|
“Digressions”
or Consequences of military history?
It
is unclear how or why Lendering views the social, economic, linguistic,
political, technical, linguistic, etc. consequences of military history
“irrelevant”? This is analogous to stating
that the non-military consequences of Battle at the Plains of Abraham
between the forces of France and England are “irrelevant” to the history of Canada. This battle has had profound
consequences with respect to the evolution of language, politics, technology,
society, etc. in Canada.
Perhaps
Lendering is not aware of the major conference in 2003 that took place
regarding the cultural consequences of the military history of Persia-Central
Asia:
Arms
and Armour Indicators of Cultural Transfer: The Steppes and the Ancient
World from Hellenistic Times to the Early Middle Ages
Wittenberg, Germany, November 25-27, 2003 at The LEUCOREA
Foundation Universities of Halle-Wittenberg and Leipzig, Germany http://www.orientarch.uni-halle.de/sfb586/d3/conf/
Farrokh’s
discussion of the consequences of military history to non-military domains
is simply in line with the established research of the military history
of ancient Iran. Would Lendering
also dismiss the entire above Conference as “irrelevant”?
It would seem that Lendering may not appreciate that military history often carries profound non-military consequences
with respect to cultural, technological, artistic-architectural, etc.
developments. Iran is no exception.
Lendering also engages in a double
standard: he tends to exaggerate the non-military consequences
of the Greek conquest of Iran, yet takes issue with respect to the non-military
consequences of Iran’s indigenous military history. |