Post god-tier history books, podcasts and documentaries
this board and crusader kings made me into a HREaboo, so im about to start this baby. his thirty years war books was great so im expecting good stuff. seems to be the definitive book on HRE.
Also is hardcore history worth getting into, or is a just a meme
Thanks in advance /his/
Ancient Egyptians were Nordic.
>VE
We wuz egyptians and shit nigga.
>>2073672
Why do so many pharaohs mummies have blonde and red hair then?
Why was king tut R1b?
Why did they build their stools the same?
>human beings aren't naturally violent.
>>2073663
>Clark, who led last year’s expedition to the Afar region of northern Ethiopia, and UC Berkeley colleague Tim D. White, also said that a re-examination of a 300,000-year-old fossil skull found in the same region earlier shows evidence of having been scalped.
Gee willy wilkerson grandpapa Corncob.
b-but muh proto communist utopia where everyone shared and raised a wife's son
>human beings aren't naturally compassionate
>Even the greatest Moslem empire was white.
You can't make this shit up.
>>2073624
Of course, the ruling class consisted of a bunch of converts.
WE
>>2074002
>implying the goktürks just replaced all the byzzis overnight.
Who was the most beautiful princess in history?
My sissis tammy
>>2073546
Current spanish princesses
>marxist historiography
>>2073372
>anime
>>2073374
Why the fuck are you even here then?
>>2073412
>not a marxist
why the fuck are YOU even here then?
Was it Mithridates and his execution via scaphism?
Lord Jesus Christ and his Crucifixion.
>>2073352
William Wallace had it pretty bad
>>2073356
>Died on the same day he was crucified
Jesus had crucifixion lite compared to others who spent days on the fucking thing.
How would WW1 have turned out if Germany went with pic related? Would a German-Russian alliance be able to defeat an Austria-French-German Entente? Or would they still lose?
Germany probably would've had a much higher chance to win.
Russia would've won in a one-on-one war against Austria-Hungary, Germany was the only reason they were able to stay in the war at all. I think Austria-Hungary would've collapsed within a year and then Germany and Russia would've been able to divert all their resources to fighting France.
This map gave Montenegro half of Bosnia.
Montenegro is 7 times smaller than Serbia.
Anyway, Bulgaria would surely be on the side of Russia and Germany in such a scenario.
Serbia and Austria being on the same side assumes several things:
1)There is no dynastic coup in 1903
2)The king of Serbia has an heir
3)The king of Serbia probably marries someone else.
4)Austria doesn't support the creation of Albania after the first Balkan war, and it's controlled by Montenegro, Serbia and Greece.
Let's assume Italy joins Germany and Russia during the war. Istria, Fiume e Dalmazia! Also, Nice.
I think Germany and Russia would have won.
They'd absolutely mop the floor with Austria-Hungary. Austria can't take on Russia 1v1, and they don't have the means to hold a front that large.
In wake of A-H defeat Serbia would probably get off scot free, and might ever switch sides and be rewarded with Austria territory in exchange for half of Macedonia. Vojvodina and Bosnia for half of Macedonia seems like quite the bargain.
Then again, assuming it controls Albania the half of Macedonia in question would have already been Bulgarian.
France would bleed.
I don't see France and Britain winning with Germany, Russia and Italy.
>>2073334
Essentially this. The West and Austria have nothing going for them. They are divided by Germany and Austria is the weakest of the great powers so it won't even last a year. To make matters worse Italy will certainly join and has nothing to gain by joining Austria the same could be said of Romania. Combine all that and you have France and Britain fighting pretty much all of Europe. They might last for a few years but it is highly unlikely that they could defeat Germany and co. in a prolonged war since Russia can easily support itself and likely much of its allies with farming.
Why do frogs get so triggered by seeing rightful german clay?
>>2073170
>Rightful German clay
>Owned by France since before the concept of a united Germany existed
>>2073170
>Alsace get "liberated" in 1870
>they get treated like second class citizens by the new Reich
I don't get it. Germany ignored Bismarck's opinion on AL and they couldn'teven bother to treat Alsacians like proper Germans.
