Find a flaw

Find a flaw.

Other urls found in this thread:

thefreedictionary.com/Elephantry
thefreedictionary.com/cavalry
en.wiktionary.org/wiki/caballus
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dromedarii
twitter.com/SFWRedditVideos

use shrank men with toothpicks to stab their bare feet

They might get flanked? Artillery, Horse archers, all that sizzle. Still looks like a good system.

When will spearlets learn?

Find a flaw /b/

How did hussars even avoid tartar bows?

Tatar bows cant melt polish steel

>Look Manolo, Muslims.

...

...

And that's the Manolo way of dealing with muslims, the classic way.

>The Muslims also utilized an ancient Berber strategy of using camel laagers as a screen from which to launch attacks (the smell of Berber camels confused Christian horses untrained to work with this type of animal)

Have fun with your "D-d-deus v-v-vult!" fanfiction though, whatever makes it hurt less.

There was constant warfare in Spain, Muslims won some, specially early one, but after the 12th century and the use of heavy cavalry be the Northern christians, it was a piece of cake for them, Camels weren't used that much in medieval spain, and if they were used they made little impact because after googling a bit I can't find anything about them.

>muslims literally and unironically get kicked out of the Iberian peninsula
>n-nice f-fanfic c-christc-uck

>dat fucked up "Allah" on the yellow shield writen from left to right
Fucking photoshop man

a charging heavy infantry phalanx that closes the distance without much casualties and then proceeds to slaughter your light infantry ala battle of plataea and marathon

That was first practiced by the Berbers in late antiquity. It worked wonders against the Vandals. When they used it against a Byzantine expedition, the cavalry dismounted.

Things did not go according to plan for the berber camelry.

Use actual pike instead of knife on a orclet sized stick.

>camelry

this word pissed me off and then I looked it up and learned that its a real word and now Im double pissed. Why the fuck do camels get their own special word? Cavalry doesnt mean horses it means literally ANYTHING mounted. elephants are cavalry, camels are cavalry, fucking tanks are cavalry...but camel cav gets their own word.

fuck that my autism is now on fire.

I never understood how this works. Like just kill the camels with spears and javelins? How even do they manage to keep the camel into formation instead of running crazy after getting arrowed?

Indo Europeans domesticated the camel on the steppes.

Because camerly sounds okayish and kinda close to cavalry while elephantry is just awful.

so? doesnt explain why they get a special snowflake word, fucking smug camel riders

thefreedictionary.com/Elephantry

thefreedictionary.com/cavalry

elephantry actually refers to infantry surrounding the elephants, not the elephant/rider themselves.

Wrong.

they didn't ''avoid'' them there is simply not much a fucking arrow can do against steel plates

eh im getting conflicting definitions the more I look it up. Some say its the elephant and rider itself, some say its the whole formation including the elephant, still others say its a synonym of "elephant cavalry," others say its the an entire unit like a battalion that involves elephants, i dont fucking know but both these unnecessary words piss me off desu.

um, the Romans could easily btfo them?

The word cavalry is derived from caballus, which was a word for horse, calling camel and elephant riders cavalry is incorrect.

en.wiktionary.org/wiki/caballus

they lack shoes

roman infantry could btfo persian infantry in a vacuum, but battles dont happen in a vacuum. Persians rely and focus on their heavy cavalry, the infantry is like a placeholder. Romans focus on their infantry, and even whu they started focusing of cataphractarii they still didnt match the horse culture of the persians. Furthermore, its not just the heavy cavalry you have to worry about but the climate itself. A bunch of roman armies met their fate at the hands of nature itself, losing the battle logistically before it even starts. Heavy infantry overheat, its part of the reason why persians didnt equip their infantry in heavy armor like the romans because they had to fight the climate just as much as the enemy and their army was built for that environment. The roman army required the perfect setup battle in the perfect circumstances, if they cant create those circumstances theyre fish out of water.

the word "cavalry" has changed, it now means any mounted warrior, on a beast or in a machine, and its a good word for that. Nice and simple and gets to the point. All these subcategories are unnecesary, just use another word to describe what kind of cavalry it is, works much better. (i.e. camel cavalry, elephant cavalry, armored cavalry, its simple, follows english rules, using a fucking adjective like our language was structured to do, you dont need a new word for things that adjectives already distinguish)

In the modern sense it is used for troops using vehicular transport, historically it means troops on horses. Troops on camels and elephants have their own words and the word for cavalry is derived from a word for horse.

Stop it now, I have provided you with the dictionary definitions and the etymology, you were just plain wrong.

