My ancient warfare professor has given us this article by Michael P. Speidel as required reading. In fact his choice of four questions to answer this week include a question on this article.
Has anyone here read it and have any opinion on it? I forced myself through the reading though I grimaced the entire time. The logical leaps and thin connections Speidel makes to support his theory that Beserkers can be traced as far back as Assyria is laughable. Turned in as a paper in any level of college class this paper would be torn apart.
Unfortunately I am not allowed in class to critique the source. My professor has told me that explaining how poor a job the author did using an epic Assyrian poem as a source when he discounts one fantastic element (Assyrian warriors turning into wild beasts) while accepting as fact equally absurd ideas (Assyrian warriors throwing aside all armor and charging into battle naked yet immune to harm) is not allowed. Simple logic is not allowed in the class, I must accept everything written by any source he gives out unless I find other authored sources that critique the work, intellectually dishonest to say the least.
Is anyone is interested in reading the entire article it can be pulled from EBSCO.
Overall I am wondering who here if anyone has read this and has an opinion on it or could point me to some good opinions on the paper.
Thanks in advance.
There was an article on it in the latest issue of Ancient Warfare.
Do you have a title and author on that article? With the various online access I have through school I may be able to pull up that article through a search since I do not get that particular magazine myself.
Quote:Do you have a title and author on that article?
Sidney Dean, 'Divine battle frenzy. Berserkers and wolf warriors', in
Ancient Warfare 3.2 (2009).
AFAIK, there is no online version available, but you may try to contact or very own Jasper Oorthuys
here, or take a subscription
here.
For a strongly critical review of Speidel's related book, Ancient Germanic Warriors: Warrior Styles from Trajan's Column to Icelandic Sagas (London, 2004), see David Woods in German History 23 (2005), 557-58.
Quote:For a strongly critical review of Speidel's related book, Ancient Germanic Warriors: Warrior Styles from Trajan's Column to Icelandic Sagas (London, 2004), see David Woods in German History 23 (2005), 557-58.
I will check into it. Unfortunately, since I go to an online University I do not believe I have access to this source either. Might just have to go down to the local public library and see if its possible for them to order this item.
Quote:My ancient warfare professor has given us this article by Michael P. Speidel as required reading. In fact his choice of four questions to answer this week include a question on this article.
Has anyone here read it and have any opinion on it? I forced myself through the reading though I grimaced the entire time. The logical leaps and thin connections Speidel makes to support his theory that Beserkers can be traced as far back as Assyria is laughable. Turned in as a paper in any level of college class this paper would be torn apart.
Unfortunately I am not allowed in class to critique the source. My professor has told me that explaining how poor a job the author did using an epic Assyrian poem as a source when he discounts one fantastic element (Assyrian warriors turning into wild beasts) while accepting as fact equally absurd ideas (Assyrian warriors throwing aside all armor and charging into battle naked yet immune to harm) is not allowed. Simple logic is not allowed in the class, I must accept everything written by any source he gives out unless I find other authored sources that critique the work, intellectually dishonest to say the least.
Is anyone is interested in reading the entire article it can be pulled from EBSCO.
Overall I am wondering who here if anyone has read this and has an opinion on it or could point me to some good opinions on the paper.
Thanks in advance.
If it's anything like Speidels book "Ancient Germanic Warrior's" then you have my sympathies. I know Raedwald/Paul Mortimer is a BIG fan.
:wink:
Quote:For a strongly critical review of Speidel's related book, Ancient Germanic Warriors: Warrior Styles from Trajan's Column to Icelandic Sagas (London, 2004), see David Woods in German History 23 (2005), 557-58.
I did not find this article but I found two other reviews of this book. One was a very forgiving review that notes the mistakes but is trying to be polite. The other is a scathing review of the book that finds everything wrong with the book that I find wrong with the "Beserks: article I started this thread about. Basically he talks about his incredibly reaching theories, his willingness to accept the most outlandish epics or poems as pure fact, and his using of the smallest of similarities to link events or cultures.
Quote:If it's anything like Speidels book "Ancient Germanic Warrior's" then you have my sympathies. I know Raedwald/Paul Mortimer is a BIG fan.
Having just read two review on this book I would say the article is exactly like his book. Maybe that is why I cannot find any reviews of the article. No one takes him seriously enough to bother to review his work.
Quote:..., and his using of the smallest of similarities to link events or cultures.
