African military systems before 1800
 |
African military innovation and change refers to the evolution of the military arts that has place on the African continent. Early warfare was keyed to defence and minor raiding, not massive campaigns annihilating tens of thousands. The full range of missile and thrusting weapons has been used in African warfare from earliest times, from spear to bow. As cultures became more elaborated so did warfare and its organisation. The tropical Congo region for example saw well articulated manoeuvres, army subdivisions into regiments and corps, and relatively sophisticated coordination by designated leaders, using drums, bells and horns made of elephant tusks.[1]. Archery made its mark throughout Africa, from weak bows and poisoned arrows of the San tribes, to the full-draw power bows of the Yoruba, Mossi and Medjay. Defensive positions ran the gamut of what is seen worldwide, from imposing castles to field fortifications with trenches and ramparts. Even more elaborated and richer societies further north in Egypt and Carthage contributed their own innovations and weapons systems. All of these form the continuum that is African warfare. Due to the massive number of different peoples and regions, a "snapshot" view of military innovation and change is taken below- using the military activities of certain selected peoples to illustrate how military innnovation and change has evolved on the continent.
Nature of military innovation and change
Military innovation: revolution versus incremental change
Military change and innovation is considered by many theorists to be a "fundamental change to the framework of war, something unpredictable, and that brings about far-reaching and systematic effects to culture, politics and society. They are in short, not small changes like adding a new type of rifle bayonet but changes of a sesimic nature.[2] Writers such as Murray and Knox argue for 5 such revolutionary changes in Western history such as the advanceof the concept of the modern nation-state, the French Revolution which merges mass politics andwarfare, the Industrial Revolution and its material advances, the First World War and its combination of mass armies and mass killing technology with foreshadowings of the Second, and finally the nuclear era. Some nations and leaders seize upon these sesimic shifts or shape them. Others resist such changes and adjustments until forced to by actual or threatened defeat.[3]
Military innovation thus may have wide effects, and encompasses changes in leadership, organisation, and outlook. Other writers note that military change and innovation can be incremental, a product of years of growth and development with one advance, building upon another. A culmination of small changes over time cna lead to major departure later on. The Marian reforms to the Roman Army for example, built upon the existing phalanx, mobilization and equipment base, but involved a more unified sense of common citizenship among Rome's soldiers, since the reogranisation de-emphasised some class distinctions. [4]. In like manner, the North's dominance in the American Civil War built upon existing structures but was fueled to unprecedented proportions by the mass mobilization of personnel and a burgeoning Industrial Revolution that enabled it to outproduce, outnumber and ultimately crush a South. In Africa, a summary of such changes would be:
- The coming of the horse
- Use of better metal weapons
- Consolidation of pre-colonial nation-states and empires
- Introduction of gunpowder weapons
- Era of colonial conquest
Innovation and the exchange and flow of knowledge and technology
Military innovation also depends on the flow of technology, materials, ideas and people. The gunpowder revolution for example finds its origin in a Chinese invention. The famous Roman gladius was copied from the Spanish tribes conquered by Rome.[5] The stirrup, so critical to Western cavalry warfare, originated in Asia, as did the compass, so critical to the navigation of naval shipping. The flow of materials, technology, ideas and people across continents and regions undercuts simplistic notions of ethnic superiority in explaining the military success of various peoples.[6] The ancient Germans for example, were poorly organised and armed and were often soundly defeated by the Romans, a Mediterranean people. In the 20th century however, the tables were turned, and the Germans emerged as very proficient fighters. The massive sweeps of Mongol cavalry forces (an Asiatic people) not only routed European armies but at their height, controlled a significant part of the Eurasian landmass, an empire that was to be bigger than Rome's, covering an estimated 12 to 22% of the earth's land surface.[7] As scholar Thomas Sowell notes, the broad sweep of history has reshuffled the rankings of peoples time and time again, and will do so again in the future.[8]
Military innovation thus encompasses:
- Shifts with widespread effects
- Social changes
- Leadership changes
- Organisational change
- Equipment changes and development of new technology
- Economic changes
- Movement of people, ideas, animals, crops, and technology via trade, migration or conquest
Military change and the African environment
Military innovation is linked not only to local culture sbut to those of a wider world, where technology, materials and concepts are spread and exchanged among peoples. The African continent is particular lacks the advantages other continents have in facilitating the spread of ideas, technology and people. As noted above, Europe benefited from many innovations originating elsewhere. Such observations on the African environment appear in several standard histories of African cultures and economies, including the development of states and their militaries. See for example Robert July's Pre-Colonial Africa).[9] The African environment, especially in the Saharan region and southwards also hinders development of certain economic engines common to other areas, such as mass production of high quality grain crops, or load-bearing animals. Such factors are critical to large-scale military operations in terms of supply and transport.[10] Massed chariot or cavalry sweeps across hundreds of miles are simply unrealistic in zones of the continent where most of the horses will die from the tsetse fly. Large-scale incursions or flows of technology, ideas or people into tropical Africa from the sea was hindered by lack navigable rivers and good natural harbours, and had to wait until comparatively late in history when changes in technology (better sailing ships,for example) helped bypass these barriers.
