Talk:Military history: Difference between revisions
Appearance
Content deleted Content added
No edit summary |
No edit summary |
||
Line 6: | Line 6: | ||
wondering if the list of generals should be elsewhere, or at least classified by conflicts. --[[user:chris mahan|Christopher mahan]] |
wondering if the list of generals should be elsewhere, or at least classified by conflicts. --[[user:chris mahan|Christopher mahan]] |
||
:I can see a problem with classifying by conflict -- lots of duplicate links...Just think of Kitchener, Gordon, Patton, Custer.... [[user:J Hofmann Kemp|J Hofmann Kemp]] |
Revision as of 17:32, 2 June 2002
Cnscription has been one of the fundamentals of many political organisation (think of the Athenian 'Pyle', the Roman farmer-soldier, the Saxon 'Fyrd', etc. Josh will probably know some better examples) Please correct me, but conscription is more ancient than the professional soldiery, which, if I remember correctly, was introduced in Rome by Marius in the second (or first?) century B.C. -- Mathijs
- maybe not so much conscription as the EXPECTATION of universal service for those eligible. That seems to be true of hoplite warfare. The Romans practiced conscription in the Punic wars, though I don't know if we know how they handled it. --MichaelTinkler
==
wondering if the list of generals should be elsewhere, or at least classified by conflicts. --Christopher mahan
- I can see a problem with classifying by conflict -- lots of duplicate links...Just think of Kitchener, Gordon, Patton, Custer.... J Hofmann Kemp