The Royal Burmese Armed Forces were the armed forces of the Burmese monarchy from the 9th to the 19th centuries, a term covering the military of the Pagan Kingdom, the Kingdom of Ava, the Hanthawaddy kingdom, the Toungoo dynasty and the Konbaung dynasty in turn. A small standing army of a few thousand defended the capital and palace, while a much larger conscript army was raised in wartime through the ahmudan system, with elephantry, cavalry, artillery and naval units. Firearms came from China in the late 14th century and were integrated into strategy only gradually. The army defeated Portuguese and French intrusions in the 17th and 18th centuries but lost all three Anglo-Burmese Wars, and the British formally abolished it on 1 January 1886. Tatmadaw remains the name of the modern armed forces.
Facts
Force Type
Force Type (category) Connections
Fought In
Source Royal Burmese Armed Forces (Wikipedia)
Source Royal Burmese Armed Forces (Wikipedia)
In the Other Atlases
Found In
Also in Geography Atlas: where this subject is found.
Source Royal Burmese Armed Forces (Wikipedia)Lead, TatmadawQuote, Lead, Tatmadaw
The Burmese name Tatmadaw remains the official name for the country's modern armed forces.
Sources
1. Royal Burmese Armed Forces (Wikipedia)
Lead, branches
The wartime army also consisted of elephantry, cavalry, artillery and naval units.
Lead, abolition
On 1 January 1886, the millennium-old Burmese monarchy and its military arm, the Royal Burmese Armed Forces, were formally abolished by the British.
Lead, Tatmadaw
The Burmese name Tatmadaw remains the official name for the country's modern armed forces.
Infobox: size
120,000 men at its height
Fought In: First Anglo-Burmese War, Lead, Anglo-Burmese Wars
the army could not stop the advance of the British in the 19th century, losing all three Anglo-Burmese Wars
Fought In: Third Anglo-Burmese War, Lead, Anglo-Burmese Wars
the army could not stop the advance of the British in the 19th century, losing all three Anglo-Burmese Wars
View the SourceReader Challenges (0)
No disputes yet. Spotted an error or a better source? Open the first one.
Sign in to dispute this or suggest a correction.