Ezias的最近内容

and who, praytell, might they be?

likewise -- and somewhere way back in my memory i remembered something about a dude still standing with arrows stuck in him. but i might be mixing that up with the story of El Cid

i think its ridiculous that people are able to melee hack at legs under the shields -- if i can see that someone is going for my legs all i should have to do is drop my shield, not lose my foot!!

it also sucks that every 2-hander i come across swings faster than my 1-hander from blocking.

i think he was gong for the solo-last stands there. i must admit that most of those i have never heard of.

very fun read! thanks for sharing

sorry archon, but you just listing stuff isnt going to convince. need a reference or something.  i will admit that i dont know when spain and france began dying their uniforms, but i can assure you that they didnt leave them undyed forever.

as to the assertion that most nations didnt dye their uniform during that time id love to see a reference and/or list of countries that didnt dye their uniforms. small feifdoms perhaps, but im pretty sure that most nations dyed their uniforms.  the primary reason for having uniforms isnt to look sexy for the ladies, but rather to diminish ones sense of individuality and hence increase unit discipline.

ive always been taught (and by what i have always found to be an excellent source; hes actually an american revolution re-enactor) that the coats were initially dyed red because red was the cheapest available dye, as has already been mentioned (and an example given for at least Sweden). anyone able to find any documentation supporting any of the ideas?

i think that most of the people who are saying the Templars are garbage are saying that as a lashback against their current surge of use in the popular eye (movies and the such) and how they seem to be slowly forming into a cliche. unfortunately i cant cite the source, but i recall a few years back reading that the Templar warriors were feared and respected by their Saracen foes. Now, correct me if im wrong, but ive never heard of ineffective and incompetent soldiers being feared and respected by their enemies.

Another thing that we need to keep in mind when actually comparing the different orders (not when just voting) was that their theatres of operation and their duties and enemies were very different. Its almost to the point of comparing apples to oranges -- we can all choose a favorite, but theres no objective, factual way to say that one is better than another.

and there was also just plain old "Manifest Destiny"; "we're American and it's our right and destiny to rule this whole continent, and anyone who gets in our way deserves what's coming to them!!" syndrome

that is true, ludial. growing up in eastern United States you never read about how Hungary was actually important and actually had some influence and power -- heck, you don't even really hear about Hungary   I don't recall there ever really being any talk about Poland or much about Russia or basically anything other than the stuff of Western Europe.  It's part of that whole "everything I've done and gone through is more important than what you've done and gone through" syndrome

alas, all it breeds is more ignorance and egocentrism.

the spaniards also wanted to get Gibraltar back, but they never succeeded. I believe it was actually what was holding up the peace treaty at the end of the revolution and why the colonies signed a treaty behind spains back.

its hard to really fully determine what the course of history would be if there hadnt been that Mexican-American War, but i feel that the same territory (or roughly the same) would have ended up in United States hands anyways. There were already many many Americans emigrating the California, Utah, New Mexico, Arizona etc, and as has been proven in times past, Americans usually want to be American, or at least not under someone else (meaning either under the United States Government or Independent, as Texas tried to do).

I think the most that would have happened is a delay of 1 or 2 decades. Of course thats also looking at it from the US point of view, it could have made things very different from the Mexican point of view.  If i remember correctly, Santa Anna was deposed for a time after the war due to a poor popular sentiment towards him. If he hadnt been soundly defeated in the Mexican-American War perhaps he would have tried to build upon his reputation of the Napoleon of the Americas, either by conquering neighbors to the south or trying to fight in what is now Canada or Texas/US (which would be basically the same war as did happen).

its the same knights but not the same battle (see AlienKnights post)

ahhh, so my memory wasnt really wrong about the battle so much as which battle was important

thank you very much for all the information Alien

you could very well be right, it has been a while since i read about it. all i truly remember was that it was a frozen lake, and i seem to recall the ragtag part too. im willing to accept that it was russians and not poles

upon further reading it seems to have been primarily poles and lithuanians, with a few others against the teutons. i also didnt see any mention of a frozen lake in this article (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Grunwald) but for some reason that is impressed upon my mind -- though admittedly it could be wrongly impressed!