimyos, their clans and for wealthy Samurai.
brooklyn, you got it all wrong.
thank you thank you thank you
Who would win? The Terrifying Aztec Warriors or a simple sneeze.
Simple Sneeze now
Yeah but if you couldn’t sneeze at that moment my ancestors would make you into a little gift for the gods
@@nelofrmokc6086 naah. no sneeze needed. just some spit. also, your ancestors were the least trained, the weaksest phisically and the dumbest of all the warriors talked about in this vid, so you can sit down
@@nostraoffice1486 you think you can beat one of them?
@@SingularityAli. just one? probably. any fit modern day man who has been in a streetfight probably could
It's wasn't just 300 Spartans, there were also around 7000 other assisting troops
Not 7000, more like 1000-2000 and he forgot to mention that they winning for only 3 days because they found a way to surround them. Imagine how desparate was a king with such an army to try to surround an army that it was like 1% of his force..
the 300 Spartans were at the forefront though. The other greeks were in positions behind the Spartan lines.
those 7000 were 1000, and they assisted in war after the war of 300, after 300 have died athens united greece
Less than 5000 greek troops were on Thermopylae, and in the last day, after they realized that tehy were getting surrounded, Leonidas (as army general) ordered only he and his 300 spartans would stay back to halt the Persians. 700 Thespians volunteered and stayed with him to the end.
Oh stranger
let the other Spartans know
that, obeying our laws (/our common ways),
here we lie dead
"Spartan tomb inscription, Thermopylae"
there was around 1000-2000 soldiers helping the Spartans and a slave told the Persians another way around the mountain to surround the Spartans
300 beat 150,000? This is blasphemy, this is madness............
Madness? THIS IS SPARTAAA!
Yaaaabdlsndhshdbexknrbesjbfwhiskenrbfjdkakejdndbsjdhrb
aAARGHAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA
hahhahahaha
He said they lost. What you talkin about Willis??
NInjas werent mostly farmers... they were mostly middle class samurai. And they almost never fought Samurai unless they were in different clans. "Ninjato" didnt exist. Its called a Wakizashi.
ChillaystiKz i thought ninjato is a straight sword while a wakizashi is a bit curved.
Interesting.....🤔
Ninja's didn't carry swords, they didn't wear black, they didn't know martial arts, and they weren't Warriors. They resembled common people.
ChillaystiKz Agreed. Ninja were really more like special forces.
@@HagakureJunkie no not even that
You missed out the Sikh warriors
@Puu Pää bruh XD
And rajput warriors too
@@AryanKumar-py6tb and mughals :)
@@ubiquitousgamer9176 nah
@@ubiquitousgamer9176 also i am a Muslim Rajput btw if that matters
How can you not mention the Polish Winged Hussars, the greatest cavalry to have ever existed and were literally undefeated for over 200 years.
Sabaton *intensifies*
Mongol empire would beg to differ.
@@redrust3 well the tatars , basically same armed force as mongols , were beat to pulp by Winged Hussars, and the always retreated when Hussars showed up on battlefield - Tatars were good army , and good army isn't stupid , they fall back and attack other formations that they ware capable to fight with ... with Hussars they didnt stand a chance and they knew it
Kuba Rzeźnik The Mongol Empire achieved its greatest accomplishments in the 1200s, while Polish Winged Hussars were formed 300 years later. By that time, the original Empire had fracturrd into four warring khanates. You cannot compare the two. During the Mongol’s zenith, their cavalry split up and the diversionary force burned Crakow to the ground. Within 3 days, the main force defeated King Bela of Hungary, and laid waste to his kingdom. At the time, the Poles and the Hungarians were the most powerful armies in Europe. Mongol invasions were only turned back in Egypt, Afghanistan, Vietnam, and Japan. At various times, Poland has been victorious. Other times, they have been defeated by Prussians, Nazi Germany, the Soviet Union, and the Tatars.
Very impressive that Poland has survived many invasions and defeats, and survived for 1,000 years! People still speak the Polish language and practice their culture!
I'm sorry, Thoughty. I love your content, but this video is just chock full of misinformation.
sooooooo much fictional myth information provided
He said maori wrong
That's right.
Yeah he used bias views of history. Like when mentioning the mongols he only showed them as the brutes by the haters of their time.
stupidest most meaningless video ever. should have titled the video :
10 Greatest Warrior Cultures in cheap hollywood pop-history
Genghis Kahn's Mongolian warriors should've been number one. The Spartan's lost despite all that badass training and stuff
Yeah, but that was because their navy SUCKED in compareson to the athenean one.
Speederzzz but they lost. that was the point. always putting Europeans at the top. that's racist bruh. they say Genghis Kahn was a monster and Alexander is great. why? all conquerors were monsters. nobody conquered by bedding their enemies. i find this video offensive because it's racist.
wolvie041007 i'm on your side. on that front, genghis khan is badass! and i don't like the spartans that much. ithink that the biggest problem with the spartans is the movie 300. which is 1% historically accurate.
Speederzzz .... and that 1% is 100% badass!
wolvie041007 Just to be clear.Each time the spartan infantry stepped into the battlefield (full strength) they won.The spartans never lost a combat but the perioikoi did.Do not compare these two types of soldiers.Spartans's strict policy of choosing a child made them be much less productive in terms of childbirth.So they eventually went out of men.END OF STORY
Hey man, I really appreciate that you stick to creating qualitative, vetted and informative videos, and make the narrative not only crisp but engaging. In a world full of crap content and click bait, you've kept this channel grounded and maintained a dignified, research based approach to creating content.
300 spartans vs. 300 samurai??
+Rahul Pasupureddy In an open field, it could go either way (more probably, Samurais could win without too much difficulty). At a field like Thermopylae? I could bet you 100 to 1 that Spartans would win and still rob you!
