Notice: This is the official website of the All Empires History Community (Reg. 10 Feb 2002)

  FAQ FAQ  Forum Search   Register Register  Login Login

Greatest Individual Soldiers
 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <1 2345>
Author
  Share Topic Share Topic  Topic Search Topic Search  Topic Options Topic Options
Barbarroja View Drop Down
Pretorian
Pretorian


Joined: 10-Aug-2006
Location: Spain
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 166 		  Quote Barbarroja Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Topic: Greatest Individual Soldiers
    Posted: 02-Oct-2006 at 07:12
I think in this infantry list must be the "tercios". The "tercios" not only were composed by Spanish, also Germans, Italians, Scotish, English, Irish, Valons, etc.
I'm sorry but my English is not very good. I'm from Vila-real (Valencia, Spain)
Back to Top
Tyrannos View Drop Down
Immortal Guard
Immortal Guard


Joined: 13-Sep-2006
Location: United States
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 0 		  Quote Tyrannos Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 02-Oct-2006 at 13:52
Originally posted by BigL

Barbarians like celts and germans also "trained" hand to hand fighting they were superior to roman in hand to hand but not formations, the celts were exellent swordsmen
Teutoburg forest shows that without formation rome wil lose
 
Arminius was a Roman trained professional soldier and commander that lead the Roman's into an unsuspecting trap . The Roman commander Varus  was also unfit for the military position he held. The Battle also which most likely did not occur in the popular Teutoberg Forest. The ambush also saw the slaughter of the families of the Romans. The likelihood was that most of barbarians that conducted the ambush were former Roman Auxiliaries as well.
 
Germanicus avenged the Roman Legion by reclaiming the lost Eagle standards in his wave of onslaught.
Back to Top
Majkes View Drop Down
Chieftain
Chieftain
Avatar
Imperial Ambassador

Joined: 06-May-2006
Location: Poland
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1144 		  Quote Majkes Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 02-Oct-2006 at 15:26
Originally posted by macon

Infantry:
 
Spartan hoplites
Macedonian heavy infantry with long spikes
Roman legionary
Vikings (Varangian guard as derivation)
Janissary
Swedish infantry in 17th century
Prussian infantry in 18th century
Napoleon's guarde troops
 
 
Cavalry:
 
Mongol cavalry
Polish heavy cavalry in 17th century
 
Very good list I would also add to infantry except Tercios which Barbarroja mentioned also Hussites and Zaphorozian Cossacks.
Back to Top
the_oz View Drop Down
Samurai
Samurai
Avatar

Joined: 30-Sep-2006
Location: Turkey
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 121 		  Quote the_oz Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 05-Oct-2006 at 10:55
Originally posted by Ponce de Leon

Originally posted by Celestial

The strongest and the most disciplined elite force was the Janissaries. They were Christian slaves taken from the Balkan provinces of the Ottoman Sultanate. They were raised to serve the sultan and fight against the enemy. They were also the first gunpowder infantry of the world and first people to use the gunpowder in battles.
    

    sounds like a farm. raising soliders to fight. soudns like a farm of christian kids taken away from mommies and daddies to fight for a tyrant who eventually would rule over the sick-man of Europe.


yes it was a farm.same as europeans.
europeans were taking away kids from mommies and daddies(usually they were killing them) for make them clean their houses etc.but we used them for battle for us.
Back to Top
the_oz View Drop Down
Samurai
Samurai
Avatar

Joined: 30-Sep-2006
Location: Turkey
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 121 		  Quote the_oz Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 05-Oct-2006 at 10:58
I think Tarkans were best in middle asia also they fought well against Romans at west Hun empire.
Back to Top
Desimir View Drop Down
Earl
Earl

Suspended

Joined: 13-Sep-2006
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 265 		  Quote Desimir Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 05-Oct-2006 at 16:12
Bulgars cavalry also called BAGATURS(there are different translations.Its iranian translation means Swords of the god.)

They were the only ones who defeated mongols three times(I am talking about Volga Bulgaria) and the first one who defeated Chingis Khan.On the fourth time mongols managed to beat them with 300 000 army and they even created their own bagatur elite units.

From bagatur comes Bogatir.
Back to Top
Bulldog View Drop Down
Caliph
Caliph
Avatar

Joined: 17-May-2006
Location: United Kingdom
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 2800 		  Quote Bulldog Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 05-Oct-2006 at 16:58
No, that's incorrect, Bagatur is a Turkic word meaning Strong man/soldier-Hero(man who conquers). It entered Persian later.
 
Bulgar's originally were Turkic, the word Bulgar and Balkan are Turkic, today's Bulgarians carry on this name but feel more Slavic.
 
The Bulgar's that remained in Volga Bulgaria are still Turkic in identity.
 
 
Celestial
The strongest and the most disciplined elite force was the Janissaries. They were Christian slaves taken from the Balkan provinces of the Ottoman Sultanate.
 
 
 Please study the Janissary system you'll discover that these stories are wild fabrications.
 
