|
Yeah, chariots only really have advantages when the horses available are undersized and the users are not well trained with them. That's why they persist in the British isles longer than in other places since by the time of the Gallic Wars the Gauls had abandoned them as a main weapon of war in favor of cavalry that was better than the Roman equivalent. And in that case they are also much more barebones chariots used for the above battle taxi and mobile javelin hucking platform uses. They were not the fancy 3+ person mobile arrow platforms manned by experts that were seen in the middle east
|
#
?
Jun 6, 2023 17:13
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 26, 2024 05:48 |
|
|
euphronius posted:I would think the wheels are probably a pain in the rear end That and terrain limitations.
|
|
#
?
Jun 6, 2023 17:15
|
|
|
Spring & autumn period Chinese definitely used chariots in battle yeah. They had been a big prestige thing for the Zhou so when the Zhou power is broken and everyone’s out to be a hegemon, part of the way they did that is get a zillion chariots to scare the other feudal lords. Compare with modern technological arms race of choice. I don’t have any source in front of me to check but iirc you use them mostly as missile platforms with a guy with a polearm to fend off other chariots. You can charge the enemy formation directly or exploit their superior mobility as a terror tactic (Caesar mentions this too). Also there’s plenty of crafty stratagems you’re supposed to be able to do like wrapping your horses in tiger skins to panic the enemy chariot-horses, or Duke Wen’s trickery with dragging branches in the dust to make it look like he’s got a huge army marching.
|
|
#
?
Jun 6, 2023 17:43
|
|
|
Mr. Nice! posted:That and terrain limitations. This is big. No source but I remember reading about how roughly-Alexander era Persian armies would sometimes prepare a battlefield for days before hand (if they could) to make sure the chariots would be good to go on it. The other thing to keep in mind about the assorted horse archer armies is that they tend to come from places where a poo poo load of horses and a poo poo load of skilled riders are already a given. Steppe nomads having a poo poo ton of horse archers isn't some kind of military revolution, it's them using the same basic tools to kill people that they use to hunt game/herd their animals/etc on the steppe.
|
|
#
?
Jun 6, 2023 18:21
|
|
|
parthia shot was used by the parthians, scythians, huns, magyars, mongols and the comanche. that one single tactic along with others prolly conquered an appreciable fraction of all world conquest
|
|
#
?
Jun 6, 2023 20:00
|
|
|
Yeah, maintaining skilled horse archers is basically an undertaking for your entire society. Even when settled peoples adopt them it's usually in limited numbers and it's insanely expensive. The Eastern Romans incorporated horse archers into their armies in late antiquity/the early middle ages, and it's never more than a small part of their forces and their quality is never equal to that of the various steppe peoples they're facing. They're one of the few examples I can think of where they actually trained their own horse archers instead of or in addition to recruiting nomadic or semi-nomadic horse archers; it's usually a lot easier to hire it out rather than set up your own multi-decade training regime. In some ways, horse nomads are basically professional soldiers or at least comparable to the warrior aristocracies of settled peoples: they usually spend much of their lives training in martial skills (even if riding and archery have other practical uses), have access to lots of resources (horses and bows are extremely expensive), and spend a decent amount of time raiding and otherwise using those martial skills. Horse archers are incredibly high quality troops kind of by their very nature.
|
|
#
?
Jun 6, 2023 20:45
|
|
|
euphronius posted:I would think the wheels are probably a pain in the rear end an arrow would be a much larger pain in the rear end
|
|
#
?
Jun 6, 2023 20:52
|
|
|
The wheel wasn't introduced to Iceland until 1900 because there weren't any roads at all before that. The first hydro powerplant in Iceland predates the first horsedrawn carriage. First hydropowerpllant around 1897 and first horse wagon around 1900. FreudianSlippers fucked around with this message at 21:56 on Jun 6, 2023 |
|
#
?
Jun 6, 2023 21:50
|
|
|
I presume they had heard about the wheel before then right
|
|
#
?
Jun 6, 2023 22:37
|
|
|
Building a hydroelectric power plant without any wheels sounds hard.
|
|
#
?