>Troops on camels and elephants have their own words and the word for cavalry is derived from a word for horse.

really because i cant find a single historical primary account that uses the term "camelry" fucking anywhere besides wikipedia pages and dictionary websites, whereas every time its mentioned the first term is "camel cavalry" and "camerly" is listed as the alternative in quotes. As far as Im concerned you have no proof that contemporaries had a special word for it, Im inclined to believe they simply called it "camel cavalry." seriously google "camelry" I honestly hope you can prove wrong but it seems like a modern term.

>The moment was critical. It appeared to the cavalry commander that the Dervishes would actually succeed, and their success must involve the total destruction of the Camel Corps. That could not, off course, be tolerated. The whole nine squadrons of cavalry assumed a preparatory formation. The British officers believed that a terrible charge impended. They would meet in direct collision the swarms of men who were hurrying down the trough. The diversion might enable the Camel Corps to escape. But the ground was bad; the enemy's force was overwhelming; the Egyptian troopers were prepared to obey---but that was all. There was no exalted enthusiasm such as at these moments carries sterner breeds to victory. Few would return. Nevertheless, the operation appeared inevitable. The Camel Corps were already close to the river. But thousands of Dervishes were running swiftly towards them at right angles to their line of retreat, and it was certain that if the camelry attempted to cross this new front of the enemy they would be annihilated.

Winston Churchill, The Reconnaissance of Kerreri, 1898

1898 is modern as fuck that just proves my point that its a modern term, give me a primary source from the persians in ancient times or the muslims in the medieval era that proves this word isnt some english historian's fanfiction that just happened to catch on.

You want a primary source in English about ancient Persians?

Are you completely fucking retarded?

my dude you need to shut the fuck up

i want a source from before literally a hundred years ago, my whole point was that this was a modern term and if you cant show me any premodern use of the term then I have nothing more to say.

Camels are white aryans.

What the fuck is a caval?
Are infantry infants?

You stupid cunt, you have really pissed me off with your imbecility. Guess what? You're speaking modern English you stupid fool. A language that didn't exist during the time of the ancient Persians or in anything like the current form in the time of the early Muslims.

You won't find primary sources saying "camel cavalry" either you moronic fuckwit.

Persians would easily win in a vaccum as they can hold their breaths longer

>you wont find any primary sources saying "camel cavalry"

look up literally any book on the subject and camel cavalry is used instead of "camelry" which is only mentioned in passing as another term for it. The word does not need to exist at all, all sources talk about it just say "camels" and are proceeded by a discussion of how they were used AS CAVALRY because cavalry already encompasses any mounted warrior and nobody but special snowflakes in the victorian era used a word like "camelry" anywhere. its a totally pointless word. Youre right, no historical source says "camel cavalry" or "camelry" but ALL of them discuss the use of camels in war AS CAVALRY.

You fucker

>look up literally any book on the subject

I just did, I looked up a description of a battle from Churchill, have you forgotten that already? And the way I found it was simply looking up a battle that would involve camels and would have an English language primary source.

They don't wear shoes

Nobody knows?

winston churchill is not an authority on camels, he probably say that word in the same context we do-as a sidenote slang term next to the definition- and thought it sounded good. Its still a shit meaningless word made up by english speakers that doesnt need to exist at all and is completely eclipsed by a better term in virtually all instances of discussion outside of a single winston churchill quote. fuck that word.

that panel is historicaly inaccurate

what would realy happen is that the arrows would penetrate armor, and the crusading knights and asorted forces would catch them in the eye, trough arms and legs, in the groin, thing is these bastards were accustomed to euro style fighting, a few darts trough the biceps didnt realy stop them, the ones that didnt fall or actually get propper killed by a lucky shot wold just ram and slash trough the poor cutfags like it just gave them a endorphin rush

people dont get what knights and medieval european professional fighters were like, only today were piecing it together based on archeology, those bastards looked like a downsized version of shwartzeneger in terminator 1 times, they were proffesionals in that it was a craft and a lifelong role, they did not much on a work day but pray, train and kill other humans, fuckers were like drones

thats one of the things about the crusades and what they meant for europe, other than the increased exposure to arab translates of ancient greek texts and examples of mechanics used in the east, what the crusades did was allow for a release valve, which is part of why knightly orders became so prominent in those times (they acted like corporate entities - a single night must serve a noble that is vasal to the king, after victory gains trickle down sort of, and a single knight might hope to gain some meager recompense plus whatever he can loot or capture, but a knight in a order gains all that the order gets, hes part of a organization and partakes of the whole wealth of the organization and shares its power relative to his rank and function)

imagine a continent filled with relatively poor killing machines, all they are waiting for is more war and someone to kill, sooner or later you just have to send them somewhere, you dont want them to work it out in your place, you let them go do their thing in the baltics, balkans, bizantine lands, north africa, holy lands... go crusading

Okay, here's a little challenge for you, since I have provided you with multiple citations.