MaegnasMw But one main advantage I think is Samurai use horses (movie evidence: Last Samurai), while Spartans don't (I might be wrong, it was depicted like that in 300). Horse warfare was one of the main reason Genghis Khan (Mongols) could easily conquer most of Asia and come up till the doorsteps of Europe. But still this would make up for an epic battle!!
Rahul Pasupureddy You are correct, Spartans were practically all infantry (perhaps the heaviest infantry the classical world had seen but still, infantry). Horses, if present, were meant only for kings/generals and maybe as labor animals. Spartans greatest advantage was their reputation, most armies never dared to face them. In the case of the Persian wars, at Thermopylae they chose the field and at Plataea they had the numbers and superior equipment (Persian armor was, for most troops, wicker shields, wooden spears and copper or bronze swords while Spartans equipped bronze body armor and shields and had iron swords and spears).
+Rahul Pasupureddy Samurai all the way. The "tech levels" are just too far apart. Later period Samurai even had access to (primitive) firearms.
+Rahul Pasupureddy Pretty much noone had that many horseman at the time,we fought at our wars mostly on foot,only years later the macedonians have adapted better tactics for infantry,and for horsemen.
i really hope u study more on your subject before talking about it, the mongols goals werent just killing like you stated, it just seemed that way because we killed alot, our goal or rather chingis khans goal was to unite nomad empires such as khwarezemia, but when we send our people to make peace and unite middle eastern countries they killed those people and because of that chingis khan was voilent (i mean who wouldnt b pissed) but i know it doesnt excuse them being killers but so what? they killed just like any other warriors on this list. i just wanted to point out that our golas wasnt to "kill everything" thats just absurd
Lol it was they would kill anyone including farmers if they were on the other side of the war
+AngryBear360 well... look at the crusades, when the crusaders conquered Jerusalem, they just killed everyone left standing including children and (after they raped them) women. You see, that's just war and it's the same for nearly every war throughout history.
+Ondřej Volejník exactly, back then if some one opposed you dont dont just say, well whatever..., u kill them :p regardless of who they r thats just war
+Disko H watch shia's "JUST DO IT" m8, good luck 👍
+Temuulen Altangerel amen
What do you mean the Vikings did some good? They were practically paragons of virtue in comparison to most of the other European cultures, they were some of the longest to preserve their Pagan ways, they created very cultural and brave countries, weakened the Kingdoms of England for King Arthur, they were some of the first to treat women as equals and allow them into battle and they were good at trade, surprisingly.
Loki Aerier They also invented the first methods of sailing *into* the wind, without oars.
Loki Ragnarok Vikings refer to the pirates from Scandinavia, not the actual Scandinavian people. Those Vikings have received the reputation a millennium after their deeds by historians looking at them with rose tinted glasses.
The fact is those pirates gained their warrior reputation and infamy not from fighting standing armies in battle but from attacking defenceless villages and cities and fleeing before an actual armed response could be mobilized.
During those raids they were known to indiscriminately kill men, women and children, capture slaves, rape and gratuitously torture people.
Anndgrim One, for the Norse being a Viking was both a job and a lifestyle, true they did raid defenceless villages but you exclude all their most famous battles:
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Svolder
www.englandandenglishhistory.com/anglo-saxon-history/the-viking-invasions-of-england-793-ad-to-900-ad-
militaryhistory.about.com/od/battleswarsto1000/p/Viking-Invasions-Battle-Of-Maldon.htm
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Edington
Those are just a few of the many battles where the Vikings fought actual armies, note, the armies weren't made of defenceless women and children. Also, the Great Heathen ARMY was an army of Vikings, therefore Vikings are soldiers for the Pagan Scandinavian countries.
Loki Ragnarok no they weren't
***** Is that your entire argument, no evidence to back up what you say?
Mongolian: *catapulted the infected black death corpses over the city walls* That will work let's go home
*Many years later*
450 Million death
which makes gengish han has the best k/d ratio
@@anarchistlilia today, that title goes to Mao Zedong
@@Youbeentagged nah, america, covid and indegenous
@@temujinkhagan5308 so you think covid killed up to 60 million people in America?
Damn you stupid
@@Youbeentagged covid AND the native american massacres
sigh... there were 7000 assisting Hoplites.. not just 300 spartans.. secondly its been proven that Samurai were not that Honourable. as to test their new swords they would kill random people on the street etc etc etc (Hence le ninja) sounds like you've just looked at movies and taken them as the truth..
Árni Rúnarson yeah, big deal with the samurai... when mongols invaded them they proved to be really weak.
700
If samurai were honourable, ninjas wouldn't have existed in first place
It is not so much movies where people get this modern notion of samurai. But its derived from the tokugawa period where there was a sizeable warrior caste that had no reason to be. So they got together and made up this nonsense Honor above all and honor over death stuff we see now, where they seppuku at just about anything and never surrender and crap. The fact that there are records of samurai forces fleeing from battle and doing what we would consider 'cowardly' actions does not matter.
in the mid and late 1800s when European showed up and Japan started their "we need to get modern' The samurai caste who was 100% ignorant of the codes that were written was just romanticized whimsy were believed to be HOW they were supposed to operate, so the Germans in Japan that were teaching the Emperor's army to use guns and modern tactics saw they last and deluded generation of samurai doing what they do and what we as humans just for the most part accept as how the samurai always were.
htennek1 Yes not all samurais were honourable but many were and same goes for some knight too
before watching, spartans should be 1
And you are CORRECT Janice what is his prize. * drumroll * A LIFETIME MEMBERSHIP TO BRAZZERS congratulations.
Patatoe Fan awesome
So what did the Spartans conquer? Nothing. THe Mongols conqured most of the world. They were the greatest.
