Why were Christians so dedicated to the destruction of polytheism? Is it because they feared pagan gods and their power? Was it their master plan to weaken the Roman Empire and defeat classic civilization?
Funnily enough, Plato's Republic lays out a lot of good reasons for why they did that stuff.
Why did polytheists throw christians to the lions?
>>3036051
their master plan was to reject 'the world' and find salvation
the fun part is they actualy believed in the gods, they just refused to worship them as gods, they called them 'powers' and 'rulers' and so on, but it was a generaly accepted thing that theres these things up in 'the heavens' and they 'govern' shit
so what the christians did was a big fuck you to the whole cosmogonic setup, it started out almost like somekind of spiritual anarchism, yes they know jupiter is up there he just has no authority over them, their god is greater and jupiter is a demon any way so fuck you
same thing with how they dealt with politeism as they became powerfull, they didnt smash statues and idols and build churches on top of ancient temples cause they were considered 'false', but cause they believed these things and places had actual powers and that realy irked people
Let's post some historical objects/artifacts
This is a pair of shoes worn by Marie Antoinette
>>3036036
Inuit snow sunglasses made to stop snow blindness. Made out of bone and a thin layer of either whale or seal skin.
I want to try making a pair next seal I catch.
>>3036036
this is a Goedendag, a Good Day in English.
They are named this because a bunch of Dutch cunts went around the city saying good day to everyone and killing anyone with a French accent.
DID NOTHING WRONG
If your country wasn't directly affiliated with Poland in WW2, your country didn't actually participate in WW2
He found in Java a piece of
a skull, seeming by its contour to be smaller than the human. Somewhere
near it he found an upright thigh-bone and in the same scattered fashion
some teeth that were not human. If they all form part of one creature,
which is doubtful, our conception of the creature would be almost
equally doubtful. But the effect on popular science was to produce a
complete and even complex figure, finished down to the last details of
hair and habits. He was given a name as if he were an ordinary
historical character. People talked of Pithecanthropus as of Pitt or Fox
or Napoleon. Popular histories published portraits of him like the
portraits of Charles the First and George the Fourth. A detailed drawing was reproduced, carefully
>>3035858
shaded, to show that the very hairs of his
head were all numbered No uninformed person looking at its carefully
lined face and wistful eyes would imagine for a moment that this was the
portrait of a thigh-bone; or of a few teeth and a fragment of a cranium.
We talk very truly of the patience of science; but in this department it
would be truer to talk of the impatience of science. Owing to the
difficulty above described, the theorist is in far too much of a hurry.
We have a series of hypotheses so hasty that they may well be called
fancies, and cannot in any case be further corrected by facts. The most
empirical anthropologist is here as limited as an antiquary. He can only
cling to a fragment of the past and has no way of increasing it for the
future He can only clutch his fragment of fact, almost as the primitive
man clutched his fragment of flint. And indeed he does deal with it in
much the same way and for much the same reason. It is his tool and his
only tool. It is his weapon and his only weapon. He often wields it with
a fanaticism far in excess of anything shown by men of science when they
can collect more facts from experience and even add new facts by
experiment. Sometimes the professor with his bone becomes almost as
dangerous as a dog with his bone. And the dog at least does not deduce a
theory from it, proving that mankind is going to the dogsāor that it
came from them.
Do you think art can serve from suffering as a source of inspiration and, let's say, "purification"? Or is it just a quite romantic interpretation of inspiration? Personally i think i might be projecting but i tend to empathize more with artists whose work represents life as a continuous struggle (not referring to the particular "conflict" of books and films but to the battle of the inner self).
>>3035716
If /ic/ has taught me anything, a lot of artist are filled with despair
Why was the Interbellum such a great fucking time?
Politics, philosophy, literature, art, music, everything was amazing and challenging and truly changing the world.
Is there a worse feel than not being an art-deco revolutionaire in the 1930s?
>Is there a worse feel than not being an art-deco revolutionaire in the 1930s?
