[006]
isolato
Current Version
Changed line(s) 1 from:
n
Sentence ''
to:
Sentence \'\'\"Like most armies, conscripts were often drawn from the lower classes of society - on average poorer, less educated, inferior in discipline, and less loyal than volunteer forces their upper-class commanders and rulers. The rich, powerful, talented, or well-connected could often find ways to get out of serving.\"\'\' is still problematic, in my opinion.
a) The \"rich, powerful and well-connected\" had no reason to find ways out of serving in the volunteer forces, which they were not obliged to, so even the volunteer armies were chiefly drawn from the lower classes or even from the otherwise unemployable (British used the term \"conscription through hunger\"). In 19th Century Europe, universal conscription was most often seen as a way to \'\'improve\'\' the average quality of troops.
b) It\'s far from universally applicable - in the ancient Rome ([[UsefulNotes/{{TheGloryThatWasRome}} after the Servian reform until the Marians reforms]]), as a citizen-soldier had to arm and equip himself, poverty actually \'\'freed\'\' from conscription those who were unable to equip themselves even as light skirmishers. (And deprived them of most of the citizens\' political rights.)
a) The \"rich, powerful and well-connected\" had no reason to find ways out of serving in the volunteer forces, which they were not obliged to, so even the volunteer armies were chiefly drawn from the lower classes or even from the otherwise unemployable (British used the term \"conscription through hunger\"). In 19th Century Europe, universal conscription was most often seen as a way to \'\'improve\'\' the average quality of troops.
b) It\'s far from universally applicable - in the ancient Rome ([[UsefulNotes/{{TheGloryThatWasRome}} after the Servian reform until the Marians reforms]]), as a citizen-soldier had to arm and equip himself, poverty actually \'\'freed\'\' from conscription those who were unable to equip themselves even as light skirmishers. (And deprived them of most of the citizens\' political rights.)
Changed line(s) 1 from:
n
Sentence \'\'\
to:
Sentence \\\'\\\'\\\"Like most armies, conscripts were often drawn from the lower classes of society - on average poorer, less educated, inferior in discipline, and less loyal than volunteer forces their upper-class commanders and rulers. The rich, powerful, talented, or well-connected could often find ways to get out of serving.\\\"\\\'\\\' is still problematic, in my opinion.
a) The \\\"rich, powerful and well-connected\\\" had no reason to find ways out of serving in the volunteer forces, which they were not obliged to, so even the volunteer armies were chiefly drawn from the lower classes or even from the otherwise unemployable (British used the term \\\"conscription through hunger\\\"). In 19th Century Europe, universal conscription was most often seen as a way to improve the average quality of troops.
b) It\\\'s far from universally applicable - in the ancient Rome ([[UsefulNotes/{{TheGloryThatWasRome}} after the Servian reform until the Marians reforms]]), as a citizen-soldier had to arm and equip himself, poverty actually \\\'\\\'freed\\\'\\\' from conscription those who were unable to equip themselves even as light skirmishers. (And deprived them of most of the citizens\\\' political rights.)
a) The \\\"rich, powerful and well-connected\\\" had no reason to find ways out of serving in the volunteer forces, which they were not obliged to, so even the volunteer armies were chiefly drawn from the lower classes or even from the otherwise unemployable (British used the term \\\"conscription through hunger\\\"). In 19th Century Europe, universal conscription was most often seen as a way to improve the average quality of troops.
b) It\\\'s far from universally applicable - in the ancient Rome ([[UsefulNotes/{{TheGloryThatWasRome}} after the Servian reform until the Marians reforms]]), as a citizen-soldier had to arm and equip himself, poverty actually \\\'\\\'freed\\\'\\\' from conscription those who were unable to equip themselves even as light skirmishers. (And deprived them of most of the citizens\\\' political rights.)
Changed line(s) 1 from:
n
Sentence \'\'\
to:
Sentence \\\'\\\'\\\"Like most armies, conscripts were often drawn from the lower classes of society - on average poorer, less educated, inferior in discipline, and less loyal than volunteer forces their upper-class commanders and rulers. The rich, powerful, talented, or well-connected could often find ways to get out of serving.\\\"\\\'\\\' is still problematic, in my opinion.
a) The \\\"rich, powerful and well-connected\\\" had no reason to find ways out of serving in the volunteer forces, which they were not obliged to, so even the volunteer armies were chiefly drawn from the lower classes or even from the otherwise unemployable (British used the term \\\"conscription through hunger\\\"). In 19th Century Europe, universal conscription was most often seen as a way to improve the average quality of troops.
b) It\\\'s far from universally applicable - in the ancient Rome ([[UsefulNotes/{{TheGloryThatWasRome}} after the Servillian reform until the Marians reforms]]), as a citizen-soldier had to arm and equip himself, poverty actually \\\'\\\'freed\\\'\\\' from conscription those who were unable to equip themselves even as light skirmishers. (And deprived them of most of the citizens\\\' political rights.)
a) The \\\"rich, powerful and well-connected\\\" had no reason to find ways out of serving in the volunteer forces, which they were not obliged to, so even the volunteer armies were chiefly drawn from the lower classes or even from the otherwise unemployable (British used the term \\\"conscription through hunger\\\"). In 19th Century Europe, universal conscription was most often seen as a way to improve the average quality of troops.
b) It\\\'s far from universally applicable - in the ancient Rome ([[UsefulNotes/{{TheGloryThatWasRome}} after the Servillian reform until the Marians reforms]]), as a citizen-soldier had to arm and equip himself, poverty actually \\\'\\\'freed\\\'\\\' from conscription those who were unable to equip themselves even as light skirmishers. (And deprived them of most of the citizens\\\' political rights.)
