Then Ares comes down from the heavens but in that instant an Aztec warrior yell “HUITZILOPOCHTLI! DESTROY MY ENEMIES AND THEIR HEARTS AND LIFE IS YOURS! Now we have 2 Gods of War
@@isra-el5745 Honestly, whenever two immortal Gods clash, it’s better to put your differences aside and band together…..the Spartans & Aztecs must unite, or else they will be destroyed.
In order to become a Jaguar warrior the applicant had to capture 12 enemies in 2 days, which is totally insane. If you think beating an enemy is hard, now imagine it doing the same without lethal force while they don't hold back, kind of Batman like. Also, the aztecs avoided pitched battles, so it was unlikely that they would just jump by hundreds into the enemies spears like in the video.
@@ryx1531 They were some of the most elite infantry the Aztecs had available and were given the best weapons and armor. Although they weren't the highest tier of elite fighters. That honor belonged to the Cuachiquah, who were veterans that rejected any promotion just to keep fighting in battle.
It should be noted that the Aztecs defeated Spanish armies (with native allies) on several occasions prior to the disease taking a stronghold on the empire. A prominent example of this is the first battle of Tenochtitlan, where the Spanish lost 3/4's of their army along with thousands of their allies. This also happened after the massacre at the Templo mayor, where the majority of the Aztec elite warriors (Eagles, Jaguars, Otomies etc.) were ambushed and killed while they took part in a religious ceremony without weapons. If an army of Aztecs were able to defeat a Spanish army with tens of thousands of native allies (not to mention with cavalry and artillery) without significant deployment of their elite forces, I think they'd stand a chance or two against a Spartan army.
@@dylanplumley280 their usually in the codex's I read one where a battle between two spanish horsemen where killed by a single aztec warrior and they where armed with a Lance
@@dylanplumley280 The Spanish had other groups like Tlaxcala that helped them. Tlaxcala helped Spain in New Mexico, Central America, and the Philippines. Cortez also had Malenche who played a key role in the Cholula massacre. The (mexicas) Aztecs could have wiped out the Spanish when Spain ran out of the city and lost the gold they were trying to steal, but then the warriors of Tlaxcala helped them. how important Tlaxcala was to the Spanish. they created a state for themselves that still exist, kept their beliefs, and were allowed to ride horses. How important was Malenche? She spoke the Aztec language, Maya, Tolteca, and Spanish.
He had to do mental gymnastics because he didnt want a fight in the comment sections. Its kinda pathetic to do that just to appease people. But this is where we are at.
@@matt59fire yeah because he's kind left out a few things to give the aztecs some hope. Right from the beginning he said "a warriors jumped through the sheild wall".... So your implying they left their 8 foot long spears as home? Their was a reason Athens feared Sparta, there is is a reason the term sparing comes from the word Sparta. These guys went centuries undefeated even by the worlds most advanced force for the time Persia. Remember Rome was the first professional army but Persia perfected it untill they lost to Sparta.
Spartans we’re more organized and disciplined and meant to fight other organized armies, but the Aztecs used guerilla warfare which was mostly aimed at catching slaves. Interesting matchup for sure
@@hanschitzlinger3676 they wouldn’t follow them into the jungles. They’d attack the cities. If the Aztecs want to flee and live in the jungle, so be it lol
It had nothing to do with advancements and everything to do with the resources available. Not many metals in the jungle and plenty of ore in mountainous regions
Yes but it was not built to take on metal tipped spears and metal edged weapons . Also The Spartans armor was not just a bronze chest plate but had Kevlar armor type armor as well that was far more advanced.
Guerrilla warfare has proven time and time again that it can be a complete nightmare for organized militaries. The Romans, and British learned this the hard way. As apparently have the Spartans in this scenario. It always surprises me that great armies do not study this type of unconventional warfare. Some look down at it as dishonorable. I think Sun Tzu has covered this about being aware of anything possible on the battlefield.
The Spartan Kryptaea would like to talk to you about Guerrilla warfare considering they where the Spartans Special Forces and Secret Police . Who's job varied from killing Helot leaders to killing enemy army commanders or attempting to. At the Battle of Thermopylae snuck into the Persians camp and missed Xerxes I by a single tent. Before retreating back to their lines. So yeah Sparta had unconventional warfare soldiers whom often acted as recon forces and assassins for the Spartans. The Krypteia are the men who sneak into you guarded palace and slit your throat in your sleep right under the noses of your guards. A right of passage for young Spartan men was to sneak out of the barracks and strangle a local Helot to death at night and sneak back in without being caught. If they got caught they would be beaten severely to near death not for killing a Helot but for getting caught. If a Spartan boy died in training they saw it as he wasn't tough enough or cunning enough to be a Spartan. Yeah Image growing up in a society where your life doesn't matter unless it's sacrificed for the state. And you are severely punished for getting caught doing something like stealing a loaf of bread. For getting caught. Which was to teach you stealth and that getting caught is always going to be punished. Yeah Spartan Hoplites where actually very good at stealth, unconventional warfare and conventional warfare. They also tended to steal from the locals whatever they needed on campaign away from Sparta. The Spartans are the only military in history to consider being on campaign to be easier than their normal daily training.
@@joebloggs5318 In World War 2 the british even created the Special Boat Service, it was a military program wich used criminals and gave them the chance of gaining conditional freedom if they suceeded in special operations made all over Europe, it was quite unconventional, but yet extremelly efective.
I'm pretty sure that the Spartans reached their peak power during the Peloponnesian war, at which point they had access to iron weapons and armor rather than the bronze that they used in the Greco-Persian war... They also had access to a great number of colonies and slaves, but all of this combined was still very tiny compared to the Aztec Empire. Still, the Aztec Empire was never stronger than the Persian Empire under Xerxes. Although Sparta alone was no match for the Persian Empire... they relied on an alliance with Athens and many other city-states. If this video were about the Delian League versus the Aztecs, it would be a Greek victory. And if it were Macedonian Empire under Iskander, they would have gone on to conquer all of Mexico, just like they did to Persia. Roman Empire vs Aztecs would just be outright unfair....
It depends on the terrain. The Aztecs had missile weapons , were highly mobile and had access to poisons. But in hand to hand combat the Spartans have the advantage. They had a high threshold for pain, they moved faster, incredible endurance, Bronze armor,
Lol a threshold for pain is not a factor in deciding a battle outcome. The Spartans also had missile weapons. Spartans would win due to armour and better drill. Same as the Spanish.
Maybe if they had metal tips and not stone. Or if the Spartans didn't have galleys, bows, and siege engines. It's not really a fair fight for technological reasons.
Everything I’ve ever seen or read about Spartans, they use the terrain to their advantage. I don’t see them making the tactical mistake of chasing the Aztecs onto unfamiliar ground, IMO
Something interesting about the writings of the conquistadores is that they were utterly horrified that a Macuahuitl was able to "decapitate a horse with a single blow" (this may as well be a myth but it shows the horror this simple weapon brought to them), even so, spanish armor was great at avoiding lethal wounds or amputations but the sheer strenght of the blows could still break their bones and leave them incapacitated, that's why they mostly used Tlaxcaltecas as the front rown and relied on firearms to avoid getting into hand to hand combat
Not exactly a myth, but probably exaggerated. This was tested on a ballistics gel horse head (which is significantly harder to cut and destroy with most melee style weapons due to the thick stickiness of the material). The Macuahuitl wasn't able to get a clean slice all the way through, but with a follow-up twist motion of force it would rip off easy enough.
@@WritingFighter I saw a video here on yt the showed the obsidian cut almost half way through a goat from the butchers so no I don't think it's an exaggeration
@@alejandroblanco7369 imagine thinking you said something smart lol you’re comparing ancestors making weapons with just rocks, bones, and wood to modern made steel blades 😂😂💀🤡
@@WritingFighter yeah but keep in mind that these warriors would have been incredibly strong and trained with these weapons since childhood. I think it is definitely real
Kind of a misconception that just because the Azteca didn't have high end metal working that they were less technologically advanced. Macahuitls are incredibly deadly, light while still possessing a razor sharp edge. The elite warriors of Quetzalcoatl and Tezcatlipoca weren't just well trained soldiers, they were shock troops and masters of asymmetric warfare. It's likely the Aztecs would've even been able to win against Spain had the smallpox epidemic not decimated the native population of the Americas. With a numbers advantage, tactics the Spartans had never seen, and a warrior mentality to match the spartans this is by no means one sided.
Dude, you're D riding so hard, the Macahuitl was just a glorified stick with a nail, after couple of blows they will lose the obsidian and become clubs. The aztecs were awesome warriors when you compare them with other stone age, isolated indigenous people fron the America's, that's it. " they were shock troops and masters of assimetric warfare" 😂😂😂😂😂😂, they got their cheeks blasted.
@@osiruchos707 Wow. Quite literally none of what you said is true. I have a macuahuitl of my own, and if constructed properly the wood will break long before the obsidian gives way. But then again you have MAGA in your name so you're not the sharpest knife in the Caesar.
In the Americas Aztecs would win easy with overwhelming numbers and jungle warfare experience. In Sparta The Spartans would use the mountains to win a long but almost flawless defensive campaign.
@@leonardoursua4765 they wouldn’t Spartans would attack there city and wouldn’t follow them in there jungle and while It happened the Spartans will go into position
One thing about the Aztecs is that they fought using Psychological warfare, and where quick to adapt their fighting styles the only reason That the triple alliance lost was because the Aztecs made a lot of enemies and the Conquistadores allied with many tribes already familiar with Aztec warfare, one of those tribes being the Otomis, and Tlaxcalans (other group of Nahuas) already familiar with their fighting style of the triple alliance, A major hindrance besides smallpox in which many historians overlook is Shifting alliances primarily amongst the Tlaxcalans who had internal political shifts either siding with the triple alliance or with Cortes who did not have authorization from the Cuban governorship
Aztecs were the masters of psychological warfare. Better be dead than taken alive to a whole city to celebrate your death, and in the end your legacy be only a skull on a massive tzompantli.
