Archived threads in /his/ - History & Humanities - 3293. page

>>1373748
The geography

/thread

Knowing enough about every facet of rulership to effectively oversee people who are much more talented than you and can do a better job.

There are five broad categories a kings deeds and accomplishments can be placed under to define whether he was a success or failure. The first is stability, the lands under a successful king should be stable, peaceful and lacking strife. Wealth is another, a successful king should have a lot of wealth at his disposal. Bringing improvement and reform to the kingdom is another mark of a successful king. Power is a crucial trait to any king, a successful king has power, influence, and domination over his kingdom. And lasting, a successful king should ensure a clean succession of his kingdom.

File: 1467489076719.gif (4MB, 361x422px) Image search: [Google]

4MB, 361x422px

what? Its like you are 13 years old or what

anyways. what you describe is nothing new altough it is doubtful that any civilized animals have existed amongst humans, some animals do inhibit early signs of civilized society.

for example raccoons. have you seen them do stuff? they have their own social order and they take upon stealth missions into human houses to steal food.

or ravens for example. they understand shit. a lot of shit. they can trick people into giving them food. they can use tools to manipulate shit. they know that other ravens are thieving bastards and thus when they have food that they won't eat right away, they will bury that food ONLY when other ravens are not looking.

or for example chimpansees have complex social orders. they trade food for favors and favors for food. they sometimes get into arguments and some others will try to break the fight apart while trying to calm them. they sometimes develop friendships with other chimps. once there was this chimp herd and the leader went into a conflict with one weak skinny chimp. most chimps cheered for the leader, but the skinny chimp had a friend who was also the right hand man of the leader. skinny chimp's friend didn't like that fight and went apeshit on the leader and K.O'd that bitch. But since he betrayed the leader, everyone thought of him as of a traitor now. So the skinny chimp and his friends decided to leave the herd. they then went to adventure around the land together as bros. pretty heartwarming story.

and chimp herds also sometimes organize very professional raids. they climb down the trees and very quietly move to their location. during that time no chimp makes a peep or even a crack. when they reach their target, they surround them very quitely and when leader signals, they go total apeshit sort of like in the recent Planet of the Apes movie where they storm like lunatics doing grazy sounds. and when they return to their herd they will flaunt their kills to those who stayed home

>>1374150
Why haven't we trained chimps to use guns yet?

File: file.png (188KB, 321x302px) Image search: [Google]

188KB, 321x302px

>>1374163
But we have

>>1373453
The Nietzschean truck comes by and crashes through both cars.

>>1373460
With no survivors.

>>1373453
they hit their fucking breaks

No, he failed.

>>1373252
It was great sure, but nowhere near one of the greatest moments in human history.

File: Da-Yu-and-the-Great-Flood-003.jpg (78KB, 400x562px) Image search: [Google]

78KB, 400x562px

Da Yu is supposed to have united the clans living along China’s Yellow River by persuading them to co-operate in a huge network of channels and canals to end its devastating floods in 2000BC

The link between rivers such as the Yellow, the Nile, the Tigris and the Indus, and the growth of early civilisations is very strong. To tame them, or irrigate, people have to be organised and submit to some kind of authority. So rulers and classes emerge.

according to early accounts sacrifices went extremely willingly. those 'saved' by the spanish were appalled by not being allowed the prvilege of sacrifice and sometimes committed suicide or begged to be killed

The hindu legends are largely allegories but people still try to burn widows in remembrance of Sati

>>1373143
This isn't particularly the point of the thread. My question is why sacrifices would exist on the scale they did if the elites themselves held their deities to be non-literal abstractions and metaphors.

>>1373146
I'm not particularly versed on the culture or history of India, but I thought Sati was uncommon, even in ancient times?

>>1373068
Yes anon, people destroy the cultural artifacts of their adversaries/competitors. It's a shocking revelation I know but as you mature you'll realize that this sort of behavior is quite common.

What classical philosophy was burned by the Latins?

None of the Mesoamericans could write except the Mayans. Furthermore, while the Spanish burned a lot of the pictorgraphy, the Catholic Church was more concerned with preservation. The Codex Borgia, for example, is preserved by the Catholic Church.

