Total Generalship: Commanding Pre-Modern Armies, Part IIIb: Officers(acoup.blog)
acoup.blog
Total Generalship: Commanding Pre-Modern Armies, Part IIIb: Officers
https://acoup.blog/2022/06/24/collections-total-generalship-commanding-pre-modern-armies-part-iiib-officers/
23 comments
Only read part of the article, but ended up skimming the blog. Definitely saving this! This is the Internet that I love. I would never find gems like this via Google. Partly because it would not appear high in search results, and partly because I'd never go looking for it! Thank you HN, and thank you blog writer.
I hadn’t heard of this blog until I saw it linked here the day after Russias invasion to Ukraine. At that time there were a lot of people talking about it of course, a lot of different takes and predictions.
There was something about the writing that made me read the whole post and it had a large impact on how I interpreted all news coming out of the war and in whole it was incredibly prescient, given it was published less than 24 hours after the first bombings.
https://acoup.blog/2022/02/25/miscellanea-understanding-the-...
There was something about the writing that made me read the whole post and it had a large impact on how I interpreted all news coming out of the war and in whole it was incredibly prescient, given it was published less than 24 hours after the first bombings.
https://acoup.blog/2022/02/25/miscellanea-understanding-the-...
Be forewarned! This blog is very addictive! The writing and level of detail is incredible! An all-around fun time, if you have the spare time.
I can highly recommend this blog. It does a really good job at presenting academic historical research in a readable way, without silently dumbing things down. The required detail for the argument is given, and the skipped details are called out as being skipped.
I think the fact this article is this high up, without having any comments, suggests that plenty of HNers, like me, just upvote uppon seeing the blog name.
I think the fact this article is this high up, without having any comments, suggests that plenty of HNers, like me, just upvote uppon seeing the blog name.
I know I do. I'm happy every time one of today's 10,000 finds it.
What a fantastic blog! I’m very happy to be one of the 10,000.
I highly recommend the two series, "Bread: How Did They Make It?" and "Iron: How Did They Make It?". (Series are called collections on the blog.)
The logistics and economics of the ancient world: fascinating.
Many other posts and collections about ancient (European, mostly) and pre-modern statecraft and institutions are also fascinating.
The "hook" or lens of looking at these topics through video games (and what they get right and wrong) is a nice way to get into the subject.
The logistics and economics of the ancient world: fascinating.
Many other posts and collections about ancient (European, mostly) and pre-modern statecraft and institutions are also fascinating.
The "hook" or lens of looking at these topics through video games (and what they get right and wrong) is a nice way to get into the subject.
I found "The Roman Dictatorship: How Did It Work? Did It Work?" fascinating.
https://acoup.blog/2022/03/18/collections-the-roman-dictator...
https://acoup.blog/2022/03/18/collections-the-roman-dictator...
The hook that got me in to reading acoup was the analysis of the battles in Lord of the Rings. How does book compare to movie compare to actual battle tactics.
The "Clothing: How Did They Make It?" series is also really good, particularly for conveying how incredibly labor-intensive it was to produce clothing with pre-industrial methods, especially before the spinning wheel.
The blog also has an awesome series about different battles in Lord of the Rings and their historical accuracy/plausibility in regards to general warfare, logistics, etc.
I think I found those via HN too.
I think I found those via HN too.
Those series are also really enjoyable, especially because they're not just about picking on implausible aspects of LotR; those posts are also about introducing a lot of different military concepts (premodern army logistics, analyzing decisionmaking at tactical/operational/strategic layers, various different types of military organization and how they can tie into civilian social structures), using LotR as an example.
>>> "That system is a hold-over from the origins of modern military structure in Europe’s early-modern gunpowder armies: the commissioned officers (whose commission, to be clear, came from the king) were drawn from the aristocracy and often the nobility, while their non-comissioned subordinates were drawn from the common soldiery who were in turn recruited from the peasantry."
Yes, it is fun to map social structure onto armies and then be all judgmental about the inequality. Or you can study the actual practicalities of war. Top of the list: Officers need to be able to communicate with people at a distance. They need to be able to read. Until very very recently that meant they had to be from the upper classes.
