Press J to jump to the feed. Press question mark to learn the rest of the keyboard shortcuts
Found the internet!
382
pinned by moderators
Posted by4 days ago
382
178 comments
353
Posted by7 days ago
353
66 comments
949
Posted by1 day ago
Helpful

In history you see countless occasions of armies getting ambushed on march. How could that happen when your army has a scouting small cavalry units around your army? If you put 3 cavalry riders together as one unit and send about 90 (30 groups) around your army, wouldn't your army basically become immune to an ambush? Even if the enemy takes down some of them, others will notify the main force.


There could be terrains hard to approach for cavalry, but then they could simply dismount to look for an ambush. They could shoot a whistling arrow to report an encounter with an enemy. (so that other scouts around them could hear it and notify the main army) Basically there seems to be so many ways to avoid unexpected ambush that I don't quite understand why so many armies in history allowed such ambushes. Moreover, if a general sees a terrain favorable for an ambush such as a forest and cliff, shouldn't they basically send scouts to see if there is an enemy army waiting? Even if his scouts are intercepted, that could at least hint at enemy presence near by.

How was real time battlefield reconnaissance operation before engagement conducted prior to the gunpowder era? How many scouts were grouped as one unit and sent out? How many units? Is there a reason why such unit size & unit numbers became a norm? I seem to recall in some battles generals sent couple hundreds of cavalry force as an advance vanguard with scouting duty instead of dispatching small sized units; again, why?

I majored in modern European history and watch a lot of historical channels on youtube thanks to my interest in the subject but I've not seen reconnaissance discussed in detail. I would love to know more about it.

949
248 comments
20
promoted
HelpfulWholesomeSilver2
Post image
20
0 comments
9
Posted by3 days ago

The Ottomans being known as a relevant power of the time, was proven more than capable of seafaring expeditions through their previous maritime voyages in the Indian Ocean, East Africa, and Indonesia. The idea of conquering up to Morocco and establishing a coast on the Atlantic Ocean uncontested by Europeans, to be used as a base of operations for colonization efforts in the Americas was floated around, and therefore why did it not come to fruition? Were the Ottomans not worried that the west would try to convert the natives to Christianity, did they not have the foresight to see the immense riches involved in colonization especially after seeing the successes of states like Portugal, Castile, and Aragon?

9
13 comments
11
Posted by3 days ago
Wholesome

I read paul cartledge's The Spartans and I feel like I understand the history of sparta a bit more but I feel inadequate that I can't remember most of the names and of people and titles and places in the book.

I feel like I can give a a summary of the events but not as descriptive as I would want since I can't remeber the titles and names. I see redditors , 4channers and youtubers explain events and parts of history in such large detail and I wonder how much is them rereading their sources and how many is it them simply just knowing what the info.


Spreading misinformation always feels bad to me even if it done out of ignorance. Because I sometimes see some people on reddit who spew bullshit that is false and but since it was said and people believe it the false information spreads and people keep spreading it. Since I feel like a can give (somewhat of ) a summary of the book if I don't want to be like how some youtubers who do history channels let their own beliefs and their ignorance spread misinformation.

11
11 comments
6
Posted by3 days ago

The Ottomans were a great power in Europe at the time, and had ambitions of conquering up to Morocco to build themselves an Atlantic coast to colonize the Americas from, considering they have been proven fair maritime explorers through their expeditions in East Africa, the Indian Ocean, and later Indonesia, how come they were so uninterested in building colonies in America? Were they not concerned that the west would attempt to christianize the natives? Did they not have the foresight to predict the tremendous profits resulted from colonization, especially after the witnessing the successes of the Portuguese, Castilian, and Aragonese states?

6
3 comments

About Community

/r/History is a place for discussions about history. Feel free to submit interesting articles, tell us about this cool book you just read, or start a discussion about who everyone's favorite figure of minor French nobility is! ------------------------------------------------------------ This is a somewhat more serious subreddit compared to many others. Make sure to familiarize yourself with our rules and guidelines before participating. Thanks!
16.6m

Members

340

Online


Created Jan 25, 2008
r/history topics

Related Communities

r/badhistory

267,766 members

r/bookclub

133,188 members

r/noveltranslations

95,059 members

r/dancarlin

34,888 members

r/AskHistory

92,074 members

r/callmebyyourname

18,517 members

r/rational

22,887 members

r/solotravel

2,136,441 members

r/NoSleepOOC

76,146 members

r/streamentry

25,514 members

Mod applications

We are looking for new moderators, click the button for more information.

Introduction

/r/History is a place for discussions about history. Feel free to submit interesting articles, tell us about this cool book you just read, or start a discussion about who everyone's favorite figure of minor French nobility is!

Moderation policy

All posts will be reviewed by a human moderator first before they become visible to all subscribers on the subreddit.

The full rules and guidelines for /r/history can be found here

AMAs & Events

r/history Rules

1.
Rule 1: Keep it civil!
2.
Rule 2: No current politics or soapboxing
3.
Rule3: No historical negationism or denialism
4.
Rule 4: Comments should be on-topic and contribute to the conversation in a meaningful way
5.
Rule 5: Discussions limited to events over 20 years ago
6.
Rule 6: Post in the right subreddit
7.
Rule 7: Follow the rules and guidelines of reddit
8.
Rule 8: Post from the original site.
9.
Rule 9: Text posts require a descriptive body text
10.
Rule 10: Titles of links should accurately describe the content not be sensationalized or misleading
11.
No Atrocity Olympics
12.
No Memorabilia, Family History, or Genealogy.
13.
This is an actively moderated subreddit and calls will be made at the moderator's discretion
14.
A full set of our rules and guidelines can be found on our wiki

Moderators

Moderator list hidden.?Learn More