Changed line(s) 1 from:
n
Sentence \'\'\
to:
Sentence \\\'\\\'\\\"Like most armies, conscripts were often drawn from the lower classes of society - on average poorer, less educated, inferior in discipline, and less loyal than volunteer forces their upper-class commanders and rulers. The rich, powerful, talented, or well-connected could often find ways to get out of serving.\\\"\\\'\\\' is still problematic, in my opinion.
a) The \\\"rich, powerful and well-connected\\\" had no reason to find ways out of serving in the volunteer forces, which they were not obliged to, so even the volunteer armies were chiefly drawn from the lower classes. In 19th Century, universal conscription was most often seen as a way to improve the average quality of troops.
b) It\\\'s far from universally applicable - in the ancient Rome ([[UsefulNotes/{{TheGloryThatWasRome}} after the Servillian reform until the Marians reforms]]), as a citizen-soldier had to arm and equip himself, poverty actually \\\'\\\'freed\\\'\\\' from conscription those who were unable to equip themselves even as light skirmishers. (And deprived them of most of the citizens\\\' political rights.)
a) The \\\"rich, powerful and well-connected\\\" had no reason to find ways out of serving in the volunteer forces, which they were not obliged to, so even the volunteer armies were chiefly drawn from the lower classes. In 19th Century, universal conscription was most often seen as a way to improve the average quality of troops.
b) It\\\'s far from universally applicable - in the ancient Rome ([[UsefulNotes/{{TheGloryThatWasRome}} after the Servillian reform until the Marians reforms]]), as a citizen-soldier had to arm and equip himself, poverty actually \\\'\\\'freed\\\'\\\' from conscription those who were unable to equip themselves even as light skirmishers. (And deprived them of most of the citizens\\\' political rights.)
Changed line(s) 1 from:
n
Sentence \'\'\
to:
Sentence \\\'\\\'\\\"Like most armies, conscripts were often drawn from the lower classes of society - on average poorer, less educated, inferior in discipline, and less loyal than volunteer forces their upper-class commanders and rulers. The rich, powerful, talented, or well-connected could often find ways to get out of serving.\\\"\\\'\\\' is still problematic, in my opinion.
a) The \\\"rich, powerful and well-connected\\\" had no reason to find ways out of serving in the volunteer forces, which they were not obliged to, so even the volunteer armies were chiefly drawn from the lower classes. In 19th Century, universal conscription was most often seen as a way to improve average quality of troops.
b) It\\\'s far from universally applicable - in the ancient Rome ([[UsefulNotes/{{TheGloryThatWasRome}} after the Servillian reform until the Marians reforms]]), as a citizen-soldier had to arm and equip himself, poverty actually \\\'\\\'freed\\\'\\\' from conscription those who were unable to equip themselves even as light skirmishers. (And deprived them of most of the citizens\\\' political rights.)
a) The \\\"rich, powerful and well-connected\\\" had no reason to find ways out of serving in the volunteer forces, which they were not obliged to, so even the volunteer armies were chiefly drawn from the lower classes. In 19th Century, universal conscription was most often seen as a way to improve average quality of troops.
b) It\\\'s far from universally applicable - in the ancient Rome ([[UsefulNotes/{{TheGloryThatWasRome}} after the Servillian reform until the Marians reforms]]), as a citizen-soldier had to arm and equip himself, poverty actually \\\'\\\'freed\\\'\\\' from conscription those who were unable to equip themselves even as light skirmishers. (And deprived them of most of the citizens\\\' political rights.)
Changed line(s) 1 from:
n
Sentence \'\'\
to:
Sentence \\\'\\\'\\\"Like most armies, conscripts were often drawn from the lower classes of society - on average poorer, less educated, inferior in discipline, and less loyal than volunteer forces their upper-class commanders and rulers. The rich, powerful, talented, or well-connected could often find ways to get out of serving.\\\"\\\'\\\' is still problematic, in my opinion.
a) The \\\"rich, powerful and well-connected\\\" had no reason to find ways out of serving in the volunteer forces, which they were not obliged to, so even the volunteer armies were chiefly drawn from the lower classes. In 19th Century, universal conscription was most often seen as a way to improve average quality of troops.
b) It\\\'s far from universally applicable - in the ancient Rome ([[UsefulNotes/{{TheGloryThatWasRome}} after the Servillian reform until the Marians reforms]]), as a citizen-soldier had to arm and equip himself, poverty freed from conscription those who were unable to equip themselves even as light skirmishers.
a) The \\\"rich, powerful and well-connected\\\" had no reason to find ways out of serving in the volunteer forces, which they were not obliged to, so even the volunteer armies were chiefly drawn from the lower classes. In 19th Century, universal conscription was most often seen as a way to improve average quality of troops.
b) It\\\'s far from universally applicable - in the ancient Rome ([[UsefulNotes/{{TheGloryThatWasRome}} after the Servillian reform until the Marians reforms]]), as a citizen-soldier had to arm and equip himself, poverty freed from conscription those who were unable to equip themselves even as light skirmishers.
