What can you tell me about Crimean Tatars?
>>1154766
>A literal muslim
Europe kekked again.
Shittiest of shit.
>last remnant of the Golden Horde
>conducted slaver raids on Christians for centuries
>got BTFO by Imperial Russians and Stalin
>those that remained are still Turk tier savages
>>1154766
They made Ukrainians cry so I'd give them two thumbs up.
Are we back in the late Roman era where the people start seeking meaning in oriental cults, while a more dogmatic burgeoning oriental religion will eventually take claim of the empire that once fought it?
>Are we back in the late Roman era
No actually we're in 21st century look at the calendar nigga.
>>1154201
Globalism changes everything. We aren't going back at anything so specific ever again.
>>1154201
Unless that dogmatic burgeoning oriental religion of yours loosens up on their strict rules and practices in order to attract more converts, while a internationally acclaimed general attributes his victories to their god despite not fully converting himself, I doubt it.
How much did this guy contribute/help the Soviet Revolution become a thing? Could it have happened without him? Or did he merely speed up the happening? Or is he just a meme tier charterer.
He sped it up.
The fault of the Russian Revolution wrests firstly on the predecessors of Nicholas II (mostly Alexander III and Nicholas I) who squandered opportunities to reform and create a sustainable modern constitutional monarchy. They also brainwashed Nicky (a man-child) into thinking he alone should rule and autocracy was necessary for the survival of Russian peoples. Nicholas II as a result constantly fucked up and blocked reformers at every turn and his stubbornness basically created a ticking time bomb that would destroy him at any moment (first in 1905, then in 1917 when it finished him off).
Rasputin did a lot of damage to the Monarchy's image among the commoners, who thought the Tsar was a "cuck" to put in modern terms for letting this guy hang around his wife and wield so much influence. He also caused domestic chaos among Russia's government through Empress Alexandra while Nicky was off losing WW1. But by this point (really by 1905) the monarchy had little chance of surviving anyway, and Rasputin was just a symptom of the disease. The urban working class and intelligentsia became fed up with the Tsar after 1905, the peasants during WW1.
Rapustin showed the nobles could care about commoners, so really he was an obstacle
There lived a certain man in Russia long ago
He was big and strong in his eyes a flaming glow
Most people looked at him with terror and with fear
But to Moscow chicks he was such a lovely dear
He could preach the bible like a preacher, full of ecstasy and fire
But he also was the kind of teacher women would desire
>ITT: Historical best bros
Hephaestion
>>1153843
Ah yes, "bros".
"Bros before hoes".
>>1153854
>III.5.3 (on the wall in the street); 8898: Theophilus, don’t perform oral sex on girls against the city wall like a dog
Can anyone recommend me an accurate movie about Genghis Khan (not a documentary). This summer I have to do a review of a movie for historical accuracy for a history class.
>>1153605
The Conqueror (1956)
John Wayne's worst movie.
>>1153605
Think about it. >>1153952 is SO BAD that your paper can be about the few things they got right instead of searching for things they got wrong. A guaranteed "A"
>>1153952
Fun fact: they filmed part of this on nuclear testing grounds, and the radiation eventually killed most of the crew, including John Wayne
From the period of 500 BC to 1500 AD, what part of the world would have been the best to be a ruler?
I mean in a hedonistic sense, which empire would have been the best to be the ruler of if you wanted a pleasurable experience with women/wine/and beauty.
Late Greece?
Rome?
Abbasid Caliphate?
Middle Age France/Germany/ or Englan?
Most luxurious and erotic life would be that of a Tang emperor
Probably Vikings because I'm into white women and BDSM.
A question about pic related....
so as we all know a lot of Aztecs died because of "European" diseases the Spanish brought into Central America.
But why weren´t the Spanish affected by any Central American diseases which were not common in Europe? Shouldn´t it be a fair trade more or less?
Wasn't syphilis one?
There weren't any catastrophic contagious diseases in the New World that the Old World hadn't already experienced.
>>1153270
Rheumatoid Arthritis is meant to originate from the new world.
I remember reading that Jesus told Peter that the church sould be inside him and not a physical one but can't find that site now.Can someone elaborate/help me find the link if possible?
>>1153140
it's both
>>1153140
Who cares? Christianity's been altered and pretty much replaced altogether within the overall course of history.
>>1153140
The body of the new creation in Christ Jesus, Christians, is the tabernacle of the Holy Spirit, and He lives in us.
There is no building on earth that houses God in this age; He dwells in temples not made by hands.
OKAY. So Uhh I figured out that uhh... the fucking ottomans landed in western europe(NOT SPAIN), Like France and england and shit. Were they trying to convert the land or something?
>>1152726
It's roaches, take a guess.
>>1152726
Come again?
>>1152726
They were allied with France.
Are there any formal theories or theses on why exactly religious conflicts happen?
>DUDE MATERIALISM LMAO
Doesn't explain why such bitter tensions are created between different sects in such short periods of time
>>1151999
Social Identity theory..
I know i know, it's not supposed to be deterministic.