Find me a primary source in any language (so long as it is the original language and not a translation into modern English) that is from before the 16th Century and uses the word "cavalry".

>find me a word in a language that was massively different than the english we speak today

whatever word they had for cavalry and meant the same thing, I guarentee it wasnt some cutsy pun. Youre going off the rails now.

Oh right, so after complaining that your issue with 'camelry' is a modern English word you have now realised cavalry is a modern English word.

How come the Romans had a different word for cavalry and camel riding troops by the way?

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dromedarii

>dromedarii

thats a specific type of camel cav specifying the single hump on the type of camel they used, its not the all-encompassing term for it. Also I guarentee you that cavalry is a far older term than camelry considering its literally a fucking pun of cavalry. Your argument is shit. Camelry is obviouspy some slang bullshit I dont even know why youre arguing that.

Terribly vulnerable to heavy infantry or cavalry

>thats a specific type of camel cav specifying the single hump on the type of camel they used

The page I just gave you specifically says that is not true.

Face it you have talked ridiculous amounts of nonsense and been disproven on every nonsense claim you have made.

it doesnt say anything of the sort, it also uses the term camel cavalry instead of camelry AGAIN, as do virtually all sources on the matter.

its literaly pike and shoot

Persians didn't armor the infantry because they wer low quality levies. Climate had nothing to do with it.

Except pike and shot involves many ranks of pikes to stop frontal assaults, and has guns to defeat armor at close range. This has neither , and existed in atime and place where most forces where very light.

>it doesn't say anything of the sort.

Fucko off

>Camels were seen as exotic and useful creatures, known for their ability to move over desert terrain. It is noted that dromedaries were used less often than camels, though the title "Dromedarii" may imply that dromedaries were used more often. However, the Romans could not distinguish between camels and dromedaries, thus using both as a means of transportation.

> it also uses the term camel cavalry instead of camelry AGAIN

What you mean by this is that you have only looked at Wikipedia and that happens to use camel cavalry as well as camelry, the only primary source quoted in the thread used camelry. Every single English dictionary I looked at for a definition of cavalry said troops on horses (plus the contemporary usage of troops on vehicles). Not a single one said "any mounted troop".

Personally I find your claim that every single language throughout history has been unable to linguistically differentiate between horse riding troops and troops riding other animals to be preposterous. And you have provided no evidence of this. Not only that but at the start of the conversation you seemed certain that every language throughout history literally used the world 'cavalry'.

they were lower quality levies in the first place because persians didnt put much effort into their infantry, their social structure had cavalry at the top and infantry at the bottom, all the money went into the cav, all the elites and heroes were cavalry, all their battles were carried by cavalry, they were a cavalry-centric force that focused on cav whereas the romans were an infantry-centric force that slowly began adopting more cavalry. Cavalry went from 5% of a legion to like 20-30% of a legion, all because the persians, barbarians, and horse tribes kept fucking them over with cavalry so they developed their own in response.
Also heavy armor is a problem in the heat and its definitely part of the reasoning, see: battle of hattin, where the crusaders basically dehydrated to death in their heavy armor.

wow you sure fucked up that strawman, real good job.
>as well as camelry
again, never fucking used ever, your only source is from practically the 20th century, camel cavalry is the main term and always listed first. My argument is that it shouldnt exist, not that it doesnt.

>every single language...unable to linguistically differentiate

they are able to linguistically differentiate through the use of adjectives and other words the english language has to expand on ideas, there is little to no reason to come up with your own word, and a primary noun describing a specific type of roman military unit does not prove that riding a camel was ever considering so special it required its own vernacular.
>literally used the term cavalry
you sure are beating the shit out of that straw man. Old English can be read by modern speakers 300-400 years ago, i guarantee that cavalry or its predecessor was used to describe camels until some shit in the victorian era decided "camelry" was a fun pun. Fuck that guy, fuck you, and fucm churchill, none of that changes the fact that this word is shit and doesnt need to exist, nor is their any historical precedent for it, nor that it is anything but a modern pun to shorten the term "camel cavalry".

Hattin was a direct result of being surrounded with no water supply. Having armor is fucking irrelevant .

>they are able to linguistically differentiate through the use of adjectives and other words

Where's your proof they use the same word and differentiate in other ways, stop making things up and provide citations.

> Old English can be read by modern speakers 300-400 years ago,

What's this even supposed to mean?

> i guarantee that cavalry or its predecessor was used to describe camels

Why are you guaranteeing something you just completely made up off the top of your head without making any attempt to check?

The predecessor was 'horshere' so I seriously doubt it did refer to bloody camels.

the surcoat was invented specifically to prevent the overheating that happens in a warm climate while wearing chainmail, wouldnt need to exist if armor was unaffected by climate