Aztecs had bronce axes and the tips of their arrows and atlatl darts were also Made of bronce, look for Tlaximaltepoztli on google. Every aztec warrior carries with him a bow or atlatl and a Lot of arrows and darts also a 1.5 meters in diemetre shield Made the way romand used to Made their shields and a heavy wooden club or a bronce axe, the macahuitl or obsidian blade was a ritual and religious weapon reserved to the top Warriors cause being a top Warrior meant being involved in some religious rituals, aztecs had cotton armors able to protec from the bronce and obsidian weapons they had, note that obsidian is sharper than steel ,the Main tactic of the aztecs was attack by distance using rains of arrows and flank with the speed of eagle Warriors. Every aztec warrior was armed with bow arrows and a bronce axe. War was sacred because they understood that life meaning is moving the body, moving the body rightly. Aztecs only lasted 200 years as a Kingdom, they were tribes of nomád hunters and then they migrated from Canadá to México, after their arrival the first 100 years they were slaves/mercenaries of the king of Azcapotzalco the owner of the lake were they put their city Tenochtitlan, aztecs never had natural resources of their own cause their only posesión was a city Made of rock floating on a lake wich waters they culdnt even exploit until they rebeled against Azcapotzalco, aztecs had no Jobs or professions everyone was a warrior. The population of one city was able to conquer a territory full of citys as largue as theirs in only 100 years
True. They would have fallen eventually anyways. But people act like the conquest was even close. Basically a couple hundred Europeans toppled the empire in a year by talking to some people and camping outside a city.
@Badwolf0683 true but it's wasn't a couple of people Tlaxcalans were close to beating the Spanish themselves but decided hey you want to join forces and beat the Aztecs
Bronze vs obsidian, I believe bronze would always prevail, as it did in Europe and Asia. Now the interesting consideration is that when the Spanish arrived in Latin America, there was a civilisation near the Aztec empire that was beginning to craft with bronze. Would things have ended differently if the Spanish had encountered bronze armoured Central America warriors, instead of what actually happened in our timeline?
@@alistairgrey5089 yes, to a point. With rate of fire of the weapons of that era, and the long supply lines from Spain to Central America, it would have at least been a slightly more level fight than it ended up being. Either way, it’s academic at this point.
@@annalorree unless the bronze was made very thick it's too soft to stop most rounds of that time. And even steel had to be specially formed to deflect the bullets. I don't think the bronze would be much of a difference. Now iron, that would make a difference.
The Aztecs had one of the most advanced sewage system during that period. While Europeans were bathing in their own feces and faced countless plagues the Aztecs always had fresh water. Not to mention they built one of the most advanced civilizations with art, large cities, and a strong government. Education was very important to the Aztec people.
This reminds me of that show deadliest warrior, which I really enjoyed. More of these please, 14th century Japanese samurai versus 16th century medieval French knights, both are in their heyday, and would be an epic clash
Deadliest Warrior had a lot of issues. 14th century Samurai vs 16th century knights wouldn't be an epic clash... it would be a one-sided curbstomp. You realize that 16th century knights had literal "bullet proofed" armor, right? If anything, it would be much fairer to give the Samurai the two century tech advantage, rather than the knights.
Yes the Spartans had advanced heavy armor but the Spanish had even more advanced armor and weapons to include fire arms, and the Aztec defeated them the first time the Spanish came to the Americas
Germany had many successes when they first invaded the Soviet Union. They lost the war. The Confederacy had many successes against the Union in the beginning of the Civil War. They lost the war. Japan ruled the Pacific early in WW II. They lost the war. Being ahead at the first doesn't count it you're not ahead at the finish line.
The Spartans would not have taken on an offensive stance against such a large Aztec army. They would have chosen their ground very carefully and waste a defensive battle considering their numbers were fewer
Even then, Aztecs would stalk like jaguar, and use fear.. imagine that Aztec death whistle before a surprise attack.. would be a crazy battle considering Spartans are pound for pound better individual fighters and even better as a team
Aztecs had bronce axes and the tips of their arrows and atlatl darts were also Made of bronce, look for Tlaximaltepoztli on google. Every aztec warrior carries with him a bow or atlatl and a Lot of arrows and darts also a 1.5 meters in diemetre shield Made the way romand used to Made their shields and a heavy wooden club or a bronce axe, the macahuitl or obsidian blade was a ritual and religious weapon reserved to the top Warriors cause being a top Warrior meant being involved in some religious rituals, aztecs had cotton armors able to protec from the bronce and obsidian weapons they had, note that obsidian is sharper than steel ,the Main tactic of the aztecs was attack by distance using rains of arrows and flank with the speed of eagle Warriors. Every aztec warrior was armed with bow arrows and a bronce axe. War was sacred because they understood that life meaning is moving the body, moving the body rightly. Aztecs only lasted 200 years as a Kingdom, they were tribes of nomád hunters and then they migrated from Canadá to México, after their arrival the first 100 years they were slaves/mercenaries of the king of Azcapotzalco the owner of the lake were they put their city Tenochtitlan, aztecs never had natural resources of their own cause their only posesión was a city Made of rock floating on a lake wich waters they culdnt even exploit until they rebeled against Azcapotzalco, aztecs had no Jobs or professions everyone was a warrior. The population of one city was able to conquer a territory full of citys as largue as theirs in only 100 years
Can you imagine an army made up of mixed engineered Aztecs and Spartans. You'd have the agility and viciousness of the Aztecs pulling gorilla tactics while the Spartans hold the line and advance as a unit. Train the Aztecs in horseback combat and you'd have horseback bola throwers.
I respect the Spartans their great warriors,but the Mexica blood that runs thrue my veins makes me so proud to have the Blood of this great warriors called Aztecs but the most fear warriors that were respected by all Aztecs were the Mexicas from the great city of tenochtitlan ,R.I.P to all the Tenochcas…. Mectloctechpa mochi techpa .Mexica Warrior Ahuethuetque.
The spartans weren't known to make strategic blunders such as moving their whole unit into an unfamiliar area, they where known to study and take advantage of any terrain any way they could This narrative seems kinda forced to shown off the Aztec strategy of digging into dirt Also the spartans had usually a back guard phalanx when on open terrain, not as strong as the main one, but certainly strong enough to repel a force of only a few hundred Aztecs I am not saying that they wouldn't eventually succumb to numbers, it's likely they would, but the way the "plot" is driven in this video reads like Aztec fan fiction
@@lockkeylive they had many strategic plunders you forgot that they won as much battles as they lost. Which is why their conquests were limited to one third of the Peloponnese.
A few ideas 1. Aztecs vs Vikings 2. Romans vs Vikings 3.Romans vs Aztecs 4. Samurai vs Vikings 5. Samurai vs Romans 6. Samurai vs Aztecs 7. Spartans vs Samurai 8. Persian immortals vs Romans 9. Samurai vs Persian Immortals 10. Vikings vs. Persian Immortals
this seems like a contrived scenario. It assumes the Spartans wouldn't realize they were being brought into a trap. Also, why is this fought on Aztec turf and not Spartan turf?
Because spartans knew what a boat is while Aztecs knew... well... how to swim, so it's more probable that they got to America than Aztecs to Europe. Anyway, if the battlefield was balanced, the video would not pass from the 2 minute mark
@@Rottendead22 well, they surely were not launching rockets to space back then, but their society didn't seem idiot to me, they could build, innovate, craft, not only materially, I'm sure they had their philosofers and of course military experts, and the later ones looked quite successful, well, not to mention that they were the first ones to, probably by chance, discover the eugenetics, which is related to evolution theory. They were much more focused into the phisical side of life but calling them "low IQ"... that's a bit "low IQ", even though "IQ" is an already disproven theory
@@grim3897 I might be thinking of another group of people then I'm not sure who but these people used one word sentences and where often underestimating of everything getting a lot of them killed
1. The Spartans would have had scouts/spies. It's their land after all, they would have seen the digging happening. 2. As a smaller force, the Spartans would have fought smarter, not harder. Would have let the enemy come to them, on their home turf. I would. It makes sense! Thanks for the awesome video, I thoroughly enjoyed it.
I think it would be cool if they would actually mix and create even more powerful warriors imagine that. Two warrior societies that mixed their war like mentalities and tactics
That's basically what the Romans did for example the Gladius was an Iberian sword. That the Roman's adopted after fighting there,the manipular formation is another example. It was a modified version of Saminite (another Italian people) war tactics.
Here’s hoping the Infographics Show keeps making more of these. Maybe it’s basic, but I would like to see a force of 15th century french knights vs one of 18th century samurai.
The Spanish fought samurais and beat them. See my video: "A conquistador refutes the 'Metatron' on Samurais VS Spaniards." He claimed there weren't samurais beaten by the Spanish in the north of Filipinas, but I proved he lied.
@@scintillam_dei they were pirates arent they. Plus was it just truly Spanish soldiers? like there weren't any enlisted filipino soldiers in the army since the Spanish in the Philippines were very small in number.
Dude if they were fighting in the jungle the spartans would get shidded on, ain’t no way they can keep their formation on that terrain and without the phalanx they are almost worthless
It's a nice video you did, but I still have some questions about it. If the Aztecs and Spartans did fight each other, then where would the battle/s be taking place, I mean it would almost be impossible for the Aztecs to sail all the way to Greece and they still have to set up settlements to keep them supplied and where would they set up a settlement at, I mean it would take many months or years (I might have mistaken it) to sail all the way to Greece and so too for the Spartans to sail all the way to Mexico to finish off the Aztecs if they wanted to conquer it and set up a league that would challenge the other city-states like Athens, and if they'd conquer the Aztecs what would the building styles be like in Mexico after the Spartans conquer it?
