It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
originally posted by: Mandroid7
I could destroy most wrestlers, but got my ass handed to me by a 100lb 15 year old at my first Jits class.
originally posted by: ketsuko
a reply to: JoshuaCox
You have take into account differences in weapons technology. Vikings did have more advanced weapons then Spartans - tougher metal.
originally posted by: TinySickTears
originally posted by: Mandroid7
I could destroy most wrestlers, but got my ass handed to me by a 100lb 15 year old at my first Jits class.
i remember those days. true too if youre doing jitsu rules.
these dudes back in the day were savages man. a different type. ive grappled my whole life. my bro is a pro fighter. early at it but legit. these pro guys are trained killers......for sure. but theyre not savages.
i just dont think i can comprehend the kind of hurt those mongols or vikings could put on someone.
drinking the blood of the horse while youre riding it? come on man
rickson gracie aint doing that #....
different kind of tough i guess. these pro dudes will mess you up for sure. theyre killing it with the training. i wonder if the boys at gracie humaita go whale hunting and battle to the death for odin and #.
originally posted by: intrptr
a reply to: JoshuaCox
In the past getting in close was your entire plan..
In fact in many modern methods shooting a missile from a drone at 20,000 feet and blowing up an enemy sleeping, in bed, at night is the highest form of cowardice.
So I get what you are saying about 'now bad' vs. 'back then' bad. Of course in retrospect, 'back then', the baddest were the ones with the 'trump' technology; horseback vs. the foot soldier, metal swords vs wooden sticks, bows vs spears, guns vs. everything.
And then the training, in any event.
originally posted by: schuyler
originally posted by: JoshuaCox
originally posted by: schuyler
originally posted by: JoshuaCox
originally posted by: schuyler
Neanderthals win hands down. EXTREMELY Harsh ice-age climate. Primitive technology. Mega beasts hunting them back, including likely Homo sapiens. You can't compare that to any relatively modern culture.
Except the humans at the time beat them senseless with roughly the same tech level...
So then who had a rougher life?
They shared the same environment...
From what I remember they were stronger, but had way shorter stumpier legs.. So they just couldn't compete over distances.
The idea that Homo sapiens "beat" Neanderthals is a supposition. There isn't any data to prove any sort of genocide against Neanderthal. In fact, quite the opposite as the average European has from 2-4% Neanderthal genes which proves, you guessed it, interbreeding. Competition does not assume fighting each other. It could have been simply a resource issue. I'm still going with Neanderthal as being the tougher of the two species--if, indeed, were talking two species here as there is considerable argument about that as well.
A nation starts off wearing wooden shoes and living a tough life, so they become tough enough to create an empire .. but once they have the luxury of an empire.. they start wearing silk shoes and get over run by the next wooden shoe society..
originally posted by: Flavian
Scythians - (Huns, Alans, Heruli, Gepathids, etc). In effect, proto Mongols. Like to use skulls of vanquished foes as drinking cups and also went in for a spot of Head Binding.
Vikings were mostly farmers and actually treid to live alongside (rather than replace) those whose lands were conquered.
Would also make an arguement for Norman Knights in that in the early days of Crusades, 200 Norman Knights rode off into Syria / Turkey to create a Kingdom......and succeded.
That said, almost impossible to get past the Turkic - Mongol tribes of the steppes. From the Huns to the Mongols to Tamerlane. Plus they gave the world the apple.