4 ms·
Europeans were superior technologically in a number of relevant fields, from navigation to metalurgy, that were directly impacting their warfare effectiveness.
by mbroncano 9y ago
Europeans were superior technologically in a number of relevant fields, from navigation to metalurgy, that were directly impacting their warfare effectiveness. The diseases just made the conquest far quicker and more importantly cheap, both in pecuniary and human terms.
- skookumchuck 9y agoEuropeans also had writing, which enabled military leaders to benefit from a thousand years of military history. Consider that an organized Roman legion could (and did) defeat barbarian hordes, equally armed, ten times their size. That's what strategy and tactics will do. Pizarro's swords and muskets didn't defeat the Inca army. It was strategy and tactics. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Cajamarca https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Cajamarca
- jcranmer 9y agoBarbarian hordes could (and did) defeat Roman legions, equally armed, twice their size. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Adrianople https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Adrianople
- skookumchuck 9y agofrom your link: "More recent scholarly works mostly agree that the armies were similarly sized" Since that battle occurred fairly late (378 AD) it wouldn't be in the least surprising that the barbarian "hordes" had learned how to fight in a more coordinated, tactical manner than a mob rushing the legions.
- mbroncano 9y agoExcellent point, it seems that the pen is mightier than the sword after all.
- soperj 9y agoAnd yet they didn't accomplish these things in other areas. Africa, and a lot of south east asia for instance are not populated by huge swaths of people of European descent.