When I was taking history, we were told something to the effect of: “When the germans (or italians, I’m not completely sure) invaded (some african country or was it Poland or Belgium? Again I’m not completely sure) their tanks were met by soldiers carrying spears (then something about two different centuries meeting, and tragic loss and all of that).”
Is this really true? ie did more than one or two cranky old farmers actually take on tanks/infantry with spears? If it is true, did they really fight the tanks (what would they do to a tank), or did the spearmen show up then skeedaddle (run away)? Did the spearmen manage to kill anything?
Personally I think the spearman story we were told was a bit of sensationalism designed to make bored students pay attention, but they wouldn’t put something false in a history text would they?
Well, I don’t know about spearmen against tanks, but I remember the Polish calvalry charges against the Germans in WWII. While not exactly the same level of technological difference as spearmen against tanks, its a pretty huge gap…and it was pretty devastating for the Poles as I recall.
There is relatively well known German propaganda footage edited to show just that. As far as I know the scene in question intentionally misleading.
But, as xtisme said, the cavalry using lances was very real. Just over 20 years earlier cavalry was used in combat on both sides, and of course the Polish army used more modern units, too. While there was a technological gap, it isn’t really a gap of centuries as it seems first.
You do not. You remember hearing German propaganda that was meant to portray Polish people as backwards and stupid, which was later respun to make Polish people look desperately brave and heroic.
As far as I know, that’s a myth that’s been perpetuated as fact. This is the only cite I found on a really quick google search but someone with more historical knowledge will probably be around shortly with more authorative citations.
Oy. When I opened up the reply window, no one had commented yet but after finishing and before hitting submit, I got distracted by some IMs and didn’t think to preview the post first.
As mentioned, you’re likely refering to the Italian-Ethiopia war of 1935-36. Italy, under the brash, chest-thumping leadership of Mussolini and having largely missed out on the 19th century dissection of Africa (including a humilating loss to Ethiopian troops in 1886 that facilitated Ethiopian independence) decided to invade the-then League of Nations member-state of Abyssinia. Although it’s far too simplistic to cast the engagement as a “spears versus tanks” engagement, Italy certainly enjoyed an industrial and technological superiority that helped decide the issue in their favor.
Perhaps the most notable outcome of the whole debacle was that it revealed the League of Nations for the worthless debating society that it was. You’d be hard pressed to find a more moving examination of the hypocrisy between the League’s sweeping Covenant and the practices of its membership than Haile Selassie’s appeal to the League in June of 1936.
Many years ago when I was in college, one of my fellow students claimed that, during the Italian invasion, the Ethiopian antiaircraft defence was to wait for a plane to strafe and then throw their spears up and hope one hits a vital spot on the plane. He further claimed that at least one plane was downed in this manner.
I have doubts about the veracity of these claims. Anyone know for sure?
This is probably not very relevant, but in the computer game “Civilization” you will frequently see spearmen (from less developed civilizations) facing off against tanks in the WWII era. This will often happen if a civilization has been isolated through history. Absurdly, the spearmen have a chance of winning such an encounter (though, unlike the Ethiopians, they have no chance of downing an airplane).
This is often cited as a reason why the combat system in Civilization is unrealistical.
Ah, yes, the old Civilization battles. I always despised it when units 1000 years behind mine in technological development won.
In Civ 3, it was calculated that horsmen were mathematically the most efficient unit you could build, assuming there were no limits on the number you could own.
Well, looks like I was the victim of German propaganda, as I DID think there were Polish calvary charges in WWII…I even remember seeing pictures of dead Polish cavalry troops in one of the Time Life WWII books I had. I knew that the Poles had mechanized forces also btw (I played the various Panzer General games after all ), and I knew that they, as well as other countries still used cavalry (I think the US actually had some cavalry actions in the pacific during WWII…if I’m remember correctly and not again the victim of propaganda).
There may have been Polish cavalry charges “against” tanks in WW2, but the object was not to destroy the tanks, but rather to go through them.
After all, lightly armed (with rifles and a relative lack of horse artillery) cavalry would do better in a civilian raid deep into enemy territory, where they would be harder to catch, than to attempt to butress your own failing lines.
At least that was one explanation posited to me to explain German footage of cavalry charging tanks.
Let’s not get TOO smug! The last US Cavalry charge was in 1942 and the taking of Mazar-i-Sharif, Afghanistan, had a cavalry charge with American Special Forces riding with the Northern Alliance troopers.
In an interesting bit of irony, the Italian invasion of Ethiopia was resisted by Ethiopians bearing German and Japanese weapons. (Cite: Richard Overy in The Road to War)
It was a little unclear which side Italy would be on and its future Axis partners weren’t sure they wanted an Italy with an African Empire.
With regards to the stories of spears downing strafing airplanes; it sounds like the sort of thing that might be claimed even if it didn’t happen. After all, the Ethiopians had guns (perhaps not enough guns, but they still had them), and it takes not very much common sense at all to see that this would be an ineffective antiaircraft defense.