Jun 6, 2023 22:40
|
|
|
Alhazred posted:It's weird how it took so long before people realized that that is a terrible idea. To have your leader exposed like that, fully knowing that your army will collapse if he's killed and leaving your country without someone in charge. I don't want you to feel like you're being dogpiled so apologies, but to elaborate on another poster's objection here, turns out that even if you know where the enemy commander is, it can be quite hard to kill him. I think video games and movies have given people a really, really generous notion of how easy it is to snipe people with a bow. The effective range of a bow is much shorter than its theoretical maximum range (i.e. it loses energy, quite a lot of it, as it travels), and armor is often quite effective. Todd's Workshop is a great youtube channel with a lot of experiments done on this very question. Anyway, I feel like telling the story of my favorite king of all time, Pepi II Neferkare. Pepi II was a king in the 6th Dynasty of Old Kingdom Egypt. His reign length is preposterous. Its quite disputed - 6th Dynasty is a VERY long time ago and so records are often not quite what we want them to be - but the critical estimate for his reign length is 64 years, while the traditional claim is 94. An important element of Old Kingdom Egypt (that is not unusual - the Hittite Empire had a similar thing going on) was that the bureaucracy of the kingdom was heavily staffed by children of the King. This in all probability is a trust thing - its hard to find people you can trust, and professional disinterested civil services don't grow on trees. The Old Kingdom was very hands on, like tax collection often included the literal presence of the king, and they had a pretty tested and repeatable system for succession where the oldest wave or so of the kings kids would be trained in statecraft broadly on the reasonable assumption that one of them would be the next king, and he'd make new little kinglets to become king after him, and so on. Trouble was that Pepi II outlived those sons, and probably most of the next wave or so. We're not 100% sure what the hell happens at this point, because Egypt more or less goes down with Pepi II. The explanation I've liked is that because Pepi II lived so long and all his groomed successors predeceased him, Egypt found itself in a vacuum of qualified bureaucrats and competent king candidates. And on the one hand, you think, "that seems like a really predictable problem, why wouldn't they have thought about it already?" And, well, it had never happened before. Because this is the sixth dynasty of ancient egypt, its not like they had a lot of precedent for succession crises. Anyway I think that's just very interesting and also a bit of a cool look at "things we assume people had figured out...they might not have figured out."
|
|
#
?
Jun 6, 2023 22:59
|
|
|
also like certain risks may be considered acceptable, eg that a dude will insanely outlive his heirs once every so often or that your head motherfucker will eat a slinger's bullet or whatever in combat.
|
|
#
?
Jun 6, 2023 23:07
|
|
|
What was the conception of the idea of "history" to those Dawn of Man civs?
|
|
#
?
Jun 6, 2023 23:13
|
|
|
if i was pepi II i would have just hung out with my great-grandchildren more so they could learn to do pharaoh stuff too. not that hard!!
|
|
#
?
Jun 6, 2023 23:20
|
|
|
zoux posted:What was the conception of the idea of "history" to those Dawn of Man civs? Ancestor worship seemed to be a rather common religious practice. They were keenly aware of all the history that went before them. Tales of the deeds of their forebears undoubtedly occupied many evenings around fires.
|
|
#
?
Jun 6, 2023 23:27
|
|
|
How exactly does bringing spare horses work on the campaign trail anyways? Do the "resting" horses follow along in the baggage train at the same pace and just not having a burden and not having to go out scouting is enough for them to recover when they're still moving? Or do they make regular camps for the horses to rest in place and move between at the speed of horse instead of being limited by the speed of people managing them?
|
|
#
?
Jun 6, 2023 23:50
|
|
|
zoux posted:What was the conception of the idea of "history" to those Dawn of Man civs? So I was about to say "all of the oldest writings I've ever seen refer pretty unambiguously to things even older, often in a tone that assumes the reader is already familiar with king z, father of y, father of x, father of w....father of a, our current king" kind of things. But then I remembered that the oracle bones don't really do this, because they're all pretty fragmentary and not like...exposition heavy at all. Once China starts producing writings like that they all seem to be like those Sumerian and Egyptian writings where the current civilization is deeply rooted in an astonishingly old history going back to (typically) divine intervention and the creation of the universe. To be a little more expansive, city building predates writing. By a lot. More or less everywhere it arose, often by 1000+ years. That's a long time, and if we're wondering how the first city builders felt about the change into building cities, we really don't know. We have some ideas about how their descendants felt - like every analysis I've seen of Gilgamesh has mentioned that the Enkidu-Shamhat narrative is about the process of learning to become civilized (via fuckin), and Chinese traditional stories about the Three Sovereigns & Five Emperors has a process of various assumed things about civilization being invented by those figures (Huangdi invents shelters, Yao invents weiqi, Shun invents flood management). So at least the stuff I've read has a conception that history has some sort of progression, that cities and agriculture and medicine had to be invented or at least divinely revealed and that people did live without those. But obviously the details are not really presented in a way that clearly resembles the archaeological record. KYOON GRIFFEY JR posted:also like certain risks may be considered acceptable, eg that a dude will insanely outlive his heirs once every so often or that your head motherfucker will eat a slinger's bullet or whatever in combat. For sure, though worth noting that most everybody else figures out ways to head off that kind of crisis, whether its by importing foreign nobles (e.g. House of Windsor) or having kings 'resign' (e.g. Qing Qianlong) at some point. Also worth noting that some of the secondary problems here did arise in other groups - "the king has to be loving like 4+ hours a day in order for us to have enough sons to staff the bureaucracy" was a thing that Hittite Emperors had to deal with.