>>2073170
>rightful clay
>>>/int/
It is Jean-Baptiste Bernadotte for me.
That was a great man.
>>2073050
I barely know anyone else except his cuckold baby, Beauharnais, and meme Ney.
>>2073050
The one that failed him because he was eating strawberries instead of commanding his men: Grouchie.
Ney, easily
Dude was far from the best, but he was definitly the bravest
>Napoleon left Moscow on October 19th with roughly 100,000 men. On November 3 it began to snow, and Napoleon gave Ney command of the 6,000 man rearguard.
>Throughout the retreat, Ney’s energy and courage were equaled by his tactical ingenuity. Musket in hand, he led countless charges. On one night march, a wagon went through the ice and a survivor could be seen clinging to the wreckage. Ney himself crawled along the ice to pull him out of the icy water. Recognizing the rescued officer, Ney said matter of factly “Ah…de Briqueville, glad we got you out!”
>The retreat went on and on, and eventually, Ney had only 100 men left. With these, Ney and General Gerard held the bridge at Kovno while it was being destroyed. Imperial Guardsman Jean Coignet described what happened. “Marshal Ney kept the enemy at bay by his own bravery. I saw him take a musket and five men and hold the bridge at Kovno. The country should be glad it has such a man.
>And so, on December 13th, the skeletal remains of the Grand Armee left Russian soil. The last man to cross into East Prussia was Michel Ney.
>At Waterloo Ney again commanded the left wing of the army. At around 3:30 p.m., Ney ordered a mass cavalry charge against the Anglo-Allied line.
>Ney was seen during one of the charges beating his sword against the side of a British cannon in furious frustration.
>During the battle, he had five horses killed under him; and at the end of the day, Ney led one of the last infantry charges, shouting to his men: "Come and see how a marshal of France meets his death!".
Even his execution was badass
Germany should have won WWI, and you know it.
>letting a grossly militaristic & authoritarian state with ultimate power vested in a literal autist become hegemon of Europe
>>2073064
You're right about Germany being gross
>germans
>winning
u may only choose 1
Look to the left to see the case in point.
>>2072945
this must be a shitpost right?
>>2072947
How so? It is the most aesthetic, whilst structurally sound.
The Romanesque-Gothic line of architecture is my absolute favorite, but it's also the most prone to bring overdone, which kills it.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fgm14D1jHUw
>It's Gorbachev!
>Because of him, we have economic confusion!
1991: Mass privatization laws in Russia are accepted in order to transform Russia into a proper market economy. This gives a rise of inequality and poverty rivaled only by the Great Depression of 1930's America.
>Because of him, we have opportunity!
1991-1999: Ex-Soviet institutions fall into the hands of shady characters and outright crime groups, who later become what we today call the Russian oligarchy.
>Because of him, we have political instability!
1993: Following a confrontation with the Russian parliament, president Yeltsin uses tanks to shell the Russian White House, resulting in the deaths of at least 150 people.
>Because of him, we have freedom!
1991-1999: Ex-Soviet institutions not belonging to crime groups are seized by them via force. Business rivals and competitors are murdered in broad daylight. Journalists criticizing criminal authorities are forced into exile or found assassinated.
>Complete chaos!
1991-1999: The overall civilian death toll for Russia in the 90's estimates between 4 to 5 million, all due to poverty, alcohol abuse, domestic violence, and crime-related murder. These just being the official estimates, and not counting the death toll for the Chechen military campaign.
>Hope!
1998: Vladimir Putin - ex-KGB agent, member of Cooperative Ozero, with ties to the Tambov Organized Crime Group - is pushed into power by Arkady Sobchak, as well as oligarchs Arkady and Boris Rotenberg and Boris Berezovsky. Following Yeltsin's resignation on New Year's Eve 1999, Putin becomes President of Russia.
>Political instability!
>Because of him we have many things... like Pizza Hut.