Supporting a group that tried to destroy it
>>3035712
rapid explosive change in both the way people were living and the government/economy around them.
Telephones. Radios, airplanes, cars, films, audio-records.
It was out of this chaos that both Leninist and Fascist Ideology's emerged or mutated into the forms they'd be known by in the 20th century.
>"I don't have a husband," the woman replied. Jesus said, "You're right! You don't have a husband"
>>3035669
what? I figure it's funny because you took it out of context but there's also not enough context to make it funny.
Can anyone tell me what this is? I picked up this coin at a local surplus store and know nothing about it other than its iraqi and has Saddam on it with a babylonian reverse Thanks!
reverse
What is wrong with capital punishment? Should it be practiced more or less? What was its impact on the history? What is the best method?
What is wrong whith capital punishment: Well i whould argue not much, as the people tgat commit the crimes have nothing to lose.
Ahould it be practiced more or less: Now a days more but the in old times it was a bit exceve.
What was it's inpact on history: BIG, i mean do you think that the people whould have revolted more if they knew that disrespecting his highness whould get your head chop of.
What is tge best method: Well i whould say that a quik and painless is the most humane, but i whould let the person that's being excuted choose.
Those poor people are just victims of an unjust society, lashing out the only they can. They need to receive treatment and education, then reintegrated into the populace, not killed. That's too harsh a punishment for any sort of crime.
>>3035082
Why is South America so good in serial killing?
Italy are much small territory for plus people...is a migration or a strategic invasion
So I just started reading this one, what is /his/ opinion on the book? Where would you place it on a ladder of books concerning history of roman republic/empire? Any recommendations?
I started reading it too but stopped, not because I got bored but circumstances in my life where I didn't have much time to just sit around and read.
Great chapter on Cicero.
"You know what's gonna happen? I'll tell you what's gonna happen. Troops are now forming behind the line of trees. When they come out, they'll be under enemy long-range artillery fire. Solid shot. Percussion. Every gun they have. Troops will come out under fire with more than a mile to walk. And still, within the open field, among the range of aimed muskets. They'll be slowed by that fence out there, and the formation - what's left of it - will begin to come apart. When they cross that road, they'll be under short-range artillery. Canister fire. Thousands of little bits of shrapnel wiping the holes in the lines. If they get to the wall without breaking up, there won't be many left. A mathematical equation... But maybe, just maybe, our own artillery will break up their defenses. There's always that hope. That's Hancock out there, and he ain't gonna run. So it's mathematical after all. If they get to that road, or beyond it, we'll suffer over fifty percent casualties. But, Harrison... I don't believe my boys will reach that wall."
He was only half right.
>>3034692
I've always wondered if AngloAmericans' experiences in this battle and in the famous charge of the light brigade are part of why we survived wwi so well. Were we exposed to the horrors of war and thus, at a cultural level, we didn't go into wwi with the expectations of traditional glory. At least amongst the culturally influential people?
>>3034989
We "survived wwi so well" because we were only in it for a year.
So, with the collapse of the Western Empire and various barbarian tribes in the former Roman territories actively Romanizing themselves, why did none of them take up the Roman model of succession, the old "throne's yours if you can take it dude, we'll accept you"?
In the Eastern Empire this was never thrown out, they were having civil wars right up to the mid-1300s, when the Empire had less land than modern day Greece.
The way we in the west formed cults of personality around royals, was this a deliberate attempt by early societies to avoid the chaotic civil wars that afflicted the Roman Empire, or is it something that just incidentally sort of happened?
>>3034209
Roman succession was based on the existence of a Senate and a citizenry to support a claimant. Barbarian tribes, no matter how Romanized they might become, still regarded themselves as tribes swearing personal oaths to a tribal chieftain. If they were to give political power to Roman citizens and senators to support new rulers, they would be diluting the power of their own tribesmen.
*beheads your ambassador*
"Portraits painted seconds before tragedy"
>>3034052
*beheads your nation*
>>3034052
Absolute Madman.