|
|
#
?
Jun 7, 2023 01:55
|
|
|
Tulip posted:
It's worth noting that this idea has been increasingly challenged by scholars over the last 15-20 years. The narrative of a sharp break following Pepy II's death is a nice one, but its increasingly at odds with new evidence discovered in the last 20 years and new scholarship that has reinterpreted the late Old Kingdom. The idea of an acute moment of collapse at the end of the Old Kingdom is reflected in later Egyptian texts from the Middle Kingdom, and for a long time Egyptologists more or less accepted this paradigm. However a lot of recent work has shown this to be an overly simplistic narrative. It's increasingly common for Egyptologists to include Dynasty 8 (Dynasty 7 probably didn't exist, and if it did exist its not super relevant here) in the Old Kingdom, instead of ending it with Dynasty 6 (Pepy II's dynasty). There was a lot of continuity between Dynasty 6 and Dynasty 8, including in kingship traditions and governmental practices. The capital did not move during Dynasty 8, and dynasty 8 kings continued to issue decrees in the same format and style that Dynasty 6 kings had. At least one Dynasty 8 king built himself a tomb in a pyramid in the style of Dynasty 6. The Dynasty 8 kings also appear to have maintained control over all of Egypt for at least 30 years after the death of Pepy II, potentially longer. This is admittedly not that long compared to the overall length of the Old Kingdom, but its a significant difference from the Egyptian state collapsing overnight after Pepy II died. There are a number of short reigning kings in Dynasty 8 following Pepy II, but there's not actually evidence that this is what led to the collapse of the Egyptian state. Instead, the "collapse" of the Old Kingdom appears to have been very gradual. Tulip posted:Because this is the sixth dynasty of ancient egypt, its not like they had a lot of precedent for succession crises. This isn't really true, there were undoubtedly a number of succession crises that occurred in the Old Kingdom. Monarchy wasn't new in Pepy II's day. Dynasty 3, the generally accepted starting point of the Old Kingdom, starts c. 2600 BC, and Pepy II reigned c. 2250 BC, over 300 years later. In addition, Dynasty 3 wasn't the beginning of kingship in Egypt. There's evidence for kings who used the key trappings of Egyptian kingship as far back as 3200 BC, although in those early days they didn't rule all of Egypt. Earlier in the 6th dynasty there is a clear sign of a succession struggle following the death of Teti, the founder of the dynasty. Teti was briefly succeeded by Userkare, who was the son of a secondary wife (and almost certainly not the heir apparent). However, he was quickly replaced by his half brother Pepy I, who was the son of Teti's senior wife and who almost certainly was the heir apparent during Teti's life, and there are several examples of Userkare's name being hacked out of monuments and replaced by Pepy I's. There are almost certainly other examples of succession struggles from the 400 year history of the Old Kingdom, and the many previous centuries where kingship was practiced, but we lack documentation of political events for most of this period. CrypticFox fucked around with this message at 02:46 on Jun 7, 2023 |
|
#
?
Jun 7, 2023 02:44
|
|
|
Alhazred posted:It's weird how it took so long before people realized that that is a terrible idea. To have your leader exposed like that, fully knowing that your army will collapse if he's killed and leaving your country without someone in charge. If you think that's dumb, the last French king to die in a joust died in 1559!
|
|
#
?
Jun 7, 2023 04:10
|
|
|
training accidents are not dumb, and jousts started as explicitly training
|
|
#
?
Jun 7, 2023 04:32
|
|
|
bob dobbs is dead posted:training accidents are not dumb i'd call any accident that ends in my death dumb tbh
|
|
#
?