But this is Speidel's style. Sometimes it pays dividends and teases out amazing connections (in his heyday, he published some fascinating papers); sometimes (increasingly frequently!) it results in nonsense (as, apparently, in this case).
Speidel must be close to retirement, so he is probably winding down, mentally.
Quote:My ancient warfare professor has told me that explaining how poor a job the author did ... is not allowed. ... I must accept everything written by any source he gives out unless I find other authored sources that critique the work, intellectually dishonest to say the least.
I wouldn't like to criticise your professor, but his method seems a little odd. It's as if you are being asked not to think independently, but to parrot whatever others have published, regardless of its credibility. Certainly, I would advise always to read reviews of your set books, to see what others think of them. But you are entitled to (and should be encouraged to develop) you own opinion, too.
P.S. For a link to Speidel's article, see
this thread.
Quote:I wouldn't like to criticise your professor, but his method seems a little odd. It's as if you are being asked not to think independently, but to parrot whatever others have published, regardless of its credibility. Certainly, I would advise always to read reviews of your set books, to see what others think of them. But you are entitled to (and should be encouraged to develop) you own opinion, too.
P.S. For a link to Speidel's article, see this thread.
That was the first thought that came to my mind. If I have to find an author who thinks as I do on every item I want to write them I am not writing critically but instead I am just regurgitating the thoughts of others, that is the worst kind of history. Its what we all hated in Elementary school and why in general so many kids dislike history.
I did email him and basically ask that question. His response was that as long as its just my opinion against the 180 plus citations and the fact that he had his article posted in a prestigious journal then I had to find authored citations for my statements. I declined to reply to him since my first thought was I could write a 10 page paper with 1000 source in it, that does not make my evaluation of those sources or my interpretation of them relevant or accurate.
Or to just use his exact words:
"It depends on whether I agree with you that a peer-reviewed journal article such as the one
assigned for your Week 4 assignments is not supported adequately by scholarship, and the answer is,
I don't agree with you. The article in question was supported by 187 endnotes and dozens of
primary and secondary sources and was vetted by one of the most prestigious academic journals
printed in the English language."
Now since I cannot find a single critical evaluation of this article, nor did the teacher supply one I find hsi arguement to be nothing more than an "I am the teacher you will do as I say" attitude.
Quote:Now since I cannot find a single critical evaluation of this article, nor did the teacher supply one I find his argument to be nothing more than an "I am the teacher you will do as I say" attitude.
It would certainly seem so. How sad.
Flipping though the article, I see a beginning which is basically speculative (all the stuff about Bronze Age berzerkers and proto-Indo-European culture) plus a better-supported article on Celtic, Germanic, and Norse mad warriors. Maybe your professor chose it for the overview more than the beginning argument?
The LBA Assyrian epic is interesting because it shows that Assyrians told stories about mad warriors, but using this to argue that this fighting style was common in real life seems like a weak argument. And what happened at the end of the Bronze Age in Southwest Asia is a hard problem, and Drews' military explanation has problems (charioteers had beaten skirmishers before, and we see the Egyptians using barbarian chariot runners and dismounting their charioteers before the catastrophe).
Quote:Flipping though the article, I see a beginning which is basically speculative (all the stuff about Bronze Age berzerkers and proto-Indo-European culture) plus a better-supported article on Celtic, Germanic, and Norse mad warriors. Maybe your professor chose it for the overview more than the beginning argument?
The LBA Assyrian epic is interesting because it shows that Assyrians told stories about mad warriors, but using this to argue that this fighting style was common in real life seems like a weak argument. And what happened at the end of the Bronze Age in Southwest Asia is a hard problem, and Drews' military explanation has problems (charioteers had beaten skirmishers before, and we see the Egyptians using barbarian chariot runners and dismounting their charioteers before the catastrophe).
In the end I skipped the article completely and did a different assignment. He had given us a reading assignment with 6 questions, we picked one to write 1000 words on. The one in regards to this article required you to take everything written in the article as absolute fact unless you could find arguements from other authored sources that refuted it.
A short writing on the organization of the Macedonian army as developed by Philip II seemed much more useful and grounded in reality. Didn't stop the professor from dinging 4 points off my final grade for two semi-colons he felt I missed. :roll:
I am not a big fan of Spiedel -- not sure why you say that Matt -- I read his book and found it to be extremely disappointing. There are one or two nuggets of information but that is about it and I have used them carefully in my own writings.
Frankly, I am a little puzzled why you mentioned me in this at all. Perhaps we should continue this off list?
Paul