Harry McNicholas A warlike culture doesn't mean they liked to conquer, Spartiates didn't felt well getting out of their country, you can see it in Thucydides book , The History of Pelopponesian Wars in cap 1, when the Corinthians affirmed the lack of experience going out of the country of all Greeks.
I like how European education brazenly glosses over any African warrior classes as if non existed
that's because they got steamrolled by Europeans therefore they where shit
MrTibbentings More like it's because your just as ignorant as the the researchers of this video. As if every other so called warrior culture featured in this video did not get "steamrolled" by the next.
+wunademones mate didn't the british beat a whole tribe in 38mins? shit like that didn't happen in europe.
MrTibbentings A whole tribe? do you even know what you are talking about?. You must be referring to when the Zulu's turned up at a British fort with spears and lost to the British who had guns, as if there is any glory in the clear advantage in weaponry. Had that've been a hand to hand fight i think we all know who would have won.
+wunademones not the fault of the british that the Zulus had spears and shit shoulda used all the time they had developing better shit, no one cares about African warriors because by the time they entered the world stage thier tech was so far behind they were (and still are to a point) irrelevant
The haka peruperu is only a single variation of the haka, there is actually hundreds of variations, and the haka is used for most weddings and funerals in the modern day as well, not just for rugby, the hakas are not only about war but also the world, life, and theaking of new zealand
This is soooooo wrong
10. Aztekts did not conuqor land in the way we think of, war for theam was more ritualistic thean about counquring
9. Mongols did take captives
8.hakka war dance is awsome
7. The ninjas worked for THE SAMMURIAS, there were even sammurias who were ninjas, they were also fercliy loayal to there masters (most of the time) becuse if they did not they would be wiped out.
6.Havent researched it, but sound fairly legit
5. romans did slash
4. Oh boy... have to make a sub list here
a. The katana was not the sharpest sword ever made, in fact its not really that good for cutting, its mainly for slashing.
b. The katana was not the main battel weapon for the samuria, they woulde perfer the naginata or the bow. They always brougth the katana with theam thougth but as a back up weapon
c. The Sammurie were just as backstabby as the Knigths of western europ.
3. I would arguee that there were no such things as a viking, yes theire were raiders from the north that gained a reputation for being scary, but thiere effectiveness was exaggerated by medieval monks.
2. chivilry code was not really followed by medieval knigths, the hade no problem killing poor peasants and raping thiere wifes.
1.Good god i hate the spartans.
a. Spartans were not much better than the athians, if they were they would have counqured athens
b. Thermopaly...... They lost that battel and they were about 7000 of theam. And during theier retreat were the famous 300 were theire was also about 1100 more greeks theier to back theam up
c. they got destroyed by other greek factions
i know my spelling is horrible
+lordofdarkdudes
Spartans were better than the athenians actually. In sparta(Σπάρτη) the only thing that someone could be is a warrior.
In thermopiles there were ONLY 300 spartans, and 700 soldiers of another city-country(greece wasn't united back then). I don't remember which was their city, but i know that spartans told them that if they wanted to leave, they could. Spartans had no problem with it.
+lordofdarkdudes
Spartans did conquer the capital of Athens, but were forced to return to their own settlements to suppress revolts inspired by the Athenians, which let the Athenians recover.
Βασίλης Οπλοποιάδης They were fron thebes also the spartans hade a bunch of helots with theam
It's samurai,not samuria _-_
+lordofdarkdudes no one ever conquered anyone in Greece because they were fine with what they had
Now lets see... Im far from a history expert but i know this:
* The Mogols didnt raid with the sole intention to destroy everything, rather to build up a reputation of what happend to those who opposed the horde. This in the end led to fewer casualties because more forces surrendered.
* The Ninja was not a silent shadow of death, skilled in all types of various combat techniques and mystic powers (Of witch you didnt mention, but is commonly associated with the Ninja). Instead Ninja means Spy. So they were spies. Most spies are not death incarnate, but rather any simple bugger who either are good at hearing things he/she shouldnt, or just happened to and offered the information to the highest bidder.
There were Ninja "Clans", at least according to historians of the time, but that information is mudded with mythology, elitism and all kinds of rubbisjh making it hard to tell what was realy truth. But basicly, they were spies. The more propper word for an assassin (And please correct me if im wrong here, im a viking, not a samurai afterall) would be Hitokiri.
Side note: Only "Real" evidence of the Kasurigma, as cool as it is, is taht Musashi supposedly fought one with that weapon. But that opponent is also the least likely person of Musashis opponents to exist.
Another sidenote: There is no such thing as the Ninjato.
*The immortals were highly skilled with the bow. This is simple logic. They were not a militia, but a professional army. That means that their livelihood, for that matter their entire professional lives circled around training for combat, and combat itself. They were not expected to be great poets, singers, craftsmen (unless you count warfare as a craft) or any such things. Instead they trained brutaly in using the tools of their trade. So here is the simple logic. If you spend (and im just pulling these numbers out of my bass) 40h a week training, and only a 10th of that training is with bow (But it would probably have been more), in a year you still have over 200 hours of bow training per year. As a refference note, the RAF had about 200 flight hours as a requirement before they sent their pilots into battle in WW2. Would you say that the RAF werent "perticularly skilled with planes"?
* The roman legion was not "masters of the shield and spear", that would possibly be the greeks. Let me also point out that shield and spear are the backbone of almost every historical military fighting force.
They were masters of Formation fighting though, where they would employ the Gladius rather than the classical spear, because it was less clumsy, more agile, faster and a lot easier to manouver with.
Most of their "spears" were javelins, that was thrown.
* The Katana (Despite whatever i wrote above, here is were the war begins. Fight gently, people) is not the sharpest sword that was ever created. Hard thing to judge, but i would say Damascus blades take that role. At least as a conceptual swrod, rather than comparing item for item.