If a Spartan witnessed the way an elite Aztec warrior fought so savagely and didn't give up no matter what, he would possibly be both terrified and impressed. The Spartans would most likely think the Aztecs as being demons because of their costumes making them appear otherworldly, it would probably have been horrifying to encounter a wide-eyed, maniacal Aztec warrior screaming wildly, ready to cleave you in half the moment he corners you!
Having more advanced technology doesn't necessarily guarantee victory. Aztecs fought guerilla style, Spartans were head on fighters for the most part and we've seen throughout history how guerilla fighters almost always outclass fighters
That's nice and all but at their height the Sparta army only had around 30,000 soldiers and only 8,000 of which were actually Spartans. Meanwhile sources suggest at their height the Aztecs had 700,000 warriors. Being outnumbered 23-1 without the advantage of a mountain pass would surely be to much for them to overcome
So this is a suprisingly bad matchup for sparta. The Aztecs use a much more mobile fighting style, while sparta is far more entrenched and stable. The aztecs fight like a pack of wolves and less like a millitary unit but they are incredibly skilled individual warriors. The phalanx on the otherhand while increadibly potent is weak on the flanks and if the formation is disrupted then the formation falls apart. If the spartans have nothing to anchor their flanks against then the aztecs will be able to easily outflank and suround them, their armor and weapons may be inferior but they will be able to dig deep into the spartans. Now spartans are also skilled indivual fighters so they will likely fight dam near to the last, so its gonna be a blood bath.
Aztecs had bronce axes and the tips of their arrows and atlatl darts were also Made of bronce, look for Tlaximaltepoztli on google. Every aztec warrior carries with him a bow or atlatl and a Lot of arrows and darts also a 1.5 meters in diemetre shield Made the way romand used to Made their shields and a heavy wooden club or a bronce axe, the macahuitl or obsidian blade was a ritual and religious weapon reserved to the top Warriors cause being a top Warrior meant being involved in some religious rituals, aztecs had cotton armors able to protec from the bronce and obsidian weapons they had, note that obsidian is sharper than steel ,the Main tactic of the aztecs was attack by distance using rains of arrows and flank with the speed of eagle Warriors. Every aztec warrior was armed with bow arrows and a bronce axe. War was sacred because they understood that life meaning is moving the body, moving the body rightly. Aztecs only lasted 200 years as a Kingdom, they were tribes of nomád hunters and then they migrated from Canadá to México, after their arrival the first 100 years they were slaves/mercenaries of the king of Azcapotzalco the owner of the lake were they put their city Tenochtitlan, aztecs never had natural resources of their own cause their only posesión was a city Made of rock floating on a lake wich waters they culdnt even exploit until they rebeled against Azcapotzalco, aztecs had no Jobs or professions everyone was a warrior. The population of one city was able to conquer a territory full of citys as largue as theirs in only 100 years
In a war it depends on the setting, open field the Spartans got it because of the formations and shields. But in woodsy jungle setting it go to the Aztecs guerilla warfare was their life. So it would be determined by setting
Yea, Spartans would have dominated. Even just on a technological basis the Aztecs would have to have between 5-15 men to every 1 Spartan to beat them with sheer numbers. On an even playing field the Spartans would most likely barely lose any soldiers
Nah man, Spartans fought conventionally while Aztecs were stealthy with blitzkrieg attacks. Aztecs would never meet them head on an even field. The Spanish had powder and steel( not bronze) and they would’ve lost theirs wats against the Aztecs anyway if it hadn’t been for disease
People are really hurt over this one 😂😂😂 the Aztecs had power in numbers, I wonder what the outcome would be if the Aztec empire had bronze like the Spartans did
Not much. The Aztecs already had light armor made of leather or cloth and thus had more mobility than metal armor warriors. Now if they just had horses, gunpowder and disease immunity they would've been unstoppable
I am pretty sure the Greeks and Romans were far smarter for their time, than the people of this time. All we do is multiply our tech from old tech. Not hard. These people actually came up with brand new crazy inventions for both life and warfare.
Aztec weapons are made of wood with knives made of glass aka obsidian and their armor were made from leather and wood. Other hand Spartans have metal shields and helmets and swords and spears.
In a bad situation the Spartans where not above asking for help, the battle of 300 was proof of this as before the final battle the Spartans had some help.
@@mentalasylumescapee6389 it wasnt just a few thousand Spaniards. many many, the vast majority of the tribes that were controlled by the aztecs rebelled and joined the spanish
My money is on the Aztec Warriors, they won practically every battle between the European Spanish conquistadors before being defeated by smallpox and other European diseases. Plus they would have the home field advantage be able to set many traps and be able to set up many defenses, on top of that they would have a lot of jungle warfare tricks that would disrupt the spartan
The muddy terrain where the battle ended was a geographical advantage similar to a choke-point. The Spartans were not used to such terrain and it was the only the Aztecs could break the spartan phalanx. If the fight had taken place in the average greek battlefield such terrain would not exist leading to total victory for the Spartans. Other than that observation,it was a great video with awesome animation!!!
300 Spartans stood up to thousands of Persian soldiers, who had better equipment and a highly advanced army for the time, and actually did some damage. They were some of the most Alpha warriors in history.
Terrain would be a very important factor as to who wins. If the roles were reversed and the Aztecs tried to invade Sparta, how would they fair, I wonder.
11:13 & 11:23 these battle scenes are so intense they have me at the edge of my seat, can't get over the great CGI looks so life like. Who will win!!! LOL
It would be a big battle, combat, challenge, contest, fight, encounter, competition, or tournament but The Spartans easily have way more going for them be it one on one or a group vs group match yeah.
I think there's something that needs to be said about the 2 opposing armies objectives. One is looking for prisoners to sacrifice. The other is going for victory.
Also Spartan were never warriors. They worked as a unit. The best army. One on one they were normal. Athenians and Thebans were the best warriors (one man army)
@@lupohutchington269 Spartans were trained to be warriors from the age of seven, every day, they were a professional army who trained almost their whole life until they died. While Athenians only trained for 2 years from the age of 18 to 20, 1 year physical training and the next year learning to fight in a phalanx. Im not sure about the Thebans, but I think it would have been similar to the Athenians. Except for the Sacred band of Thebes which was an elite unit consisting of 300 gay men, who were the only ones in Greece who could match the Spartans in terms of skill and discipline.
Gotta hand it to the ancestors (Aztecs). They were bred for warfare and capturing the enemy alive was their greatest prize. They def had to have skills to accomplish that. I'm sure they could hold their own against Spartans ☀️🦅✊🏼
Aztec children were separated into schools based on ability. Those who showed talent were given to an academy of war and trained for their entire lives to be warriors. They honed their skills competing in war games against other schools. These games were to the death on certain holidays. Warrior society for sure.
Depending on the battlefield as well, if it was on Aztec turf in the rainforest, I do not believe the Spartans could have won Rely lines and shield walls. That’s hard to do and thick, thick, thick jungles when you have jaguar and Eagle warriors, jumping at you from all sides.
The Aztecs were incredibly effective at defeating, capturing, and enslaving their fellow indigenous peoples, building an enormous empire that was only defeated by Europeans from Spain.
Never heard of heavy Spartan Cavalry. As far is i know, they only used light cavalry as spotting and flanking force. Nevertheless great video as always.
Spartan Cavalry was a thing, but they were of very low quality. In reality, I doubt they would do much against the Aztecs as seen in this video. Without a stirrup or Warhorse training that the Spanish have been producing throughout the medieval time, the Aztecs will make short work of them.
I would say Spartans immediately, but I know of the stories about them. Don't know about the Aztecs. But, the Spartans have had a lot of experience fighting big battles, maybe more then the Aztecs? Also, I think that tactics would play a role, and I don't know if those Aztecs could match Greek war strategy in a big battle. Your should combine the two however, Spartan backbone with Aztec skirmishers
Aztecs specialized in stealthy and blitzkrieg attacks in order to stun and capture they’re enemies. While Spartans always fought conventionally with head on wars
@@mullerpotgieter Spartans don't have any institutional ability to capture and hold large settlements That is why they only ever conquered one third of the Peloponnese
@@yourmom3790 I assume Aztecs may actually be better at ambushing and individual hand to hand combat (although bronze breastplates and Corinthian helmets could shrug off blows from clubs and obsidian swords), but when it came to open fiend battle they probably would not be able to match the more disciplined Spartans.
Personally I perceive the Aztecs in their warrior culture and style of warfare and individual glory to be more akin to the Celts than the Greek hoplites or Roman legions. I think the Inca army would have posed more of a challenge to the Spartans as they had more disciplined ranks of troops and used bronze weapons.
Stone Age Aztecs vs Iron Age Spartans... Unfortunately the Aztecs would probably lose this fight. On a side note it is interesting to me that the tribes in the Americas were so far behind the acients in the Old World.
@@roamingmillennial2200 it’s because the natives in America were alone. The Silk Road was incredibly significant. Going from Asia to Africa. Trading products and innovation like gunpowder, steel spices and so on. Imagine the trading between China Romana Egyptians and Greeks all mostly on land. The meso Americans were entirely cut off
Honestly i think the aztecs flanking the main force would have worked, only because the aztecs have a vast amount of man power compared to the spartans
Tbh, you guys gave advantages to the Aztecs. They had defenders advantage, were prepared with defences and had terrain advantage. I wouldn't say this was really a fair fight. Kind of biased. It would probably go the other way if the advantages were reversed. Even if the Aztecs had a larger force
No not really. He was stressing the 1v1 disadvantage that the aztecs had and how they are technologically inferior like for a third of the video. He said himself that if the numbers were balanced, the result would be the opposite. And on top of all this, the Spartans had the home field advantage. He was kinda implying that the aztecs were low-key fodder, at least that's how I took it.
