Why was the medieval African armies incredibly inferior to the Euroasian medieval armies?

[GalliumerianSlayer]

Too bad that the Mogadishu Museum doesn't exist any more, you'd be surprised what was shown in there regarding Somali military attires.

[Ololhilaac]

Interesting.
I want to tknow the direct co-relation between the ostracisation of medal workers and the military might of Somalis.

How were people handling medals and making military equipment viewed in advanced historical empires?

Were they also looked down on in other cultures?
When did this phenomenon start in the Somali culture?

Peace and Bariis. O.H.

[SultanOrder]

I don't really see it as a bad thing. You have to be constantly fighting, to really care about armor. To have large armies with heavy armor and swords, you need to have a lot of money to spend on that stuff. Also, large armies = lots of fighting = lots of killing, pillaging, and raping. Compared to Asia, Europe, African's were relatively peaceful, and didn't have the kind of bloodshed the rest of the world had.

[Musa26]

Interesting.
I want to tknow the direct co-relation between the ostracisation of medal workers and the military might of Somalis.

How were people handling medals and making military equipment viewed in advanced historical empires?

Were they also looked down on in other cultures?
When did this phenomenon start in the Somali culture?

Peace and Bariis. O.H.

the correlation is simple but the problem of ostracizing metal workers covers more than just the military capabilities that somalis could of developed over time, infact i would go as far as to say that by ostracizing metal workers we basically killed all chances to innovate

[TheblueNwhite]

The question has already been answered.

Africa had the first all female combat fiercest fighting force, the Dahomey Amazons.

[TheMightyNomad]

Interesting.
I want to tknow the direct co-relation between the ostracisation of medal workers and the military might of Somalis.

How were people handling medals and making military equipment viewed in advanced historical empires?

Were they also looked down on in other cultures?
When did this phenomenon start in the Somali culture?

Peace and Bariis. O.H.

This is a common myth. Somalis never looked down on blacksmithing and carpeting.

Infact they valued such people and had great pride in craft work.



This is an assumption tossed out in front because they assume the lower caste status of gabooye(tumaal,yibir and madhibaan). Was because they look down on blacksmithing.

Nothing could be further from the truth. Just because pastoralites valued their occupation did not mean they rejected or looked down on other occupations. Which other somalis engaged in.

If you hear such myths being spewed by people, just know that it is used as an ad hominem attack on Somali culture and excluding everyother sub culture(farming, trading, sea faring, blacksmithing, woodwork,weaving and fishing). All of these are sub cultures that fall within the larger Somali cultural pool.

Its funny they scream about diversity and against a somali monolith. Yet they don't mind stereotyping Somali culture as pejoratively as only nomadic. Which is self contradictory and a denial of the diversity within Somali culture.

[Revolutionary]

Low IQ.

Time to accept Allah gave Africa lower IQ compared to the rest of the world. He intended them to be slaves

Even tho, I shouldn't be saying this but I lol'd hard.

[gurey25]

I don't really see it as a bad thing. You have to be constantly fighting, to really care about armor. To have large armies with heavy armor and swords, you need to have a lot of money to spend on that stuff. Also, large armies = lots of fighting = lots of killing, pillaging, and raping. Compared to Asia, Europe, African's were relatively peaceful, and didn't have the kind of bloodshed the rest of the world had.

very good, you hit the nail on the head.
Its about the environment and who you fight.
Your weapons and tactics will adapt to the enemy.
In the case of somalis our warfare consists of raiding and skirmishing, with little full frontal assaults on each other.
You also have the pastoral lifestyle and semi-desert dry grasslands, and camel transport.
This makes the somalis analogous to Vikings, in their mobility, or like the early muslim armies.

Now that i think of it, the armies of the khulafa al rashidun , from abu bakr to uthman were armed pretty similiar to somali nomads.
vast majority had zero armour, not even the leather armour.
Some mail and leather armour were worn by a minority that could afford it, and somalis relied more on spear than sword.
Horses were used for quick assualts and raids, and made up 1/4 of the armies of the early muslims.
The same ratio as somali clans too.


When the arabs had to face the Byzantine armies that adapted to their new skirmish tactics they had to adapt,
they had to get more armour and more horses.
Within just 20 years after yarmouk, where horses made up 1/4 of the army, and hardly anyone wore armour.
you had the 1/2 the army on horses and a majority armoured.
basically the armies of bani ummaya copied the cataphract of the byzantines almost exactly, and they even organized their armies
on the byzantine styles.
The cabbasids copied the dehegan system of the persians later on.

somalis never had to adapt . real wars were too far and few in between, making lessons learnt easy to forget.


Any one should look at the weaponsand the tactics , doctrine of an army to judge it.

for example those naked Zulus depicted in the picture, could go toe to toe with all the medieval armies and most likely win.
The zulus were tactically more sophisticated than a majority of medieval armies, and their mobility was amazing.

[James Dahl]

Yeah armies don't adopt armor unless they have to, it's expensive and slows you down. Until you have to fight heavy infantry you never need armor as most combat is skirmish combat, lots of quick probing attacks.