I will say this though: Katana is an exelent sword, especially since they were made from crap metal. Japan has a rather poor reserve of metal, and what metal they have is of rather shady quality. So it is very likely the Sharpest sword ever created... In Japan and by japanese metal.
The Katana could not easily slice right a man. They did test the blades like that according to legend and shoddy historians, but it was with a few special things added, like a longer (about half a meter to a meter) handel to get more force out of it.
The Samurai was not the most "fearless warrior that ever lived".
In fact it is basic military etiqette (Maybe not the rigt word) to die for causes out of honor, religous beliefs, social standings and other such things. The Vikings thought they went to paradise if they died in battle. Do you think that made them less willing to face death on the battlefield?
What marks a warrior? Someone who lives to fight. What marks a soldier? Someone who lives to die for a cause. So the Samurai were soldiers. Just like the vikings, immortals, roman legionaries (At least when rome was strong and had propper roman legions and not mercinaries)
*The battleaxe was not the weapon of choise for the Viking. It was the spear. Everyone uses spears. rich vikings had swords, poor vikings had axes. All had spears. (i way all, but obviously not like 100% of every fighting viking had spears, but it is so common a weapon throughout history you could say that everyone uses spears)
*The Vikings were not violent savages. They were raiders and farmers and traders. More farmers and traders realy, but such things dont end up as the most interesting headlines. "The feared Vikings, ruthlessly traveling accross europe to plow the land and sell their craft with murderous intent!"
* ... the entire medieval world. Do you mean Europe? And do you mean somewere between year 800-1500? Are you sure? What about the Mongols? Or the Ottomans?
*Knights were not the Upholder of Peace, enforced with a strict code of honor. Knight were an oppressing force when at home or a semi-professional military force when at campaign. Their Code of Honor is, if anything, a handbook of how not let people get above their station, how to punish people who do not bow low enough and loose rules to get away with being as brutal and opressing as they could be.
*Knights were not bound by the law to accept any duel. They accepted duels from other knights, but only when they could not murder the bastard without getting bad rep for it. Realy, knights were an elitistic warrior class that handed out their own judgement and was often driven with religious intent. People of that description, no matter what title or name you give them, are generally propper bastards.
*Spartans were indeed elite fighting men who devoted their lives to the art of combat. Just like the samurai, the Immortals and so on. They were Soldiers, not Warriors or Fighters.
* 300 spartans did stand up to around 70.000 to 200.000 persians, but they were not alone. They also had about 5000 other greek forces with them. Still bad odds, but better than the legends.
dear Thoughty, please dont stop making videos. I enjoy your videos. But if your making videos about history, research more than just the DVD shelf. Your description of the Ninja is just as valid as TMNT, and i dare say few concider that a documentary.
With love from Sweden, Kami.
KamiRecca i agree jag är också från Sverige
HOLY SHIT..... I am early..... Better think of a joke...
Blackberry
The Aztecs didn't strangle or stone prisoners of war, instead they used prisoners of war as slaves or as blood sacrifices to Huitzilopochtli.
Your video is incorrect. The Spartans at Thermopolea were the core of a small unit of about 8,000 soldiers from allied city states.
+Iron Cross you don't know what you are talking about...
***** Read about it.
I have read about it and I am greek by the way and I know exactly what happened spartans had help but they were not 8000, I don't want to play it smart I just let you know
there were 300 spartans and 3000 allied powers-city states
Κωνσταντίνος Βούλγαρης ακριβως, εκτος απο την τελευταια μαχη που εφυγαν με εντολη του Λεωνιδα και εμειναν μονο 1000 ατομα εναντια σε χιλιαδες περσες
the katana does NOT easily slice a man in half.
Why do people make so much bullshit? omfg
Thenotsointeresting Doge The sword itself doesn't, no, but it's possible to do so with relative ease if you're strong enough.
***** Like with every other sword?
*****
Yeah, pretty much. Strength is the major factor.
And a blade... You'll have a hell of a time with a mace or hammer, lol.
Pat Norris
Actually, the weapon will go through bone with relative ease if you swing right.
Pat Norris
Ah, makes sense.
"Come back with your shield or on top of it" I believe it means come back as a victor or a martyr.
How exactly do you "come back a martyr"?
Carried on the shoulders of his men back to Sparta for a burial possibly. It's a figure of speech doesn't mean it has to be taken so literally.
Adam S no it means "come back alive as a man who couldn't take the war or come back dead as a brave warrior"
no it means exactly what Adam said. I don't get the confusion, it's pretty self explanatory. dead men were brought back on their shields. It's like asking "was my husband shot in the front or in the back?" (in the back = he was running away.) without his shield = he dropped his shield and ran off, rather than fighting to the death with it.
H TAN H ΕΠΙ ΤΑΣ in capital letters is the famous phrase. ἢ τὰν ἢ ἐπὶ τᾶς in small ones.
which means i (the spartan female talking, either mother or wife) will expect you to come back either dead or alive.
also theres no such thing as a "martyr" in ancient greek life or philosophy.that kind of thinking is made for fanatics.the true meaning of the phrase (reading between the lines as english say) is : whether you come back alive or dead, do not come back as a coward. (without the shield). keep in mind that it was utter contempt in greek city states for a man-citizen to drop his shield in the face of the enemy
6:36 what did you expect, for them to wear sneakers?!
No, leather boots are a thing though
the greeks had some sort of greaves you roman fan boy
heels
suprised that no one mentioned cossacks - warrior culture, that led victorious fights against ottoman, polish, mongolian and japanese empires, and have created Russia bigger than its todays territory
Barbarossa Can a couple of undisciplined drunks successfully siege and plunder the capital of the Ottoman Empire? Apparently they can, four times actually, later on the Cossacks also became the primary shock cavalry of the Russian Empire. Before that they managed to set up their own autonomous state within the Zaporozhnie Oblast in Ukraine.
