Inspired: maps of medieval polities with no lines on them at all, because medieval 'borders' were frequently notional at besthttps://twitter.com/nihilocrat/status/1232851250519166976 …
Näytä tämä ketju
-
Also inspired: look for political maps with peoples on them rather than polities. Until at least the twelfth century most princely titles referred to peoples: king of the English, not king of England; king of the Franks, not king of France. Translations tend to elide this nuance.
Näytä tämä ketju
I've been struck by how the Romans tend to be specific in their wars. They fight against the Carthaginians, the Numantines, or the Cimbrians...or against Pyrrhus, Antiochus, Philip V. You have wars against peoples, and wars against specific monarchs.
-
-
Well, and the division is eminently logical, right? In all the cases of war against a monarch, the conflict is defensive (so, not against the king's people as such), retaliatory (against the actions of the king), or focused on spheres of influence which may cross "borders." No?
-
Hm. The Romans phrase all of their wars as justified in one way or another. I always thought it was interesting because it expressed a distinction between polities that were thought identical to their people, and those which were just the personal possessions of a given king.
- Näytä vastaukset
Uusi keskustelu -
Lataaminen näyttää kestävän hetken.
Twitter saattaa olla ruuhkautunut tai ongelma on muuten hetkellinen. Yritä uudelleen tai käy Twitterin tilasivulla saadaksesi lisätietoja.