1991-1999: The monthly income for an average Russian citizen unassociated with crime at the time estimates between 50 to 120 dollars. The person was lucky enough if he had spare money to afford himself a cheeseburger from McDonalds, let alone a pizza from Pizza Hut.
>Hail to Gorbachev!
1999: The discovery of "Ryazan sugar" proves the involvement of FSB in 1999's apartment bombings which took the lives of at least 300 people. Following Putin's inauguration, discussion on this subject has been close to nonexistant in Russian media.
>Hail to Gorbachev!
2002: The Russian government uses chemical weapons to disrupt a hostage crisis, killing all the perpetrators and also 130 of the hostages.
>Hail to Gorbachev!
2003: The Russian government arrests oligarch Mikhail Khodorkovsky and effectively eliminates YUKOS, the most successful at the time company in Russia, by forcing it into bankruptcy and appropriating it's asses for state-owned companies Rosneft and Gazprom.
>Hail to Gorbachev!
2004: Censorship in Russian media over the Beslan school siege which ended in the deaths 380 people, out of which 180 were children.
>Hail to Gorbachev!
2008: The Russian government invades Georgia, a former brotherly nation, after Georgia announces it's plans for joining NATO.
>Hail to Gorbachev!
2011: Bolotnaya Protests are crushed by the Russian Government. This is followed by mass arrests against the protest organizers, acceptance of new laws breaching human privacy, and increase of control over the Russian media.
>Hail to Gorbachev!
2014: Russia annexes the Ukrainian territory of Crimea and uses mercenary personal to spark an outright separatist war in the Eastern region of Ukraine after Ukrainian citizens dethrone president Viktor Yanukovich, a Russian puppet that has also been denied presidency once in 2004 following mass protests against voting fraud.
>Hail to Gorbachev!
2015: With sanctions and oil prices plummeting effectively marking the end for Russia's economic prosperity which started in the early 00's, the Russian government accepts new laws and bills which further breach human privacy, and also creates a military National Guard to use in cases of civil unrest.
>Hail to Gorbachev!
2015: Russia makes use of the situation in Syria, by slandering America's unsuccessful involvement in the war, as well as fuelling anti-Western nationalist movements throughout Europe.
>Hail to Gorbachev!
2015: Russian and NATO militarization reaches new heights since the end of the Cold War.
>Hail to Gorbachev!
2016: America elects Donald Trump, close associate to Russian oligarchs, and friend of Vladimir Putin.
You reap what you sow, America.
>>2072649
*assets
Why won't Japan apologize for their WW2 atrocities?
>>2072600
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_war_apology_statements_issued_by_Japan
>>2072601
Wikipedia is not a reliable source anon
>>2072601
Not good enough
Why does /lit/ defend a completely unfalsifiable philosophy from Spinoza but not the bongle-dingle philosophy I made up 5 minutes ago which is completely correct because they are deduced from my dingle-bongle axioms? Because masturbating over Spinoza gives you pseudo-intellectual cred while masturbating over a no-name person's unfalsifiable philosophy does not?
Why does /lit/ talk about Newton being interested in theology in a half assed and hand wavey way, and as if we should think higher of Newton becasue of this? Because /lit/ takes it as a truth that being associated with, and having great reverence for, the bible should earn someone greater respect. Due to the fact that religious authorities and sources have had a lot of respect at various times, and nothing at all to do with the "truth" of religion. Or, in other words, and completely expectedly: For completely pseudo-intellectual reasons.
Why does /lit/ strongly state that "Science can't give us moral answers!"? Becasue it is true, AND to imply that philosophy (not including science) can give us moral answers- which is wrong, as the moral answers would have to be deduced from prior axioms (so in other words, the "right" answer could be defined differently by different people).
Why will /lit/ insult anyone who uses the word "unfalsifiable"? Because the circlejerk is being interrupted.
wrong board my man
>/lit/ poster
>can't read
Like pottery.
It doesn't matter, Wittgenstein already solved philosophy.