A fellow patriot mate, Cossacks didn't do anything like that. They were in Russian army. Don't talk stupid. Russians didn't siege Istanbul ever. They just arrived at the gates of it :) l guess u are a big ignorant.
Barbarossa the sieges of Istanbul were executed by the Zaporozhian host which was an independent Cossack state. The Cossacks you're thinking of would be the Don and Kuban Cossacks who were integrated into the Russian Empire after Catherine the Great.
A fellow patriot no nation in history captured capital of Ottoman Empire until 1918. Cossacks just fought against vassal of Ottomans, Crimean khanate. They never came close to Ottoman Empire's capital with their own name. The only power who came near to Istanbul was Russians.
How can you say that they sacked the capital 4 times? Where did you get that idea from :D wtf.
I do not think the Cossacks fought the Mongolians. They also did not fight the Japanese. Both Russian and Ukrainian Cossacks were used to protect the southern frontier against the Muslims.
Ninja？please don't watch too many movies.
Ninjer Assassins
You're an idiot
Shinobi were indeed very real
Yes, they were spies, mostly. There is barely any records what so ever of actual "ninjas" that used "ninjutsu" or anything of the sort, there never was a way of the ninja, or a clan of ninjas. The version of the ninja as we know it is entirely fictional, brought to the world somewhere around the 20th century?
The ones we call ninjas wore normal clothing, most of them pretended to be monks and they barely ever killed people, to killed people.
I mean, not saying assassination attempts didnt happen, they did. BUT IT WASNT 1 PERSON. More like, a fucking army. or well... A unit of sorts....
I should probably go to sleep.
YOU'VE been watching too many movies -- Ninja WERE real and existed during the Sengoku era, but I think it's important to know that the popular image of the ninja as black-clad assassins is mostly myth.
The head-to-toe black outfit comes from Japanese theater. In Japanese theater, it's accepted that someone dressed in all black is invisible (similar to how audiences accept that a painted backdrop represent a forest or whatever). So when portray the stealthy ninjas, they used those costumes to represent them on stage.
There were of course spies and assassins in feudal Japan, but little is known about them (like intelligence agencies of our age, they were secretive). Most "ninja" weapons actually stems from the period of time when the Japanese government banned ownership of weapons. Those who wanted to carry weapons had to disguise them (so the e.g. the kama is a modified agricultural tool). So they weren't ninja weapons per se.
There is a lot of mystery and exoticism surrounding ninjas and their secret arts. This is not by accident.
One of the ninja's greatest advantages was that no one knew anything about them and they had no idea how they managed to accomplish amazing feats.
Sometimes people would hear of their accomplishments and really embellish the story. Other times the ninja communities themselves would spread insane rumors. This was obviously great for business.
Also not everyone could be a Ninja. It's important to note that some Samurai were ALSO Ninja.
how about the Persian Sassanid ctapharact knights?
+Darius Ashkani That's an order of warriors, not a culture.
Immortals weren't a culture either, nor were the Roman legion that were mentioned in this video
Darius Ashkani
Nor were samurai, ninja or knights. They don't belong here any more than cataphracts.
+DeathsHood The video is sort of retarded, lol.
Karl Herzog
Somewhat, yes. It also has numerous historical inaccuracies, making it slightly more stupid.
Proud Maori here with european and polynesian heritage. Pleased to see the culture of my ancestors up here!
Ae, here too mate!
Me too 🇳🇿🇳🇿🇳🇿
Lol, the Maori warriors, best known for their dance. Greatest warrior my ass
Clueless keyboard warrior i read.
+david yang best known for creating trench warfare actually
+david yang probably they didn't have to fight after they did the dance cause the enemies shat themselves
+david yang There is a story of great battle between them and English . English had guns and win but their myth was born there and then . Cos they run into bullets and menage to reach English line or something . Check wiki you will get more info for 3 minutes with Google then you will get in that whole video
+david yang I live in new zealand and fucking maori gangs are everywhere.
BEFORE WATCHING: Spartans...
I KNEWW ITTT I KNEWWW ITTTTT!!
Andrew | #Walkthroughs the front cover is the immortals who beat them but
Same and its obvious
I am from greece and we are savage
No mercy
you forgot the undefeated gurkhas of nepal the bravest of the brave
I really do agree, especially in the world wars...
The gurkhas don't get enough respect for their contribution.
What about the swiss huh?
Sikhs too
I was going to say the Gurkha's.
You also forgot about the Celts... They were fearsome warriors, and excellent swordsman. I'm surprised a lot of these lists hardly, if ever include them. The Romans employed them as mercenaries, or guides. They didn't fear the Legion, nor the Saxons.
And the Celts were ACTUALLY A WAR CULTURE !
The Celts actually fought successfully against the romans. Until Romans through deceit made the Celtic tribes fight against each others.
There were 60.000 persians at thermopylae....
And 7.000 greeks
300 spartans(Right on that)
700 thebieans
And 6.000 greeks
Thats what historians say, im not judging you thoughty2
There are said to to hundreds of thousands or even millions of persians but no one can be certain because of historical bias.
reggie cahill no way there is millions that attacked thermopylae
66_greenrunner_77 Why so sure? Were you there, or how do you know? We cant know it for sure, ever. And it didnt happen like that "because historians say"
The persian empire was large enough to have one million soldiers but was very unlikely as the slave soldiers would want to fight the persians for killing their friends and family
66_greenrunner_77 No what Thoughty meant was after all those troops left 300 Spartan soldiers stayed vs many Persians, learn history before you start talking BS.
how the fuck u put glass in an egg?
Open the egg, fill it with glass and... Close the egg?
Ninjas dude
+Dr Boom Ever heard of magic?
ninja would shove a baggie of broken glass up the chicken orifice before the shell mineralized. just don't get them mixed into your omelette.
