What fascinates you in the Middle Ages?

Off-topic
#21

Yes, we had basically war economy the whole cold war. The Czechoslovak army was supposed to be the main force at the beginning of any conflict. The actual plans for the Czechoslovak army actually didn’t go beyond 7 days, since it was considered that most of Czechoslovak soldiers (up to 2 million if fully mobilized) would be KIA or otherwise out of action and secondary Soviet forces would take their place in the warfare.

FYI that is still better than the US plans for the “neutral” Austria, which was supposed to be nuked in order to make its territory radioactive and impassable for Commie forces.

#22

I would argue the warfare would have developed the same way independent of the exact region the ®evolution took place. (Even after Mohács the European governments were formally disgusted by turkish use of canons in the open battlefield.) Concerning reformation I mentioned the Council of Constance (in fact murder of Hus was probably the most disgusting inquisitional tribunal ever) and implicated Hus / Jeroným / Petr Chelčický (who is actually supposed to influence Gandhi and who definitely influenced Tolstoy) had considerable role in the process of reformation.

Our role during WW2 was minor. Of course Germany needed and used our industry - it is often cited historical paradox that Israel defended itself in 1948 using Messerschmitts offered by Czechoslovakia. It’s true that German industrial potential greatly increased after the Munich / March '39. But our role was still extremely marginal - even so that Benes needed to maneuver rather unfortunately between London and Moscow to achieve post-war acknowledgement of Czechoslovakia. We were so marginal Churchill and Stalin dealt with the post war future of Poland and Greece but never mentioned Czechoslovakia alas.

But I still suppose the highest point of our history would probably be the Sixties. Consider the eminence of Czechoslovak culture (literature, film and especially theatre which was considered to be the pinnacle of european theatre then). Of course the 1918-38 period greatly contributed to the cultural boom of sixties. And still we weren’t worth the western power its support in August '68. :frowning:

1 Like
#23

I heard/red ČSLA was supposed to capture Strasbourg in case “something happens”. :smiley:

#24

The rest sounds okay but I dispute this.

France, Burgundy and Germany (HRE) were quite fond of the canon in open fields and often had artillery trains that put Napoleon to shame.

#25

You missed the point. I wasn’t referring to the WW2 production, but to the armaments that were formerly belonging to the Czechoslovak army and were transferred directly to Wehrmacht in 1939 and subsequently used against Poland (which itself invaded Czechoslovakia side by side with Germans year before) and against France (which forced Czechoslovakia to surrender without fight in Munich).

Sooner or later, gunpowder weapons would be used also in the battlefield, but it can not be disputed that their employment by Žižka was a milestone in military strategy.

Also, when it comes to firearms - please see Japan history. They were eventually banned in Japan because they allowed the common folk to easily kill the war caste. In Europe they led to the fact that heavily armed and thoroughly trained knights could be taken down by peasants. If they were not actually introduced by a peasant army (Hussites), they could have had the same fate as in Japan (at least for some time). Even more so considering that fighting on the battlefield was taking place mostly among peers in European armies, i.e. high noble vs high nobles, low noble vs low nobles, etc., and they would not normally attack enemy from different social strata, even if given ample opportunity (I might not be best informed as regards the time and area regarding this phenomenon, so please feel free to correct me).

It has next to no impact on today even in the Czech Republic, not to mention abroad. Unlike the 15th century Czech reformation or advancements in military strategy.

#26

That was the furthest the Czechoslovak soldiers were expected to get. The Commie block had much larger and better equipped armies than the Western European states - their main defense lied in the nuclear weapons. You can see that especially on comparisons of tank forces. The 48hours to 7days plans were actually planned due to expected nukes and radiation. ČSLA was expected to be either nuked out or with soldiers worn out by radiation rather then stopped on the ground. That would be the moment in which the 2nd wave consisting mainly of Soviet forces would roll over.

Of course, half the earth would be nuked in the meantime.

1 Like
#27

True, it was highly hypocritical from them.

#28

Tunak, Snejdarek… you are two Czechs discussing our history in foreign language in " What fascinates you in the Middle Ages?" thread.

