LogFAQs > #962641372

I think it really depends. Some people just read Wikipedia and use history to promote supremacist or nationalist ideals. Personally Iike it because it gives an insight into the past and while I do like military history it's also tied to culture. I mostly follow modern day historians on Twitter and read what they recommend, Dr. Roel Konijnendijk really sparked my interest in classical Greek history, not only for writing really detail responses but also trying to frame it within the context of classical Greek culture as well as tear down some of the myths surrounding Greek warfare and the whole aura of western exeptionalism tied to it. I really enjoyed his book on classical Greek warfare precisely because it was as much about Greek culture as it was about warfare.

A perfect example is how the Ancient Greeks had a disdain for authority. This is a something that is told to us by Xenophon and other writers of the 4th century, Xenophon himself was put on trial by his men for beating a disobedient man under his command and he had to fight for his life. Military authority was not inherently valid, and we even hear of men taking pride in being defiant to their commanders. All this stems from the ancient Greek fear of tyrants and the like. It's also why most Greek militias couldn't go further than being poorly organized militias who could only perform the most basic of commands and what made the Spartans stand out with the capability of performing feats such as being able to stay in formation while on the move something only performed by spartan led mercenaries or armies finding themselves in desperate conditions like the Sicilian expedition or the Greco-Thracian mercenary army stuck in the Persian heartland following the death of Kyros the Younger.