|
Hey Smeggins I've got a question you might be able to answer: How successful was the US response to the Philippine insurrection? What could they have done better?
|
#
?
Nov 26, 2013 17:48
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 13, 2024 20:47 |
|
|
Rodrigo Diaz posted:As for my particular issue, the best one I can think of is his insistence that spears (edit: single-handed spears that is) were used exclusively underhand unless you were throwing them, based on his experiences as a reenactor. Someone in the comments section pointed out that plenty of red figure pottery (the stereotypical Greek vase) has overhand spear use. He made a reply video where he insisted the only possible reason such a use was included is because these artists were trying to sell pots, and overhand spear use looked more dramatic. He then cherry-picked some examples of what he considers to be 'more realistic' depictions where, of course, the spears are underhand. It was really blatant confirmation bias. Don't underestimate people's willingness to bend reality for visual effect. Historically and today, I would very much hesitate to use art as a refutation without any other evidence (and I am an art student), especially when you're talking about stuff veering on abstract like red figure pottery. Not that I disagree with what you're saying. Lindybeige seems to have a couple of central ideas (e.g. people are cowards) and cherry picks to hell in support of them in all his videos. He makes good points every now and then so I wouldn't completely discount him, but people's willingness to accept what he says as sacrosanct is loving annoying and seems to be a rising trend lately. Although that seems to be a rising trend with lots of easy access history sources (including these SA threads, to be honest).
|
|
#
?
Nov 26, 2013 18:09
|
|
|
If anyone is using my posts on the Something Awful forums as a resource instead of (where they disagree) books by people with decades of experience, they probably should not do that!
HEY GUNS fucked around with this message at 18:36 on Nov 26, 2013 |
|
#
?
Nov 26, 2013 18:33
|
|
|
Rodrigo Diaz posted:Lindybeige is chronically wrong, and he puts himself forward as an authority. Whether or not it's just his opinion he expects people to treat it as credible historical fact. As such he deserves to get ripped. TL;DR: really I should stay out of this thread after bedtime when I'm inclined to think "good enough" and just leave a point. a travelling HEGEL posted:And, of course, the drawings of the important eyewitness and chronicler Onfim of Novgorod 
|
|
#
?
Nov 26, 2013 18:35
|
|
|
I do quite like Lindybeige but I've always taken him with a pinch of salt. When it comes to reenactment stuff he's an enthusiastic amateur like myself and many of us here. The whole No Overhand stab! thing is really silly. Not only are people fighting for their lives quite pragmatic about what way they'd like to stab someone, but those Greek spears were counter weighted with a bronze butt spike making them even easier to use overhand. The pikes video as mentioned already is absurd as well. He also seems like a staunch Imperialist.
|
|
#
?
Nov 26, 2013 18:35
|
|
|
Arquinsiel posted:The pike video you mention is one of those points that I find difficult to believe he is raising seriously as opposed to Socratic method via youtube. Arquinsiel posted:That is just so
|
|
#
?
Nov 26, 2013 18:37
|
|
|
Koramei posted:Don't underestimate people's willingness to bend reality for visual effect. Historically and today, I would very much hesitate to use art as a refutation without any other evidence (and I am an art student), especially when you're talking about stuff veering on abstract like red figure pottery. A lot of the time I'd agree but for this kind of detail pictures are more-or-less what we have to go by. We know from Xenophon, for example, that cavalry used their spears over- and underhand, but that isn't up for debate (or it shouldn't be). Also it's the kind of thing that is fairly easy to see in pictorial evidence, and dealing with categorical denials like this are fairly easy to break down. For another (pictorial) example of spear use with a more-than-incidental interest in realism in fighting, consider this image from a 15th c. fighting manual:  I wish I had it in a larger size but I'm using the internet.
|
|
#
?
Nov 26, 2013 18:38
|
|
a travelling HEGEL posted:If anyone is using my posts on the Something Awful forums as a resource instead of (where they disagree) books by people with decades of experience, they probably should not do that! Books are always the best source yes. I love History books.
|
|
|
#
?
Nov 26, 2013 18:54
|
|
|
SeanBeansShako posted:Books are always the best source yes. I love History books. The best books to read are Politically Incorrect Guides.
|
|
#
?
Nov 26, 2013 18:57
|
|
|
SeanBeansShako posted:Books are always the best source yes. I love History books.
|
|
#
?