Am I the only one who finds it a bit “úsměvné” :slight_smile:

2 Likes
#29

One can’t leave a remark that the Czech history is “marginal” unanswered, for the above-mentioned reasons, even if it goes beyond the topic of original thread, and even if I consider myself Silesian rather than Czech.

To get more back on the track: if it wasn’t for Protestantism and other reformed churches, the Catholic Church might have well been vested in its 15th century dogmas even today, so in a sense the Middle Ages would still be on. And without Czech Reformation & connected philosophy (not only religious), there would hardly be Luther or his protest. So much about marginal history.

1 Like
#30

I don’t dispute this. My point is our role was still minor. (In fact I would argue our industrial potential was probably more important than the equipment of czechoslovakian armed forces.)

Improbable. Firstly because of the Turks and perhaps the Saadians etc. who used firearms eagerly. European powers would not ban their defensive capacity and more so their potential offensive capacity against each other / the rest of the world. Secondly because there was no authority capable of forcing such ban in the whole Europe (or even in the whole Italy for that matter). But again I will not dispute the unappreciated importance of Jan Žižka (even Prokop Holý).

True. But I think the impact on today is not the only applicable measure. The sixties were followed by forty years of disastrous decline which hopefully tends to end nowadays. The Hussite movement was followed by perhaps even longer period of deterioration. But then again the whole world knew Czechoslovakia as a country of culture (and even some diplomatic importance) thanks to the sixties. And I still doubt the real value or impact of Bohemian reformation and military advancements. The words pistol or howitzer and the statue of Jan Hus on the Luther Denkmal in Worms don’t fascinate me that much.

I don’t think so. I would even argue the dogmatism of the church was rather strenghtened by the outbreak of the reformation. (Council of Trent, the jesuits etc.) People had started to spend their time on more interesting topics that the Credo and Holy trinity and then Luther came. :smiley:

Wenceslaus is quite right. Let’s give enough space to the topic itself. :slight_smile: It’s quite an interesting one.

1 Like
#31

The catholic church introduced a number of those dogma’s to combat Protestantism, the 14th century and the 16th century Church a wholly different beasts so we simply cannot accept this as the most likely course of events.

2 Likes
#32

From what do you gather they disliked cannons?

#33

I am afraid I badly expressed what I meant. It was hypocritical from them to blame Suleiman for usage of artillery at Mohács at the time they used artillery themselves.

#34

When and where did they say that? Did they writer a formal letter of complaint to him ? :smile:

#35

It wouldn’t be impossible, would it? :smiley:
I am not able to respond. I am rather a dilettante and don’t keep a database of sources. (In fact I never thought it could be useful and was proven wrong many times since.)

#36

Say hi to globalization :smiley:

#37

Innitialy, yes. But then the church saw that it lost this battle and had to adjust its views so as to leave the middle ages (starting with the language of mass). Similarly with gays - they became the focus of church agenda and hate-spitting only after they became increasingly accepted in secular society. But in the end, even the Catholic is nowadays realizing that the bitgoted line is contruproductive and [starting to back-off its homophobic rethorics][1].

And that is happening despite the fact that the scripture is very straightforward on the issue:

[quote]If a man lies with a male
as he lies with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination.
They shall surely be put to death. Their blood shall be upon them. [/quote]
Leviticus 20:13
[1]: http://www.cbc.ca/news/world/catholic-church-makes-stunning-overture-toward-gays-1.2797497

#38

Yes they deviate from the scripture but what are you trying to tell me?

#39

You mean Second Vatican Council? That’s 1962-65. It seems to me little exaggerated to claim Hus helped it. :smile:
Please consider the whole of baroque and Counter-reformation.

#40

mmh, I think Luther had for a lot of luck, because he had powerful sympathizers among the princes. Although this was very religious matter, but they sat with their patronage political character, an intellectual resistance.

And the second stroke of luck, I think, was the invention of printing by Gutenberg.
Thus, the information monopoly of the Church was broken and there were larger groups of people quickly become sensitized and mobilized in remote areas.
Who knows, had Jan Hus, Zwingli, and all can use these opportunities many others, the Reformation might have started earlier and would have been different. Maybe even the 30-year war one first (Europe) would be - world war become …

© 2015 Warhorse Studios www.warhorsestudios.cz