Nothing personal on the Aztecs, but I think in that part of the world they are not used to organised warfare as in Europe and Asia. Simply they didn’t have that many though enemies to improve their skills
There were Greek conquistadores serving el Imperio español. Some could have been descendants of the Spartans. Of course, most in Greece today are frauds who WISH they were Greek but are just Slavs.
Romans would win that one, and by a lot. The Han Chinese were essentially peaceful and only cared to defend their borders from nomadic tribes, while the Romans had the most disciplined army that ever existed prior to Napoleon's era. But the true Roman advantage isn't even on the battlefield, but in Logistica.
@@Lynemn Romans were one of the strongest empires no doubt but I think it’s hard to say how these two fare against each other if forced in all out war. The technology was comparable and the tactics were very different. Discipline, technology, strategy and adaptation will all play a part.
@@fooltube9999 The technology was comparable, yes, but that's probably the only comparable factor. But with empires of the scale of Rome and China, being able to move soldiers and supplies over long distances is the deciding factor even more than discipline and strategy, and Rome excelled at all three. A standing army that consists of professional soldiers led by knowledgeable officers will almost always defeat a similar-sized force of conscripts, and Rome had the first and only standing professional army of its time.
@@Lynemn I think it would be something of a wash. While I think the Romans would have the advantage in terms of having better quality infantry, armor and weapons. The Han could field far more soldiers, their military also had better emphasis on cavalry (both heavy and skirmishing) and their cavalry had stirrups. Plus the Han could outgun the Romans with greater numbers of archers. Not to mention they had crossbows which I think would have been a game changer against the Romans who didn't prioritize missile infantry and mostly left those duties to their auxiliaries.
@@barbiquearea I think you are vastly overestimating the population of the Han Dynasty. They had approximately the same population as the Roman Empire, meaning they had approximately the same number of fighting-age males as a pool for their soldiers. Only the northern Wei territories had much in the way of cavalry, and they didn't have the sort of heavy shock cavalry that were required to break through shield formations. They did have a lot of archers, but their crossbows were not the sort of armor-piercing high medieval crossbows that you're thinking of. Roman infantry was designed very specifically to counter archers though... not many gaps in their shield wall to speak of, and they had the training (through thousands of drill repetitions) to close ranks almost instantly if a legionnaire was wounded by arrow fire. Also, an army marches on its stomach, so the Romans could field more soldiers in practice as they had the logistics to feed them. Arrows are also limited and expensive, so the superior logistics means the Roman archer auxiliaries can replenish their ammunition faster than the Chinese can.
The Aztecs are almost winning when suddenly they hear the Spartan general yell "ARES! DESTROY MY ENEMIES AND MY LIFE IS YOURS!" 💀💀💀
Then Ares comes down from the heavens but in that instant an Aztec warrior yell “HUITZILOPOCHTLI! DESTROY MY ENEMIES AND THEIR HEARTS AND LIFE IS YOURS!
Now we have 2 Gods of War
@@isra-el5745 Honestly, whenever two immortal Gods clash, it’s better to put your differences aside and band together…..the Spartans & Aztecs must unite, or else they will be destroyed.
ZEUS! destroy my enemies and all the women is yours 💀💀💀
Jajaja
This is the intense story that I would gladly to bear witness!
Aztecs had buildings too they had legal courts, aqueducts, stadiums, schools, city squares. Not huts.. they even had a sewer system.
Whoa…
Yeah the majority of the population was most likely peasants who lived in huts tho
@@turkeysandwich1998 lol were you there?
@@jessedeniz4313 I don’t think he had to be 🤪
They had it all just no bronze shields 😮😂
In order to become a Jaguar warrior the applicant had to capture 12 enemies in 2 days, which is totally insane. If you think beating an enemy is hard, now imagine it doing the same without lethal force while they don't hold back, kind of Batman like. Also, the aztecs avoided pitched battles, so it was unlikely that they would just jump by hundreds into the enemies spears like in the video.
Jaguars were elites of aztecs weren't they? Although I believe that they're basic infantry.
@@ryx1531 They were some of the most elite infantry the Aztecs had available and were given the best weapons and armor. Although they weren't the highest tier of elite fighters. That honor belonged to the Cuachiquah, who were veterans that rejected any promotion just to keep fighting in battle.
@@ryx1531 that would be a group of Aztecs know as the “Shorn Ones” they were completely bald and supposedly the best
Who wants to be a Jag? Eagle knights are the best!
@@ryx1531
All aztec soldiers are infantry. The first horses they saw were the Spanish chargers, which they also sacrificed to their gods.
It should be noted that the Aztecs defeated Spanish armies (with native allies) on several occasions prior to the disease taking a stronghold on the empire. A prominent example of this is the first battle of Tenochtitlan, where the Spanish lost 3/4's of their army along with thousands of their allies. This also happened after the massacre at the Templo mayor, where the majority of the Aztec elite warriors (Eagles, Jaguars, Otomies etc.) were ambushed and killed while they took part in a religious ceremony without weapons. If an army of Aztecs were able to defeat a Spanish army with tens of thousands of native allies (not to mention with cavalry and artillery) without significant deployment of their elite forces, I think they'd stand a chance or two against a Spartan army.
Where’s your source I would like to read up on this too.
@@dylanplumley280 their usually in the codex's I read one where a battle between two spanish horsemen where killed by a single aztec warrior and they where armed with a Lance
@@skylerarroniz7513 Awesome. Thank you.
@@dylanplumley280 The Spanish had other groups like Tlaxcala that helped them. Tlaxcala helped Spain in New Mexico, Central America, and the Philippines. Cortez also had Malenche who played a key role in the Cholula massacre. The (mexicas) Aztecs could have wiped out the Spanish when Spain ran out of the city and lost the gold they were trying to steal, but then the warriors of Tlaxcala helped them. how important Tlaxcala was to the Spanish. they created a state for themselves that still exist, kept their beliefs, and were allowed to ride horses. How important was Malenche? She spoke the Aztec language, Maya, Tolteca, and Spanish.
I think a fair rebuke would be the people of Carthage and Hannibal who had many great ambush and tactical victories over Rome.
So the question is more specifically who would win in a fight a thousand Spartans or every Aztec warrior on the continent
Don't forget the Aztecs got prep time, while not having to bother with the logistics of supplying the soldiers.
He had to do mental gymnastics because he didnt want a fight in the comment sections. Its kinda pathetic to do that just to appease people. But this is where we are at.
@@matt59fire yeah because he's kind left out a few things to give the aztecs some hope. Right from the beginning he said "a warriors jumped through the sheild wall".... So your implying they left their 8 foot long spears as home? Their was a reason Athens feared Sparta, there is is a reason the term sparing comes from the word Sparta. These guys went centuries undefeated even by the worlds most advanced force for the time Persia. Remember Rome was the first professional army but Persia perfected it untill they lost to Sparta.
The fact that they have very different styles of battle yet still hold their own is amazing!
Spartans we’re more organized and disciplined and meant to fight other organized armies, but the Aztecs used guerilla warfare which was mostly aimed at catching slaves. Interesting matchup for sure
This isn’t reality, it wouldn’t even be close, spartans would crush them unless they had way more numbers
@@xSSxTejas what about marches through the jungle? Spartans wouldn’t be able to line up and could easily get demolished
@@hanschitzlinger3676 they wouldn’t follow them into the jungles. They’d attack the cities. If the Aztecs want to flee and live in the jungle, so be it lol
I think Aztecs would stand no chance against Spartans.
It’s crazy to see how advanced in military training and equipment the Spartans were in 500 BC compared to the Aztecs 2000 years later!
Name checks out
It had nothing to do with advancements and everything to do with the resources available. Not many metals in the jungle and plenty of ore in mountainous regions
Mexico and Central America (where the Aztec empire originates) is plenty mountainous. Many times more mountains then in small Greece
The America's was behind in technology to Europe at all times prior to conquest.
@@escoboxinganalysis2237 stick to analyzing boxing
0:08 unarmored? The Aztecs actually had armor made out of dozens of layers of chemically hardened cotton which functioned like hardened leather armor
Musket ball go brrrr hahah clearly didn't work
@@michaellavaughnrobinson bullets and swords are very different but you right
Yes but it was not built to take on metal tipped spears and metal edged weapons . Also The Spartans armor was not just a bronze chest plate but had Kevlar armor type armor as well that was far more advanced.
@@michaellavaughnrobinson how do you like watching america change? Culture go brrrr
@@daydayr97 Change? America is supposed to be diverse asf
Guerrilla warfare has proven time and time again that it can be a complete nightmare for organized militaries.
The Romans, and British learned this the hard way. As apparently have the Spartans in this scenario. It always surprises me that great armies do not study this type of unconventional warfare. Some look down at it as dishonorable. I think Sun Tzu has covered this about being aware of anything possible on the battlefield.
Are you serious? The British used unconventional warfare all the time. You might want to look up people called the SAS.
The Spartan Kryptaea would like to talk to you about Guerrilla warfare considering they where the Spartans Special Forces and Secret Police . Who's job varied from killing Helot leaders to killing enemy army commanders or attempting to.
At the Battle of Thermopylae snuck into the Persians camp and missed Xerxes I by a single tent. Before retreating back to their lines.
So yeah Sparta had unconventional warfare soldiers whom often acted as recon forces and assassins for the Spartans.
