The first and third ones.

Sorry, I don't follow.

http://24.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_lg5zbsqq1K1qgfbgio1_r1_1280.jpg

The Kingdom of Kongo had an interesting military, pretty comparable to late medieval England with large levies of peasant archers and then a noble army.

^ Well they wuz kangs n shiet so it's natural.

It looks like they held lived from 1390s-1860s. If they were still using late middle ages technology in 1860 (think Franco-Prussian War or American Civil War) then they were still pretty backwards. No Muskets, No cannons, No ironclads, no trains, ect. America was a backwater at the time and even they could muster a decent number of these.

Edited 8/28/2017 23:51:52

They already had muskets by 1665

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Mbwila

Also note; Kongolese Christianity incorporating syncretic elements isn't an argument against them, all Europeans adopted syncretic characteristics, as did Asians and Native Americans. This is by design of the Christian faith, and the reason the good men of the church preserved so much Roman and Hellenic lore.

I mean what do you expect history was written by white men do you think they are actually gonna say the advancements of the Congo? Of course they wont! That is why you idiots think they are inferior and what not lol good thing i took a break from this forum lol

Kikongo already had switched to the Latin alphabet and writing by 1557

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/e/e3/Kikongo-m.jpg

@Tabby That is not a bad argument, don't you know the saying.. "The winners write history."? Cmon, I thought you should know. The Congolese people were absolutely massacred by the Belgians do you think the Belgians will leave any trace of evidence that proves them to be equal to them rather than inferior? Tabby do you even know the only reason Colonialism was not frowned upon by the people? "The White Mans Burden." If the people found out the people their nation is "colonizing" isn't actually uncivilised but rather equal and civilised they will obviously disprove against their goverment! But the goverment doesn't want due to the many benefits of colonization. Okay now try to attack my main points in this paragraph and NOT switch to another point.

Note, what I'm saying about the Kongo Kingdom does not apply to all of the modern Congo.

If they were equals then how did the Congolese lose?

They didn't, the Portuguese supported a king to the Kongolese throne and he accepted vassalage to protect his power.

Though that likely wouldn't have happened had there not been the Kongo civil war, which lasted forty years, sacked Sao Salvador, and left the kingdom in a general mess with the king only nominally controlling most of it, so there's the smoking gun really.

If they were equals then how did the Congolese lose?

Two military forces may be using technology which is equal, in all respects, this does not indicate that those forces will of necessity fight to stalemate.

It is more likely that one side will lose. If the issue is fought without let it is most likely that one side will lose decisively. That loss will be due to a failure in one or more of the following factors.

Strategy
Tactics
Leadership
Materiel
Logistics
Training
Intelligence
Morale
Willpower
Numbers

This is naturally the case.

Logistics
Intelligence
Morale
Willpower
Numbers

are on Congo's side %100 and the rest is 50/50


So why did they lose?

Edit: Because they were kangz n shiet

Edited 8/31/2017 10:34:05