Re: Tech Levels and Quality was Re: DS3 design (long)

I agree with John A. on this, but there are even more factors than he
mentions.

--- John Atkinson <johnmatkinson@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Sun, 26 Sep 2004 15:08:28 +1000, Alan and Carmel Brain
> <aebrain@webone.com.au> wrote:
> 
> > Isandhlwana, for a start.
> > http://www.rorkesdriftvc.com/isandhlwana/isandhlwana.htm
> 
> A clear case of a force that did everything wrong.  Every single
> thing they could.

And was outnumbered 25,000 to 1,350.  While at Rorke's Drift the next
day less than 150 British held off 5,000 zulus.

>  
> > Little Big Horn
> > http://www.eyewitnesstohistory.com/custer.htm
> 
> Little Big Horn is a questionable one--the 'high tech' force was
> armed with single-shot breechloaders and the 'low tech' one largely 
> armed with repeating rifles.	And the 'high tech' force made a 
> deliberate (moronic) decision to leave behind their most devestating 
> weapons.  A battery of gatling guns would have made the outcome of 
> that battle quite different.	Even had the Sioux eventually stuck 
> around and won, it would have effectively destroyed the tribe.
> 

And Custer faced 2,000 Sioux with less than 300 troopers.

There are other cases of US cav being trounced by Sioux, Cheyenne,
Cherokee, etc., but before ~1870, these were cases of being outnumbered
10:1 or more, and after ~1870 were both outnumbered and the Sioux et
al. 
had equipped themselves with repeating rifles, while the US troopers
were limited to 1870 Springfield trap-door BLRs.

There are several notable cases pre ~1872 of swarms of indians being
driven off by a relatively small number of lever-action Henrys or
Spencers among the defenders.

> > I'd argue that Teutorburger Wald qualifies too
> > http://www.ancientsites.com/aw/Thread/81774
> 
> Swords is Swords, man.  Higher level of organization does not mean
> higher technological level.
> 

As with several other notable defeats of late Republic/early Empire
Romans, they were put in a situation where their strengths (open field
vs. infantry) were minimized or eliminated, and their weaknesses were
exploited, while commanded by politically appointed incompetants.

Now, if one side were iron-age and the other limited to bronze, copper,
or stone, then we could talk about technology differences.
Can you say "Conquistidors", "Aztecs", "Maya", and "Incas".  :)

J