Archived threads in /his/ - History & Humanities - 2469. page

I'm a flatbed truck driver and got to transport something like the left one time. Was pretty cool senpai

>>1925029
The Girls und Panzer art books.

only significant because hitler was thinking about sending the jews there

I always conquer it first in Vicky 2

It was a funny movie can't wait for more. I like the lemurs

File: henry field armor.jpg (1MB, 2903x3722px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 2903x3722px

>>1923877
no

but with enough arrows, eventually one will find a gap in the plate and hit a joint or get stuck in the padding

This armor is after the heyday of longbows, but the armor most people think of as "knight armor" was after the proliferation of gunpowder

>>1923877

Yes, at very close range (20 yards), if they get a good direct hit (not a glancing blow) and if the plate in question is pre-16th century.

File: treb.jpg (91KB, 814x559px) Image search: [Google]

91KB, 814x559px

Could a trebuchet pierce plate?

>>1923728
white genes
and memes

>>1923728
that's average height in those times

>>1923733
>Most histories identify Toussaint's father as Gaou Guinou, a younger son of the King of Allada (also spelled Arrada), a West African historical kingdom located in modern-day Benin, who had been captured in war and sold into slavery.
literally no white blood in him
>>1923736
blacks and upper class whites tended to be taller than average, amongst them toussaint and turner would have been manlets

also MLK was definitely a manlet for his time

>>1923598
Humans, when given power over others, usually are dicks. Reproduction is a quite basic human right, and as such there is no substantial reason in a pre genetic engineering era to restrict it more than absolutely necessary.

Why do you assume nature itself isn't practicing eugenics?

Women won't fuck and have kids with anyone you know.

>>1923598

Because we aren't rabbits and most people don't want to have more than 1 or 2 kids.

Im sure if condoms weren't shit, birth rates would halve.

There are plenty of imbeciles

File: atheism.png (557KB, 800x1188px) Image search: [Google]

557KB, 800x1188px

>>1923557
>implying STEMlords do not apply their autismo to philosophical questions

>>1923557
Nice contrast faggot

A round shield is easier to make and structurally sound.

>>1923247
So you can use the bottom tip to strike people.

>>1923253
>making a longer shield was too hard for medieval apes

lmao truly muh ancestors were people worth venerating

It is hard to know because you are comparing people from different eras, who used different technologies and faced different enemies.

How do you compare Erich von Manstein with Oda Nobunaga?
Alexander the Great with Wellington? Wellington faced better generals than Alexander did.

And then, there is the fact that we know very little about Chinese and Indian history. How do you compare Scipio Africanus with Wang Jian?

>>1923245

>This is literally, objectively, and provably the top 5 list.

no

>>1923263
Scipio was a general that was purely reactionary to Hannibal. He had very little ambition.

This list is objective. If you take all the generals in history, gave them the same army and had a tourney, these are the top 5.

>>1923265
Go watch another top 10 generals list, pleb

>where did it all go wrong?
Communism

>>1923277
Nah. it was opening to the world. Haile Selassie tried to modernize his country. That meant he needed to send young men abroad. These guys brought back ne ideas and saw how backwards Ethiopia was compared to the ROTW. The men he furthered were the men who ended his reign. It 's a miracle he came out of the first two coups.

>>1923209
It was the Soviet Union's influence, ruining everything as usual.

>>1923094
Yeah, why?

>General Runaway
>alpha

>Americans
>Alpha

>>1923082
welcome to earth
we hope you enjoy your stay

Go for a walk bro

>>1923082
>firts 2
Agreed.

>moralty
True, but politics was alwys a shitfest. Compared to historic rulers modern politicians actually kill very few people, if any.

>novels
The wast majority of art ever produced is crap and is forgotten in a decade.

>science and math
U wot? They are some of the only marketable fields that can get private
Investments.

>>1923024
no

orthodox will be doing the same shit for another quintillion years

Yes, and I say this as somebody who used to be a secularist and still is to some extent.

Just look at India, constantly watering down their way of life for minorities.

