05-24-2011, 04:02 AM | #21 | ||
Data is Turned On
|
Quote:
--- Quote:
The other section of Wikipedia I've cited (the one that says that Muslim navies eventually adapted to the weapon, implying it took some time and creditting it with some effectiveness,) on the other hand, is pulled from a different work: Pryor, John H.; Jeffreys, Elizabeth M. (2006), The Age of the ??????: The Byzantine Navy ca. 500–1204, Brill Academic. Here's an article from 1992, Secrecy, Technology and War: Greek Fire and the Defense of Byzantium, 678-1204, that also appears to credit naval siege breaking effect to Greek Fire, same as the other article. Now, I'm sure that there's some primary sources that were made available for the first time about Byzantine/Muslim wars between 1992 and now. So I'm just going to say that I'm not going to take your word for it that among those there happens to be material that establishes "Greek Fire was a pathetic weapon" as incontrovertible fact, contradicting every bit of work expressing a different view before that.
__________________
6201 Reasons to Support Electoral Reform. Last edited by Archbio; 05-24-2011 at 04:41 AM. |
||
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|