Notice: This is the official website of the All Empires History Community (Reg. 10 Feb 2002)

  FAQ FAQ  Forum Search   Register Register  Login Login

Ethnicity as a factor in military sucess

 Post Reply Post Reply
PoitierFrance View Drop Down
Immortal Guard
Immortal Guard

Joined: 27-Sep-2018
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 2
  Quote PoitierFrance Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Topic: Ethnicity as a factor in military sucess
    Posted: 27-Sep-2018 at 15:30
Greetings fellow avid history readers. As a new member on this forum this is my very first thread.

One of my main interests is military history with a special focus on textual description of engagements between armies, spanning the whole ancient and medieval periods.

One of my conclusions is that some ethnicities seem to both physically and mentally better geared for war, with the result that they always give the impressions to their enemies as formidable warriors, both as victors But even as defeated.

Here is my list of these warrior in no particular order:
Ural-Altaic (Turks, mongols etc)

Peoples i consider to belong to a non-warrior people:

I’ve reached this conclusion based on accounts (quite a few of them eyewitness accounts), clearly conveying the impression that the above mentioned peoples either as belong to a warrior type people or not.

Definition of a warrior people: Strong body, often a mesomorph body type or endomorph type. Mentally tough, oftens withstand enemy attacks for a very long time, inflicting heavy casualties on their enemies even when they lose.

Definition of non-warrior people: medium to small body type, either ectomorph or at best case a combination of ecto-mesomorph type. Mentally not very tough, often needs to be assured of its numerical superiority, or knowing they have their enemies trapped in ambush. Can not sustain enemy charges for a very long time, if at all. Easily routed, seldom initative to perform individual feats.

That’s my take. Feel free to agree or disagree with explanation.
Back to Top
Guests View Drop Down
  Quote Guests Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 15-Jul-2019 at 01:14
I would mostly have to disagree. When it comes to ethnicity, we must also look at cultures within these groups to answer why certain kinds of people would choose to fight in the first place. much of this has connections to their religion, governments, where they live, their connections to outsiders of other cultures as well.

Ancient Germans, Celtics, Romans,Greeks, Arabs, Japanese, Assyrians and many others all over the globe would be seen as warrior nations because war is a major part of their religion. War gods in their polytheistic religions.

Next we must look at governments and their motivation to expand their realm. Roman Empire, Greece, Persian Empire, the Huns, Mongols; if they could win and expand, they would do it. All about influence and power. Such has continued through to the end of the Cold War.

When Islam began to spread, so did the hundreds of Jihads declared by the followers to non-Muslim areas. This is an example of how religion can make a prior non warrior nation of people into a culture that ready for a fight.

After the establishment of the UN there has not been a massive war with great losses.  With the weapon tech of today, it is all about who wants to start the fight as body-build means little now. anyone can take on anyone if both are up to fight. After WWII, no one wants to have another killer like that.  However with the great amount of unrest in both large and small nations, when will the spark hit the keg?
Back to Top
 Post Reply Post Reply

Forum Jump Forum Permissions View Drop Down

Bulletin Board Software by Web Wiz Forums® version 9.56a [Free Express Edition]
Copyright ©2001-2009 Web Wiz

This page was generated in 0.047 seconds.