Pattern in African military innovation: Pre industrial era
Given the critical role that borrowing from other cultures (horses, domesticated animals, gunpowder, compasses, etc.) plays in military innovation, numerous nations are indebted to others for advances in the military art, both directly and indirectly. Innovation is the process of combining known (whether local or borrowed) elements into new patterns, and military innovation are no different. The areas below offer a snapshot of developments on the African continent, which stretches from the Mediterranean to the Red Sea, the Atlantic, to the Indian Ocean. As Arican historian Basil Davidson notes, Africa and its peoples are not simply in a region south of the Sahara, as is so often conceived in both the popular and academic imagination.[11]
The naval forces or Carthage
The warships of Carthage dominated the Mediterranean, and introduced several innovations that ensured Carthaginian dominance for several decades. Construction as, etc
It should be noted that the Romans improved their initially crude naval capabilities by copying the design of Carthaginian warships.[12]
The Cavalry forces of Numibia
The cavalry forces of Numibia were a key part of Hannibal's victories over Rome. They were light cavalry, using javelins as their primary weaponry and riding bareback, and helped trap adn annihilate several legions at the catastrophic Roman defeat at Cannae. etc.
The chariots of Egypt
Chariots were not an Egyptian invention but their extensive use in defeating enemies from the Maghreb and Levant (Assyria, Hyskos etc) serves as an illustration of their effective use by the Egyptians. etc etc
The bowmen of Nubia
Nubian archers played an important role in the Egyptian armies, and indeed parts of Nubia were called Ta-Seti or Land of the Bow by the Egyptians. The two peoples were ethnically the closest in the region -exchanging people, material and culture over several centuries. Archers plied their trade in the Egyptian forces, and rendered good service against such foreigh enemies as the Asiatic Hyksos. They also served in an internal security, policing role within Egypt itself. Such activity however was not always one way. While Egypt itself had a number of pharaohs of Nubian origin or extraction earlier on, the Kushite 25th Dynasty, originating in Nubia, was to conquer Egypt itself, drawing upon the archery skills of the region's bowmen.
The Zulu military system[13]
Military reforms of Shaka
The Zulu are a significant case in African military innovation and change, due to their military system which transformed large portions of the continent and the fact that their methods spanned both the pre-gunpowder adn gunpowder eras. Tribal warfare among the Zulu clans was heavily ritualistic and ceremonial until the ascent of the ruthless chieftain Shaka, who adapted and innovated a number of tribal practices that transformed the Zulu from a small, obscure tribe to a major regional power in Southern Africa. Many of the innovations of Shaka were not simply created out of thin air, nor can they be dubiously credited to the influence of European troops drilling several hundred miles to the south, nor can they merely be dismissed as the product of vague environmental forces like drought or overpopulation. Shaka's predecessor, Dingiswayo had definitely initiated a number of expansionist changes, and was himself responsible for the initial rise of the Zulu monarch. Shaka, aided by number of clan chiefs, continued this expansion, albeit in a much more direct and violent manner. Shaka's conception of warfare was far from ritualistic. He sought to bring combat to a swift and bloody decision, as opposed to duels of individual champions, scattered raids, or light skirmishes where casualties were comparatively light. Such a brutal focus demanded changes in weapons, organisation and tactics.
New weapons and new organisation
New spear and shield. Shaka is credited with introducing a new variant of the traditional weapon, discarding the long, spindly throwing weapon and instituting a heavy, shorter stabbing spear. He is also said to have introduced a larger, heavier cowhide shield, and trained his forces to thus close with the enemy in more effective hand to hand combat. The throwing spear was not discarded, but standardised like the stabbing implement and carried as a missile weapon, typically discharged at the foe, before close contact. None of these weapons changes are largely important in the local context, but mated to an aggressive mobility and tactical organisation, they were to make a devastating impact.