Soldiers in the past also didn't do "basic training" as we know it today. If you want a soldier to obey orders then those orders better come from someone who held some sort of prior authority over the solider. Military discipline requires structure. When turning farmers into soldiers the only way to keep them in line is to utilize an existing structure, ie social class. Farmers (the bulk of soldiers) will obey orders from their landlords. They won't obey some random person just because some other random person tells them to.
Just after the soviet revolution the Russian army toyed with setting aside social class, even attempting democratically-elected officers. It did not go well. They quickly reverted to the old system.
Yes, it is fun to map social structure onto armies and then be all judgmental about the inequality. Or you can study the actual practicalities of war. Top of the list: Officers need to be able to communicate with people at a distance. They need to be able to read. Until very very recently that meant they had to be from the upper classes.
Soldiers in the past also didn't do "basic training" as we know it today. If you want a soldier to obey orders then those orders better come from someone who held some sort of prior authority over the solider. Military discipline requires structure. When turning farmers into soldiers the only way to keep them in line is to utilize an existing structure, ie social class. Farmers (the bulk of soldiers) will obey orders from their landlords. They won't obey some random person just because some other random person tells them to.
Just after the soviet revolution the Russian army toyed with setting aside social class, even attempting democratically-elected officers. It did not go well. They quickly reverted to the old system.
> Yes, it is fun to map social structure onto armies and then be all judgmental about the inequality.
The quote is actually not judgemental, just descriptive. Your second paragraph seems to quite aptly explain why the structure of armies matches the structure of society. That claim of armies mirroring society is a very common claim on this blog, and your explanation is indeed the explanation this blog has given when expanding on why armies mirror their societies.
The quote is actually not judgemental, just descriptive. Your second paragraph seems to quite aptly explain why the structure of armies matches the structure of society. That claim of armies mirroring society is a very common claim on this blog, and your explanation is indeed the explanation this blog has given when expanding on why armies mirror their societies.
Really interesting, I started back at part 1 and wish the author did two things to clarify their writing: didn't spend so much time discussing how video game battles work (only to make the point that the real world was nothing like video games; so frankly, I don't care) and define words that aren't common knowledge (the term "socii allae" is linked to another blog post which doesn't mention the term until many paragraphs down). I guess every writer is entitled to their own voice though.
Bret has written so much at this point that he’s got the enviable problem of balancing how to introduce established concepts for new readers while not being repetitive for his existing readers.
On the video games front, that’s a big part of his writing: using pop culture as an entry point to learning about history. So yeah he kind of needs to lay it out in order to compare it to history. Usually smoother for movies and shows because there’s a narrative to work with vs just mechanics.
On the video games front, that’s a big part of his writing: using pop culture as an entry point to learning about history. So yeah he kind of needs to lay it out in order to compare it to history. Usually smoother for movies and shows because there’s a narrative to work with vs just mechanics.
[deleted]
This blog is catnip for high-systematising people, especially ones who are also LotR fans. Highly recommended.
This is apples to oranges to kiwis...
Hoplites were mostly a citizen army, phalanx were professional soldiers and Roman legions (in classic era) were professional army with many specialists troops especially engineering.
You need different numbers of officers not for the battle but for other tasks.. War for 99% isn't battle but engineering, logistsics etc..
Just as an example Jululis Cesar in Gaul had build a bridge over Rhine twice and it took them just a few days.. Hoplites from Anabasis were just wandering around looking for an existing bridge.
Hoplites were mostly a citizen army, phalanx were professional soldiers and Roman legions (in classic era) were professional army with many specialists troops especially engineering.
You need different numbers of officers not for the battle but for other tasks.. War for 99% isn't battle but engineering, logistsics etc..
Just as an example Jululis Cesar in Gaul had build a bridge over Rhine twice and it took them just a few days.. Hoplites from Anabasis were just wandering around looking for an existing bridge.
When comparing fruits (armies) it makes lots of sense to compare apples to kiwis to oranges (romans to greeks to Macedonians).
The article is in a series about "how does a general command an army in battle". Within that series this article is about the role of officers, in battle.
The officer numbers are mentioned to explain how armies acted. But how armies wanted to act is not used to explain why officer numbers were the way they were.
The article is in a series about "how does a general command an army in battle". Within that series this article is about the role of officers, in battle.
The officer numbers are mentioned to explain how armies acted. But how armies wanted to act is not used to explain why officer numbers were the way they were.