Shaw Montgomery it was in an egg shell
huns, turks, byzantines, rajputs, do better research
+himanshu khetan It's a video of opinion. Want a different list? Make your own video.
+DeathsHood it's by no means a bad list and I support just about all of these but I am just making an observation, there is no clear basis for his numerator and based simply on military prowess there were others that made larger impacts. I understand that this is an opinion video and I like most of the content creator's works
*****
Incoming wall of text.
The list itself is lacking in substance based solely off what it was titled to be: That of warrior *cultures*.
Knights, Immortals, The Legion, Ninja, and Samurai being warriors *in* a culture, as opposed to the culture itself, and not belonging on this list.
However, to be a warrior *culture* military prowess isn't as important as the role *of* the military, or combat, in the culture.
Spartans, for instance, were at one point in their history, known primarily for their art and artisans.
They then made a rather sudden and immediate change into a militaristic society where literally every capable male child became a warrior. Battle and battle prowess was all and everything from childhood to death, for a Spartan. They were the embodiment of a 'warrior culture'.
Vikings, however, were primarily non-combatants; traders, farmers, artisans, etc... The primary reason they deserve a spot on the list, however, is their view of combat and its role in their religion.
To a 'Viking' a glorious and honorable death in battle reserved you a place at the side of Odin, their chief deity. It was, therefore, a rather pivotal focus of old Norse culture.
When making the decision as to who should be on any list of warrior *cultures*, factor in what combat meant to them, and what role it played in their society.
The Turks, as an example, were less focused on their warriors in terms of cultural significance, and more on the maintenance and expansion of their empire. They had great warriors, and were militarily rather successful for some time, but war and warriors were not their main focus, culturally speaking.
The Rajput were a sect *of* warriors within a greater culture with other, more pressing focuses. India is one of the oldest centers of both learning and industry on the planet, after all.
The Byzantines, in the same vein as the British much later, utilized war and their warriors more as tools; extensions of the will of the empire, there only to further its economic and political goals. They were good at waging war, but it was a tool.
I don't know enough about the Huns to make a statement of their culture.
I apologize for the rant, but it seemed pertinent to note the differences in what the list was intended to be, and the warriors you mentioned earlier.
I agree. however, that the list could be better researched, and that there are warrior cultures better suited to positions on it.
I just misinterpreted your first comment to be the typical "My favorite warriors weren't here therefore he is wrong" argument. There's a *huge* amount of them in the comment section.
+DeathsHood perfectly understandable, I feel the same way about the idiots that make UA-cam a painful experience. Thankfully there are the knowledgeable ones as well.
+himanshu khetan THANK YOU,SOME ONE !
His information on some of these is straight from film and television rather than historical documents.
How did I know Spartans were gonna be at the top... XD
Have you seen the trailer for the new game "For Honor".
Jace: The Grey Warrior
I have not.
Darth Sidian I'll show you a vid, hold on.
Jace: The Grey Warrior
Ok
***** ???
Where are the Sikhs? Ever heard of the battle of chamkaur where 40 Sikhs fought around 2 million mughals? Battle of Saragahri where 21 Sikhs defeated 10,000 Afghans. And numerous amounts of battles where the Sikhs were out numbered by the Mughals and still ended up defeating the mughals.
+Robert Roberts Lol
40 Sikhs vs 2 million Mughals? What are you shitting me, they would have been slaughtered without the vast majority of the army even knowing it had happened. this shit is wack.
Nic Rage The Sikhs did get killed but the Sikhs put up a great fight. We're talking about Warrior culture in this video and 40 Sikhs going against 2 million mughals shows bravery and not being afraid of death which two attributes a real Warrior should possess.
lol
U r a chutiya. Ask a Sikh what that means
Ugandan knuckles
KNOW DA WAE
i suck at games DA WAE! DA WAE! DA WAE!!!!!
Bruh😂😂😂😂
*no*
**Cluck**
awww thoughty2 used to wear suit like he be presenting in class 💀
Three things.
1) European, Mid East, and pan asian fencing / other swordplay have some advantages over the Katana. Every Samurai was different, but as a weapon the katana is over-specialized for cutting over piercing, and their popularity is just because they look incredible, and downright beautiful.
2) Ninjas were usually the peasantry and serf's response to Samurai persecution. Feudal combat is less honorable, more people with swords oppressing those without. A "Ninja" peasant caught with a katana would probably be executed, as these weren't weapons for them. That's why so many of their weapons are improvised.
3) Vikings were kinda like the huns with boats. They were really just shock troops with a distinct advantage (vikings had boats, huns were great horsemen). Just like China and Rome, when Europe adapted to the Viking's tactics, they were better able to defend against them. Shit, christianity arguable did the most of anyone to fuck over the vikings, not actual armed resistance.
Now, then...LET THE FLAME WARS BEGIN!
Mike Zilla 1) The katana is actually just as varied in design as European swords. The hilt length, blade length, curvature, width, depth, point, etc... all vary for different purposes. A katana with minimal curvature, thin spine and a stabbing point is just as effective at armor penetration as any other blade.
You still don't want to stab a heavily armored opponent *anyways* because you'll have a hell of a time getting your blade out again, lol.
2) Although they weren't called 'vikings', the Norse cultures people apply the name to weren't just specialized with boats.
They were well trained, skilled martial fighters, and defeated military forces from one end of the known world to the other. 'Viking' berserkers were commonly sought after as personal guards and mercenaries all the way into Persia.
***** Wrong on the katana/stabbing part. Katanas were brittle and you always wanted to stabb an armored opponent because its the only way you will kill him with a sword. A stab through the chain mail at the joints.
Right on the Vikings though. Warrior culture through and through, complete with a death-cult and the works. Every man was a fighting man and they were trained since childbirth. Hell the law said every man must own an axe, a shield and a spear. Compared to say the Samurai and the Knights where only the upper classes were real fighting men.
