Archived threads in /his/ - History & Humanities - 235. page

>>3281371
>flag
Saarland/10

>>3281371
Please, there are thousands thought experiments like that during every war, it's highly unlikely it would have happened even if everything happened the way Brits wanted it too happen. There was a sliver of a chance that actual post-war Bulgaria joined Yugoslavia, but thankfully everyone realized that it would have been silly.

>>3281371
It's like a less creative Dominican Republic flag

>>3281355
It was actually becoming the norm while the empire was still in place. new laws were being imposed to keep minor farmers attached to the land for easy taxation.

It was popular because it did not rely on foreign conquests or a robust trading economy, that made it stable in a time of instability.

>>3281328
I've been here for too long.

File: hannibal.png (404KB, 961x1305px) Image search: [Google]

404KB, 961x1305px

>>3281328

>>3281869
Yeah, those Romans are losers. So glad Western civilization was based on glorious Carthage.

>>3281226
Other nations actually have higher value and ideals, thus were able to develop art and etiquette. Anglos are still peasants who think that "u cheeky cunt m8 i swear i am going 2 rek u i swear on me mum" and a good fistfight qualifies as culture.

>>3281345
Tbqh famalamadingdong, u sound like u just cant handel the bantz m8.

Anglo culture was very divided from the get go, one theory I read proposed that the decline of the tin trade lead to less trade and therefore lead to a break down in communI cation between hubs. This left great variance in England itself, the many differing accents in England is some evidence of this. Couple that with the various invasions of Normandy, saxons and other influences it lead to a soft image of a hegenomic of England. To this day many local rivalries exist like the Geordies and mackems. The rivalry between these groups is still quite fierce and of course the banter between them sets the stage for the English man's banter. Taking it to the next stage of other countries which England has a rich history of fucking their shit up or getting their shit fucked up, the english man is already well prepared for bantz.

>>3281224
>Why and how did feudalism decline in western Europe?
Urbanization and trade. In the HRE (particularly) many cities recieved the title of Imperial Free Cities, granting them special rights and having them answer directly to the Emperor. This of course meant, that they weren't really part of the feudal system, since they were largely selfgoverned (with lots of power being held by the guilds) and little influence by nobles. The increase in trade meant, that the currency was now increasingly based on gold/silver and not on the typical fief resources, like grain, wood, wool etc. With this came a shift of power away from the landed nobitlity, towards merchants and bankers (i.e. Borgias or Fuggers). The increase in gold as a universal currency (as well as changes in warfare) led to the warfare system being based on mercanaries instead of knights, further eroding the feudal society.

>>3281224
>a fife

>>3281165
Because it's tied to a political platform they approve of.

Americans are all temporarily embarrassed millionaires.

Not Timportent was merely Tamerlane born in the wrong time period.

chateaubriand

>>3280972
The (auto)biographies and diaries of other great men.

>>3280972
Knock yourself out.
http://www.artofmanliness.com/2014/02/03/the-libraries-of-great-men-theodore-roosevelts-reading-list/

File: 1502383619077.jpg (104KB, 592x814px) Image search: [Google]

104KB, 592x814px

>>3280940
How's middle school going?

>>3280940
>Hurr durr dismissive question in response to an actual question

Off yourself

Anyway op, morality is only standardized by factions because the good lord hasnt returned yet. Finding an arbitrary definition is an exercise in futility, because no single person's values correlate the same way to their morals as another. I hope thats a good answer to your question.

>>3280940
This thread, and by extension you as the creator of it, depress me

>>3280922
>for fucks sake
My LORD We should find cover!

No Need my trusty cock sucker, my target will protect me!

>>3280922
Depends in the situation and place really.

In Europe and the Middle East the aristocracy and the royalty did have some sort of chivalry wherein ideally the Quality was to be spared the butchery of fleeing soldiers in battle and are instead to be captured. To think nothing of the ransoms, especially the astronomic ransoms you could demand for a monarch's life.

Its different in dynastic squabbles though, someone has to fucking die.

>>3280922
Two things.

1. Armor was incredibly effective during the medieval period. It would take concerted effort to kill a fellow nobleman you couldn't just lazily swing a sword and take his head off like you would a peasant.

2. A dead noblemen isn't worth anything. Ransoms were extremely important.

An example of the two things at work can be found in 1168 when the brothers of Lusignan ambushed the Earl of Salisbury. The attempt was to kidnap him and hold him for ransom and political leverage but because the Earl was returning from pilgrimage and in supposedly safe lands he was unarmored. This resulted in his accidental death and the subsequent banishment of Lusignans.

>>3280890
He didn't eradicate them, so probably too lightly

Read a book brainlet.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iyPM5dhaPH0

>>3280876
Adolf Hitler: The Greatest Story Never Told.

>>3280659
Pompey Magnus and Julius Caesar

Ruairí Ua Conchobhair and Henry II of England apparently quite liked each other, to the point where Henry agreed not to levy taxes upon the Irish in exchange for 50 cow hides a year

File: Shang_Xi,_Guan_Yu_Captures_General_Pang_De.jpg (3MB, 2200x1862px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 2200x1862px

>>3280659
In Chinese civil wars there were plenty of cases when rival generals would beg respected enemy generals captured in battle to switch sides with the meme drama of enemy generals saying no and better execute them because Muh Honor.

>>3280591
>Alexander and Hephaestion

Just cause Alexander fucked dudes, didnt make him no homo. He had bastards and what not.

>>3280614

Did he fuck Hephaestion, or does modern society misinterpret what it meant to be war bros back then?

File: bach.jpg (612KB, 1400x787px) Image search: [Google]

612KB, 1400x787px

Because it's formal and proficient. I'm not exactly sure how someone thought it up, but the modern day piano has only existed since about the late 1700s. They used organs, harpsichords, fortepianos, and other keyboards before that.

>>3280292 (OP)
A piano allows one person to play multiple separate melodic lines simultaneously and to play all sorts of complex chords, while having much better dynamics (ability to shift between quiet and loud) and control over intonation than a harpsichord and being much cheaper and more portable than an organ. Composers loved them because you can effectively compose for a whole orchestra on one, and you can also improvise very effectively while making a lot of musical choices on one. Regular people loved them because back then, before recorded sound, one of the most common ways to listen to music would be to play it yourself from a score (or have a friend do it), and pianos let middle class people do just that. On a piano you can play a simplified version of an entire orchestral work that gets the main thrust of it across. (Or even more, if you're a virtuoso - for example, see Liszt's piano versions of Beethoven's symphonies).
As for the technical details of how it developed, I don't know much about that, but it's an extensively researched subject, so you should be able to find what you're looking for.