3 ms·

Sparta maintained a 10:1 ratio of helots to Spartans, and that was in the early iron age. I imagine the ratio could have been substantially worse in the neolit

Sparta maintained a 10:1 ratio of helots to Spartans, and that was in the early iron age. I imagine the ratio could have been substantially worse in the neolithic and bronze ages. (Iron democratized violence compared to the bronze age, due to the lower cost of forging iron weapons. I'm sure neolithic violence had a different socioeconomic basis, but greater centralization of violence doesn't seem implausible.)

evincarofautumn 12y ago
> Iron democratized violence compared to the bronze age Could you expand on this? If I have the resources to make an iron sword and you don’t, I can cut your bronze spearhead like butter. That doesn’t seem particularly democratic.
- Perceval 12y ago
  During the Bronze Age, bronze weapons and armor were rarer. It cost more to mine and work bronze, and it cost more to buy a panoply. Therefore the distribution of those possessing the top-of-the-line violence capacity was concentrated in a narrow martial elite. The Iron Age broadened the number of people who could afford a panoply, because iron was easier to mine and cheaper to work (once they figured out how). The distribution of those with the ability to use force was a substantially broader elite, less concentrated than during the Bronze Age. When the ability to wield lethal violence becomes cheaper and available to a wider number of people, it's being "democratized." Samuel Colt's 1873 Single Action Army revolver is a more recent example of the democratization of violence capacity—“God made Men, but Samuel Colt made them all equal.” A similar argument can be made about the widespread availability of the cheap AK-47 following WWII.
  - deciplex 12y ago
    Yep, that's why you meant "due to the higher cost of forging bronze weapons".
    - Perceval 12y ago
      Thanks, edited.
      - evincarofautumn 12y ago
        That was the main source of my confusion.
- ricree 12y ago
  >If I have the resources to make an iron sword and you don’t, I can cut your bronze spearhead like butter Bronze isn't particularly worse than iron, when it comes to making weapons. Its primary drawback is its scarcity, compared to iron.

evincarofautumn 12y ago

> Iron democratized violence compared to the bronze age Could you expand on this? If I have the resources to make an iron sword and you don’t, I can cut your bronze spearhead like butter. That doesn’t seem particularly democratic.

Perceval 12y ago
During the Bronze Age, bronze weapons and armor were rarer. It cost more to mine and work bronze, and it cost more to buy a panoply. Therefore the distribution of those possessing the top-of-the-line violence capacity was concentrated in a narrow martial elite. The Iron Age broadened the number of people who could afford a panoply, because iron was easier to mine and cheaper to work (once they figured out how). The distribution of those with the ability to use force was a substantially broader elite, less concentrated than during the Bronze Age. When the ability to wield lethal violence becomes cheaper and available to a wider number of people, it's being "democratized." Samuel Colt's 1873 Single Action Army revolver is a more recent example of the democratization of violence capacity—“God made Men, but Samuel Colt made them all equal.” A similar argument can be made about the widespread availability of the cheap AK-47 following WWII.
- deciplex 12y ago
  Yep, that's why you meant "due to the higher cost of forging bronze weapons".
  - Perceval 12y ago
    Thanks, edited.
    - evincarofautumn 12y ago
      That was the main source of my confusion.
ricree 12y ago
>If I have the resources to make an iron sword and you don’t, I can cut your bronze spearhead like butter Bronze isn't particularly worse than iron, when it comes to making weapons. Its primary drawback is its scarcity, compared to iron.