Rome's failed invasion of Nubia
- Thread starter JadeB
- Start date
UpAndComing
Veteran
Of course it's hidden
To the victor go the spoils and hidden failures
To the victor go the spoils and hidden failures
Premeditated
MANDE KANG
Cushtyes were putting in work back then
I think Taharqah was the one that save the Abrahamic religion
Sudan could have had the same amount of tourist as Morocco and South Africa if they would have been stable and focus on tourism since independence. Lots of rich monuments and history.
I think Taharqah was the one that save the Abrahamic religion
Sudan could have had the same amount of tourist as Morocco and South Africa if they would have been stable and focus on tourism since independence. Lots of rich monuments and history.
ReturnOfJudah
Veteran
Without watching the video or knowing about the campaign, I would suspect that the reason they had difficulty was because they were so heavy infantry-centric, and that's just not suitable for hotter climates. You'd get cooked wearing all that metal in the mid day heat.
I know they had a lot of success in other hot places like Egypt and north Africa in general, along with Syria and Jordan. Plus southern Europe itself can get pretty warm in the summer. But I would think that Sudan is hotter still than those places. And more humid too.
Generally wherever they struggled it was because of unfavourable geography and climate which acted as a force multiplier for their enemies and as a force divider for their own system of military organisation and equipment. The dense forests of Germany, the Iraqi desert, and it would appear the lands of Sudan as well.
This is equally true for everybody, though. The Persians before them were all conquering with their foot archer and light infantry system, until they got bogged down in the high mountains of Greece and got overpowered by the Greek heavy infantry. The Mongols were unstoppable everywhere except in the tropics, where the extra moisture in the air from humidity and the daily heavy rains made their horse-archers completely ineffective, because water dissolved the animal glue used to bind their composite bows. They had such a problem with humidity and rain in Vietnam that they never attempted another tropical campaign afterwards, so they stayed out of India and Africa altogether.
This is why I find ancient and medieval military history so interesting, because the military systems were a direct product of each individual culture, and because all of these systems had their limits which would be exposed once you got into a part of the world that had a completely different climatic and geographic environment to your home. There was always a trade off: if you're really good at one thing, you cost yourself being good at another thing. And nobody could master all the range of skills that were needed.
You don't get this diversity or this link between culture, environment and military systems in modern warfare. Everything is basically the same, so it's a lot less interesting to think about.
I know they had a lot of success in other hot places like Egypt and north Africa in general, along with Syria and Jordan. Plus southern Europe itself can get pretty warm in the summer. But I would think that Sudan is hotter still than those places. And more humid too.
Generally wherever they struggled it was because of unfavourable geography and climate which acted as a force multiplier for their enemies and as a force divider for their own system of military organisation and equipment. The dense forests of Germany, the Iraqi desert, and it would appear the lands of Sudan as well.
This is equally true for everybody, though. The Persians before them were all conquering with their foot archer and light infantry system, until they got bogged down in the high mountains of Greece and got overpowered by the Greek heavy infantry. The Mongols were unstoppable everywhere except in the tropics, where the extra moisture in the air from humidity and the daily heavy rains made their horse-archers completely ineffective, because water dissolved the animal glue used to bind their composite bows. They had such a problem with humidity and rain in Vietnam that they never attempted another tropical campaign afterwards, so they stayed out of India and Africa altogether.
This is why I find ancient and medieval military history so interesting, because the military systems were a direct product of each individual culture, and because all of these systems had their limits which would be exposed once you got into a part of the world that had a completely different climatic and geographic environment to your home. There was always a trade off: if you're really good at one thing, you cost yourself being good at another thing. And nobody could master all the range of skills that were needed.
You don't get this diversity or this link between culture, environment and military systems in modern warfare. Everything is basically the same, so it's a lot less interesting to think about.
Learned about this back in like elementary school history class 
...they were nicknamed something like "The unconquerable Cushytes" 
...they were nicknamed something like "The unconquerable Cushytes" 
Trajan
Veteran
Yapdatfool
Superstar
The way I see it:
Rome pulled up and took some shyt. didn't want to go further cause they knew they would lose.
Then the Queen of Nubia/Kush pulled back up for ALL the smoke.
Rather than fight the queen, Rome said 'yea we don't want the smoke, lets start a co-op' AND here's some extras to further show we don't want them problems.
Rome pulled up and took some shyt. didn't want to go further cause they knew they would lose.
Then the Queen of Nubia/Kush pulled back up for ALL the smoke.
Rather than fight the queen, Rome said 'yea we don't want the smoke, lets start a co-op' AND here's some extras to further show we don't want them problems.
I’m reading a book about Nero right now.
Ruthless lil mutterfukker. I’m in the part about his teen years now, I can’t wait to get to the adulthood fukkery!
I’m getting old as fukk getting excited over stuff like this
the landscape, weather and climate dictate how any conflict plays out. so many examples of this.
famously, Napoleon's campaign into Russia getting the cold shoulder by old man winter, ditto for Hitler.
overcoming these obstacles with proper planning will be a shock to any enemy. Hannibal traversing the Alps is a great example.
the Mongols were also stopped twice by their failure to master the seas. they got the OG Kamikaze wash twice...
i agree that the homogenous nature of modern militaries is not as interesting as seeing to alien cultures clash but it is what it is.
all we have to fawn over now is Havana syndrome.
That doesn't count. How are you going to account for a freak cyclone hitting your navy not once but twice? I mean today it would be a point for criticism because we can see that shyt coming with meteorological science where it is. But in the medieval period, the best preparation they ever did was make an offering to the sea gods, and maybe gutted an animal to study its guts and make predictions about the future based on that. So you can't blame a naval invasion for failing because a cyclone destroyed all the ships
they were using flat bottomed river boats to traverse the sea, breh.
if they had a proper sea faring navy they may have stood a chance.
Mongols gotta hold them soggy L's.