Nov 26, 2013 18:58
|
|
a travelling HEGEL posted:Well, not just any books. You have to make sure the sources are good, the reasoning is good, and the reviewers liked them. Lots of books look fine but it turns out they're actually crap. Well yeah, obviously. Books suggested in this thread are always winners too. Rodrigo Diaz posted:The best books to read are Politically Incorrect Guides. I like to nerd out over old school strategy game manuals myself.
|
|
|
#
?
Nov 26, 2013 19:00
|
|
|
^^^ I haven't been keeping a keen eye on everything in this thread, but I have seen some lovely books recommended by goons before, so it's good to always be discerning. I think they've usually been called out on it though. How on earth do you find those pictures so quickly, Rodrigo Diaz? I'm hopeless at delving for examples. But yeah, I didn't say that to disagree with you on the underarm/overarm thing (not that I know enough about it to disagree), I just wanted to talk about the art- and it is something I want people to keep in mind, especially when it's essentially ancient pop art. Rabhadh posted:I do quite like Lindybeige but I've always taken him with a pinch of salt. When it comes to reenactment stuff he's an enthusiastic amateur like myself and many of us here. The whole No Overhand stab! thing is really silly. Not only are people fighting for their lives quite pragmatic about what way they'd like to stab someone, but those Greek spears were counter weighted with a bronze butt spike making them even easier to use overhand. The pikes video as mentioned already is absurd as well. He also seems like a staunch Imperialist. I used to like him okay but then I tried watching some of his non-history videos. He just has incredibly lovely opinions on everything. Koramei fucked around with this message at 19:10 on Nov 26, 2013 |
|
#
?
Nov 26, 2013 19:07
|
|
|
Bah. GURPS 3e sourcebooks are cleary the best historical texts you can get. So what's the deal with Japanese castles? They look relatively indefensible to my Western eyes (relatively low stone escarpments under what appear to be wooden ceilings and paper walls). But presumably they worked else the daimyo wouldn't have kept building the drat things.
|
|
#
?
Nov 26, 2013 19:13
|
|
|
Not an expert but I think they were designed to basically overstretch and tire out an attacking force instead of protecting the defenders? I expect it also depends on the castle type and era said castle was built too.
|
|
|
#
?
Nov 26, 2013 19:15
|
|
|
I may have read this in a really sketchy source, but most of the time the feudal Japanese armies would just sally out and meet the enemy on the field. The castles were there more to just impress the peasants and be administrative centres/ palaces. But then my only other knowledge of feudal Japanese castles comes from Ran and Throne of Blood which both involved them being besieged so
|
|
#
?
Nov 26, 2013 19:16
|
|
|
Here's another picture of over-hand spear use: Something to keep in mind about over-hand spear use compared to coutching is that it allows you to attack enemies around and behind you, instead of just in front (admittedly less effectively). This is important when you aren't using stirrups (as in the Irish cavalry pictured) or they haven't been invented yet.
|
|
#
?
Nov 26, 2013 19:20
|
|
|
Grand Prize Winner posted:So what's the deal with Japanese castles? They look relatively indefensible to my Western eyes (relatively low stone escarpments under what appear to be wooden ceilings and paper walls). But presumably they worked else the daimyo wouldn't have kept building the drat things. Japan is a lot more seismically active than Europe and their castles reflect this.
|
|
#
?
Nov 26, 2013 19:23
|
|
|
Grand Prize Winner posted:Bah. GURPS 3e sourcebooks are cleary the best historical texts you can get. I think you may just be looking at the preserved keep, and not the complex as a whole. Japanese castle construction was about clearing a big-rear end stretch of hillside, and then piling on fortifications until you got a castle within a castle, perhaps within another castle. Most of them haven't survived in their entirety to the modern day, and quite a few were decorative ones built between the Sengoku Jidai and the Meiji restoration. Here's how Himeji castle was meant to look like.  The concept is kind of like a star fort, where you're just trying to make as many favourable angles for the defenders as possible. The irregular construction of defenses was meant for confusion. Also, those stone walls are steep as hell and real tall. You can't just leisurely climb them, like in Shogun 2. Slim Jim Pickens fucked around with this message at 19:41 on Nov 26, 2013 |
|
#
?
Nov 26, 2013 19:39
|
|
|
^^^^ That looks like a nightmare to take. a travelling HEGEL posted:What are you talking about, he is a mighty warrior. 
|
|
#
?
Nov 26, 2013 19:41
|
|
Arquinsiel posted:^^^^ His weakness is being attacked at any upwards angle by a spear or pike. He'll never suspect it.
|
|
|
#
?