Jun 7, 2023 04:48
|
|
|
FishFood posted:Yeah, maintaining skilled horse archers is basically an undertaking for your entire society. Even when settled peoples adopt them it's usually in limited numbers and it's insanely expensive. The Eastern Romans incorporated horse archers into their armies in late antiquity/the early middle ages, and it's never more than a small part of their forces and their quality is never equal to that of the various steppe peoples they're facing. They're one of the few examples I can think of where they actually trained their own horse archers instead of or in addition to recruiting nomadic or semi-nomadic horse archers; it's usually a lot easier to hire it out rather than set up your own multi-decade training regime. the problem with horse archers is that they need constant training/retraining for soldiers to retain their skill. Much like how pilots have to constantly fly to retain their combat skill. It's particularly bad with horse-archers, like if a soldier fall out of practice for a while they lose almost their entire skillset. which means that if there's ever a budget shortfall or political crisis that causes your horse archer corps to be disbanded (say during peacetime): then it's very very difficult to re-assemble another one. Steppe nomads don't have this problem because that's their way of life, but settled societies will lay off professional soldiers all the time. So it's very hard to consistently field armies of horse archers to counter nomads.
|
|
#
?
Jun 7, 2023 17:08
|
|
|
CrypticFox posted:It's worth noting that this idea has been increasingly challenged by scholars over the last 15-20 years. The narrative of a sharp break following Pepy II's death is a nice one, but its increasingly at odds with new evidence discovered in the last 20 years and new scholarship that has reinterpreted the late Old Kingdom. The idea of an acute moment of collapse at the end of the Old Kingdom is reflected in later Egyptian texts from the Middle Kingdom, and for a long time Egyptologists more or less accepted this paradigm. However a lot of recent work has shown this to be an overly simplistic narrative. Thank you for this, though I will defend myself with "I tried to stick to relatively non controversial established history for a reason." Dynasty 7 I actually think is a really interesting artifact and really showcases a lot of the problems with the traditional history of Egypt (and to be honest, I'd generally consider the "Dynasty" terming to be a bit misleading - when I first started reading any Egyptian history I thought "Dynasty" here was being used similar to Tang or Han dynasties, which is not the case!). My understanding as an amateur is that sources drop off pretty sharply around the time Pepy II dies, is that not the case? And I do think this is a bit of a quibble over the notion of "a lot." Even adding in Sumerian history on top of the Egyptian history, I'd still say that they were in relatively new territory with the whole "stable long-term succession of kings" thing! I'm trying to be generous and kind to our ancestors and what they had.
|
|
#
?
Jun 7, 2023 19:22
|
|
|
Tulip posted:when I first started reading any Egyptian history I thought "Dynasty" here was being used similar to Tang or Han dynasties, which is not the case!
|
|
#
?
Jun 7, 2023 20:36
|
|
|
I'm sorry to report that thread regular and all around good guy epicurius has passed.
|
|
#
?
Jun 7, 2023 20:56
|
|
|
Tulip posted:And I do think this is a bit of a quibble over the notion of "a lot." Even adding in Sumerian history on top of the Egyptian history, I'd still say that they were in relatively new territory with the whole "stable long-term succession of kings" thing! I'm trying to be generous and kind to our ancestors and what they had. I mean, three centuries doesn't sound like much compared to the scale we're looking back across, but it's a long long time by human standards. You couldn't have talked to someone who talked to someone who talked to someone who remembered either a time before kings or a time before that dynasty; we're less time than that into the notion of a representative electoral body holding power, and while there have been and will continue to be shakes and jolts in that related to who they represent, how they're elected, and how those who circumscribe their remit are trained and selected, there's quite a bit of continuity even across these jolts. There's also the historiographical and linguistic question of what constitutes a king and how we got our records. It's a bit of a trap to go "but this is what we consider the first recorded king, how could he know how to maintain dynastic power?" because our concept of "king" is in turn informed by our concept of who maintained stable dynastic power making them a "king" rather than a "warlord" or "chieftain", and our concept of "first recorded" is influenced by who had descendants who considered it important to their own legitimacy to carve "son of, son of" into a rock we've happened to find; our evidence for kingship would only be produced once the concept of kings was well-enough established. e: rip, that sucks. Mandoric fucked around with this message at 22:44 on Jun 7, 2023 |
|
#
?
Jun 7, 2023 21:17
|
|
|
Elyv posted:I'm sorry to report that thread regular and all around good guy epicurius has passed. Aw gently caress, that's awful.
|
|
#
?
