>>40361
>>40361
>They usually add something liek: "military ruling class", or how Holcombe wrote: "armored horse‐riding warrior elites".
More or less true. A warrior caste keeping check majority of peasant group is very typical characteristic of feudalism. The warrior caste is actually is more about keeping those peasants in check hence whole economy is stagnant, land based so it's more stability based rather than profit.

Interestingly if you dig about ancient sparta you'll notice spartans who derive from dorians kept mycenian descend helot slaves in check. These slaves were state property rather than personal or private property. Spartan military training and slaves having right to having family with each other confirm this. Their system almost completely rely on keeping the peasants/slaves in check. Since many spartans did not know how to fight on horseback nor had military tradition about it I think they compensate this with more martial training and forbidding many other jobs for spartans.

Just like feudal powers they also fallen into dissarray, mainly because economically most of the land was not belonged to common citizens and low population of spartans so they started to rely on freemen.

Though militarily they were overestiated even other nations in their region achived much better military sucess like macedonians even after alexander the great.

>>40353
>scholasticism
Wasnt that quite opposite of rennesaince values? Scientific thought is not created in scholastic era. Only good I can say about scholasticism that thomas aquintas reintroduced aristo to the west. Plato's ideals quite oppose scientific method as quite underestimate human logic considers human observation quite 'fallible'

>The first thing that led to modernity was born in the "Dark Ages
well rainbows occur after heavy rain afterall, cant argue against that.