But if you think about it, when people start to divide along ideological lines, they become team players suddenly, and there's not just a division, but a full on hatred.
>>1151999
Idk if there's a formal theory yet or not, but religions are not what you think. They themselves are declarations of a political nature, adherence to a religion means adherence to a certain loosely defined political community. Religions don't have 'values' on their own with which they determine the thinking of their followers, currently trending values in a given religion are always the values that would be the values of that given community anyways, and these are determined by the respective community's political, social and economic past and opportunities. Thus religion is also a formal legitimiser of power structures and political aspirations.
When religions divide into sects, these divisions always happen along already existing power struggles - it's the final step of saying fuck you, we are not the same group anymore. A few examples to support the claims:
Christian Schism: Quite obvious, the two most important and roughly equall powerful seats of the Church were stretched over such a distance that one could not directly influence the other and it's imminent vicinity and vice versa. When this became clear, they divided the cake between themselves. Naturally, this was mainly communicated as theological disagreements but come on.
Islam 'Schism': An ordinary succesion struggle. It is an established fact that Shiism was a political movement before they formalised it in a religious form - as Islam was in itself a very clear political reform of unification, progressive laws and conquest, the state and the Chruch were fused together from the beginning, so this was necessary.
Bosnia/ Balkans: The middle of the Balkans was basically the no man's land of religion, neither the Pope nor the Patriarch could firmly extend and stabilise their influence as it was about halfway between them. Hence the strange religious nature of the area, the Bogomil Church and so. However, when the Turks came, it became obvious who was the top dog down there.
>>1152318
Explain the Yugoslav wars without mentioning religion once
Will there ever be Objective history?
>>1151855
>there might be ppl in the future who get to spend all their immortal traveling back in time, filling in all the blanks and creating the ultimate objective history collection of humanity
jelly as fuck tbqhfamalam
>>1151855
No, even if you could go back in time and record everything without influencing the course of history, you could never know each persons true intentions, because if you asked them, that would change time, because of this we can only speculate on how gay hitler really was...
It seems as if Hesiod's Golden Age where "the earth gave for all their needs of its own accord and rivalries of any kind were thus unknown" recalls Hunter-gatherer nomadic life.
Is the Silver Age where people "lived as children with their mothers for a hundred years" then a reference to the contact with the matriarchical Cucuteni-Trypillian culture?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Decline_and_end_of_the_Cucuteni%E2%80%93Trypillian_culture#Gradual_assimilation_theory
How would Hesiod know anything about either of those things?
>>1151879
Oral tradition?
>>1151908
>Oral tradition?
Thousands of years later? No way.
What does /his/ think of Alan Watts?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ssf7P-Sgcrk
I've always enjoyed listening/reading him. He's got a bit of a reddit-tier philosophy-bro thing going on, but part of his appeal is that he didn't toe the fedora line.
>This way of looking at the world - in a sort of passive move - permeates our general feeling about life. As Westerners, we are accustomed to looking at human existence as a precarious event occurring within a cosmos that, on the whole, is completely unsympathetic and alien to our existence. We have been reared within an early twentieth-century form of common sense, based on the philosophy of the science of the nineteenth century, which rejected Christianity and Judaism. Therefore, we tend to regard ourselves as biological accidents in a stupid and mechanical universe that has no finer feelings and that is nothing more than a vast, pointless, gyration of radioactive rocks and gas.
>Buddhism is not a religion
DROPPED
>>1151763
>Alternatively - if we have a more traditional outlook - we see ourselves as children of God and, therefore, under God's authority. We believe that there is a big boss on top of the universe who has allowed us, at his pleasure, to have the disgusting effrontery to exist. So we'd better mind our Ps and Qs, because that boss is always ready to punish us, with the attitude of "this is going to hurt me more than it is going to hurt you."
>When we adopt ether of these worldviews - the scientific or traditional - then we are defining the world as something to which we do not really belong. We are not really part of it.
>>1151776
Can say that of all eastern religions.
I think he is a very wise man but take things he says with a grain of salt, don't just accept them as fact. He is more of an entertainer than a philosopher.
>>1151776
You could certainly argue that about any Eastern religion since they are functionally so different than western religions
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t_Qpy0mXg8Y
>>1151740
No, because most of what he discusses as the closing of the Mediterranean occurred during the 6th century due to massive plague and famine, seemingly accounts for every military action by Saracen forces ever but doesn't do the same with Latin activity nor explain and present his methodology for review, says North Africa was depopulated by the Arab conquest because of silt in North African harbors being proof that Arab families all had a minimum of 50 goats and that dhimmi laws said they could graze them on Christian agricultural land (?) when we know cities like Lepcis Magna were all but abandoned before the Arabs even showed up due to desertification, Berber raids over 3 centuries earlier, and mismanagement by military governors in Libya.
For a start.
Pseudo historian driven by hate
>>1152295
Basically this, though I think we should be very scared of Islam.
What if the Allies had bombed the Baku oilfields in 1940?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Pike
>>1151562
They probably would have been too ineffective to do significant damage
>>1151562
Wasn't the Germans getting oil from Russia at that point?