If you could change history

[The Archregimancy]

ROOOOOAAAAAAAR, I KNOW HISTORY!

So, oh great history mod, I have an inquiry:

I seem to have heard it said that the Pechenegs employed chariots well after most sensible militaries had abandoned them, but used them almost exclusively for personal transport, rather then combat.

Is there truth in this?

According to pp 72-73 of Birkenmeier's The Development of the Komnenian Army, the Pecheneg 'chariots' - as described by Anna Comnena (via reports from Byzantine military commanders) - were war wagons which were often circled to form a fortified camp rather than the classical light war chariot. This was a tactic used (unsuccessfully, as it happens) against both Alexius I and John II during the Comnenian period

In that sense, they likely more resembled a Boer laager rather than a 'chariot' in the usual sense of the word.

I admit I had to look that up.

And I'm an archaeologist, not a historian

[Priory Academy USSR]

and military dictatorships will probably never again get the endorsement of the population.

Did they ever have the endorsement of the population? By their very nature, most of them maintained control through force and violence and not through the support of the people.

[Nazis in Space]

And if CSA had won?

The United States would be a Christian fundamentalist, ultra-nationalistic, xenophobic, impoverished, under-developed hellhole.

Given that fundamentalist christians were, IIRC, one of the driving forces of the abolition movement, the first part seems debatable.

[EnragedMaldivians]

So, oh great history mod, I have an inquiry:

I seem to have heard it said that the Pechenegs employed chariots well after most sensible militaries had abandoned them, but used them almost exclusively for personal transport, rather then combat.

Is there truth in this?

According to pp 72-73 of Birkenmeier's The Development of the Komnenian Army, the Pecheneg 'chariots' - as described by Anna Comnena (via reports from Byzantine military commanders) - were war wagons which were often circled to form a fortified camp rather than the classical light war chariot. This was a tactic used (unsuccessfully, as it happens) against both Alexius I and John II during the Comnenian period

In that sense, they likely more resembled a Boer laager rather than a 'chariot' in the usual sense of the word.

I admit I had to look that up.

And I'm an archaeologist, not a historian

He said you know history not that you were a historian. Anyway isn't archaeology a subset of history, except that you work primarily with unwritten sources?

Also, you have have to put "ROOOOOAAAAAAAR, I KNOW HISTORY!" on your sig.

[Anachronous Rex]

So, oh great history mod, I have an inquiry:

I seem to have heard it said that the Pechenegs employed chariots well after most sensible militaries had abandoned them, but used them almost exclusively for personal transport, rather then combat.

Is there truth in this?

According to pp 72-73 of Birkenmeier's The Development of the Komnenian Army, the Pecheneg 'chariots' - as described by Anna Comnena (via reports from Byzantine military commanders) - were war wagons which were often circled to form a fortified camp rather than the classical light war chariot. This was a tactic used (unsuccessfully, as it happens) against both Alexius I and John II during the Comnenian period

In that sense, they likely more resembled a Boer laager rather than a 'chariot' in the usual sense of the word.

I admit I had to look that up.

And I'm an archaeologist, not a historian

Thank you.

Right. Well, that being the case, I would change history to make what I originally wrote true.

[The Archregimancy]

Anyway isn't archaeology a subset of history, except that you work primarily with unwritten sources?

HERETIC!

BURN THE BLASPHEMER!

In the Western Hemisphere archaeology is usually classed as a subdiscipline of anthropology. In most of Europe and Australasia it's usually classed as an independent but interdisciplinary branch of the humanities.

[Farnhamia]

Anyway isn't archaeology a subset of history, except that you work primarily with unwritten sources?

HERETIC!

BURN THE BLASPHEMER!

In the Western Hemisphere archaeology is usually classed as a subdiscipline of anthropology. In most of Europe and Australasia it's usually classed as an independent but interdisciplinary branch of the humanities.

If I could change history I would make is a subdiscipline of archaeology.

[Imsogone]

I wouldn't change history because there is no guarantee that any change I made would not make things worse.

[Conserative Morality]

I wouldn't change history because there is no guarantee that any change I made would not make things worse.

"Great deeds are usually wrought at great risks." - Herodotus

[Czechanada]

According to pp 72-73 of Birkenmeier's The Development of the Komnenian Army, the Pecheneg 'chariots' - as described by Anna Comnena (via reports from Byzantine military commanders) - were war wagons which were often circled to form a fortified camp rather than the classical light war chariot. This was a tactic used (unsuccessfully, as it happens) against both Alexius I and John II during the Comnenian period

In that sense, they likely more resembled a Boer laager rather than a 'chariot' in the usual sense of the word.

I admit I had to look that up.

And I'm an archaeologist, not a historian

He said you know history not that you were a historian. Anyway isn't archaeology a subset of history, except that you work primarily with unwritten sources?

Also, you have have to put "ROOOOOAAAAAAAR, I KNOW HISTORY!" on your sig.

That is incorrect. Archaeology is a subset of anthropology.

[Farnhamia]

He said you know history not that you were a historian. Anyway isn't archaeology a subset of history, except that you work primarily with unwritten sources?

Also, you have have to put "ROOOOOAAAAAAAR, I KNOW HISTORY!" on your sig.

That is incorrect. Archaeology is a subset of anthropology.

viewtopic.php?p=13773850#p13773850

[Czechanada]

That is incorrect. Archaeology is a subset of anthropology.

viewtopic.php?p=13773850#p13773850

Yes, Imsogone is wise with his or her decision on what could be possibly changed in history.

[Farnhamia]

viewtopic.php?p=13773850#p13773850

Yes, Imsogone is wise with his or her decision on what could be possibly changed in history.

What?

[New haven america]

Stop the killing of the Native Americans.

[Libertarian California]

Ralph Nader 2000!

Peace out everybody!

[Farnhamia]

Stop the killing of the Native Americans.

Native Americans enjoyed killing Native Americans as much as anyone.

[Rajaputra]

Ralph Nader 2000!

Peace out everybody!

Yes, this.

[Wamitoria]

Ralph Nader 2000!

Peace out everybody!

Having him win or having him not run?

[Czechanada]

Yes, Imsogone is wise with his or her decision on what could be possibly changed in history.

What?

Your linked directed me to Imsogone's post, did it not?

[Farnhamia]

Ralph Nader 2000!

Peace out everybody!

Having him win or having him not run?

Not run, if you ask me. And even if you don't.

[Farnhamia]

What?

Your linked directed me to Imsogone's post, did it not?

I didn't think you clicked it. Nice.

[Priory Academy USSR]

What?

Your linked directed me to Imsogone's post, did it not?

It linked me to Arch's post. Imsogone's post was at the bottom of the screen, though.

[Libertarian California]

And if CSA had won?

Both sides would have been destroyed within 50 years if the South won.

[Libertarian California]

Ralph Nader 2000!

Peace out everybody!

Having him win or having him not run?

Having him win.

[Czechanada]

Your linked directed me to Imsogone's post, did it not?

It linked me to Arch's post. Imsogone's post was at the bottom of the screen, though.

Of course.