It's almost like it's in the name that they need to protest everything.

Edit: On a more serious note, what you're describing is general ingroup/outgroup mechanics. If too many people conform to the ingroup, they need to create new rules in order to maintain an outgroup.

Lmao! That’s so crazy! 300 vs 300 and only 1 and 2 survived. Those two guys probably agreed to tell everyone they gave that last guy what for and made him run for home!

Because Oliver Cromwell was a Puritan. Christmas was to them a day of observation and everything else was either Pagan or Papism (which to a Puritan is one and the same).

[removed]

Look on the brightside: You ain't the only group of Protestants that acts contrarians. In fact, sometimes I feel many traditions, habit, and "culture" are due to being contrarian.

John Reynolds played a role in this too. Buford’s cavalry was the true vanguard, though Reynolds was in command of the advance corps (Meade’s various corps were all strung out at this point and not unified in preparation for a battle). His orders were explicit not to bring on a general engagement, which made sense given the state of his army. Meade also wanted to fight back at Pipe Creek, some 20 miles southeast, and had issued orders to ultimately draw his army together there. To fight in Gettysburg would mean issuing all new orders to generals who were many miles in many directions. There was uncertainty of where Lee’s forces were in PA, and the belief was they would try to attack Washington from the NW, so it made sense not to advance too far north.

Reynolds clearly understood that Gettysburg had favorable terrain and ordered Oliver Howard’s corps to join him there, rather than fall back to Pipe Creek. After Reynolds was killed and Winfield Hancock arrived at Gettysburg, he confirmed Reynold’s decision to fight there rather than fall back. That was good enough for Meade, who abandoned the Pipe Creek line and moved up to Gettysburg.

It’s worth noting that a similar process was happening to Lee’s army. Buford had engaged Devin’s brigade (Hill’s corps), which was the vanguard of the Army of Northern Virginia. Lee had to quickly bring his three corps together at Gettysburg. Both he and Meade benefitted from the many, many roads that led to Gettysburg like the spokes of a wheel.

Sorry I didn't respond to your rather well delivered comment with something more interesting, but it is Christmas(happy Christmas btw),and trust me I have no love for the Tudors either as a welshman hahaha.

Technically, the Battle of the 300 Champions fits your bill.

Yeah, like come on he's a monk ffs.

[removed]

[deleted]

>. By the 1st-2nd century CE, the Roman Empire were producing an estimated 50,000 tonnes of iron a year

I've read that the estimates of those Roman iron production figures aren't really reliable. This is because those numbers are based on estimates of per capita production from a single Roman province (Roman Britain) that incidentally was a high iron production region, had a lot of iron ore, and had a relatively large military garrison. And that estimate of a disproportionately high iron rich & producing region was then extrapolated to the rest of the empire based the Empire's population.

Edit: You are correct. The unreliable Romano-Britain iron production extrapolation estimates are the estimates for 80k tons, and not estimates for up to 50k tons.

Javalyn was also very common as a initial weapon.

Again, another good post.

Looking forward to the brawl

I'd say it was less of a weapons advantage and more due to a tactical advantage of better army composition and more flexible troops. The Roman pila could double as a 7 foot thrusting spear, and many of the Macedonian or Successor State troops also had short swords as backup weapons.

At Pydna and other battles, the Macedonian or Successor state armies had their formations fall apart due to poor tactics and/or inflexible formations that broke apart chasing after the enemy or broke apart due to rough terrain. They also had an overreliance on pike infantry and neglected their supporting troops and cavalry wing that were crucial to a successful mixed unit formation. Alexander's army was less than 1/3 pikemen iirc and was mostly non pikemen.

I've read it was both. Some sources say they often carried two pila, but in some contexts and some time periods, they carried only 1 pila.

Correction to the post above - Roman swords were longer in the mid Republican era. The gladius actually got shorter (eg. 6 inches shorter) by the time of the early Empire compared to med Republican era swords. They only got longer by the mid to late Empire with the adoption of the spatha for infantry.

Roman swords were longer in the mid Republican era. The gladius actually got shorter (eg. 6 inches shorter) by the time of the early Empire compared to med Republican era swords. They only got longer by the mid to late Empire with the adoption of the spatha for infantry.

Note that the claim that Roman formations are too tight to use spears/axes/longer weapons/etc is a myth. A typical or common Roman infantry formation during the Republic or early Empire is described as having around 3 feet of space between each man. This is a rather spacious formation that gives each soldier plenty of room to deploy spear or sword, and is a more spacious formation than the classical Greek phalanxes that used heavy thrusting spears.

