Zulus vs Spartans who wins

[Made Man]

I get it...

Nikkas want to champion African warriors vs the Greeks. But that shyt really ain’t close on a neutral field . They would only have a better chance in South Africa because they know the terrain .

The fact that we are even having this convo due to one civilization predates the other by thousands of years Says it all .

Your better off asking about Kush ,Mali or the Kushyte Egyptians vs the Spartans .

 

[Afro]

Shaka Zulu

 

[The Odum of Ala Igbo]

Anyone interested in military history already knows the general weakness of the Spartans in relation to what made them strong.

(actually i'd be more interested in how Zulus manage Cavalry warfare on a massive scale)
​

If you know, you know

 

[Made Man]

They were armed.

Yea they were . Eventually 20000 can overwhelm
2000 rifles. Especially when flanking. But when they came back and took them seriously it was a wrap.

 

[MegaManX]

Zulus would destroy the Spartans for the simple fact that Spartans rely on defensive formations and the Zulu are literally Skirmishing warriors. They would pepper them from all sides with javalins, outpace them, and wear them out. They would never hard engage them. Phalanx is not invincible. It has clear flaws.

 

[Afro]

Shaka Zulu turns around and tries to run away. William Wallace throws his Dirk at Shaka, but Shaka deflects it with his Iklwa. He starts to climb a hill, but stops to chew on some poisonous herbs. He sees Wallace running after him and continues to run up the hill. Shaka Zulu tries to spit the poison at Wallace as he approaches, but Wallace manages to turn his head away and prevent the poison from getting into his eyes. Wallace swings his Claymore at Shaka's Zulu Axe and knocks it out of his hands. Shaka then swings his Iklwa and slashes across Wallace's stomach. Wallace swings back in retaliation and slashes Shaka's back. Shaka manages to stab Wallace in his waist, forcing him to stumble back. Shaka Zulu charges at William Wallace, but Wallace regains his balance at the last second and points his Claymore upward. Shaka Zulu jumps at Wallace, but accidentally impales himself on the sword. William Wallace pulls the sword and throws Shaka's dead body aside before giving a loud victory cry.


Cacs say Zulu couldn't even take out a drunk Scottsman

 

[Made Man]

Zulus would destroy the Spartans for the simple fact that Spartans rely on defensive formations and the Zulu are literally Skirmishing warriors. They would pepper them from all sides with javalins, outpace them, and wear them out. They would never hard engage them. Phalanx is not invincible. It has clear flaws.

What would they do to Calvary and Archers? Nobody can answer this

 

[Houston911]

.....

 

[MegaManX]

Terrain being even, numbers being even...

shyt... even if the Spartans are outnumbered. Spartans win easily 10 out of 10 times.

I think people in this Thread are really undervaluing the importance of armor. Zulus have cowhide shields for protection and what else? Spartans have bronze cuirasses, bronze helmets, thick shields coated in bronze, and bronze arm/leg greaves.

It’s the reason why during the 1st Crusades the Christians were having so much success against the lightly armoured Muslims even though they were outnumbered in a lot of battles 2 to 1.

tell me again how a spartan forces an entire army of mobile skirmishers to EVER fight in melee?

They literally have no reason to ever engage unless they feel your line is broken. Spartans had no archers and relatively lame ass cavalry. Skirmishers obliterate armored infantry, especially in mass. On top of that their spear infantry would make cavalry rushes extremely dangerous.

 

[videogamestashbox.com]

I get it...

Nikkas want to champion African warriors vs the Greeks. But that shyt really ain’t close on a neutral field . They would only have a better chance in South Africa because they know the terrain .

The fact that we are even having this convo due to one civilization predates the other by thousands of years Says it all .

Your better off asking about Kush ,Mali or the Kushyte Egyptians vs the Spartans .

1. Um no, we are simply answering the question as posed by the OP
Now if you have another scenario in mind put it on the table ...maybe you'll get an answer, maybe not.