Pasan Etternavn
Not wrong. You want to stab weaknesses, not armor.
Joints such as the neck, armpits, elbows, hips, knees, visor, etc... are all viable points to stab an armored opponent.
You *NEVER* want to stab through heavy armor because your weapon *will* get stuck.
Another way to defeat an armored opponent is to use heavy, blunt weapons such as a mace, flail, or hammer to crush the armor or cause a concussion.
Um in a full plate there were no open places save for the visor. The joints were covered in chainmail which you can stab through. Hence the development of the long stabbing swords. they were meant to pierce through that chainmail.
Or you could go the easy way and use a poleaxe.
Pasan Etternavn
I never said 'open places' I said 'weaknesses'. Of which there are many.
THIS IS SPARTAAAA!!!
the best warriors in the world are Mongols and Turks.put your lies to an end.you know it.The Mongols and the Turks ruled more than 120 states alone.Genghis khan,Atilla,Sultan Suleiman,Conqueror Sultan Mehmed,Baibars,Ghaznes Mahmut,Ogeday,Timur,Bumin Kagan,Mete Khan etc.
lol
Why didn't I see the Winged Hussars?
Polish Lithuanian Mapping cause they got recked by vikings
Because they are not a warrior culture? I mean Vikings, Spartans and Mongols especially had every male as a warrior thus a warrior culture as per the list. Hussars are a part of the Russian culture that separates alike the nobles not like a culture etc
they never fought vikings tho......
and if you are talking about swedes, if anything it was the winged hussars doing the "wrecking", along with essentially anyone else that they faced
Charles Russian culture? Husars were poles and lithuanians
Charles you are the dumbest human I ever seen, firstly , being Viking was a job (The same with the Hussars) secondly Husaria where Polish not Russian
Thanks for this bro
the amount of false information is a lil bit too high for my taste.
Same here
The Pure Healer Actually that's pretty accurate I don't know what ninjas you're talking about but please tell me
Woah Biang ninjas were not assassins, and they did not have known specialized weapons they also were not required to learn martial arts in any compacity
The Pure Healer Ninjas didn't only assassinate but they definitely did, you would think someone who is trained in stealth weren't be hired as assassins? Also ninjas were trained to fight but did it as rarely as possible
Woah Biang no they werent trained to fight and yes they did rarely assasinate but in general no they were not assassins just like james bond is not an assassin hes a spy... also "trained in stealth" is an odd way of putting it... its not like they vanished from thin air using a forgotten magic they just spied on people
What about the freaking Macedonians!!!! Alexander the Great conquered Persia some of India,Egypt, and Greece. What!!!!!!!!😵
+Marques Morris Think of it as the spartans represent all greeks (including macedonians).
dude fkof they weren't Macedonian
Ιωάννης Στυλιαράς vikecah Ok I guess I can see it that way. Vikecah bro common no internet trolling. I have a right to state an opinion. ( that was very valid I might add)
gre894 You do know if we were scientifically and technically speaking Macedonia was a huge nation above Greece. To my knowledge, they had a different religion and society than Greece. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Macedonia_(ancient_kingdom). If you think of Greece when you say Alexander the Great then you are ignorant to a certain degree.
Marques Morris No offence, but i think you should educate yourself better.
why you didn't say anything about the hashashin
not really warriors more like shit assasins
Because they are not great enough to be on that list? ^^
Because maybe they are not as good as any of these warriors mentioned, especially if there middle east
Someone has apparently watch Season 1 of Marco Polo
still got like two episodes
3:07 WHEN YOU AND YOUR HOMIES HAVING A PARTY AND YOUR MOM WALLS IN AMD SAYS LETS GO NOW.
Native American warriors were pretty effective and deserve to be on any appropriate warriors list. I mean they did kill enough Vikings to force them to leave America.
well the aztecs were in their, aztecs can count as native since they were native of the americas too
They found dead dead vikings in Mexicos cost. Most of the natives of the Americas fight alike
Jesse brit proof?
proof of what dead vikings in the Americas or that all of the natives of the Americas fight alike?
Jesse brit yeah what source of that viking fought natives in mexico? vikings in mexico its all myth
Battle of thermopylae, a unmatched battle in history? Do you even history bro? Do you even know Admiral Yi?
And was 300 spartans and lie 10k other guys that i dont remenber
+brasil HUE no, this event of the battle has been misunderstood in the mass colture. At the beginning of the fight there was a greek army (composed by soldiers came from different parts of Greece including spartans and athenees ecc) that defended the pass. This army was composed by some thousands of soldiers. The epic part of this history is the final: the persian army found a pass on the mountains that conducted behind the greeks. The soldiers were demoralized and almost defeated; there was no way they could resist; so the general Leonides and 300 other spartan soldiers decided to sacriface themselves covering the greeks while they came back. an heroic sacriface that demonstrated the world how they had big giant balls, i mean, courage.
+Cryoshark 1000 2000 or 3000 ... its still worser than 1 to 10
***** Ok try wikipedia... look 1st to 3rd day... Number of persians...
***** Exaclty you can say this for every fight ;)
Sooo many inaccuracies. It's like you didn't even bother to do any research except Hollywood films!
Haka is a adrenaline dance to scare the opponent and haka Peru Peru is a haka where you jump with the taiaha weapon actually
*THEN THE WINGED HUSSARS ARRIVED*
SheePillow COMING DOWN THE MOUNTAIN SIDE
coming down....they turned the tide
the tide for top 1 that is. I doubt a battle line of 300 spartans are able to withstand 300 winged hussars. My doubt is doubled if Joakim starts singing while they fight.
I cringed when he praised katana for being ''the sharpest sword of all time.''
Come on, do some research, the katanas were not anything too spectacular compared to other swords of the time...