3 feet of space is also comparable to or greater than the spacing used by many pike formations, as many Rennisance European pikemen also had around 3 feet of space between each man and sometimes had as little as only 1.5 feet of space. Even the more loose formation of Ming Dynasty pikemen was still only 3.5 feet between each man according to the Ming military blog.

Thus, contrary to some belief that Roman combat was too cramped for spears, there would be no issue in using a long heavy thrusting spear or a 7 foot pila/throwing spear in melee combat when there was 3 feet of space between each man.

Of course, there could have been and probably were cases when the Romans switched to a much tighter formation where a shorter sword was more manuverable and easier to use than a long thrusting spears or pila in melee.

> This restricted the space, making it difficult for the enemy to wield swords or axes or spears in the tight quarters. The small gaps in the shield wall were used to strike the enemy, the gladius' design was perfect for close up thrusting attacks.

The Roman formations were often even more loosely spaced than typical spear and pike formations. A typical or common Roman infantry formation during the Republic or early Empire is described as having around 3 feet of space between each man. This is a rather spacious formation that gives each soldier plenty of room to deploy spear or sword, and is a more spacious formation than the classical Greek phalanxes that used heavy thrusting spears.

3 feet of space is also comparable to or greater than the spacing used by many pike formations, as many Rennisance European pikemen also had around 3 feet of space between each man and sometimes had as little as only 1.5 feet of space. Even the more loose formation of Ming Dynasty pikemen was still only 3.5 feet between each man according to the Ming military blog.

Thus, contrary to some belief that Roman combat was too cramped for spears, there would be no issue in using a long heavy thrusting spear or a 7 foot pila/throwing spear in melee combat when there was 3 feet of space between each man.

Of course, there could have been and probably were cases when the Romans switched to a much tighter formation where a shorter sword was more manuverable and easier to use than a long thrusting spears or pila in melee.

You're right, and i think there are more to blame such as Henry Ireton for the brutality caused in Ireland but lets not downplay the brutality of Cromwell.

The 1640s campaign was the latest in a 100 year campaign of genocide of Irish culture and people that expands beyond arguments of contemporary tactics.

The Tudor reconquest had a particular aim to destroy Gaelic culture, outlined in great detail in works by Lord Camden and Edmund Spencer, including tactics of scorched earth and how best to kill an displace Irish from the land. This ending in the flight of the earls was the major hammer blow tpogaelic civilisation.

Its was still surviving afterwards for the following years but Cromwell firmly put the secular gaelic order in its grave. By the time of William of Oranges wars a few decades late all that was left was its religious distinction until the gaelic revival of the late 19th century.

So in relation to destroying Irish heritage Cromwell was by no means the only the only vicious agent of it, but was undoubtedly the head of the most brutal. It just theres more blame to go around

In my visits to Scotland and Ireland I was introduced to many historic sites that were destroyed by Cromwell, and one cathedral up in the Orkneys he couldn't quite be bothered to travel to.

[removed]

"Normal" and "evil" are not opposites.

For a silly one: is there any case of a battle in which almost all participants were killed?

Fetishes are by nature a product of the sexualization of a non sexual thing for sexual gratification. An easy one to explain is urophila or the fetishistic sexual obsession with urine, there are many versions of this paraphilia but chiefly it's thought it is caused in some people who are raised in extremely religious households where the rare time they can touch their genitals or explore their sensations is during urination therefore at the onset of their sexual awakening they associate urinating with the ability to even momentarily touch their genitals and possibly engage in a quick act of masturbation these episodes continue and out it grows to where the individual associates urine with sex and will seek out a partner to engage with them and play out that fantasy. Feet maybe in a society like most Western cultures where we usually wear a foot covering like a shoe rhat covers the whole foot and that seeing people nearly naked in swimsuits at a beach including their feet may initiate a sexual feeling in an individual that eventually becomes a foot fetish, of course there are other possibilities too. Recording them is as old as the written word, several ancient texts talk of people and their sexual proclivities including punishments for some, even the Bible has rules against things that are fetishes and notes them. Kraft- Ebing like you say was one of the first if not the first to write it down and study it, although his ideas were very much like many others of his day, incorrect and subsequently disproven. He thought in the same vein as the Church that sex was an act for procreation alone and that any other sex was a perversion and may require "treatment".