For classics twitter consideration (@BretDevereaux @ProfPaul_J ) (without rendering my own opinion, which is worth little).https://www.academia.edu/45455304/The_battle_mechanics_of_the_Hoplite_Phalanx?fbclid=IwAR0qEj5KHMEj2JGOyzy8-1bgwKNdiQqS2CvlzKYp4qrZLIPCAi-aJIKrjNs …
-
-
Not a Classical historian, but some parts of the paper have me feeling very cautious, like the interpretation of Xen. Ages. 1.31 and the use of a single magazine article to make sweeping statements about the Middle Ages that the article either doesn't support or is wrong about.
1 vastaus 0 uudelleentwiittausta 1 tykkäys -
The 'analogy with medieval knights' bit is one of those points where I can actually kind of see it as a comparison that could be valid and instructive, but only with a lot of explanation of what exactly is meant, where the analogy holds and where it fails.
2 vastausta 0 uudelleentwiittausta 1 tykkäys -
Vastauksena käyttäjille @BretDevereaux, @Hergrim ja
'Their kit was expensive' provided here isn't quite enough to make the analogy work. A lot of urban militias, *in the middle ages* had expensive kits. What made knights different was the possession of skills linked to a specific, skill-heavy style of combat.
2 vastausta 0 uudelleentwiittausta 1 tykkäys
At the very least, it ought to come with a proviso that the 'hoplite class' seems to have been far more extensive than the knightly class ever was. The Second Estate was c. 1.5% of pre-revolutionary France, for instance. Even the Spartiates are a bigger slice of the population.
Lataaminen näyttää kestävän hetken.
Twitter saattaa olla ruuhkautunut tai ongelma on muuten hetkellinen. Yritä uudelleen tai käy Twitterin tilasivulla saadaksesi lisätietoja.