Zulu courage |
Dawn
|
Would you make do with a non-expert, Robert? And a woman too!
I think that with the same training they could have been evenly matched. Keeping in mind that spear training started with stick fighting amongst the younger Zulu boys. Would the British army have started this young? In this scenerio I guess the Zulus would have an advantage. I am reminded of the English archers of a earlier period who had to start training as young as 6 in order to develop the arm and chest muscles required to shoot the long bow. Now, bows and arrows against spears? If the gun had not been invented, then is this what the British army would have been fighting with? Now who would win that battle? Dawn |
||||||||||||
|
Michael Boyle
|
Robert, I'm not sure if the experts would care to weigh in on this but like Dawn I'll hazard an opinion.
One on one I wouldn't think the "Tommy" would stand a chance. The average Zulu was bigger (don't have stats on this, just going by contemporary Western comments and photos), better fed and the cream of the crop from his society whereas the average British soldier (lots of stats on this!) was smaller, less well fed and, let's just say not exactly the cream of his society. There's a reason for weight classes in pugilistic sports. I think courage for both would be equal. Having said that I think as an army the British would prevail if they adapted Roman Legionary tactics of tightly disciplined formations, fortifications and cavalry support. To me the more interesting question would be what would have happened if the Zulus had adapted to modern firearm use and become proficient in their use? Can you imagine the psychological effect of the sight of 20,000 screaming Zulus with fixed bayonets coming at you from all sides! MAB |
||||||||||||
|
Rich
Guest
|
You know when I look at the battlefield tactics in the War I have to believe the psychological edge in battle was always with the British who fought in ranks. Zulu leadership had to be spectacular in that it was up to them to bite the bullets so to speak before they could even close with the enemy with the assegai. For me, their victory at Isandhlwana showed tremendous bravery in the face of murderous fire. This, in contrast, to say what happened at Gallipoli where that effort failed terribly.
And Mike as to your point on the Brits adopting Roman tactics, I'd suggest that the Zulus, ever the warriors they were, most probably would look at a bunch of scenarios to lop them off piecemeal just like Arminius did with Varus' legions in the Teutoberg Forest. From the Royal Geo Society, the Brits were pretty good geographers but not in Zuluand! Old Cetsh I'd think would see to that! |
||||||||||||
|
tom
|
We should have taken advantage of our leather boots and used the guns to fire tin tacks at 'em.
Imagine. 25,000 Zulus doing the Riverdance! That would have given us time to get away |
||||||||||||
|
mike snook 2
|
Michael
You overlook the traditional British secret weapon - rum. Mike |
||||||||||||
|
Adrian Whiting
|
Dawn,
Though the Longbow majors in an earlier period of history than my black powder interests tend to take me to, I have a recollection that we are talking about a weapon capable of perhaps 12 rounds a minute, though more pragmatically discharging 5 or 6, which becomes particularly effective between 350 and 250 yards, has significant ammunition supply problems because the soldier usually carries a rather limited amount when compared to his potential rate of fire and can pierce significant metal protection. Apart from needing rather more than a recruit's course of fire and an annual musketry practice, the only element missing is that the firer's view remains unhindered by smoke ! |
||||||||||||
_________________ Hope this assists, Adrian |
Joseph
|
Well... for fun anyway... I think the French Knights at Agincourt would agree that the longbow would have defeated the Zulus.
Joseph |
||||||||||||
_________________ www.batlantacrimecruiser.com |
Zulu courage |
Robert John
|
Many thanks everybody for your replies but we have wandered off topic a little---I was wondering if, assuming both sides were armed exactly the same, would the courage and ferocity of the Zulu have overcome the tenacity and discipline of the British?
I know that if 20,000--30,000 Zulus were charging down on me with the intention of putting my lights out permanently I would need a quick change of clothes!! Dawn, Given the quality of your answers who needs experts anyway? |
||||||||||||
_________________ R J Jones |
Joseph
|
Well... if armed exactly the same... then the Brits would have sent in their own army of many thousands and dealt with the Zulus handily.
Joey |
||||||||||||
_________________ www.batlantacrimecruiser.com |
Zulu courage |
|
||
Powered by phpBB © 2001-2004 phpBB Group
phpBB Style created by phpBBStyles.com and distributed by Styles Database.
phpBB Style created by phpBBStyles.com and distributed by Styles Database.