Jun 7, 2023 21:41
|
|
|
Tulip posted:
Just to add to this, IIRC it was around 1000 years in the actual city that developed the writing (e.g. Ur), but even longer for nearby city states (e.g. Jericho goes back to 9000 BCE or so, while writing developed in Ur around 3000 BCE).
|
|
#
?
Jun 8, 2023 00:09
|
|
|
Typo posted:the problem with horse archers is that they need constant training/retraining for soldiers to retain their skill. Much like how pilots have to constantly fly to retain their combat skill. It's particularly bad with horse-archers, like if a soldier fall out of practice for a while they lose almost their entire skillset. IIRC the Mongols had this problem where the further they got from Mongolia and as time went on, attrition, ageing and settling down meant they inevitably started losing those horse archers that can't be replaced, and can't necessarily just go back and recruit more.
|
|
#
?
Jun 9, 2023 10:12
|
|
|
I'm aware that this is very much not ancient history, but I'll take the chance and ask anyway since most history buffs congregate here; I know very little about the history of the golden age of piracy/buccaneering age, does anyone have a good book on the topic to recommend - either a historical overview or books on specific people or occurences?
|
|
#
?
Jun 10, 2023 15:43
|
|
|
Dante posted:I'm aware that this is very much not ancient history, but I'll take the chance and ask anyway since most history buffs congregate here; I know very little about the history of the golden age of piracy/buccaneering age, does anyone have a good book on the topic to recommend - either a historical overview or books on specific people or occurences? David Cordingly's _Under the Black Flag_ is the modern authoritative text. https://www.amazon.com/Under-Black-Flag-Romance-Reality/dp/081297722X Alternatively if you want a free download out of copyright look up "Howard Pyles Book of Pirates."
|
|
#
?
Jun 10, 2023 16:07
|
|
|
Surely a disbanded military company could find, uh, its own work...
|
|
#
?
Jun 10, 2023 19:23
|
|
|
AAAAA! Real Muenster posted:Is there a good place to read up on how it is different? Because I've always been confused by it. Egyptian numbered "dynasties" come from Manetho's Aegyptica, a history of Egypt written in Greek in the 3rd century BC by an Egyptian priest. Manetho categorized all of Egyptian history up to Alexander into 30 groupings of kings called "dynasties." I am putting the word in quotes because Manetho's dynasties don't always correspond to families. Sometimes a Manethian dynasty contains a bunch of unrelated kings and sometimes a direct family line is split across two different dynasties. Manetho didn't make up these groups of kings from scratch, his dynasties broadly match up with groupings in the Turin Canon, a New Kingdom era king list preserved on a badly fragmented papyrus. Sometimes the reasons for the divisions between dynasties is obvious, but sometimes we can only guess why Manetho and/or his sources decided to divide them where they are divided. For example, the final king of Manetho's 5th dynasty was almost certain the father of the first king of the 6th dynasty, and the 13th dynasty contains a bunch of kings we are can be pretty confident were not blood relatives of each other. The Manethian dynasties are also the basic framework used by modern Egyptologists for categorizing the chronology of Egyptian history, so in that sense they are often used to refer to a period of time and the distinctive features of that time period. The absolute chronology (exact dates) of Egyptian history is still a little hard to pin down, and using Manetho's dynasties is a useful way to be fairly precise about what time period you are talking about without needing to an exact date that you may not be super confident about.
|
|
#
?
Jun 11, 2023 05:17
|
|
|
Tulip posted:My understanding as an amateur is that sources drop off pretty sharply around the time Pepy II dies, is that not the case? This is partially true. Surviving royal monuments become a lot rarer after Pepy II dies, and those are a very important source for Old Kingdom history. Autobiographical tomb inscriptions of royal officials also become rarer after Pepy II dies, although they do not disappear entirely and they remain an important source on the following period. Surviving royal decrees become a lot rarer following Pepy II, but this more so than other changes to political sources is probably a quirk of preservation, as essentially all surviving royal decrees from the Old Kingdom come from one temple in the city of Coptos, and changes at that one temple may not be reflective of overall changes across Egypt. Sources for king lists also sparser and harder to interpret after Pepy II died, which makes establishing a reliable chronology of people and events pretty difficult, since dates and references given in terms of the regnal year of a king don't help much when you don't know the sequence or number of kings in the period. However, there are still a lot of non-royal sources, and in fact there is an increase in some non-royal written sources over the century or so following Pepy II's death. Private inscriptions on steles and other personal monuments are very common in this period, and actually increase sharply in number over that century. There's also still a fair amount of tombs from this period, including some with lengthy narrative inscriptions. Coffin inscriptions also become a lot more common in the century following Pepy II's death, which provide important sources on religion and religious change. Over a thousand spells are recorded on coffins from this period, many of which are not present in Old Kingdom texts, or appear in different forms than they did in the Old Kingdom. So overall, sources on political history are much rarer, but sources on social history are actually more abundant (although still quite limited compared to later periods).
|
|
#
?