The Krypteia are the men who sneak into you guarded palace and slit your throat in your sleep right under the noses of your guards.
A right of passage for young Spartan men was to sneak out of the barracks and strangle a local Helot to death at night and sneak back in without being caught. If they got caught they would be beaten severely to near death not for killing a Helot but for getting caught.
If a Spartan boy died in training they saw it as he wasn't tough enough or cunning enough to be a Spartan. Yeah Image growing up in a society where your life doesn't matter unless it's sacrificed for the state. And you are severely punished for getting caught doing something like stealing a loaf of bread. For getting caught. Which was to teach you stealth and that getting caught is always going to be punished.
Yeah Spartan Hoplites where actually very good at stealth, unconventional warfare and conventional warfare. They also tended to steal from the locals whatever they needed on campaign away from Sparta.
The Spartans are the only military in history to consider being on campaign to be easier than their normal daily training.
@@joebloggs5318 In World War 2 the british even created the Special Boat Service, it was a military program wich used criminals and gave them the chance of gaining conditional freedom if they suceeded in special operations made all over Europe, it was quite unconventional, but yet extremelly efective.
@@joebloggs5318 The SAS were established long after the British learned the lessons of guerrilla warfare so that example is a moot point
@@joebloggs5318 think you missed the point of his comment he’s talking about the past
I'm pretty sure that the Spartans reached their peak power during the Peloponnesian war, at which point they had access to iron weapons and armor rather than the bronze that they used in the Greco-Persian war...
They also had access to a great number of colonies and slaves, but all of this combined was still very tiny compared to the Aztec Empire. Still, the Aztec Empire was never stronger than the Persian Empire under Xerxes. Although Sparta alone was no match for the Persian Empire... they relied on an alliance with Athens and many other city-states.
If this video were about the Delian League versus the Aztecs, it would be a Greek victory. And if it were Macedonian Empire under Iskander, they would have gone on to conquer all of Mexico, just like they did to Persia.
Roman Empire vs Aztecs would just be outright unfair....
The Roman Empire vs the U.S. army
The Roman empire would out number the Aztecs. Combine that with better equipment and tactics and it would be an absolute slaughter.
@@OGMENDOZA661 so your talking about guns, grenades, tanks, planes vs spears and shields? Common even a 2 year old would not to brought this up
@@OGMENDOZA661 Roman empire wins USA hasn't won a war in 77 years
Would the macedonians beat the han dynasty thou?
Infographics Show bringing back Deadliest Warrior is something I didn't know I wanted.
Yea, except the Deadliest warrior had multiple experts and test dummies to see the damage of the arsenals.
It depends on the terrain. The Aztecs had missile weapons , were highly mobile and had access to poisons. But in hand to hand combat the Spartans have the advantage. They had a high threshold for pain, they moved faster, incredible endurance, Bronze armor,
"Access to poison" lol everyone has access to poison wtf
Lol a threshold for pain is not a factor in deciding a battle outcome. The Spartans also had missile weapons. Spartans would win due to armour and better drill. Same as the Spanish.
Maybe if they had metal tips and not stone. Or if the Spartans didn't have galleys, bows, and siege engines. It's not really a fair fight for technological reasons.
@@horstnietzsche1923 even though separated by 2000 years Sparta wins 🏆
Sparta had horses and the wheel..
Everything I’ve ever seen or read about Spartans, they use the terrain to their advantage. I don’t see them making the tactical mistake of chasing the Aztecs onto unfamiliar ground, IMO
They did several times historically
@@carlosortegaplol. When. Cite a source
@@MasonMasedaZombieMoshPit1643his name is carlos ofc he’s going to have a bias
Something interesting about the writings of the conquistadores is that they were utterly horrified that a Macuahuitl was able to "decapitate a horse with a single blow" (this may as well be a myth but it shows the horror this simple weapon brought to them), even so, spanish armor was great at avoiding lethal wounds or amputations but the sheer strenght of the blows could still break their bones and leave them incapacitated, that's why they mostly used Tlaxcaltecas as the front rown and relied on firearms to avoid getting into hand to hand combat
Not exactly a myth, but probably exaggerated.
This was tested on a ballistics gel horse head (which is significantly harder to cut and destroy with most melee style weapons due to the thick stickiness of the material). The Macuahuitl wasn't able to get a clean slice all the way through, but with a follow-up twist motion of force it would rip off easy enough.
@@WritingFighter I saw a video here on yt the showed the obsidian cut almost half way through a goat from the butchers so no I don't think it's an exaggeration
@@skylerarroniz7513 lol so can a basic butchers cleaver lol
@@alejandroblanco7369 imagine thinking you said something smart lol you’re comparing ancestors making weapons with just rocks, bones, and wood to modern made steel blades 😂😂💀🤡
@@WritingFighter yeah but keep in mind that these warriors would have been incredibly strong and trained with these weapons since childhood. I think it is definitely real
Kind of a misconception that just because the Azteca didn't have high end metal working that they were less technologically advanced. Macahuitls are incredibly deadly, light while still possessing a razor sharp edge. The elite warriors of Quetzalcoatl and Tezcatlipoca weren't just well trained soldiers, they were shock troops and masters of asymmetric warfare. It's likely the Aztecs would've even been able to win against Spain had the smallpox epidemic not decimated the native population of the Americas. With a numbers advantage, tactics the Spartans had never seen, and a warrior mentality to match the spartans this is by no means one sided.
Depends where they fight, in the junges of South America, Sparta loses, but in Greece, many states come together against shared enemies.
Hello does anyone here believe in Jesus?
@@connorlancaster7541 Not relevant to the discussion. The Lord Shepherd died before the advent of the Azteca and Sparta served Ares
Dude, you're D riding so hard, the Macahuitl was just a glorified stick with a nail, after couple of blows they will lose the obsidian and become clubs. The aztecs were awesome warriors when you compare them with other stone age, isolated indigenous people fron the America's, that's it. " they were shock troops and masters of assimetric warfare" 😂😂😂😂😂😂, they got their cheeks blasted.
@@osiruchos707 Wow. Quite literally none of what you said is true. I have a macuahuitl of my own, and if constructed properly the wood will break long before the obsidian gives way. But then again you have MAGA in your name so you're not the sharpest knife in the Caesar.
In the Americas Aztecs would win easy with overwhelming numbers and jungle warfare experience.
In Sparta The Spartans would use the mountains to win a long but almost flawless defensive campaign.
América is 1, and the USAIDS isn't even half of it.
Tbh all Native American tribes would win
@@leonardoursua4765 they wouldn’t Spartans would attack there city and wouldn’t follow them in there jungle and while It happened the Spartans will go into position
@@leonardoursua4765 no not really the aztec was the biggest empire in the America's tribes are tribes separated groups not a empire
The aztecs live between more mountains than the spartans
One thing about the Aztecs is that they fought using Psychological warfare, and where quick to adapt their fighting styles the only reason That the triple alliance lost was because the Aztecs made a lot of enemies and the Conquistadores allied with many tribes already familiar with Aztec warfare, one of those tribes being the Otomis, and Tlaxcalans (other group of Nahuas) already familiar with their fighting style of the triple alliance, A major hindrance besides smallpox in which many historians overlook is Shifting alliances primarily amongst the Tlaxcalans who had internal political shifts either siding with the triple alliance or with Cortes who did not have authorization from the Cuban governorship
Aztecs were the masters of psychological warfare. Better be dead than taken alive to a whole city to celebrate your death, and in the end your legacy be only a skull on a massive tzompantli.
Aztecs had bronce axes and the tips of their arrows and atlatl darts were also Made of bronce, look for Tlaximaltepoztli on google.
Every aztec warrior carries with him a bow or atlatl and a Lot of arrows and darts also a 1.5 meters in diemetre shield Made the way romand used to Made their shields and a heavy wooden club or a bronce axe, the macahuitl or obsidian blade was a ritual and religious weapon reserved to the top Warriors cause being a top Warrior meant being involved in some religious rituals, aztecs had cotton armors able to protec from the bronce and obsidian weapons they had, note that obsidian is sharper than steel ,the Main tactic of the aztecs was attack by distance using rains of arrows and flank with the speed of eagle Warriors. Every aztec warrior was armed with bow arrows and a bronce axe.
War was sacred because they understood that life meaning is moving the body, moving the body rightly.
Aztecs only lasted 200 years as a Kingdom, they were tribes of nomád hunters and then they migrated from Canadá to México, after their arrival the first 100 years they were slaves/mercenaries of the king of Azcapotzalco the owner of the lake were they put their city Tenochtitlan, aztecs never had natural resources of their own cause their only posesión was a city Made of rock floating on a lake wich waters they culdnt even exploit until they rebeled against Azcapotzalco, aztecs had no Jobs or professions everyone was a warrior. The population of one city was able to conquer a territory full of citys as largue as theirs in only 100 years
True. They would have fallen eventually anyways. But people act like the conquest was even close. Basically a couple hundred Europeans toppled the empire in a year by talking to some people and camping outside a city.
@Badwolf0683 true but it's wasn't a couple of people Tlaxcalans were close to beating the Spanish themselves but decided hey you want to join forces and beat the Aztecs
Aztec:*War drums*
Spartan:*Nokia Arabic ringtone flute*
😂😂
Bronze vs obsidian, I believe bronze would always prevail, as it did in Europe and Asia. Now the interesting consideration is that when the Spanish arrived in Latin America, there was a civilisation near the Aztec empire that was beginning to craft with bronze. Would things have ended differently if the Spanish had encountered bronze armoured Central America warriors, instead of what actually happened in our timeline?
Not particularly. Gunpowder versus bronze is still a gunpowder victory.