Logistics. The fast moving host, like all military formations, needed supplies. These were provided by young boys, who were attached to a force and carried rations, cooking pots, sleeping mats, extra weapons and other material. Cattle were sometimes driven on the hoof as a moveable larder. Again, such arrangements in the local context were probably nothing unusual. What was different was the systematisation and organisation, a pattern yielding major benefits when the Zulu were dispatched on military missions.
Age-grade regimental system. Age-grade groupings of various sorts were common in the Bantu tribal culture of the day, and indeed are still important in much of Africa. Age grades were responsible for a variety of activities, from guarding the camp, to cattle herding, to certain rituals and ceremonies. It was customary in Zulu culture for young men to provide limited service to their local chiefs until they were married and recognised as official householders. Shaka manipulated this system, transferring the customary service period from the regional clan leaders to himself, strengthening his personal hegemony. Such groupings on the basis of age, did not constitute a permanent, paid military in the modern Western sense, nevertheless they did provide a stable basis for sustained armed mobilisation, much more so than ad hoc tribal levies or war parties.
Shaka organised the various age grades into regiments, and quartered them in special military kraals, with each regiment having its own distinctive names and insignia. Some historians argue that the large military establishment was a drain on the Zulu economy and necessitated continual raiding and expansion. This may be true since large numbers of the society's men were isolated from normal occupations, but whatever the resource impact, the regimental system clearly built on existing tribal cultural elements that could be adapted and shaped to fit an expansionist agenda.
Mobility and training. Shaka discarded sandals to enable his warriors to run faster. Initially the move was unpopular, but those who objected were simply killed, a practice that quickly concentrated the minds of available personnel. Shaka drilled his troops frequently, implementing forced marches covering more than fifty miles a day. He also drilled the troops to carry out encirclement tactics (see below). Such mobility gave the Zulu a significant impact in their local region and beyond.
Encirclement tactics. The Zulu typically took the offensive, deploying in the well known "buffalo horns" formation. It was composed of three elements:
- the "horns" or flanking right and left wing elements to encircle and pin the enemy. Generally the "horns" were made up of younger, greener troops.
- the "chest" or central main force which delivered the coup de grace. The prime fighters made up the composition of the main force.
- the "loins" or reserves used to exploit success or reinforce elsewhere. Often these were older veterans, sometimes positioned with their backs to the battle so as not to get unduly excited.
Organisation and leadership of the Zulu forces. The Zulu forces were generally grouped into 3 levels: regiments, corps of several regiments, and "armies" or bigger formations, although the Zulu did not use these terms in the modern sense. Although size distinctions were taken account of, any grouping of men on a mission could collectively be called an impi, whether a raiding party of 100 or horde of 10,000. Numbers were not uniform, but dependent on a variety of factors including assignments by the king, or the manpower mustered by various clan chiefs or localities. A regiment might be 400 or 4000 men. These were grouped into Corps that took their name from the military kraals where they were mustered, or sometimes the dominant regiment of that locality.
Higher command and unit leadership. An inDuna guided each regiment, and he in turn answered to senior izinduna who controlled the corps grouping. Overall guidance of the host was furnished by elder izinduna usually with many years of experience. One or more of these elder chiefs might accompany a big force on an important mission,. Regimental izinduna, like the NCOs of today's army, and yesterday's Roman centurions, were extremely important to morale and discipline. On the battlefield, coordination was supplied by regimental izinduna (chiefs or leaders) who used hand signals and messengers
Influence of the Zulu innovations
The Zulu military system was to transform large swathes of the continent, from south east Africa, into parts of East and Central Africa through the disruptive warfare that broke out during the reign of Zulu king Shaka. Numerous nations were to arise copying Zulu methods and weapons. The Shangaan for example, founded by war-leader Shoshangana, were to migrate into what is now Mozambique and force the Portuguese into paying them tribute.[14] The disruption, known as the Mfecane was also to create several powerful nations it its wake, such as the Swazi, the Nebebele, the Shangaan, etc.
The mounted cavalry of the savannahs
Existing in the band of territory where the tsetse fly was not strong, the mounted cavalry was the true aristocracy of the savannah. Weaponry ranged from lance and javelin, to chain mail armour and metal helm,ets. Contrary to popular impressions, Africa did produce significant cavalry forces where the environment permitted it. As they did further north in Carthage, Egypt and libya, the introduction of the horse had a transformational effect on African warfare. Both horses and chariots are recorded in the rock art of the Sahara, and from this area, horses seem to ahve spread to the rest of the continent. The savanahs of Western Africa and the Sudan in particular saw the emergency of several powerful cavalry-based states.