 
The Devshirme system didn't STEAL CHRISTIAN SLAVES, they didn't take them by force, they would go to villages and first make a list of families with more than one son. Then the strongest sons, then a vilage meeting would be held and if the families agreed they would enroll their sons to the Devshirme system. It was like a bording school, only a medieval one were you changed religion and became a warrior but also recieved the best education.
 
It gave the peasantry a chance, did you know they would hold celebrations for Devshirme year and even Muslim families would try to enroll their kids into the system.
 
The children were allowed to return to their families and bring back their wealth to them.
 
You have to realise that back then, there was no "benefits", no hope's or chances, being born into the peasantry class was a hard life, it didn't matter if you were Christian or Muslim poverty is poverty and if your given a way out for most people it didn't matter how they would go for it.
 
 
 
The "Ghazi's" were great warriors.
Siphai's.
Independance War Turkish fighters.
 
Brittish armies Ghurka's
SAS Commando's
 
Samurri's
 
Mamluke's were fearsome warriors.
 
 
 
 


Edited by Bulldog - 05-Oct-2006 at 17:20
      What we do for ourselves dies with us. What we do for others and the world remains and is immortal.
Albert Pine

Back to Top
Heraclius View Drop Down
Chieftain
Chieftain
Avatar

Joined: 28-Jun-2005
Location: England
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1231 		  Quote Heraclius Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 06-Oct-2006 at 05:17
Originally posted by BigL

Barbarians like celts and germans also "trained" hand to hand fighting they were superior to roman in hand to hand but not formations, the celts were exellent swordsmen
Teutoburg forest shows that without formation rome wil lose
 
 Discipline and formation are infinitely more impressive and valuable than individual prowess, Teutoburg is one of very few examples of the barbarians utterly destroying an Imperial army in that fashion. The teutoburg, few neglect to mention, was swiftly avenged by Germanicus and it took centuries for the barbarians to overwhelm the Romans and when they finally did, they used their experience in the Roman army as a model on how to defeat them.
 
 The Romans were relentlessly trained in hand to hand combat, a professionally trained Roman soldier in my opinion was better than an individual Gallic swordsman for example, who had recieved no professional training and who would likely lack armour and possibly even a shield.
A tomb now suffices him for whom the world was not enough.
Back to Top
Desimir View Drop Down
Earl
Earl

Suspended

Joined: 13-Sep-2006
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 265 		  Quote Desimir Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 06-Oct-2006 at 06:02
Oh my god!!!!!!!!!!!!

Understand it once and for all,bulgars were not turks,they had iranian origin.Today most of historians have unquestionable proofs of iranian theory.
Back to Top
Bulldog View Drop Down
Caliph
Caliph
Avatar

Joined: 17-May-2006
Location: United Kingdom
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 2800 		  Quote Bulldog Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 06-Oct-2006 at 13:47
Oh my god!!!!!!!!!!!!
Understand it once and for all,bulgars were not turks,they had iranian origin.Today most of historians have unquestionable proofs of iranian theory.
 
LOLSomeones in SEVERE denial mode, today hardly any historians subscribe to this theory, the only ones who cling on so hard to it are Bulgarians who want to be proud of their past but hate Turks too much to accept their origins as "Bulgars" were Turkic.
 
Just accept it man, its the reality, Bulgars were Turkic, if you feel Bulgar embrace your past, if you feel Slavic its not a problem anyway cos you wouldn't feel "Bulgar"
 
Bagatur is a Turkic word, didn;t they tell you that either.
 
Here are your Bulgar cousins, the Chuvash Turks and Volga Tatar Turks.
 
 


Edited by Bulldog - 06-Oct-2006 at 14:06
      What we do for ourselves dies with us. What we do for others and the world remains and is immortal.
Albert Pine

Back to Top
Desimir View Drop Down
Earl
Earl

Suspended

Joined: 13-Sep-2006
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 265 		  Quote Desimir Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 06-Oct-2006 at 14:14
There is and a counter theory about chuvash language of volga bulgars.But here is not the place to argue about it.

Bagaturs were may be one of the greatest warriors.Did anyone else defeat mongols three times.
Back to Top
Bulldog View Drop Down
Caliph
Caliph
Avatar

Joined: 17-May-2006
Location: United Kingdom
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 2800 		  Quote Bulldog Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 06-Oct-2006 at 14:49
Excuse me but who are you to tell "Chuvash" what there language is and who they can and can't be. They are Turks, historically Turks and their branch is Bulgar;sWink Volga Tatar's aswell are your cousins, their language is also Turkic.
 
Bagaturs were Turkic Bulgar warriors, embrace your Bulgar past my friend.
      What we do for ourselves dies with us. What we do for others and the world remains and is immortal.
Albert Pine

Back to Top
Desimir View Drop Down
Earl
Earl

Suspended

Joined: 13-Sep-2006
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 265 		  Quote Desimir Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 06-Oct-2006 at 14:55
But our past is not tukik.And now appear more and more proofs of indoeuropean origin of bulgars.You cant imagine how different we were from turkic tribes.
Back to Top
Bulldog View Drop Down
Caliph
Caliph
Avatar

Joined: 17-May-2006
Location: United Kingdom
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 2800 		  Quote Bulldog Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 06-Oct-2006 at 15:11
There is no evidence, some flimsy new-age theories by people who don't want to accept their past.
 