@@alistairgrey5089 yes, to a point. With rate of fire of the weapons of that era, and the long supply lines from Spain to Central America, it would have at least been a slightly more level fight than it ended up being. Either way, it’s academic at this point.
While Spartans had bronze armor and a bronze faced shield, their spearhead, arrow heads, sword/dagger were made of iron and or steel.
@@annalorree unless the bronze was made very thick it's too soft to stop most rounds of that time. And even steel had to be specially formed to deflect the bullets. I don't think the bronze would be much of a difference. Now iron, that would make a difference.
@@alistairgrey5089 plus europe and asia has progressed by a large margin from bronze
The Aztecs had one of the most advanced sewage system during that period. While Europeans were bathing in their own feces and faced countless plagues the Aztecs always had fresh water. Not to mention they built one of the most advanced civilizations with art, large cities, and a strong government. Education was very important to the Aztec people.
@@jaydenrobles2207yeah disease killing 90-95% of true American population wins wars
@@jaydenrobles2207 …nobody said they did?
no one bathed in poo
I got most of them died from common colds and diseases. Maybe they should’ve bathed in Poo.
The greeks did it 2000 years earlier and much better constructed
This reminds me of that show deadliest warrior, which I really enjoyed. More of these please, 14th century Japanese samurai versus 16th century medieval French knights, both are in their heyday, and would be an epic clash
I personally think the samurai as their calvary might make up for weaker swordsman.
@@ryx1531 yeah and samurai don’t fear losing their life and see it as an honor to die while fighting for their leader
@@ryx1531: Medieval Europeans had bigger warhorses and better armor than their Japanese counterparts.
Deadliest Warrior had a lot of issues. 14th century Samurai vs 16th century knights wouldn't be an epic clash... it would be a one-sided curbstomp. You realize that 16th century knights had literal "bullet proofed" armor, right? If anything, it would be much fairer to give the Samurai the two century tech advantage, rather than the knights.
i remember deadliest warrior. I miss that show, it was pretty good. 👍👍👍
Amazing how in almost every “ancient warrior vs spartans” when the spartans lose its because they are heavily outnumbered
Strength in numbers. Nothing to it really.
Well as much merit as the Spartans have they lost the battle of Thermopylae because of numbers
It's a solid tactic. It's wasteful but it works.
@James Cardwell the spartans would have lost to persia anyways. Sparta alone is not enough to beat persia.
Quality has the price of numerical inferiority. But less is more.
Infographics coming through with the glossed over, half facts again for the win!!
Yes the Spartans had advanced heavy armor but the Spanish had even more advanced armor and weapons to include fire arms, and the Aztec defeated them the first time the Spanish came to the Americas
Germany had many successes when they first invaded the Soviet Union. They lost the war. The Confederacy had many successes against the Union in the beginning of the Civil War. They lost the war. Japan ruled the Pacific early in WW II. They lost the war. Being ahead at the first doesn't count it you're not ahead at the finish line.
Aztecs got their cheeks clapped by the god-emperor Hernan Cortez
They were outnumbered like 1000 to 1
Yes a small invading force in unknown land vs an entire army that knows the land extremely well 😂😂
@@osiruchos707 only cuz they were literally filled with diseases they won of luck not skill and filled with diseases
Ok now let’s have that Aztec/Mayan God of war game 😂
The Spartans would not have taken on an offensive stance against such a large Aztec army. They would have chosen their ground very carefully and waste a defensive battle considering their numbers were fewer
Even then, Aztecs would stalk like jaguar, and use fear.. imagine that Aztec death whistle before a surprise attack.. would be a crazy battle considering Spartans are pound for pound better individual fighters and even better as a team
@@lonewanderer1017 if you pit Aztecs east if the Atlantic in 300bc they would be slaughtered 😂
@@kyartick8502 absolutely, Aztecs would be destroyed if that were the case
Aztecs had bronce axes and the tips of their arrows and atlatl darts were also Made of bronce, look for Tlaximaltepoztli on google.
Every aztec warrior carries with him a bow or atlatl and a Lot of arrows and darts also a 1.5 meters in diemetre shield Made the way romand used to Made their shields and a heavy wooden club or a bronce axe, the macahuitl or obsidian blade was a ritual and religious weapon reserved to the top Warriors cause being a top Warrior meant being involved in some religious rituals, aztecs had cotton armors able to protec from the bronce and obsidian weapons they had, note that obsidian is sharper than steel ,the Main tactic of the aztecs was attack by distance using rains of arrows and flank with the speed of eagle Warriors. Every aztec warrior was armed with bow arrows and a bronce axe.
War was sacred because they understood that life meaning is moving the body, moving the body rightly.
Aztecs only lasted 200 years as a Kingdom, they were tribes of nomád hunters and then they migrated from Canadá to México, after their arrival the first 100 years they were slaves/mercenaries of the king of Azcapotzalco the owner of the lake were they put their city Tenochtitlan, aztecs never had natural resources of their own cause their only posesión was a city Made of rock floating on a lake wich waters they culdnt even exploit until they rebeled against Azcapotzalco, aztecs had no Jobs or professions everyone was a warrior. The population of one city was able to conquer a territory full of citys as largue as theirs in only 100 years
@@heman2052bronze* correction
Can you imagine an army made up of mixed engineered Aztecs and Spartans.
You'd have the agility and viciousness of the Aztecs pulling gorilla tactics while the Spartans hold the line and advance as a unit.
Train the Aztecs in horseback combat and you'd have horseback bola throwers.
I respect the Spartans their great warriors,but the Mexica blood that runs thrue my veins makes me so proud to have the Blood of this great warriors called Aztecs but the most fear warriors that were respected by all Aztecs were the Mexicas from the great city of tenochtitlan ,R.I.P to all the Tenochcas…. Mectloctechpa mochi techpa .Mexica Warrior Ahuethuetque.
This was beautifully put together... it seemed like it was actually happening...lol.. I loved it... Thanks and keep it up ❤❤💯💯💪🏽💪🏽😉
The spartans weren't known to make strategic blunders such as moving their whole unit into an unfamiliar area, they where known to study and take advantage of any terrain any way they could
This narrative seems kinda forced to shown off the Aztec strategy of digging into dirt
Also the spartans had usually a back guard phalanx when on open terrain, not as strong as the main one, but certainly strong enough to repel a force of only a few hundred Aztecs
I am not saying that they wouldn't eventually succumb to numbers, it's likely they would, but the way the "plot" is driven in this video reads like Aztec fan fiction
Yeah. He gave the Aztecs every advantage.
@@charlesfinch4223 they*
He is just the narrator, don't give him all the flack for things he didn't write
@@lockkeylive they had many strategic plunders you forgot that they won as much battles as they lost. Which is why their conquests were limited to one third of the Peloponnese.
You should more in tho the history of the Aztec they were beast … matter fact Black Panther is basically based of them …. the Jaguar King
Absolutely right. That 'stealth commando style' fighting here atributed to the Aztecs seems far too streched from reality.
A few ideas
1. Aztecs vs Vikings
2. Romans vs Vikings
3.Romans vs Aztecs
4. Samurai vs Vikings
5. Samurai vs Romans
6. Samurai vs Aztecs
7. Spartans vs Samurai
8. Persian immortals vs Romans
9. Samurai vs Persian Immortals
10. Vikings vs. Persian Immortals
There is a recorded event of another native group from Mexico who were Aztec enemies and fought against Japanese pirates and defeated them.
1. Vikings win!
2. Vikings win!
3. Romans win!
4. Samurai win!
5. Samurai win!
6. Samurai win!
7. Samurai win!
8. Romans win!
9. Samurai win!
10. Vikings win!
this seems like a contrived scenario. It assumes the Spartans wouldn't realize they were being brought into a trap. Also, why is this fought on Aztec turf and not Spartan turf?
Because spartans knew what a boat is while Aztecs knew... well... how to swim, so it's more probable that they got to America than Aztecs to Europe. Anyway, if the battlefield was balanced, the video would not pass from the 2 minute mark
@@grim3897 weren't Spartans also known for a bellow average IQ
@@Rottendead22 well, they surely were not launching rockets to space back then, but their society didn't seem idiot to me, they could build, innovate, craft, not only materially, I'm sure they had their philosofers and of course military experts, and the later ones looked quite successful, well, not to mention that they were the first ones to, probably by chance, discover the eugenetics, which is related to evolution theory. They were much more focused into the phisical side of life but calling them "low IQ"... that's a bit "low IQ", even though "IQ" is an already disproven theory
@@grim3897 I might be thinking of another group of people then I'm not sure who but these people used one word sentences and where often underestimating of everything getting a lot of them killed
@@Rottendead22 no.
1. The Spartans would have had scouts/spies. It's their land after all, they would have seen the digging happening.
2. As a smaller force, the Spartans would have fought smarter, not harder. Would have let the enemy come to them, on their home turf. I would. It makes sense!
Thanks for the awesome video, I thoroughly enjoyed it.
@@no_name4080you do if you’re trying to invade
“3/1? Good odds for any Spartan.”
Spartan: Ah I see, you think war is your ally. You merely adopted it. I was born in it. Molded by it.
I love that. And its so true.
The Spartan are really an example of sacrifice in battlefield
I plan to learn Tamazight. From a Spaniard in Angkorland.
I think it would be cool if they would actually mix and create even more powerful warriors imagine that. Two warrior societies that mixed their war like mentalities and tactics
Unfortunately given the how and why Sparta fell apart, that’s an impossibility of the highest magnitude.
@@MinatoNamikaze-ub4bk yeah and given that my people died of disease and Spanish conquistadors. Sad that such societies colapsed so easily
That's basically what the Romans did for example the Gladius was an Iberian sword. That the Roman's adopted after fighting there,the manipular formation is another example. It was a modified version of Saminite (another Italian people) war tactics.
