Re: Putting the 'Anal' into Analogies

From: Stewart Stansfield <stu_stansfield_at_m1dA_74sVbe0Xa5BT58_ZDoqHUc_MR2JtSkuWDtN6goksgwNRQpF3Q_B7jWsZ>
Date: Thu, 15 Dec 2005 21:54:20 -0000


Daniel:
> > Similar military, alot more similar than Lunars and Romans.

Jane:
> Your Lunars have weaponry of pike&shot and later period?
Gunpowder? Serious
> artillery? I know YGWV, but....

Jane, you technological determinist, you! :)

I understand that technology is a factor in any continuum of analysis of a given military, but many social factors are pretty robust and transferable.

For example, even putting the Garrison and Satrapal forces aside, the Lunar Army is a glorious and polyglot mix of forces. Regiments are individual entities fashioned by cult and history, dominated by the varying patronage of the Emperor, denominations, Leagues, Associations and families.

If you want to look at the development of these factors, of individual regimental cultus, of military patronage and proprietorship, of territorial recruitment and its consequences, of the often curious mix and competition of public and private military enterprise, and of how a nascent 'standing army' might operate in a limited fiscal and bureaucratic system, then I can't think to hand of a better period that illustrates this than the late medieval and early modern. Add/mix in/replace with regimental cults, myths and magic to the concept, and you're off.

Just forget the weapons for a minute; looking beyond the ancient world can give some fresh insights. But then I'm biased :)

Cheerio,

Stu.            

Powered by hypermail