Anyway, today Bulgarians say they're Slavs so what does it matter, the only thing Bulgar about you is the name Bulgar.
 
If you want to accept your past, go visit your ancestors in Tataristan-Chuvashistan federal states of Russia, there you'll find out what I've been saying all along their TurkicWink
 
This Indo-European theory is wishfull thinking for some Bulgarians who hate Turks yet want to feel proud of their history but get frustrated because their connected to people they hate. Since when did Indo-Europeans have "KHANS"Wink
 
If you didn't dislike Turks, you would accept your past like everyone else does.


Edited by Bulldog - 06-Oct-2006 at 15:14
      What we do for ourselves dies with us. What we do for others and the world remains and is immortal.
Albert Pine

Back to Top
Desimir View Drop Down
Earl
Earl

Suspended

Joined: 13-Sep-2006
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 265 		  Quote Desimir Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 06-Oct-2006 at 15:17
Everyone else!!
We will duscuss this somewhere else.
Back to Top
Majkes View Drop Down
Chieftain
Chieftain
Avatar
Imperial Ambassador

Joined: 06-May-2006
Location: Poland
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1144 		  Quote Majkes Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 06-Oct-2006 at 15:17
Originally posted by Desimir

Oh my god!!!!!!!!!!!!

Understand it once and for all,bulgars were not turks,they had iranian origin.Today most of historians have unquestionable proofs of iranian theory.
 
What is it with those Iranians? Every nation wants to be their descendants. In Poland during I Republic there was a theory that Polish are of Sarmatian origin. It is of course bullsh*t cause we are Slavs.
Back to Top
Heraclius View Drop Down
Chieftain
Chieftain
Avatar

Joined: 28-Jun-2005
Location: England
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1231 		  Quote Heraclius Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 06-Oct-2006 at 17:00
Originally posted by Desimir

But our past is not tukik.And now appear more and more proofs of indoeuropean origin of bulgars.You cant imagine how different we were from turkic tribes.


 What the hell does it matter? Whats your problem with your peoples origins?

 Why would anybody care if they had Turkic or Indo-European origin Confused it seems to me to be totally irrelevant, a mere fact of life that ought to have no impact.
A tomb now suffices him for whom the world was not enough.
Back to Top
Bulldog View Drop Down
Caliph
Caliph
Avatar

Joined: 17-May-2006
Location: United Kingdom
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 2800 		  Quote Bulldog Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 06-Oct-2006 at 17:43
Heraclius some people havn't matured enough to simply accept who their forefathers were.
 
In England nobody denies that Angle's, Saxons, Normans and Native Brittish Islanders are among the forefathers of today's English. Instead of getting worked up about it, its embraced and turned into a source of pride. There are so many documentaries on for example the BBC about Stone Hendge, Normans, Boudaccia, Romans, Druids, Merlin, Normans.
 
Its a great policyClap
      What we do for ourselves dies with us. What we do for others and the world remains and is immortal.
Albert Pine

Back to Top
Hellios View Drop Down
Arch Duke
Arch Duke
Avatar

Joined: 25-Sep-2006
Location: Canada
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1933 		  Quote Hellios Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 07-Oct-2006 at 00:10

Spartans.

 

We're talking about individual soldiers, right?  Not about how a state conquered another, because that encompasses other factors.  The Spartans were conquered because their society was so heavily based on militarism, that they ignored (and even discouraged) anything else, like economics, politics, academics, etc.  They fell behind their competitors in these fields, so their society in general (no matter how good the soldiers where) became weakened.  Spartans were forbidden non-military pursuits and occupations.  Sparta was a nation closed off from the influence of other nations, with few foreign imports & ideas, creating a barren cultural world, devoid of great works of music and literature, just military, military, military...   According to Byzantine sources, some parts of the Laconian region remained pagan until well into the 10th century AD, and Doric-speaking populations survive until today.  The individual soldiers continued to display their qualities until the last battles (sometimes causing very disproportionate losses to numerically superior enemies) due to their cunning & willingness to die for each other in battle.

 

"Spartan" remains synonymous for anyone rigorously self-disciplined or courageous in the face of pain, danger, or adversity.

 
One thing about the Spartan military I find controversial is how they used bi-sexuality as way of making the soldiers "love" each other so they would be more willing to die for each other in battle.  Too radical for me...lol.
 
 
Regards.
 


Edited by Hellios - 07-Oct-2006 at 00:12
Back to Top
Desimir View Drop Down
Earl
Earl

Suspended

Joined: 13-Sep-2006
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 265 		  Quote Desimir Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 07-Oct-2006 at 04:01
Ok then,If we were turks that mean we were the most advanced and had the most fascinating culture among turks.
Oh,i should be proud with it.
Back to Top
 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <1 2345>

Forum Jump Forum Permissions View Drop Down

Bulletin Board Software by Web Wiz Forums® version 9.56a [Free Express Edition]
Copyright ©2001-2009 Web Wiz

This page was generated in 0.125 seconds.