Patterns of military change: the gunpowder era
The challenge of gunpowder
A proverb attributed to the King of Dahomey in the 19th century states: "He who grinds the powder, must winthe battle." Such an observation was both perceptive and realistic as gunpowder weapons took on an increasingly large role in African warfare. Introduction of such weaponshowever did not quickly displace native arms and organization. Responses were mixed- from outright rejection (the Zulu king Shaka for example dismissed firearms), to eager adoption, to a mix of spear and rifle side by side on the battlefield. Nevertheless the comingof gunpowder revolutionized military practice on the continent. etc etc
The mounted gunmen
The Basuto riflemen
Forged under the shadow of the ruthless Shakan system, the Basuto created a mounted light cavalry model that was to have success elsewhere in indigenous Africa - fast-moving groups of horsemen armed with guns. The basuto were surrounded by enemies- from the Zulu, to other African nations, to grasping British and Boer interlopers. They fought them all off.
The Boer kommandos
While operations of the Boers in South Africa was to have significant effects in that part of the region, sparking the development of gun-armed cavalry forces among such peoples as the Basuto and the Griqua. Their mounted horsemen clashed with Briton and Bantu, inflicting a number of defeats on both, and in turn suffering setbacks in their conflicts with these enemies. The genesis of the Boer kommando lies in.. etc etc..
The mobile forces of Samory and Adbel-kader
The mating of firearms to traditional African cavalry forces was to have a wide impact in two ways: (a) conquests of indigenous tribes and neignbors and (b) resistance to European colonial invaders bent ontheir own progam of conquest.
Samory in Mali
The long 7 year guerrilla warfare fought by Samory Toure against the French relied heavily on both the horse and the gun. His armies were divided into 3 echelons.. etc etc
Adbel-Ek-kader in Algeria
The success of AdbelElkader against French invaders of Algeria rested primarily on his mobile striking forces... etc etc
The mixed gun and spear formations of West and Central Africa
The encircling impis of the Zulu: Spear versus bullet
The swarming dervishes of the Mahdi
Head to head with modern armies: the Ethiopians at Adowa
Summary
As noted above, military innovation takes in more than new weapons, but also includes profound changes in outlook and organisation. The most extreme example of this on land is the military reforms of Shaka, but other developments, such as the naval ships of Carthage exercised an equally profound effect on the history of the Mediterranean, and adjoining lands in North Africa, Spain and Italy. Military change and innovation can be both revolutionary and transformational, or slow and incremental. Both patterns may combine at various times and places to make significant changes. Military change an innovation in Africa is not simply a product of ideas introduced from the outside. As noted above, the nations and empires of Europe borrowd freely from elsewhere, both within and outside of Europe. Environmental advantages such as an East-West climate axis, and better transportation capacity facilitated this flow of technology, concepts, materials and people, more so than in Africa. The East-West axis for example, and the absence of such crippling pests as the tsetse fly promoted movement of the horse (a critical component in military transformation) into Asia and Europe at a much more rapid rate than into most of Africa.[15] When Africans had access to the same wider pool of technology and ideas, similar transformational effects took place.
Outside influences however are not the only reason for significant change and military innovation in Africa. The growth and consolidation of indigenous empires and states also played a key role. The military reforms of Shaka are a case in point, having no need for horses, guns or ships. The growth of other empires and local hegemonies in places from West africa to the Congo, provides further illustration. Massed naval battles on the Great Lakes of East Africa for example relied little on anything from the outside. When internal empire building met with the normal flow of technology and ideas major changes were to take place.
See also
References
- ^ Robert July, Pre-Colonial Africa, Charles Scribner, 1979
- ^ B. Greenwald, Understanding Change: An Intellectual and Practical Study of Military Innovation, Ohio State University, 2003
- ^ Greenwald, Understanding Change, op. cit
- ^ John Warry, Warfare in the Ancient War
- ^ Warry, op. cit
- ^ Thomas Sowell, Conquest and Culture, 1993
- ^ Chambers, James, The Devil's Horsemen Atheneum, 1979
- ^ Thomas Sowell, The Economics and Politics of race, 1983
- ^ Robert July, Pre-Colonial Africa, Charles Scribner, 1975
- ^ July, op. cit
- ^ Basil Davidson, History in Africa
- ^ Adrian Goldsworthy, The Punic Wars
- ^ Donald Morris "The Washing of the Spears")
- ^ JD Omer-Cooper, The Zulu Aftermath
- ^ Sowell, op. cit