@@LanMandragon1720Roman's also had non Roman's fighting in there army's
@@Ricardorhino88 Indeed and that's how you became a Roman alot of the time
Here’s hoping the Infographics Show keeps making more of these. Maybe it’s basic, but I would like to see a force of 15th century french knights vs one of 18th century samurai.
Pls infographic show give us more ancient civilization battles!
Nice initiative. Do more videos on the deadliest warrior
Now there needs to be a video about Zulu warriors versus Maori warriors or Knights versus samurai.
knights vs Samurai in general tends to be a curbstomp for the knights. European armor is just THAT much better than the Japanese equivalent.
@@formerhunter2 more like due to superior genetics
@@jmgonzales7701 Correlation isn't causation. Racists have inferior arguments.
The Spanish fought samurais and beat them.
See my video:
"A conquistador refutes the 'Metatron' on Samurais VS Spaniards."
He claimed there weren't samurais beaten by the Spanish in the north of Filipinas, but I proved he lied.
@@scintillam_dei they were pirates arent they. Plus was it just truly Spanish soldiers? like there weren't any enlisted filipino soldiers in the army since the Spanish in the Philippines were very small in number.
THIS IS THE CONTENT WE WANT AND NEED
Dude if they were fighting in the jungle the spartans would get shidded on, ain’t no way they can keep their formation on that terrain and without the phalanx they are almost worthless
It's a nice video you did, but I still have some questions about it. If the Aztecs and Spartans did fight each other, then where would the battle/s be taking place, I mean it would almost be impossible for the Aztecs to sail all the way to Greece and they still have to set up settlements to keep them supplied and where would they set up a settlement at, I mean it would take many months or years (I might have mistaken it) to sail all the way to Greece and so too for the Spartans to sail all the way to Mexico to finish off the Aztecs if they wanted to conquer it and set up a league that would challenge the other city-states like Athens, and if they'd conquer the Aztecs what would the building styles be like in Mexico after the Spartans conquer it?
"You're in my hood now, Chief, THIS IS SPARTA!"
Make this a series with different warriors
If a Spartan witnessed the way an elite Aztec warrior fought so savagely and didn't give up no matter what, he would possibly be both terrified and impressed. The Spartans would most likely think the Aztecs as being demons because of their costumes making them appear otherworldly, it would probably have been horrifying to encounter a wide-eyed, maniacal Aztec warrior screaming wildly, ready to cleave you in half the moment he corners you!
Do you really think a spartan will be afraid? They are not afraid to die. Wearing a costume and scream won't make a spartan flinch. You are delusional
They would probably inspire myths of Eagle Men and Lion Men similar to how the Scythians inspired myths of Amazons and centaurs
Spartans obviously would win simply due to the ability to forge metal weapons
With even numbers 100% agree… the Aztecs had a huge army and they have the power in numbers
Having more advanced technology doesn't necessarily guarantee victory. Aztecs fought guerilla style, Spartans were head on fighters for the most part and we've seen throughout history how guerilla fighters almost always outclass fighters
That's nice and all but at their height the Sparta army only had around 30,000 soldiers and only 8,000 of which were actually Spartans. Meanwhile sources suggest at their height the Aztecs had 700,000 warriors. Being outnumbered 23-1 without the advantage of a mountain pass would surely be to much for them to overcome
More of these!
Gotta love how the Aztec victory scenario had to assume 1000 to 1 and 1500 year Aztec advantage for them to win.
So this is a suprisingly bad matchup for sparta. The Aztecs use a much more mobile fighting style, while sparta is far more entrenched and stable. The aztecs fight like a pack of wolves and less like a millitary unit but they are incredibly skilled individual warriors. The phalanx on the otherhand while increadibly potent is weak on the flanks and if the formation is disrupted then the formation falls apart. If the spartans have nothing to anchor their flanks against then the aztecs will be able to easily outflank and suround them, their armor and weapons may be inferior but they will be able to dig deep into the spartans. Now spartans are also skilled indivual fighters so they will likely fight dam near to the last, so its gonna be a blood bath.
Aztecs had bronce axes and the tips of their arrows and atlatl darts were also Made of bronce, look for Tlaximaltepoztli on google.
Every aztec warrior carries with him a bow or atlatl and a Lot of arrows and darts also a 1.5 meters in diemetre shield Made the way romand used to Made their shields and a heavy wooden club or a bronce axe, the macahuitl or obsidian blade was a ritual and religious weapon reserved to the top Warriors cause being a top Warrior meant being involved in some religious rituals, aztecs had cotton armors able to protec from the bronce and obsidian weapons they had, note that obsidian is sharper than steel ,the Main tactic of the aztecs was attack by distance using rains of arrows and flank with the speed of eagle Warriors. Every aztec warrior was armed with bow arrows and a bronce axe.
War was sacred because they understood that life meaning is moving the body, moving the body rightly.
Aztecs only lasted 200 years as a Kingdom, they were tribes of nomád hunters and then they migrated from Canadá to México, after their arrival the first 100 years they were slaves/mercenaries of the king of Azcapotzalco the owner of the lake were they put their city Tenochtitlan, aztecs never had natural resources of their own cause their only posesión was a city Made of rock floating on a lake wich waters they culdnt even exploit until they rebeled against Azcapotzalco, aztecs had no Jobs or professions everyone was a warrior. The population of one city was able to conquer a territory full of citys as largue as theirs in only 100 years
I need this channel to narrate how the rest of my life will go
Aztec reverse engineer the spoils of the enemy, the boats too, then explore the world as the Vikings did n expand the Aztec empire, skol/salud..lol
In a war it depends on the setting, open field the Spartans got it because of the formations and shields. But in woodsy jungle setting it go to the Aztecs guerilla warfare was their life. So it would be determined by setting
I always enjoy your videos and am frequently impressed with your ability to pronounce some of the names in them
This was amazing I now have a new addiction and you must feed that new addiction WITH MORE BATTLE
haven’t watched this video yet but knowing about spartan culture, spartans 100%
Yea, Spartans would have dominated. Even just on a technological basis the Aztecs would have to have between 5-15 men to every 1 Spartan to beat them with sheer numbers. On an even playing field the Spartans would most likely barely lose any soldiers
Yeah nope, aztecs only lost because of gunpowder and disease, a couple swordy boys would be no match..
@@welersoncarvalhodeavila4499 yes and i’m sure your opinion has no bias on your personal standards at all
Nah man, Spartans fought conventionally while Aztecs were stealthy with blitzkrieg attacks. Aztecs would never meet them head on an even field.
The Spanish had powder and steel( not bronze) and they would’ve lost theirs wats against the Aztecs anyway if it hadn’t been for disease
@@eldin8910 and yours doesn’t? Aztec army was so much larger there is never a even playing field in war Aztecs win everytime
People are really hurt over this one 😂😂😂 the Aztecs had power in numbers, I wonder what the outcome would be if the Aztec empire had bronze like the Spartans did
Not much. The Aztecs already had light armor made of leather or cloth and thus had more mobility than metal armor warriors. Now if they just had horses, gunpowder and disease immunity they would've been unstoppable
Spartans use flutes to march.
Aztecs: Laughs in death whistle
I find it amazing how old civilizations are what lead to the modern techniques used today, whether for war, technology or urban areas
I am pretty sure the Greeks and Romans were far smarter for their time, than the people of this time. All we do is multiply our tech from old tech. Not hard. These people actually came up with brand new crazy inventions for both life and warfare.
Aztec weapons are made of wood with knives made of glass aka obsidian and their armor were made from leather and wood. Other hand Spartans have metal shields and helmets and swords and spears.
I'm betting on the Spartan. But give points to the Aztec warrior for having such a cool weapon.
Didn’t the Spartans also ask for Ally help occasionally?
And
The Aztecs took over other Tribes right?
In a bad situation the Spartans where not above asking for help, the battle of 300 was proof of this as before the final battle the Spartans had some help.
Spartans were born to war....whereas 200,000 Aztecs got slaughtered by a few thousand Spaniards...it's no question here
@@mentalasylumescapee6389 it wasnt just a few thousand Spaniards. many many, the vast majority of the tribes that were controlled by the aztecs rebelled and joined the spanish
@@mentalasylumescapee6389 disease.
@@pandasniper1 we're both wrong "less than 200 Spaniards " ROLMAO R.I.P Aztec Empire.
when is part 4 of i survived 400 days of THE INVASION coming out
My money is on the Aztec Warriors, they won practically every battle between the European Spanish conquistadors before being defeated by smallpox and other European diseases. Plus they would have the home field advantage be able to set many traps and be able to set up many defenses, on top of that they would have a lot of jungle warfare tricks that would disrupt the spartan
I can already hear Leonidas screaming his famous battle cry.🗡
THIS IS SPARTA!!
@@michaeljensen9557 Leonidas then kicks an aztec warrior to a bottomless pit
The muddy terrain where the battle ended was a geographical advantage similar to a choke-point.
The Spartans were not used to such terrain and it was the only the Aztecs could break the spartan phalanx.
If the fight had taken place in the average greek battlefield such terrain would not exist leading to total victory for the Spartans.
Other than that observation,it was a great video with awesome animation!!!
I thought the muddy terrain is the result of Aztecs burying themselves in the dirt?
300 fans thinking the spartans could win alone against the might of the Aztec army
I love this channel it has all the info I never wondered but want to know
“They’re the only people on Earth of whom war brought respite to their training” Bros were literally takin naps out in the battlefield
Reminds me of that old show Deadliest Warrior. That show was awesome
Exactly what I thought.
