I started recently to dive into the ancient greek culture because of my interest in literature and philosophy. While I think I can enjoy a lot of such subjects by directly approaching them, I believe I would comprehend them better if I had a bigger understanding of how the greeks lived and what were the major events that led to their importance in the western world.
That said, my point is: I want to study ancient greek history by myself. My university course isn't directly related to history - neither do I intend to become a historian, so I could say this would be done as a "hobby".
In /lit/ there is a recurring meme of "Start with the Greeks", as the greeks are the foundation of western literature as we know it. However, this guide is more focused on this specific subject, and lacks a bit on the historic part.
So, /his/, could you recommend me ancient greek books on history, economy, and everything related to understanding the greek culture and life (apart from works of fiction)? Thanks a lot!
I suggest to ask Reddit because no one seems to have answered you.
That and I myself disagree with reading the Greeks without reading what they did wrong.
Give me boss images of warrior shit pls.
>>2057445
Is that the most badass helmet to exist?
>>2057445
Russian warrior supremacy
>>2057445
>Egyptians kill every firstborn boy
>Romans kill every firstborn boy
What did God mean by this?
>>2057412
The weak must fear the strong.
>>2057412
God prefers sequels
>>2057412
He wanted to contrast his mild request for genital mutilation with the outrageous hubris of man.
is the people's crusade the worst military blunder in history?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/People's_Crusade
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HIs5B2U7US0&list=PLEb6sGT7oD8HbI-6NTBomKb8eD1mXSgKd
What about children crusade?
>>2056852
>military
>>2056862
I think that never happened.
Someone point me towards the best Modern English translation of The Bible and why it's the best.
>>2056743
bump
I've long grown out of limiting myself to one translation and now I read multiple versions at once.
http://studybible.info/parallel-bible
>>2056743
Depends on what you want/need or by whay you mean by "best."
If you want beauty and prose...
>1611/1769 King James Version.
If you want great translation and excellent readability...
>English Standard Version.
If you want the best translated, best manuscripted, closest to the literal meaning of the original Hebrew & Greek, put together by the highest caliber scholars in modern times...
>New American Standard Bible
Why turks genocided proud assyrian race? This is the crime against innocents, against people with much longer history than islam and ottomans themselves.
>>2056716
>Assyrians
>History
Literally about a dozen people building big sandcastles and being sadistic cunts, nothing else
Assyrians are a nation not a race. They were fucks that got bent over by Persia.
>>2056728
They preserved many ancient texts including Gilgamesh
Do you, /his/, believe that a Third World War is just around the corner? Will it be the western world facing off against China?
>>2056512
I believe it will be facing the middle east.
>>2056520
That would be pretty pathetic as world war. Iraq was destroyed in like 5 days and its military was the strongest on the planet.
>>2056527
What?
This is bullshit, resources were always traded in africa by black people.
>>2056309
beautiful prose though dont you think?
>>2056309
>who were exposed to ships by trading Arabs
The ones in western Africa who never saw Portuguese or Arabs never developed sailing on their own.
Is an Holy Roman an empire?
>>2056209
Reich doesn't only translate to empire. It also translates to realm. So yes.
Despite what a old French memer would say, the Holy Roman Empire was indeed holy, Roman und ein Empire.
Well, the HRE was founded by Charlemagne, so frenchies are actually pissed that they ended up with Franc instead of the empire.
So in my history classes, I've been taught that the reason for the first crusade was essentially the Vikings.
Appeantly because the Vikings kept hitting monasteries, soldiers were trained. Then the Vikings up and left (and they were hard to catch anyways) and all these soldiers had no work, so thy bullied the local populous.
So The Pope, being The Pope, created the first Crusade to get rid of this problem. Either A) they all died and the problem was delt with, or B) they captured the Holy Land and killed all the non believers.
Can anyone confirm or deny? How off their rockers are the teachers?
Also general crusade thread I guess.
>>2055725
Sounds like something a highschool teacher would say
Viking Age was completely over at 1095 when Clermont happened. You missed a golden opportunity to humiliate your "teacher".
>>2055725
Are you a Brit?
Is this what British education has come down to?
"muh evil colonialism" BTFO by Varg
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rQ7g0f7b56E
>>2055587
Actually, the reverse is true. Black people cant fight, that's why the Italians couldn't beat the Caucasoid Ethiopians.
>>2055587
stopped reading at Varg
>>2055606
not an argument
Is this man's image redeemable in the modern world?
>>2055239
Only the eternal anglo hates him
>>2055241
This, most of the continent loves him. I think the only ones that hate him are French lefties
Are friends important?
>>2055198
To men, yes.
To women, not really.
>>2055217
Then why aren't women contributing more to the overall suicide rate?
>>2055198
Of course unless your goal is to do nothing and kill yourself. You need friends to make life barenable. Can also be useful if you need something but can't trust a normal person to do it.
The other I was reading about Charles the V and what stroke me was how lucky he was to gain the Spanish throne as he was the 4th person in the succesion line. I was wondering how much would have Europe changed if either Juan or Miguel would have survived.
If Juan survived:
>Spain would have kept its alliance with the Habsburgs for the Italian wars
>Francis claim to the HRE would become stronger as Charles wouldn't have the financial muscle that he had in the other timeline
>In either case Francis wouldn't have been so agressive towards Spain and the Habsburghs are they wouldn't be a single force.
>In any case protestantism wouldn't have spreaded that much as Francis would be the emperor or wouldn't ally himself with the protestant kings as there was no need
>France may be able to keep Milan/Lombardy in this timeline.
>Spain wouldn't have been involved in as many wars and would mostly focus on colonization,building and army and fighting the Ottomans.
>Assuming that Juan would follow Ferdinand's policies Spain may would have been able to grow a strong manufacturing sector as they wouldn't own Flanders and grow a bigger navy.
>This may have ended in Spain hitting the industrial revolution a in a couple of centuries.
>England colonial ambitions would move straigth to India as Spain's navy was too big for them to compete in America.
>France would expand through the HRE as the Spanish and Habsburgh aliance would be weaker each generation and the fact that Charles would have fewer resources to fight the Ottomans
If Miguel survived
>Something similar to Juan's timeline would happen + the union with Portugal
>This would mean that Miguel may have grown an interest in India due him having the right to colonize it due Tordesillas + the increase of resources as he now owns Castille as well.
Is my alternate history feasable or am I missing something?
>>2054953
It was hardly unique, considering the infant mortality rates in the pre-industrial world.
Reads like an Europa Universalis AAR.
How strong would be an alternative axis consisting of Germany, (facist) France and Italy?
They would still fucking lose.
Fascism is a shitty system.
>>2055028
delusional
>>2055028
This desu