Don't most if not all religions openly or secretly wish for other religions to disappear? Secularism is the practice of keeping the state and religious organisations separate. Breaking into people's homes and shooting them for praying in secret is not an inherent part of secularism. A religious state is just as capable of terrorising its citizens as a secular one, because oppressive regimes tend to pick whatever ideological justification is the most appropriate at the moment.

What are you, some dunce who bought into conservative propaganda?

File: hith-mussolini-92424342-1-E.jpg (282KB, 686x385px) Image search: [Google]

282KB, 686x385px

> “Just observe the nation that is defended by devoted patriots. The patriots fall in bloody battle or in the fight with hunger and want; what does the nation care for that? By the manure of their corpses the nation comes to "its bloom"! The individuals have died "for the great cause of the nation," and the nation sends some words of thanks after them and - has the profit of it. I call that a paying kind of egoism.”

Just look at that smug face

File: image.jpg (32KB, 384x384px) Image search: [Google]

32KB, 384x384px

>>1922936

>not Napoleon Bonaparte

>choosing a Cuck and a faggot who got killed by the people he ruled over

Nigga please

>>1922936
>"a spook"
Was Mussolini the original Stirner poster?

>>1922894
>How much of this is American revisionism?

Contrary to what the children on /his/ often say, "revisionism" doesn't mean "lying," it just means reevaluating the narrative. But to answer your real question, yes, American culture mythologized its "founding fathers" into greater than human status, to try forge a common culture from scratch. They were just people.

>Were they really all good or were some of them corrupt?

I don't know about "corrupt," but obviously they all had flaws.

>Was George Washington really a good general?

He was a great leader but a mediocre general. His real achievement is uniting and maintaining a chaotic coalition of disparate forces.

>Was there a rivalry between them about who should run things?

Yes, there was all sorts of bickering and wildly different ideas about what sort of country it should be.

>What kind of men were they? Were they upper class?

Yes. The poorest among them were at least well off lawyers (e.g. Adams). Some were extremely wealthy businessmen (e.g. Hamilton). Most were born wealthy, and were basically aristocracy (e.g. Jefferson).

>How did the citizens view them at the time?

This I don't really know.

lets just say if the civil war never happened, the shit they came up with would've been perfect.

>>1922894
They were people. Incredible people certainly but still people. They had their flaws.

>How much is revisionism
Quite a bit. Americans have this kind of weird shinto thing going on with the founding fathers that probably would horrify them if they knew.

>Was Washington a good general
Solid leader, meh general.

>Was there a rivalry between them
Man you really should read some of the shit they talked to and about eachother. It's the stuff of legend. They agreed that they wanted independence but as per how that independence should be framed after, there were a lot of ideas and disagreements.

And the FF talked mad shit about eachother over it.
Personally I'd be interested to know how the US might've turned out had Washington been crowned a king and we'd been a constitutional monarchy.

>Were they upper class
Most of them were very well off. Some of them had to work for it, others were born into it.

>>1922833
He was unpopular for a reason and if there's anything he did wrong it was completely misread what the Roman people wanted, and as a leader that's simply not something you can do and expect to get away with forever.

He wasnt as cruel as Caligula but he also mismanaged resources and spent lavishly on himself just as much.

I think what people don't really understand is the fact that Nero, and Caligula for that matter, were still basically kids when they became emperors. Caligula was the oldest of the shittier emperors when he was named and he was only like 24.

Given that's its been shown human behavior really hasn't changed a whole lot since then, imagine a poor decision making 20 year old given absolute power of a vast empire.

Mistakes were made.

Hoooh boy. He murdered his mother, murdered his first wife to marry his lover, generally displayed the qualities most hated by a Roman. He likely wasn't playing a fiddle as Rome Burned, but he did proceed to buy out the burned down homes of the poor to build a giant golden palace for himself, rather than using that money to rebuild for others. He tried to convince everyone that the christians burned the city, and he punished them to prove that. He punished them far too harshly, and many romans could not suffer the cruelty of it.

He was a hedonist and a cruel one at that, who's only aim was to be popular, rather than to properly rule.

>>1923023
Well to be fair he did rebuild most of Rome and expand it a little and build everything out of brick instead of wood and implemented many anti-fire measures and some historians believe the the domus aurea was also for public use or at least some segments of it were