Nov 26, 2013 19:46
|
|
|
SeanBeansShako posted:His weakness is being attacked at any upwards angle by a spear or pike. He'll never suspect it.
|
|
#
?
Nov 26, 2013 19:48
|
|
a travelling HEGEL posted:I thought his weakness was the Russian alphabet and going to bed on time. Technically don't most of us not sleep that well and only a handful of us know the latter too?
|
|
|
#
?
Nov 26, 2013 19:51
|
|
|
Just to be clear, we're worrying about Onfim, noted sage, scholar, chronicler of noted events and warrior without peer, reading the thread, not Lindybeige, Englishman who has opinions on the internet.
|
|
#
?
Nov 26, 2013 19:52
|
|
Arquinsiel posted:Just to be clear, we're worrying about Onfim, noted sage, scholar, chronicler of noted events and warrior without peer, reading the thread, not Lindybeige, Englishman who has opinions on the internet. My bad. We're getting a bit off track now too in general. So yeah, Japanese Castle Complexes look pretty awesome.
|
|
|
#
?
Nov 26, 2013 19:53
|
|
|
Arquinsiel posted:Just to be clear, we're worrying about Onfim, noted sage, scholar, chronicler of noted events and warrior without peer, reading the thread, not Lindybeige, Englishman who has opinions on the internet. Of course. After all, one of these people has simplistic opinions based on a limited view of the world and a terrible education. His primitive "us-vs-them" mentality has no doubt been shaped by the barbaric practices of his homeland. The other one is a seven year old from medieval Russia. Edit: And this actually is on topic--I really like regions with silty mud. All that birch bark writing from Novgorod has been preserved, or the Hunley. One of the people found in the Hunley had a comb in his pocket with a few strands of hair still in it. HEY GUNS fucked around with this message at 20:03 on Nov 26, 2013 |
|
#
?
Nov 26, 2013 19:55
|
|
|
You all are forgetting that he's actually a wild beast, thank you very much < >
|
|
#
?
Nov 26, 2013 19:59
|
|
|
Citing the Somethingawful forums in homework might not be a good idea.1 1. a travelling HEGEL, comment in "Ask Us About Military History: Here Be Dragoons," comment posted on November 26, 2013, http://forums.somethingawful.com/showthread.php?noseen=0&threadid=3585027&perpage=40&pagenumber=19#post422399480 (accessed November 26, 2013). Godholio fucked around with this message at 20:16 on Nov 26, 2013 |
|
#
?
Nov 26, 2013 20:11
|
|
|
Is Onfim the youngest known early historical author, as in the youngest person to have produced attributable (signed or otherwise) historical written documents?
|
|
#
?
Nov 26, 2013 20:16
|
|
|
Other than The Art of War and On War by Clausewitz, are there any must read, for lack of a better term, comprehensive martial philosophy or strategy books? Because I don't have enough 1000 page history books on loan from my library as it is. 
|
|
#
?
Nov 26, 2013 20:28
|
|
|
I'm not a fan of The Art of War, personally. It's about half mysticism and bullshit. Clausewitz is not light reading, just a warning. If that's the kind of thing you're after, Jomini is worth a look. Alfred Thayer Mahan is one of the few comprehensive naval writers I'm aware of. Vegetius was a good read, albeit short.
|
|
#
?
Nov 26, 2013 20:38
|
|
|
Godholio posted:I'm not a fan of The Art of War, personally. It's about half mysticism and bullshit. Clausewitz is not light reading, just a warning. If that's the kind of thing you're after, Jomini is worth a look. Alfred Thayer Mahan is one of the few comprehensive naval writers I'm aware of. Vegetius was a good read, albeit short.
|
|
#
?
Nov 26, 2013 20:59
|
|
|
Godholio posted:I'm not a fan of The Art of War, personally. It's about half mysticism and bullshit. Clausewitz is not light reading, just a warning. If that's the kind of thing you're after, Jomini is worth a look. Alfred Thayer Mahan is one of the few comprehensive naval writers I'm aware of. Vegetius was a good read, albeit short. Bwuh? I don't recall any mysticism from my version; the only part that might not be useful in the modern day is the part about the use of fire arrows but even that could be refluffed to incendiaries in general. quote:Yeah, the Art of War was full of nice phrases and general rules of thumb, but I don't think it taught me that much about applied military thinking. It kind of sounds like people have weird expectations as to what the AOW is actually supposed to teach; the general rules of thumb serve as a foundation in which to base applied military thought on top of. Raenir Salazar fucked around with this message at 21:04 on Nov 26, 2013 |
|
#
?