Jun 11, 2023 05:40
|
|
|
I wish i could take men named Pepy seriously. It’s as bad as all those Romans named Pupius or Baebius
|
|
#
?
Jun 11, 2023 12:40
|
|
|
CrypticFox posted:This is partially true. Surviving royal monuments become a lot rarer after Pepy II dies, and those are a very important source for Old Kingdom history. Autobiographical tomb inscriptions of royal officials also become rarer after Pepy II dies, although they do not disappear entirely and they remain an important source on the following period. Surviving royal decrees become a lot rarer following Pepy II, but this more so than other changes to political sources is probably a quirk of preservation, as essentially all surviving royal decrees from the Old Kingdom come from one temple in the city of Coptos, and changes at that one temple may not be reflective of overall changes across Egypt. Sources for king lists also sparser and harder to interpret after Pepy II died, which makes establishing a reliable chronology of people and events pretty difficult, since dates and references given in terms of the regnal year of a king don't help much when you don't know the sequence or number of kings in the period. Thank you this does match up with my much more amateur understanding. The narrative I heard from one Egyptologist was that the... let's say complications caused by Pepy II's reign and death manifested largely as a decentralization of power. Not a Dark Age in the traditional sense so much as a change in where and how power is exercised. I have no idea one way or the other if the transition from the Old Kingdom to the 1st Intermediate Period corresponded with a decline to general standard of living1. My gut is that it would but that's purely my cynicism/antipathy to the type of people who tend to become local aristocratic elites (eg landlords). 1to explain a little more what I mean, we do have quite robust evidence that the withdrawal of Roman power from much of Western Europe corresponds to significant declines in SOL in the affected areas, the most convincing evidence to me at least being that skeletons become shorter and show more signs of malnutrition.
|
|
#
?
Jun 11, 2023 16:25
|
|
|
Ghost Leviathan posted:IIRC the Mongols had this problem where the further they got from Mongolia and as time went on, attrition, ageing and settling down meant they inevitably started losing those horse archers that can't be replaced, and can't necessarily just go back and recruit more. If you recruited these horse archers from the steppe, you also kind of had to have an enemy to point them towards since they often didn't care overly much if you told them to stop raiding your own civilian population during peacetime. IIRC the reason that Asia Minor became Turkey was that the Fatamid Calilphate in Cairo was nominallly allied to the ERE, so when the Abassid Caliphate in Baghdad started having trouble with their own Turkomen soldiers wrecking havoc on their own population they pointed them in the general direction of their enemy's ally - the ERE - and told them to go raid them instead. And since this coincided with a period of Byzantine hisory where a couple of emperors viewed their own generals as the main threat against them and made sure that anyone competent lost their job, these Turkomen could fairly quickly go from raiding to conquering.
|
|
#
?
Jun 12, 2023 13:25
|
|
|
Mandoric posted:I mean, three centuries doesn't sound like much compared to the scale we're looking back across, but it's a long long time by human standards. You couldn't have talked to someone who talked to someone who talked to someone who remembered either a time before kings or a time before that dynasty; we're less time than that into the notion of a representative electoral body holding power The House of Commons might want to have a word with you there. Or, you know, the Icelandic Althing. America did not invent the concept of representative democracy ;p (or, of course, democracy at all, there's a reason that word is Greek)
|
|
#
?
Jun 12, 2023 15:21
|
|
|
feedmegin posted:The House of Commons might want to have a word with you there. Or, you know, the Icelandic Althing. America did not invent the concept of representative democracy ;p (or, of course, democracy at all, there's a reason that word is Greek) Even Walpole still expected at times to be dismissed for reasons other than losing the confidence of the Commons, no? Though, yeah, I'm missing a size/significance qualifier there. Mandoric fucked around with this message at 01:55 on Jun 13, 2023 |
|
#
?
Jun 13, 2023 01:51
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 26, 2024 05:48 |
|
|
They just found a sealed bottle of Roman purfume in an urn https://www.sciencenews.org/article/ancient-roman-perfume-smell-patchouli Neat they can ID patchouli
|
|
#
?
Jun 13, 2023 02:41
|
|