And also there were about 20,000 spartans in the goddamn battle against the persians (exact number is not known for sure) .
Lauri Uuniemi It wasn't 20'000 Spartans. It was 300 Spartans and several thousand soldiers from other city-states.
Thank you for clearing out my mistake, what i meant was that there were 20 000 soldier on the side of the spartans.
Lauri Uuniemi Well based on Historical logistics, recruitment pool, available resources and so on - it has estimated that the Persian army was about a 100,000 to 120,000 strong. So the Greeks face them with a 1 to 10 odds and they had the better tactical ground and they didn't kill as many Persian troops as they claimed since the Persians waged a far longer war and considering the numbers of troops they returned home after losing the war.
Mirrorwarrior and to add it lasted long, when defeat was inevitable, the 300 Spartans stayed to "hold off" ? the Persians. While the rest went back to warn of the impending march to Greece...
Nort10 The Spartans and some Greeks stayed there since it becomes really hard to hold a position when flanked by such a large force without sufficient numbers ATLEAST until the invention of guns.
Forgot about me and my crew
You were peices of shit, not worthy of this list
Fairly weak what you had on the Maori, there was a lot more to them. Happy they are on this list though.
You know what's crazy is theirbwas a group of Aztecs that escaped the Spanish incuisiton, they believe they became mauri
@@alexanderm3504 The Māori are _Polynesian_ - which means, according to DNA evidence, their ancestry comes from Melanesia, South East Asian Islands, Taiwan - entirely the other side of the Pacific Ocean from the Americas. Their closest relationship to the Aztecs is that both ethnic groups - like all other humans on the planet - ultimately came from Africa at some point in the distant past.
The samurai would kick the Aztecs asses the samurai are pretty intimidating wearing all that armor with the mask and fucking katanas
Shiloh Sigala He put the Samurais ahead of the Aztecs lol
their armour is not that good, they didnt wear armour as good as the other people
Samurai armour is leather with very little metal on it, and with bad patterns
feet and hands were completely open, most armours didnt even have front neck protection
Aztecs were pretty intimidating as well. They were painted mostly black, had bone piercing trough several body parts. Their lack of swords wouldn't have been a setback either. There are Spanish conquistadors who describe warriors being able to chop off a horses head in one swing with their axe-swords. Their volcanic glass was actually sharper then a katana. It was weaker then iron but the japanese their iron wasn't that great either. Pigs iron as its called. A Damascus steel blade would have sliced a katana in half in combat.
Shiloh Sigala it is individual skill that takes the price
your so stupid its laughable. From about the 15th century to the 17th century they had full metal light armour go back to anime and manga
*I would prefer that Māori's would be number one as greatest warrior's because they would do anything to Kill their enemies, Even if they are badly injured or bruised. **#MāoriPride**.*
Which countries did they conquer? The only ones that should matter are the ones who conquered countries. Alexander the Great matters because he went out an conquered The Spartans never conquered anything.
I agree. Maori never got outside New Zealand. A warrior culture is one that must face many different opponents and win. Maybe not all but most. You must be able to hold the land
i would say TONGA they took over samoa fiji and other islands..
@Harry McNicholas when it comes to a great warrior conquering isn’t anything to do with it, it’s bravery, flexibility, adaptiveness and how well one can overcome adversity.
Considering the Maori Warrior using weapons comparable to Stone Age tech was able to best a well trained British Redcoat armed with a gun the most feared soldier during this time period I believe this earns them high merits.
If we use your concept of Greatest warriors it would put the British Redcoats in first place considering they where one of the main reasons the largest empire to have existed grew to the size it was.
War for New Zealand lasted 10 years and the maori werent defeated, in the end the British sued for a peace treaty to trade goods for temporary inhabitance of the land, apon agreement the maori tricked. The morale of the story is the maori lasted 10 years and weren’t conquered but rather betrayed. That definitely makes them warriors. Plus Alexander only did so well because of the work his father put in before hand in the end he became greedy with power and thristed to conquer more, that’s not a warrior that’s greed and selfishness from power. Nevertheless Alexander the Great is still a conqueror
the katana is not the sharpest anything...
the sharpest sword yes
Detryk Willis nope.
correction sharpest sword of pre modern times
Detryk Willis Can you stop talking out of your ass please?
Detryk Willis Even Indian curved swords were sharper than katanas.
I didnt know this about Rome... Thanks!!! GREAT video
Namekians? Saiyans? Wow this list sucks haha
+R700LimiT namekians are a peaceful nomadic race they had only 1 true warrior and a few elders who could fight. piccolo doesnt count he grew up on earth
+thedriftkingdogman how can a cartoon be a great warrior? He cant fight because he is made of paper.
Edda233 that point missed you like a full bus huh?
+thedriftkingdogman Clever as hell, that one.
i know when he mentioned Spartans he for got about master chief
The Ninjato is a modern creation. Ninja used Katanas, Wakizashi, or Tachi.
ninja-to not katana...
Georgi Minchev Ninjatos did not exist in feudal japan.
+Georgi Minchev they were shortened katanas
+Dylan Chew yep... short straight katanas called ninjato
+Dylan Chew yep... short straight katanas called ninjato
I beg of you **NOT** to do this with modern military powers! The negative repercussions are immense and indescribable!!!
***** there is only one modern power i can think of who was developing a warrior culture.
Oh yeah, society as we know it will crumble if a youtuber makes a top 10 video about modern military powers. I can only imagine the immense destruction that would ensue as a result of that video.
trey king lol
*****
The Gurkha
***** incorrect, being a warrior has nothing to do with technological age, it has to do with attitude as well as skill in relation to the technological age. Example: Nazi Germany was building a warrior culture which had high emphasis on military within the realm of their social engineering (this is probably the only example in modern times besides Japan... there may be some smaller nations though).
The Spartan saying meant to either come back victorious or dead.