2. This convo says more about the average joe only knowing the Zulus(and not much else) as relates to "African military history" ...as opposed to any or reason you might think.

 

[Made Man]

tell me again how a spartan forces an entire army of mobile skirmishers to EVER fight in melee?

They literally have no reason to ever engage unless they feel your line is broken. Spartans had no archers and relatively lame ass cavalry. Skirmishers obliterate armored infantry, especially in mass. On top of that their spear infantry would make cavalry rushes extremely dangerous.

Stop .

Spartans had archers just like every other Greek civilization . Lame ass Calvary >>>No/ little Calvary

 

[MegaManX]

Calvary would crush them on the flanks

When you say "cavalry would crush them on the flanks" like a cavalry charge with no engagement EVER WORKS. There are only two types of charges in all of history.

The Heavy Horse charge. This is brute force heavily armored riders and horses breaking the lines of an army that does not have long spears or trenches.

The Light Cavalry flank. This is lightly armored or no armor at all horsemen who attack enemies who are either ALREADY ENGAGED or ill equipped to fight back.

Cavalries worst nightmare is spears. Even worse if the spearmen have absolutely no engagement.

Spartans have no way to force a fight in melee, which makes the cavalry charge a suicide mission. Spartans, along with most greek had TERRIBLE archers. Some of the worst in the world. Why? Because they perfected the Phalanx. The Phalanx made archery practically useless so no one ever invested in it heavily. Almost all war in Greece was against other greeks. Sparta was gods IN GREECE. They would be shyt in open combat vs any balanced military OR skirmishing force. This is why the Romans whipped that ass. Legionnaires not only had shield wall formations, but they also carried atleast three javalins on them to harass their enemies

 

[Made Man]

1. Um no, we are simply answering the question as posed by the OP
Now if you have another scenario in mind put it on the table ...maybe you'll get an answer, maybe not.




2. This convo says more about the average joe only knowing the Zulus(and not much else) as relates to "African military history" ...as opposed to any or reason you might think.

I’m just speaking on championing an African Military to fight the Cacs. Dudes letting that cloud their judgement. Shaka reforming fighting with a short spear in and shield is great for that civilization in Africa, but really insignificant in the grand scheme of things in the world and a few thousand years too late . I admire the fighting spirit and how he transformed farmers into warriors but He mainly dominated other African tribes .I know that’s hard to hear but it is what it is .

 

[Made Man]

When you say "cavalry would crush them on the flanks" like a cavalry charge with no engagement EVER WORKS. There are only two types of charges in all of history.

The Heavy Horse charge. This is brute force heavily armored riders and horses breaking the lines of an army that does not have long spears or trenches.

The Light Cavalry flank. This is lightly armored or no armor at all horsemen who attack enemies who are either ALREADY ENGAGED or ill equipped to fight back.

Cavalries worst nightmare is spears. Even worse if the spearmen have absolutely no engagement.

Spartans have no way to force a fight in melee, which makes the cavalry charge a suicide mission. Spartans, along with most greek had TERRIBLE archers. Some of the worst in the world. Why? Because they perfected the Phalanx. The Phalanx made archery practically useless so no one ever invested in it heavily. Almost all war in Greece was against other greeks. Sparta was gods IN GREECE. They would be shyt in open combat vs any balanced military OR skirmishing force. This is why the Romans whipped that ass. Legionnaires not only had shield wall formations, but they also carried atleast three javalins on them to harass their enemies

They would engage with their phalanx. Yes Zulu would have a mele advantage but they would use a hammer an anvil tactic. Meaning while the phalanx are engaging the Zulu warriors calvary would attack them in the back. Plus In Shaka time he utilized the short spear, not a long one that would effect calvary. They only way the Zulu can win is with guerilla warfare with quick strikes against camps and supply lines in their territory .

 

[O³ (O cubed)]

Zulus. Them gay ass Spartans would lose.