Any history buffs know of famous battles or wars were smaller armies with inferior weapons were able...?

Question

to win against enemies with bigger armies and better technology? If so feel free to describe the battle situation and how they did it.

I am asking this question so I can prove an important point.

Answer 1

The Battle of Bannockburn is the best example of what you are asking.

English Troops - 20,000
Scottish Troops - 6,500
Victor - Scotland

By cutting off the second half of the English army from crossing the river, the Scottish were able to hold the marshy ground the English horse were incapable of charging on.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Bannockburn
_______________________________________________
Another great example would be the battle of Caene in 220B.C.

Carthaginian Troops:
40,000 heavy infantry,
6,000 light infantry,
8,000 cavalry
Total - 54,000 Troops

Roman Troops:
86,400–87,000 men (16 Roman and Allied legions)
Victor: Carthage

Through strategic maneuvering, the larger force was drawn into a a V-wedge. They were then surrounded and DESTROYED. Only 6,000 survivors were able to band together and cut their way to freedom.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Cannae
_______________________________________________
The last example I will provide is the Battle of Issus. This took place between Alexander the Great and Darius III of Persia. The forces are as follows:

Macedonian Troops:
13,000 peltasts
22,000 hoplites
5,850 cavalry

Persian Troops:
103,000 (unknown)
Victor: Macedon

Through strategic use of his Cavalry, Alexander put pressure on the Emperor Darius, who fled. This caused a general rout and a death toll of 30,000+ among the Persians.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Issus

I hope this helps you prove your point. :-)

Answer 2

LOL!!!! In 1814 we took a little trip Along with Colonel Jackson down the mighty Mississip. We took a little bacon and we took a little beans And we caught the bloody British in the town of New Orleans. We fired our guns and the British kept a'comin. There wasn't nigh as many as there was a while ago. We fired once more and they began to runnin' Down the Mississippi to the Gulf of Mexico. We looked down the river and we see'd the British come. And there must have been a hundred of'em beatin' on the drum. They stepped so high and they made the bugles ring. We stood by our cotton bales and didn't say a thing. Old Hickory said we could take 'em by surprise If we didn't fire our muskets 'til we looked 'em in the eye We held our fire 'til we see'd their faces well. Then we opened up with squirrel guns and really gave 'em ...HELL Yeah, they ran through the briars and they ran through the brambles And they ran through the bushes where a rabbit couldn't go. They ran so fast that the hounds couldn't catch 'em Down the Mississippi to the Gulf of Mexico. We fired our cannon 'til the barrel melted down. So we grabbed an alligator and we fought another round. We filled his head with cannon balls, and powdered his behind And when we touched the powder off, the gator lost his mind.

Answer 3

Adobe Walls in the Texas Panhandle. A crumbling, abandoned fortress where two trading post stores were recently added to the site to serve buffalo hunters.

Twenty-eight men and a woman were there when an attack came by several hundred Kiowa, Cheyenne and Comanche, armed with weapons ranging from spears, bows, to modern repeating rifles of the time. It's been estimated half were armed with rifles, many of which had been taken from buffalo hunters. Which is to say, the same armament as those of the defenders. The date was June 27, 1874,

The battle lasted several days. no one knows how many Cheyenne, Comanche and Kiowa were killed, but 13 bodies and 58 horse carcasses were counted after the battle, despite the darkness hours attempts, each night by the attackers, to remove their dead.

Three defenders were killed during the battle, and a fourth accidently shot himself on the sixth day.

Answer 4

I think there are plenty of examples of WARS where the one with the less resources in manpower and technology defeated the one with the most. You see, a war lasts a long time, and things like position, initiative, drive, will, readiness are sometimes as important or more important than resources. I can think of the Persian Wars, Caesar's conquest of Gaul, the first Crusade, most of the Napoleonic Wars, even Vietnam or Afghanistan in modern times etc.

But BATTLES? I am not so sure. Yes, there is plenty of legends of how Alexander the Great and Caesar defeated their enemies with a fifth of their forces, but we know so little of the actual battle that it's not certain we are getting a complete picture. There are plenty of historians who believe that some of these battles were actually a lot more one-sided that anybody cares to believe. Either the manpower or the technology has been on the winning side.

Answer 5

Agincourt - 100 Years War, English vs French, English outnumbered, estimates range from 3-1 to 6-1 ratio. English were successful despite being outnumbered. Victory was achieved through excellent use of terrain. Wikipedia has a pretty good outline of the battle.

Answer 6

The battle of Isandwana, during the Zulu wars. The British contingent were massacred by a Zulu force. Numerically superior (22000 vs 1400) the Zulu force took advantage of conditions and tactical errors to completely overwhelm the British.
The British errors included spacing their sentries too far apart on the perimeter. Allowing the Zulus to infiltrate their lines.

Also (allegedly) an eclipse led to poor visibility conditions for the British.

The Zulu's advantage was they were fighting on their terms by crawling silently through the long grasses of the Veldt.

Also, the capture of Conwy castle in 1295/6. A small band of Welsh rebels captured a garrisoned English castle. Using the time honoured tactic of duping the English sentries into opening the gate (by claiming they were there to fix a leaking roof!! Heh, heh, heh! -We still laugh at that in Wales!)

Answer 7

Not overly famous but the Battle of Julianstown in Drogheda , Ireland c.1640was between the English and the native Irish. The English consisted of about 200 well armed and well armoured soldiers, yet inexpierienced and the Irish side consisted of about 60 men with no armour and pikes. As they were coming the English general shouted a formation command to his troops and for some reason the Irish thought he had shouted "death charge" as Gaelige. The Irish then decided well if they want a death charge they'll get a death charge and took out running and screaming towards the English. The English did what any inexperienced yet sensible person would do when faced with a pack of "death charging" Irish men and turned on their heels and ran away.

Answer 8

The best example of this was the American Revolution. The British Army was the best equipped and was far larger than the American Army, but it was unable to draw the Americans into a decisive battle. The few major skirmishes that did occur were on the terms of the Americans while the British could never draw the Americans into a decisive showdown where the British would have the advantage.

Answer 9

Koreans, Vietnamese, Iraqis...

Answer 10

Vietnam doesn't fit as a proper answer. The vietcong were numerous and their numbers kept growing because of the tactics the americans used in a futile attempt to gain the upper hand. While they were for the most part poorly equipped because they used guerilla tactics and had incredible numbers and combined with the disadvantages that the us had, distance lack of support from home no real way of locating the enemy, it didn't realy matter.