Alex_R
Auto-translated
I read some posts and came across a categorical statement that quality ALWAYS(!) beats quantity!
Although I study legal disciplines, I still heard a story from a historian about the Zulu Wars: on one side was a corps of Englishmen - professional soldiers, disciplined and trained, equipped with the latest technology: the newest weapons, artillery (isn't that quality?), and on the other - a huge army of the Zulu king Shaka Zulu (I think that's what his name was) - isn't that quantity? In general, during the battle, the corps was defeated, and Shaka negotiated acceptable peace terms for himself...
I would like to know - did the story I described really happen, and are there other similar cases in history?
His name was Shaka Zulu, although that's not important, I understood what you meant. In general, this is not a very good example, because the quality of the English was wasted due to incompetent command. And the Zulu army had a number of advantages:
- they fought on their territory
- numerical superiority
- a strong leader
- discipline no worse than the English
There are even versions that the British had been waiting for an attack for several days and nights, and simply lost their vigilance, and the Zulus, it seems, attacked early in the morning, so suddenly that the British did not have time to fire a single shot, although many may have still been sleeping.
P.S. This is a completely real story, considering that the Zulus were called warrior-leopards (they could move silently and unnoticed) and in close combat, against the spears and axes of the natives, there is nothing you can do.
P.S. And the quantity there was SO HUGE ... oh my!
