The Inquisition : $b a political and military study of its establishment — John Shaqi
The Inquisition : $b a political and military study of its establishmentNickerson, Hoffman
History
The Inquisition : $b a political and military study of its establishment
Nickerson, Hoffman
Albigenses; Christian heresies -- History -- Middle Ages, 600-1500; Inquisition; Prohibition
Here is a real knowledge of ground and, what is more important, _a
careful estimate of time and movement_. I know nothing better in the
reconstruction of a mediæval battle than this first-rate piecing
together of evidence through common sense upon the flanking surprise
movement executed by Simon de Montfort against Foix’s division of the
enemy at Muret. It is an unbreakable chain of calculation, and at the
same time a full explanation of what happened. This piece of work, in
the fifth chapter of the volume here presented to the reader, is as
good as anything can be of its kind, and an excellent representative
of that new, modern, accurate work now ridding us of the loose stuff
which encumbered history through the past two generations. That is
the way to reconstruct a mediæval battle in the absence of detailed
evidence, to see the movements as they actually took place.
I have laid emphasis on this particular section of the book by way of
contrast to the insufficiency of so typical a name as Freeman’s. I
ought rather, perhaps, to turn to the book as a whole and then again
to certain other specific points of excellence which have struck me.
Mr. Nickerson’s study is mainly concerned with explaining the nature
of the early Inquisition; incidentally he gives us a very clear
view of the Albigensian War, and what is especially remarkable in
the clarity of his view is the arrangement of the episodes. I note
that the author has done what is of first importance in all military
chronicling, and that is, the division of episodes _not_ in equal
measures of time but by their separate military characteristics.
It is a principle too often forgotten even by professional military
historians. A war may take twenty years, or fifty, or one. It may,
by accident, divide itself naturally into two or three episodes
of fairly equal length in time or it may by coincidence fall into
episodes corresponding more or less with a successive series of
years (e.g.,) Marlborough’s Campaigns in Flanders in the early
eighteenth century. But much the greater part of military history
is concerned with episodes which have no relation to such more or
less equal time-chapters. The general rule is that three or four
successive phases of a campaign (or battle) occupy the most disparate
lengths of time. The proper way to treat _military_ history is to
give to the capital episodes their relative _military_ importance;
not, as in the case of a civilian chronicle, to weigh that importance
by the time involved.
For instance, no one can read a clear account, however short, of the
great European War without seeing it as a siege; it is therefore,
like every siege (not raised, nor degenerated into a blockade)
essentially divided into three episodes:—
(_a_) The preliminaries of containment, that is the war of movement
prior to the establishment of siege conditions.
(_b_) The siege itself.
(_c_) The storming of the siege line and the collapse of the besieged.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account