>>1373100
Not OP but since he's made this exact thread before I can tell you what he's going to say: the evil Christian monks wrote over classical manuscripts with "useless church garbage."

File: 1456699395631.png (71KB, 324x370px) Image search: [Google]

71KB, 324x370px

>Frog thinking anglos learn about this faggot

Richlieu was just a silly character in The Three Musketeers. Rousseau was a silly character that ruined the enlightenment. Locke was a silly British man who couldn't best the god-man Hobbes.
Locke is best.

Rousseau knew her way around the island better, BUT Locke had a deeper connection to the island. I'd pick Locke desu.

File: 1453431210160.jpg (178KB, 993x803px) Image search: [Google]

178KB, 993x803px

They're watching....

65.5 million years ago they decided to stop reproducing, walking hand in hand into extinction - one last midnight, brothers and sisters opting out of a raw deal.

>>1372912
Because you touch yourself at night.

God created them 6000 years ago
then they ran out of food so they dug underground and died, hence fossils

>>1372894
St-stop stabbing me then, br-bro!

File: 1408524430492.jpg (43KB, 500x375px) Image search: [Google]

43KB, 500x375px

>>1372894

>>1372894
>tfw Brutus was in on it too
>why are all the Senators laughing at me
>stab myself 23 times in the back to escape the humiliation
>"W-who's laughing now?"

Depends on the definition of sexism. There are some strains of feminism, particularly those prominent in the media today and related to radical and queer theory, that argue that the maintenance of the concept of gender /gender norms is inherently sexist, as it ensures a dichotomy which is used to maintain patriarchy through "masculine" norms of control and domination. These theories often cast masculinity as a strategy for maintaining male dominance. Thus, the very idea of masculinity is inherently linked with the existence of sexism. Personally, I find this definition of sexism to be really harmful, as it gives men and women, even avowed femininists, carte blanche to attack typical male insecurities while at the same time arguing that a woman suffering distress based on female insecurities is a mark of patriarchal oppression. Given that we really do not know to what extent male and female behavior is innate, it seems equally wrong to attempt to destroy any concept of gender norms because "it's just a social construct" as it is to force women into childbirth because "it's natural for women to be mothers." If your definition of sexism assume that gender itself is sexist, then no, I wouldn't say all sexism is wrong.

>>1372008
Khalid was much better, and I'd hardly say he is comparable to Alexander, especially considering they had completely different motives and means of fulfilling their goals, however in terms of scale, the muslims do win.

You'll hear a lot about the weakness of Iberia and North Africa though, to discredit them, although that'll depend on your own opinion.

I don't care much for him, but Khalid is great.

>>1372008
>desert nomad polygamist childfucker
>"greatest" warrior of all time

If that were true we'd all be speaking Arabic by now.

WE WUZ CONKERERZ N' SHIEEEEET!

>>1372008
well he was certainly the most successful when looking at time frame, people today still fight and die in his name and will probably continue to do so for a very long time.

It's almost like he was out of his fucking mind by then and in utter despair

Mentally unstable people never kill themselves right

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Drug_policy_of_Nazi_Germany

he realized what he had done

File: 1444823733428.png (226KB, 4500x4334px) Image search: [Google]

226KB, 4500x4334px

>>1371921
No, Wellington was the greatest strategist of his era because he defeated the greatest strategist of his era.

>inb4 blucher

Wellington still would've won even without that faggot.

>>1371921
>Wasn't he the greatest strategist of his era?
No, beating a bunch of useless Germans gave him an illusion of grandeur so he sperged out and went against Russia.

>>1371961
>invading Russia in the winter
>got stranded in Egypt
>cucked by his wife

Napoleon was a meme

>>1371798
I declare that all doctrine is spooks

>the schism wouldn't have happened without Luther
The Latins were pushing shit way too much and it was inevitable, it had been in works since the 1300's.

>>1371851
Martin Luther didn't want it to happen originally though. He was more of a whistle blower than a reformatory.
Then the Catholic Church had to threat it like a bunch of idiots.