A Collection of Unimitigated Pedantry

[grumbler]

I thought that the best parts of the Rohan videos were then he explained how stupid an ideas was (e.g. Theoden marching his entire capital populace directly at an enemy army) and then explained why, from a movie-making perspective, that was a good idea (make the audience feel that the battle was existential; give Eowyn an opportunity to see Aragorn in action so her falling in love with him isn't pathetic groupie-ism).  He's also good with his takes on how unnecessarily silly some of the battle was, but how safety concerns likely played a part in some of the silliness.

I do think he understates the extent to which Saruman is betting everything on the Ring being at Helm's Deep or in Rohan ready to be picked up by the winner of the battle.  Saying that he wanted to be "established in Rohan" when Sauron turns up seems a bad take, since he could not come close to matching Sauron's power without the Ring.

A lot of his historical analysis is aimed at a less-well-informed audience, but his meta-discussions are great.

His GoT "Loot Train" video is quite good.  I'm less versed on medieval logistics, so I was the "less-well-informed audience" he was aiming at.

[The Minsky Moment]

I read a book years ago on Alexander and the logistics of the Macedonian army - it did a lot of this kind of analysis and showed how Alexander's campaigns and movements were shaped by the powerful logistical constraints on pre-modern armies.  It's one of things that made me realize that ancient accounts of mass popular migrations had to have been exaggerated.   

[Valmy]

Next you will be telling me that Xerxes didn't really invade Greece with a million men.

[jimmy olsen]

I read a book years ago on Alexander and the logistics of the Macedonian army - it did a lot of this kind of analysis and showed how Alexander's campaigns and movements were shaped by the powerful logistical constraints on pre-modern armies.  It's one of things that made me realize that ancient accounts of mass popular migrations had to have been exaggerated.

Haven't mass migrations come back into fashion with the genetic proof of repeated wholesale population replacement in many areas?

[The Minsky Moment]

]Haven't mass migrations come back into fashion with the genetic proof of repeated wholesale population replacement in many areas?

I think we've discussed this - the examples of complete pop replacement usually involve small base populations replaced over very long periods of times.  I.e. prehistoric Neolithic peoples occupying Britain over centuries of time and replacing small bands of fisher-gatherers.

I'm talking about things like Caesar's account of the entire population of Helvetica moving en masse across the Massif Central, or the older accounts of "barbarian tribes" moving huge distances in massive numbers through German forests.

[Malthus]

]Haven't mass migrations come back into fashion with the genetic proof of repeated wholesale population replacement in many areas?

I think we've discussed this - the examples of complete pop replacement usually involve small base populations replaced over very long periods of times.  I.e. prehistoric Neolithic peoples occupying Britain over centuries of time and replacing small bands of fisher-gatherers.

I'm talking about things like Caesar's account of the entire population of Helvetica moving en masse across the Massif Central, or the older accounts of "barbarian tribes" moving huge distances in massive numbers through German forests.

Different peoples have vastly different levels of mobility - depending on their economic and cultural basis.

The Germanic tribes Caesar encountered were, allegedly, largely pastoralists (though they also practiced opportunistic agriculture). Way it appeared to work was that Germanic tribes historically practiced both agriculture and pastoralism, but the more displaced a tribe was by violence (either among the tribes, or between the tribes and the Romans), the more it emphasized pastoralism, for exactly this reason: better mobility.

People whose income had way of life derive largely from herds of animals are often far more mobile, en mass, then settled agriculturalists who must grow a surplus then find some way of transporting it with them, or purchasing it (or stealing it) en route. The latter is never practical when a whole population is on the move, rather than a proportionally much smaller military force.

Now, I certainly would not want to have to drive huge herds of cattle through dank German forests ... as to whether it is possible or not, I don't know.

[Threviel]

Been reading this every chance I've gotten. It's very interesting, I am very fond of academics that can make modern research accessible. Oftentimes the well written and well produced stuff (youtube, podcasts, any media really) are just re-hashes of older research previously made accessible.

So, any other tips like this?

[Sheilbh]

I'm not seeing that at all, but it's probably not unusual to see very different takes on an author who is less interested in evidence than explanation.  The Persians are not the Fremen in Herodotus.

Agreed and not unusual even with an author interested in evidence because what it means is always going to be interpretive.

I think they're sort of linked poverty and smallness = freedom; bigness and wealth = autocracy. The line from Cyrus that soft lands breed soft men and you can't have land that produces both good crops and good fighting men. I think it's, probably a Greek commonplace. It's not that Persia necessarily gets less free, but it does get softer, richer, more luxurious - like Egypt.

I haven't read the blog - because I tried one and just didn't find it that interesting (I've nver really been into military stuff ) - butI feel like the Fremen of Herodotus are probably the Scythians?

[grumbler]

Agreed and not unusual even with an author interested in evidence because what it means is always going to be interpretive.

The fact that evidence is always going to be interpreted (and thus selected because it either confirms the interpretation or qualifies it) is an issue, of course.  Good historians also include the evidence that introduces a "but..." in their interpretations.  Devereaux cites (correctly, IMO) the book shattered Sword (on the battle of Midway - if you are at all interested in the battle, you've got to read that book) because the authors do just that:  they present the evidence that the Japanese flight decks were pretty much clear of aircraft when the American dive bombers attacked, but also includes the eyewitness testimony of those who say differently.

I think they're sort of linked poverty and smallness = freedom; bigness and wealth = autocracy. The line from Cyrus that soft lands breed soft men and you can't have land that produces both good crops and good fighting men. I think it's, probably a Greek commonplace. It's not that Persia necessarily gets less free, but it does get softer, richer, more luxurious - like Egypt.

The Greeks city-states themselves were both prosperous and capable of producing good fighting men.  It's certainly a trope that city-states that expanded too much became unfree (the Athenian Empire, for example) but that's not an element of the Fremen Mirage that Devereaux is claiming is a historical standard.

I haven't read the blog - because I tried one and just didn't find it that interesting (I've nver really been into military stuff ) - butI feel like the Fremen of Herodotus are probably the Scythians?

If the Scythians are the Fremen and Herodotus believes in the Fremen Mirage, then he'd have expected that they'd have overthrown Philip of Macedon rather than losing to him.  Remember that the Fremen Mirage proposes that "the poorer, harder people will inevitably overrun and subjugate the richer, more prosperous communities around them."  I'm just not seeing this expectation in the historians' accounts.

[Berkut]

Grumbler, the blog in question is saying that the Fremen mirage is wrong though. His argument is that it is largely a myth. Am I missing something from your critique?

[grumbler]

Grumbler, the blog in question is saying that the Fremen mirage is wrong though. His argument is that it is largely a myth. Am I missing something from your critique?

My critique is that the Fremen Mirage is a strawman.  It's a plot device in a scifi book, not something actual historians have said or written about.

[Razgovory]

The extreme example the author uses is a strawman.  If it was true we'd have been conquered by the Inuit by now, but the basic idea of civilization causing weak, decadent, soft men is a pretty common one and that the reverse, that privitation makes strong warriors is a common one.  Am I spelling "privitation" correctly?Because the autocorrect does not like that word.

[Habbaku]

Privation.

[Razgovory]

Thanks.

[Eddie Teach]

The extreme example the author uses is a strawman.  If it was true we'd have been conquered by the Inuit by now, but the basic idea of civilization causing weak, decadent, soft men is a pretty common one and that the reverse, that privitation makes strong warriors is a common one.  Am I spelling "privitation" correctly?Because the autocorrect does not like that word.

Two mediocre warriors > one strong one