Mfw when i go to war
>>2798480
The French were the first to use them senpai
>uses gas and flamethrowers
>protests against shotguns because they are "inhuman"
>>2798775
This is a really good one.
> Hannibal
> India
> Persia
> Southest Asia
Can we discuss their role is history?
>>2798445
Go to bed Hanibal
>>2798657
The Khmer had ballista elephants. He wasn't the only who was hooked on the meme
>>2798678
Only in Age of Empires
Was Christianity responsible for the fall of Rome?
>>2798345
Yes, we are the muslism of the past
I wonder what will kill the muslim european culture
No. It is a common misconception invented by 18th century Enlightenment Protestants that the Roman Empire was destroyed due to spirituality and loyalty to Christian teachings instead of the state, befitting their own prejudices and belief that loyalty to both the Pope and to their own nations were impossible. It is perfectly feasible to argue that in actual fact Christianity more solidly bound the people of the Roman Empire together and made them more loyal to the emperor, who was quite literally God's deputy on Earth in some ways.
Superficially it might be possible to argue that vasts amount of money being spent on private chapels and spiritual pursuits instead of being lavished on the people of their native city in the form of baths and amphitheatres in some way undermined Roman urban civilization but it isn't that straightforward.
>>2798345
No, [insert present day bogeyman] was, obviously!
I dare you to find a fucking flaw.
>>2798276
Couldn't stop Wilhelm II autistic tantrums.
>>2798276
Was kind of aggressive, not a problem when he was in control but it set a bad precedent
>>2798276
He was only really good at foreign politics.
When did the family cease to be the building block of western society?
It's not?
I dunno how you grew up as a feral child OP but most people have families
children should be property of the state tbhwyf
>>2798081
The nuclear family is degenerate, brought upon by rampant capitalism.
The extended family is the true answer.
redpill me on oliver Cromwell, was he /ourguy/? he was a strong leader who destroyed degeneracy but Trotsky considered him a revolutionary
>>2797633
>Degeneracy
Back to /pol/
"I totally don't want to be dictator guys"
wow what a coincidence, and then as soon as he dies the monarchy comes back
>>2797633
Savior of Britain.
>>2797644
kek, this, like FDR
>as soon as he croaked everyone falls all over themselves to make sure there's never a repeat
was their such thing as romantic love
It existed enough to lead into Troyan War.
did romance exist during pagan times?
>>2797541
Greeks certainly had a concept of it
How does /his/ feel about women as rewards. You know, like if you won a war, you would take some of the opposing side's women. My stance on it is that it is wrong, but if the women give consent, they may be presented as an award at the end of a challenge/fight/duel, et cetera. Thoughts?
>>2797442
I agree anon. Consent is good, and rape is bad. I'm glad we made this thread.
>>2797442
I disagree anon. The might of the conqueror is good, consent does not matter and is bad. I'm glad we made this thread.
I am ambivalent. Consent should be given but the conqueror could provide more for those he claims. I am glad we made this thread.
Can someone explain runes to me?
An invention by the Etruscans. As always Northern Europeans copied Southern European innovation and later said "we wuz writers n sheeit" despite being nothing of the sort.
>>2797092
Actually, it's more likely to be northern italic characters adopted, with some others taken or modified from etruscan, or latin, apart from a scant amount of original characters
Are these three the bestest friends in history?
Roosevelt
>Hated Churchill, saw him as a dinosaur of the old order in the way of his progressive vision of a global de-colonized world
>Saw Stalin as an uncivilized brute he could charm and manipulate, unaware that he was the fact the one being manipulated
Churchill
>Hated Roosevelt. Saw him as a disrespectful naive product of nepotism with no idea what he was doing. Would never say this to his face, and he realized Britain needed a close relationship with the US
>Saw Stalin as the true threat once Nazism was defeated, saw through his lies even though he aided the Soviets
Stalin
>Saw Roosevelt as a naive idiot he could manipulate
>Saw Churchill as a capitalist land lord of the old tyrannical order that was too dangerous to be allowed to do what he wanted. Had to manipulate Roosevelt against him
>>2796690
Its weird knowing everyone but churchill severely underestimated Stalin
>>2796690
I don't believe for a second that Roosevelt and Churchill hated each other.
How effective was a group of archers against knights/foot soldiers? Was there any tactics that were developed to counter archers? Were archers held to the same training standards as other soldiers?
>training standards
Unheard of in post-Roman Europe until the 16th century. Armies would briefly practice moving in formation while already on campaign, at best. This is not to say that individual skill and fitness were not valued but there were no formal standards.
Archers were almost completely ineffective against an actual army in combat.
The distances a group of archers would need to stand back would make their arrows unable to pierce most types of protection.
Their true charms come out in the days and weeks after an engagement. They would rarely kill a man outright but the wounds they caused would.
For a large army having lots of wounded is worse than having lots of dead.
>>2796440
If they were useless then armies wouldn't bring them.
The lethality of arrows is highly exaggerated by media and fanboys but let's not go overboard. There were plenty of medieval battles won thanks to the archers disordering the enemy.
How?
...is that a question or a statement?
>>2796217
How is that even possible, I mean? It's popular nowadays. Is that a manifestation of male voyeurism or even cuckoldry?
>>2796230
iunno man
historical reactions have been quite varied. You've got people who used it as an example of exactly why male homosexuality shouldn't be tolerated, because it would lead to something as utterly abhorrent as female homosexuality. On the other hand you've got people who considered it harmless and while male homosexuality would be punished severely, females who engaged in homosexual activity were given a slap on the wrist.
Are there any records of early man's interaction with other primates?
What do you regard as "early man"?
No and it's a shame
I'm really fascinated what those ultra-early humans were up to day to day. Not the cavemen, but not civilized either. Like the guys who came right before Sumeria.
I remember reading something on here I think about Romans capturing a bunch of gorillas and the gorillas killing a bunch of Romans on their ship. Or was it Portuguese from the 15th century? Idk
what are your thoughts on long extended periods of solitude. Good or bad?
>>2795893
>solitude
it's basically all i know
makes you not care about what others think, until you notice you're losing your sanity and barely holding on.
It can be good. It can be bad. If you prefer solitude, as in you actually find in more beautiful and invigorating, read Nietzsche's "Free Spirit" chapter in Beyond Good & Evil.
But know that there is a difference between loving independence and being a hermit.
>>2795946
Jesus christ, this.
What are some legitimate arguments, if any, for gender being a social construct?
pic semi-related
None exist.
>>2795802
>biology is a spook because I want to cut my dick off and be a pretty girl
t. the modern left
Boy have penis
Girl have vagina