10-27-2006, 01:56 AM
Quote:By "early modern" I was speaking rather broadly, say the 16th to 18th centuries, with an emphasis towards the end of the period. In this period soldiers were mostly ill-paid professionals raised from the poor, and frequently badly treated as leaders either saw soldiers as expendable or raised more men than they could properly feed and clothe. Marshal DeSaxe's (an 18th century French general) Reveries Upon the Art of War casually assumes that soldiers will be treated badly unless an army undertakes reforms. (The author has some eccentric suggesions). By Napoleonic times several organizational advances had occurred which made somewhat larger field armies possible, while late medieval armies were mostly rich amateurs (eg. Flemish militias, some men-at-arms) or professionals of a rather higher status (eg. English longbowmen, Swiss pikemen, some men-at-arms) and therefore had to treat most of their soldiers reasonably well.Sean Manning:3qihbsue Wrote:You think the ancients were better able to withstand privation than early modern peasants?
No, I think they were better able to withstand privation than modern soldiers. I hadn't considered early modern armies as a point of comparison. What exactly do you mean by the term?
Nullis in verba
I have not checked this forum frequently since 2013, but I hope that these old posts have some value. I now have a blog on books, swords, and the curious things humans do with them.
I have not checked this forum frequently since 2013, but I hope that these old posts have some value. I now have a blog on books, swords, and the curious things humans do with them.