0
What else can I help you with?
How did the hundred years war affect standing armies?
Rights
Are standing armies an integral feature of egalitarian societies?
Standing armies are not inherently an integral feature of egalitarian societies. While some egalitarian societies may maintain standing armies for defense and security, others prioritize local militias or community-based defense systems that reflect their egalitarian values. The presence of a standing army can sometimes contradict egalitarian principles, particularly if it leads to hierarchical structures or social inequality. Ultimately, the relationship between standing armies and egalitarianism varies depending on the specific societal context and values at play.
Why did most king not keep standing armies in medieval times?
because reasons
What were the three sources for revenue the monarchies used to pay for their standing armies?
tax.robbery and stealing
Why were Aztec battles often short?
Poor armor, dangerous weapons, and small armies to begin with
How did the Muslim culture change cordoba?
The Muslim culture changed Cordoba by the Muslims treaties, mercenaries, and standing armies.
As result of the Hundred Years War the feudal knight was discredited and European countries established professional standing armies?
True
What Armies were used in the cold war?
Other than the "hot battles" of the cold war; Korea & Vietnam, no armies were used during the cold war. If any armies had been used...there would not have been a cold war! It would have been World War III. The standard "standing armies" (armies that existed but were never used) were the NATO (and the short lived SEATO) and Warsaw Pact armies. The Warsaw Pact armies were the USSR's version of the free world's NATO armies. Another words, had there been a war (instead of a cold war); NATO would have fought the Warsaw Pact armies.
Why did Thomas Jefferson distrust large standing armies?
because they could be used to establish a dictatorship.
Why did the most kings not keep standing armies?
Most kings did not maintain standing armies due to the high costs associated with salaries, supplies, and equipment, which could strain royal finances. Instead, they relied on feudal systems where local lords provided troops in times of war, allowing kings to mobilize forces without the burden of permanent military upkeep. Additionally, standing armies could pose a threat to a king's power, as they might become loyal to their commanders rather than the crown. This reliance on temporary forces ensured greater control and stability for the monarchy.
Why did Thomas Jefferson see navies less dangerous than armies?
navies could not march inland and endanger liberties
As result of the Hundred Years' War the feudal knight was discredited and European countries established professional standing armies is this true or false?
true.
