6 ms·
"Oh boi, not this horrible and flawed argument again" Starting out with your point written like this seems aggressive and patronizing. "This idea of "Europe wo
by poisonarena 5y ago
"Oh boi, not this horrible and flawed argument again" Starting out with your point written like this seems aggressive and patronizing.
"This idea of "Europe won because it is good at tech" really needs to die. " Because you don't like it?
I disagree. Spanish Conquistadors were some of the greatest and most experienced warriors in all of history, and were trained veterans of the reconquest of Spain from the Moors. Why people want to discount the fact that obsidian shatters on steel, Spanish had shock cavalry, dogs, and just the thought of hearing and seeing a gun go off for the first time is wild. Disease catalyzed things for sure, and is definitely one of the biggest factors in the speed in which the conquest of the Americas happned, but to entirely discount The Spanish Empires elite warriors seems like a revisionist cope, because you want to demonize colonizers.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Cajamarca https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Cajamarca
168 Spanish vs 3000-8000 Incan warriors
Only one Spaniard was injured and 2000+ Incan warriors were killed, the rest taken prisoner. That probably would nothave happened without cannons, horses, and swords
- shakow 5y ago> and were trained veterans of the reconquest of Spain from the Moors Cortes was 7 y.o. when the Reconquista ended...
- poisonarena 5y agoWho trained Cortes? The Spanish developed tactics for decades and decades, building knowledge from previous wars and conquests.
- shakow 5y agoIt does not make any sense. To this measure, every last soldier in a European army until post-WWII era should be a highly trained veteran.
- poisonarena 5y agoI think you are missing the point entirely, I am saying that there is a thing called collective military knowledge, The Spanish had experience in fighting wars for many years. This knowledge of tactics and techniques is passed on through training.
- shakow 5y agoAnd I'm saying that virtually every country on Earth has some military knowledge. You really think that France/the German principalities/England/the Ottoman Empire/the PL Commonwealth/the Kievan Rus'/... just forgot everything after a war, and that Spain, miraculously, was the only country to understand that experience is a thing? And do you believe that the Southern American populations religiously waited for the White Man to bring them the concept of armed conflicts, and that they lived in perfect harmony until then, miraculously oblivious to the concept of conquest and imperialism?
- poisonarena 5y agoI think you may be putting words in my mouth and getting pretty worked up, because I didn't say what you are implying. I am just stating(for the third time now) that Spain was at the cutting edge in 15th century warfare. Regarding your last paragraph, which is on some other tangent, but since you brought it up, it is known that the Aztecs and Mexica had a very different view on the purpose of warfare.
- wwtrv 5y agoWhile it’s true that the conquistadors had immense success in their initial encounters with the natives, the Aztecs would have adapted eventually to counter the Spanish had they not been crippled by the European diseases. This seems to have already been the case in the siege of Tenochtitlan where the Spanish suffers huge casualties despite having similar numbers (together with their allies) to the Aztecs. This was the case with many of the North American tribes and even with the diseases it took the Spanish another 150 years to subjugate all of the Mayan cities.
- wwtrv 5y agoCortes was an opportunistic lawyer/notary he had no military experience before the conquest of Mexico and I’m not sure there is any evidence that he had any military education.
- poisonarena 5y agoWell he overthrew the Aztec Empire.. Also his dad was an infantry captain. And he seemed to be commanding his armies, and armies of allied tribes https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Otumba https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Otumba
- wwtrv 5y agoYeah he turned out to be a fairly competent commander but it was main his diplomatic skill that allowed him to conquer Mexico. There is no way he would have won without the tens of thousands of native allies that fought alongside the Spanish.
- YeGoblynQueenne 5y ago>> 168 Spanish vs 3000-8000 Incan warriors Actually, those were not warriors. Note the listings of the Stength of the belligerents in the information box, on the right of the article (on the right as seen in a PC browser): >> 3,000–8,000 unarmed personal attendants/lightly armed guards [2] The opening paragraph of the wikipedia article also makes it clear that the "battle" was more like a slaughter: >> The Battle of Cajamarca also spelled Cajamalca[4][5] (though many contemporary scholars prefer to call it Massacre of Cajamarca)[6][7][8] was the ambush and seizure of the Inca ruler Atahualpa by a small Spanish force led by Francisco Pizarro, on November 16, 1532. The Spanish killed thousands of Atahualpa's counselors, commanders, and unarmed attendants in the great plaza of Cajamarca, and caused his armed host outside the town to flee.
- poisonarena 5y ago>> 3,000–8,000 unarmed personal attendants/lightly armed guards [2] Wikipedia said they had Knives and ropes Almost all medieval battles end with routes and slaughter. What I am saying is 168 were able to take 5000 prisoners without the help of advanced technology?
- YeGoblynQueenne 5y agoBecause the majority were civilians incapable of putting up a fight.
- poisonarena 5y agoHow do you even know that? Text says they were armed with knives. And what do you mean "civilians" in this context? The article lists them as armed belligerents.
- YeGoblynQueenne 5y agoWell, I'm going by what the Wikipedia article says, that they were "Atahualpa's counselors, commanders, and unarmed attendants". According to the article the "armed host" was stationed outside the city and fled when the emperor was killed. Edit: sorry, captured, not killed.