Nov 26, 2013 21:02
|
|
|
Regarding military classics in the same theme of Godholio's example - what's the concensus on Musashi's Five Rings / The Dokkodo? Are any of the Japanese treatises produced during the Sengoku Jidai and later periods considered "must read" material for scholars of the region? Don't mean to hijack the conversation, but in my undergrad studies, I was helping a professor do some research into warfare conducted by the ancient civilizations in India (forgot the names, just remember that they were along a southern river plateau). One of the things I noticed that a lot of non-European civilations did was fight their naval battles as though they were land conflicts. I'm not talking Greece/Rome's "Board em and get stabbing", I mean "hey lets build floating castle/tower and have at it." The examples I picked up on were in India, China, Korea, and Japan. So my question is this: why would cultures that otherwise showed great capability and innovation in maritime design and function (China, India, etc.) chose to forgo all of those advantages and engage in relatively static combat? Was it more of a topographical constraint or something more to do with the strategic know-how of the individual generals of the time?
|
|
#
?
Nov 26, 2013 21:07
|
|
|
Raenir Salazar posted:Bwuh? I don't recall any mysticism from my version; the only part that might not be useful in the modern day is the part about the use of fire arrows but even that could be refluffed to incendiaries in general. Mysticism probably isn't the right word, but the gist of it is "here are a series of catchy
|
|
#
?
Nov 26, 2013 21:14
|
|
|
Raenir Salazar posted:Bwuh? I don't recall any mysticism from my version; the only part that might not be useful in the modern day is the part about the use of fire arrows but even that could be refluffed to incendiaries in general.
|
|
#
?
Nov 26, 2013 21:14
|
|
|
Along with A.T. Mahan, Corbett writes a book about naval strategy as well - He writes this around the turn of the century in England, and can sorta be seen as a maritime version of Clausewitz's On War http://www.amazon.com/Some-Principles-Of-Maritime-Strategy/dp/1843426226
|
|
#
?
Nov 26, 2013 21:17
|
|
|
Is Mahan worth the read simply because of the history behind it, or (also) because he was correct? I guess his writings bore out as far as Tsushima and WWI, but I keep getting it in my head that the Japanese were a little misguided for having bought into him so hard (although I suppose that's hardly Mahan or his writings' fault)
|
|
#
?
Nov 26, 2013 21:20
|
|
|
Cumshot in the Dark posted:Other than The Art of War and On War by Clausewitz, are there any must read, for lack of a better term, comprehensive martial philosophy or strategy books? Because I don't have enough 1000 page history books on loan from my library as it is. Just be sure you are familiar with the Hegel-style dialectical approach before you read Clausewitz. You always run into people misquoting Clausewitz who just don't seem to get the way he writes and thinks in that book.
|
|
#
?
Nov 26, 2013 21:27
|
|
|
a travelling HEGEL posted:Well, not just any books. You have to make sure the sources are good, the reasoning is good, and the reviewers liked them. Lots of books look fine but it turns out they're actually crap. Speaking of which, has anyone in this thread read this: http://www.amazon.com/The-Balkans-Nationalism-Powers-1804-1999/dp/0140233776 Is it any good?
|
|
#
?
Nov 26, 2013 21:29
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 13, 2024 20:47 |
|
|
gradenko_2000 posted:Is Mahan worth the read simply because of the history behind it, or (also) because he was correct? I guess his writings bore out as far as Tsushima and WWI, but I keep getting it in my head that the Japanese were a little misguided for having bought into him so hard (although I suppose that's hardly Mahan or his writings' fault) Mahan is importance cause the naval buildup leading up to WW1 was largely cause every country followed his doctrine. Its funny that Japan placed so much emphasis on the Mahanian style'd decisive battle, when they probably could have done a lot better if they read Corbett instead. From wiki- Corbett's value for today's military professional lies in four of his concepts: 1) Controlling lines of communications, focus on the enemy, and manoeuvre for tactical advantage; 2) The aspects of political, economic and financial dimensions of waging war as well as with the technological and material aspects of war; 3) The primacy of politics in war and in devising an appropriate strategy to protect the national interests and 4) The emphasis on efficiency in battle while preserving costly assets. Japan definitely hosed up on #2, and to a lesser extent, 3 and 4.
|
|
#
?
Nov 26, 2013 21:30
|
|