Roman Army under Caesar vs Japanese army under Tokugawa - Historum

Arkkataka · July 14th, 2010, 08:02 PM

This is a match up my friend and I considered once. To again note, this is army vs army not general vs general and therefore far more things must be taken into account. Because of all the possible factors I'll eliminate a few and say that it is Caesar's army he used when starting his conquest of Italy, and Tokugawa's army he used in the battle of Sekigahara. It would take place on a great plains type of environment with a river to the east and mountains to the west. With Caesar starting at the river while Tokugawa starts at the mountains.

Keep in mind there are several factors to play and If you don't mind I would want you to explain how each of those factors makes a difference. I should like a very complete answer as to why one side or the other would win. Good Luck!

**DIVUS IVLIVS** · July 14th, 2010, 08:13 PM

Shouldn't this be in the Speculative History Section?

If it's general vs general then Caesar wins by dint of being of of the greatest military geniuses of all time (Tokugawa was also pretty good, but not quite that good). Army vs army... that's a bit more difficult. One has to factor in the quality of the equipment that each side is using - Tokugawa's army after all, was if my memory serves me correctly using gunpowder weaponry by the point that we describe here, which is somewhat ahead of what the Romans have, to say the least. Then one has to consider the tactics used by each army - on an open plain I'd probably give Caesar's Romans higher marks for military organization at the end of the day. Do the Romans try and pull of an engineering miracle of the kind that they made use of at Alesia against Vercingetorx and Vercassivellaunus or at the Rhone against the Helvetii? Or do they try and slug it out in open battle in the style of the battles at Pharsalus or Thapsus?

sylla1 · July 14th, 2010, 08:34 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Arkkataka

This is a match up my friend and I considered once. To again note, this is army vs army not general vs general and therefore far more things must be taken into account. Because of all the possible factors I'll eliminate a few and say that it is Caesar's army he used when starting his conquest of Italy, and Tokugawa's army he used in the battle of Sekigahara. It would take place on a great plains type of environment with a river to the east and mountains to the west. With Caesar starting at the river while Tokugawa starts at the mountains.

Keep in mind there are several factors to play and If you don't mind I would want you to explain how each of those factors makes a difference. I should like a very complete answer as to why one side or the other would win. Good Luck!

As DI said, speculative history indeed.

It is always army versus army (out of the Homeric epics, I mean).

This match is pretty unbalanced; Tokugawa's army had firearms. IMHO, that would be the end of this story; period.

blacksmit049 · July 15th, 2010, 01:24 AM

I think this was discussed.

**leakbrewergator** · July 15th, 2010, 05:20 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by sylla1

As DI said, speculative history indeed.

It is always army versus army (out of the Homeric epics, I mean).

This match is pretty unbalanced; Tokugawa's army had firearms. IMHO, that would be the end of this story; period.

This. Firearms win the day for Tokugawa.

Outside of that, his army was not that impressive at Sekigahara. A betting man would have had a hard time going against the Western forces at the start of the battle.

**Frank81** · July 15th, 2010, 07:15 AM

Tokugawa's armies had fire weapons, not all the soldiers had it and certainly fire weaponry isn't a guarantee of victory by itself, but it's too much advantage for the japanese army. Tokugawa was able to field armies of nearly 90.000 men, the leadership was clear and brilliant but probably not as well assembled as a roman army, but they were experienced men. Experienced men plus fire weaponry it's too much for any roman army.

A different matter would be a japanese army of the Onin War or a few time before the spread of fire weaponry in Japan, as those of Takeda Ieyasu or Uesugi Kenshin.

**Belisarius** · July 15th, 2010, 08:14 AM

Moved to speculative.

**Salah** · July 15th, 2010, 10:50 AM

We have already done this topic, just not specifically "Caesar's" and "Tokugawa's" armies.

I vote for the Romans - not due to some fanatic loyalty to Julius Caesar (of which I have been accused in the past).

The arquebus takes too long too load; it was not the most leathal weapon on the 16th Century Japanese battlefield (that being the katana or yari), so if it couldn't route ashigaru why should it route veteran legionaries? In the time it takes the Tokugawa ashigaru to reload, the legionaries will be upon them, gladii drawn and ready for business.

In hand-to-hand, the Romans have almost every advantage. Their armor is at least as good, their swords are more effective in close-combat, and they are better-drilled than the best of ashigaru.

**leakbrewergator** · July 15th, 2010, 11:31 AM

^^I don't think you can say firearms were not the most lethal weapon on a 16th/17th century battlefield. While they were outnumbered by the other weapons, their impact was certainly felt more.

A trained teppo unit using rotating volleys would have little difficulty in reducing a legionnaire unit into a VERY manageable number. Plus, by the time of Sekigahara, Ieyasu had employed the use of artillery. I'm sorry, but I don't see Caesar's army standing a chance.

Arkkataka · July 15th, 2010, 11:41 AM

Oi never knew someone had already done this topic, and thanks for moving it to another forum Belisarius.