When I think of this I think about the 300
300 Spartans stood up to thousands of Persian soldiers, who had better equipment and a highly advanced army for the time, and actually did some damage. They were some of the most Alpha warriors in history.
The reason the Spartans had won was better equipment, strategy, bravery and skills
Um... the Spartans didn't win...
@@Undyne_undying It was literally 300 vs. Thousands upon Thousands. Lol
@@justinklinck6575 Probably 7000 against 200 000.
in a narrow ravine where the pahalanx formation couldnt get flanked. and they also almost got beaten the athenians mutliple times
There is a 2000 year gap between these warriors.
3:42 that captive dude sure is vibin with them lol
Terrain would be a very important factor as to who wins. If the roles were reversed and the Aztecs tried to invade Sparta, how would they fair, I wonder.
They wouldn't invade greece or europe the aztec yes were warriors but didn't wanna conquer anything
Sparta would win in an open field and the Aztecs would win in the forest or jungle.
Yep packed shield wall-spears formation for the win.
Spartans would also win in mountainsides..
No mention of the death whistles? That would’ve been terrifying as a spartan.
to a trained spartan warrior that been training since childhood? doubt it have any effect
@@songhan1586 i disagree. The Spartans were very superstitious and religious.
11:13 & 11:23 these battle scenes are so intense they have me at the edge of my seat, can't get over the great CGI looks so life like. Who will win!!! LOL
I love this
It would be a big battle, combat, challenge, contest, fight, encounter, competition, or tournament but The Spartans easily have way more going for them be it one on one or a group vs group match yeah.
One on one the Sparties only have their armor advantage
Not at all Aztecs lost to gunpowder and disease, swordy boys would be a easy sacrifice
I think there's something that needs to be said about the 2 opposing armies objectives. One is looking for prisoners to sacrifice. The other is going for victory.
Also Spartan were never warriors. They worked as a unit. The best army. One on one they were normal. Athenians and Thebans were the best warriors (one man army)
You've watched too many movies. They weren't sacrificing people every day
@@lupohutchington269 Spartans were trained to be warriors from the age of seven, every day, they were a professional army who trained almost their whole life until they died. While Athenians only trained for 2 years from the age of 18 to 20, 1 year physical training and the next year learning to fight in a phalanx. Im not sure about the Thebans, but I think it would have been similar to the Athenians. Except for the Sacred band of Thebes which was an elite unit consisting of 300 gay men, who were the only ones in Greece who could match the Spartans in terms of skill and discipline.
Gotta hand it to the ancestors (Aztecs). They were bred for warfare and capturing the enemy alive was their greatest prize. They def had to have skills to accomplish that. I'm sure they could hold their own against Spartans ☀️🦅✊🏼
Gotta disagree
"They were bred for warfare"
Spartans literally discarded their children if they were not deemed fit enough.
@@youbadatdagame8417 okay, and how does that change the fact that the Aztecs were a warrior society?
Aztec children were separated into schools based on ability. Those who showed talent were given to an academy of war and trained for their entire lives to be warriors. They honed their skills competing in war games against other schools. These games were to the death on certain holidays. Warrior society for sure.
@@youbadatdagame8417 Aztecs we’re also bred for warfare it still doesn’t change that fact
Depending on the battlefield as well, if it was on Aztec turf in the rainforest, I do not believe the Spartans could have won Rely lines and shield walls. That’s hard to do and thick, thick, thick jungles when you have jaguar and Eagle warriors, jumping at you from all sides.
“The fear has been beat out of them” got me laughing
The Aztecs were incredibly effective at defeating, capturing, and enslaving their fellow indigenous peoples, building an enormous empire that was only defeated by Europeans from Spain.
And keep in mind the Spanish had native ally’s
Never heard of heavy Spartan Cavalry. As far is i know, they only used light cavalry as spotting and flanking force. Nevertheless great video as always.
Spartan Cavalry was a thing, but they were of very low quality. In reality, I doubt they would do much against the Aztecs as seen in this video. Without a stirrup or Warhorse training that the Spanish have been producing throughout the medieval time, the Aztecs will make short work of them.
I would say Spartans immediately, but I know of the stories about them. Don't know about the Aztecs. But, the Spartans have had a lot of experience fighting big battles, maybe more then the Aztecs? Also, I think that tactics would play a role, and I don't know if those Aztecs could match Greek war strategy in a big battle. Your should combine the two however, Spartan backbone with Aztec skirmishers
Aztecs specialized in stealthy and blitzkrieg attacks in order to stun and capture they’re enemies. While Spartans always fought conventionally with head on wars
@@yourmom3790 So it would be a matter of breaking spartans before they reach major settlements.
@@mullerpotgieter Spartans don't have any institutional ability to capture and hold large settlements
That is why they only ever conquered one third of the Peloponnese
@@yourmom3790 I assume Aztecs may actually be better at ambushing and individual hand to hand combat (although bronze breastplates and Corinthian helmets could shrug off blows from clubs and obsidian swords), but when it came to open fiend battle they probably would not be able to match the more disciplined Spartans.
Personally I perceive the Aztecs in their warrior culture and style of warfare and individual glory to be more akin to the Celts than the Greek hoplites or Roman legions. I think the Inca army would have posed more of a challenge to the Spartans as they had more disciplined ranks of troops and used bronze weapons.
One thing aztecs could do that spartans can is stamina. They could run non stop for days.
Sep Spartans knew how to form square
Stone Age Aztecs vs Iron Age Spartans... Unfortunately the Aztecs would probably lose this fight. On a side note it is interesting to me that the tribes in the Americas were so far behind the acients in the Old World.
Behind how? Militarily?
@@anonymouswashingtoncenter3462 technology, metalworking, etc.
@@roamingmillennial2200 it’s because the natives in America were alone. The Silk Road was incredibly significant. Going from Asia to Africa. Trading products and innovation like gunpowder, steel spices and so on. Imagine the trading between China Romana Egyptians and Greeks all mostly on land. The meso Americans were entirely cut off
Astecs where primitive people
Where my descendants from Aztecs💪🏽
Yeee
Honestly i think the aztecs flanking the main force would have worked, only because the aztecs have a vast amount of man power compared to the spartans
Sounds like the Michigan State vs San Diego State game was a good one!
The Atlatl actually has been proven to be armor piercing it went through Spanish horses and armor
I like how yall know tons about both history. Book recommendations would be greatly appreciated (audible preferably 😅)
Tbh, you guys gave advantages to the Aztecs. They had defenders advantage, were prepared with defences and had terrain advantage. I wouldn't say this was really a fair fight. Kind of biased. It would probably go the other way if the advantages were reversed. Even if the Aztecs had a larger force
No not really. He was stressing the 1v1 disadvantage that the aztecs had and how they are technologically inferior like for a third of the video. He said himself that if the numbers were balanced, the result would be the opposite. And on top of all this, the Spartans had the home field advantage. He was kinda implying that the aztecs were low-key fodder, at least that's how I took it.
This is similar to what the Vikings experienced when fighting Native North Americans
Nothing personal on the Aztecs, but I think in that part of the world they are not used to organised warfare as in Europe and Asia. Simply they didn’t have that many though enemies to improve their skills
Oh my goodness, my friend and I debated something like this 3 years ago! I was the guy for the Aztecs. I'm sending this to him immediately.
There were Greek conquistadores serving el Imperio español. Some could have been descendants of the Spartans.
Of course, most in Greece today are frauds who WISH they were Greek but are just Slavs.
Being from San Diego, it is my duty to say, GO AZTECS!
Romans vs Han Dynasty would be a good one. Same time period, the two dominant empires from east and west.
Romans would win that one, and by a lot. The Han Chinese were essentially peaceful and only cared to defend their borders from nomadic tribes, while the Romans had the most disciplined army that ever existed prior to Napoleon's era. But the true Roman advantage isn't even on the battlefield, but in Logistica.
@@Lynemn Romans were one of the strongest empires no doubt but I think it’s hard to say how these two fare against each other if forced in all out war. The technology was comparable and the tactics were very different. Discipline, technology, strategy and adaptation will all play a part.
@@fooltube9999 The technology was comparable, yes, but that's probably the only comparable factor. But with empires of the scale of Rome and China, being able to move soldiers and supplies over long distances is the deciding factor even more than discipline and strategy, and Rome excelled at all three. A standing army that consists of professional soldiers led by knowledgeable officers will almost always defeat a similar-sized force of conscripts, and Rome had the first and only standing professional army of its time.
@@Lynemn I think it would be something of a wash. While I think the Romans would have the advantage in terms of having better quality infantry, armor and weapons. The Han could field far more soldiers, their military also had better emphasis on cavalry (both heavy and skirmishing) and their cavalry had stirrups. Plus the Han could outgun the Romans with greater numbers of archers. Not to mention they had crossbows which I think would have been a game changer against the Romans who didn't prioritize missile infantry and mostly left those duties to their auxiliaries.
@@barbiquearea I think you are vastly overestimating the population of the Han Dynasty. They had approximately the same population as the Roman Empire, meaning they had approximately the same number of fighting-age males as a pool for their soldiers. Only the northern Wei territories had much in the way of cavalry, and they didn't have the sort of heavy shock cavalry that were required to break through shield formations.
They did have a lot of archers, but their crossbows were not the sort of armor-piercing high medieval crossbows that you're thinking of. Roman infantry was designed very specifically to counter archers though... not many gaps in their shield wall to speak of, and they had the training (through thousands of drill repetitions) to close ranks almost instantly if a legionnaire was wounded by arrow fire.
Also, an army marches on its stomach, so the Romans could field more soldiers in practice as they had the logistics to feed them. Arrows are also limited and expensive, so the superior logistics means the Roman archer auxiliaries can replenish their ammunition faster than the Chinese can.