Skirmish infantry is powerful with their rapid mobility as long as you never have to fight heavy infantry. The Persian army conquered everything between India and Greece with well organized skirmish armies until they ran into the first heavy infantry army of Europe, which skirmish tactics couldn't deal with. The Persians had great cavalry though which made up for this, until the Greeks got cavalry too, then nothing could stop Alexander's army until they encountered something they couldn't deal with, war elephants.

Africa for the most part skipped over having to deal with heavy infantry, no African army fought a heavy infantry force, the Europeans they encountered later on had abandoned heavy infantry and adopted the missile weapon heavy armies of pre-cavalry days, due to the adoption of firearms.

Militaries in the ancient world were sort of a matter of tactics catching up to technology. Originally armies were all missile weapons, bows or slingers or whatnot. Cavalry made this tactic no longer work, since a cavalry force could run down your missile troops who couldn't deal with these rapid moving forces. To deal with cavalry, infantry adopted skirmish tactics. To defeat cavalry and skirmish tactics, heavy infantry counters both of those. To deal with heavy infantry you need knights, heavy cavalry that can smash through infantry. To deal with knights you need firearms or some other really powerful missile weapon like a longbow, which bring you full circle back to where you started.

[Siciid85]

What about the Carthiginians? They were "African" and terrorized Rome for 15 years

[cyanide]

Interesting.
I want to tknow the direct co-relation between the ostracisation of medal workers and the military might of Somalis.

How were people handling medals and making military equipment viewed in advanced historical empires?

Were they also looked down on in other cultures?
When did this phenomenon start in the Somali culture?

Peace and Bariis. O.H.

This is a common myth. Somalis never looked down on blacksmithing and carpeting.

Infact they valued such people and had great pride in craft work.



This is an assumption tossed out in front because they assume the lower caste status of gabooye(tumaal,yibir and madhibaan). Was because they look down on blacksmithing.

Nothing could be further from the truth. Just because pastoralites valued their occupation did not mean they rejected or looked down on other occupations. Which other somalis engaged in.

If you hear such myths being spewed by people, just know that it is used as an ad hominem attack on Somali culture and excluding everyother sub culture(farming, trading, sea faring, blacksmithing, woodwork,weaving and fishing). All of these are sub cultures that fall within the larger Somali cultural pool.

Its funny they scream about diversity and against a somali monolith. Yet they don't mind stereotyping Somali culture as pejoratively as only nomadic. Which is self contradictory and a denial of the diversity within Somali culture.

stop lying

[Estarix]

Any one should look at the weaponsand the tactics , doctrine of an army to judge it.

for example those naked Zulus depicted in the picture, could go toe to toe with all the medieval armies and most likely win.
The zulus were tactically more sophisticated than a majority of medieval armies, and their mobility was amazing.

That's just ridiculous, you could smash any zulu army using cavalry archers. The bull's horn formation similarly could be easily countered as it's very basic tactic. Knights would also steamroll any zulu army, the zulu spear could not pierce through the armour of a knight. They'd also likely flee if an army brought an Arquebus to the field.

[LiquidHYDROGEN]

Any one should look at the weaponsand the tactics , doctrine of an army to judge it.

for example those naked Zulus depicted in the picture, could go toe to toe with all the medieval armies and most likely win.
The zulus were tactically more sophisticated than a majority of medieval armies, and their mobility was amazing.

That's just ridiculous, you could smash any zulu army using cavalry archers. The bull's horn formation similarly could be easily countered as it's very basic. Knights would also steamroll any zulu army, i doubt the zulu spear could pierce through the armour of a knight. They'd also likely flee if an army brought an Arquebus to the field.

Zulus handed defeats to the Victorian British, the most powerful and well-equipped army at the time. Mongol archers wearing leather and clothe annihilated heavy armoured medieval knights. War is as much about tactics as technology.

[Estarix]

Any one should look at the weaponsand the tactics , doctrine of an army to judge it.

for example those naked Zulus depicted in the picture, could go toe to toe with all the medieval armies and most likely win.
The zulus were tactically more sophisticated than a majority of medieval armies, and their mobility was amazing.

That's just ridiculous, you could smash any zulu army using cavalry archers. The bull's horn formation similarly could be easily countered as it's very basic. Knights would also steamroll any zulu army, i doubt the zulu spear could pierce through the armour of a knight. They'd also likely flee if an army brought an Arquebus to the field.

Zulus handed defeats to the Victorian British, the most powerful and well-equipped army at the time. Mongol archers wearing leather and clothe annihilated heavy armoured medieval knights. War is as much about tactics as technology.

The zuluz outnumbered the British 15 to one and the british were led incompetently. A better example when comparing the strength of an 19th century militia force to Zulus is the battle of blood river when few hundred boers smashed 10 - 20,000 zulus.

The reason why the mongols defeated the knights was due in part to their tactics but mostly because of the bow. The mongol bow had a maximum range of 200 metres and it's draw strength would allow it pierce through armour. Not to mention, they could shoot atleast a dozen times a minute; also their mobility would allow them to feign retreat or employ hit and run tactics which a knight on their own would struggle against.
The zulu would be utterly useless when fighting similar foes on open field. The only alternative would be retreating into the forests.

[Musa26]

What about the Carthiginians? They were "African" and terrorized Rome for 15 years

the founders of Carthage were actually Phoenicians by origin