>mfw Caesar fucked a Paki
Piss off, Archie
Why did Rome become a republic? Surely there was more reason to it than them simply rising up against King Tarquin and abolishing his rules and laws? What was it about the idea of monarchy that they found to be bullshit?
>>920563
>What was it about the idea of monarchy that they found to be bullshit?
To prevent a tyrant king from showing up. This was before feudalism and Christianity so people weren't nearly as willing to allow a person to rule over them.
>>920563
What the fuck are you talking about
>>920563
Probably because, despite what Livy claimed, there were probably several families of roughly equal power and involvement with the overthrow of the Tarquins, none of whom wanted to cede authority, which led to a power sharing arrangement and eventually republic.
/his/
Why were Roman emperors so batshit insane?
define "batshit"
Many stories about "mad" emperors were fabrications or exaggerations by political rivals who understood that a story about a Emperor making his horse a senator and attacking the ocean would spread more quickly among the uneducated and easily amused plebs as opposed to a "he made policies I don't like and don't benefit me" stories
They had lead in their wine.
>>920501
Arguably only 2 emperors were insane for sure, Elagabalus (a transgender North African who liked to prostitute himself in the imperial palace) and Commodus (who functionally a giant asshat who was probably a psychopath, given how much he enjoyed killing and watching the act of killing that even surprised the Romans)
Caligula and Nero were likely more spoiled assholes than anything else. Domitian was just a dick to the Senate and christians. Tiberius was just paranoid.
I'd also say that Justinian's successor was insane, considering that he apparently needed to be chained to a bedpost in order to prevent him from gnawing on people later in his life
What actually is the "thing-in-itself" in Kantian philosophy?
>>920480
Kant's thing-in-itself. If you know what I mean.
You Kant know.
>>920480
That which accounts for the sensory data of experience; that which cannot be known like the phenomenal, physical, natural world can be known, but that which can be merely conceived as "that which appears" underlying the spatiotemporal appearance known by me; the correlate that explains, grounds, the phenomenal world-as-appearance; that which is independent of the forms of the human mind, independent of the ways in which the human mind imposes regular order upon the raw data given within the human mind's faculty of sensibility (the human mind's faculty for receiving sense data).
In other words: within my mind arises sensations of colors and temperatures and textures and tastes and smells - and the thing-in-itself is the ground of all this consequent sense data given within the innate forms of my mind; my mind has innate functions, operations characteristic of it, that structure this given sensory content into the orderly, regular, intelligible, predictable patterns that characterize the natural world and this world's progression through time.
Who are the most relevant philosophers in the field of aesthetics?
Me
t.eggspert
So /his/ considering the romans knew about steam (also greeks) could they ever develop in an industrialization? Or they needed more than just know about steam and slaves?
>>920294
They had slaves. That's literally the reason technological innovation was so slow during the Roman Empire particularly (though only compared to today). The Greek Alexandrian who built the first steam device was like "this shit is useless when you have slaves who can do this shit far more easily". Plus the major pitfall of mechanisation is that it puts people out of work, and most people in the ancient world were only seasonally employed to begin with.
>>920310
But imagine heavy industrialization and slaves... just.
>>920294
The steam engine was a consequence of industrialization, and the knowledge of steam by the Ancients doesn't mean a steam engine anymore than the knowledge of oil mean an internal combustion engine.
Okay, so anything unholy and/or nonreligious is considered secular.
In Judeao-Christianity their God gave them ten commandments for people to follow.
So, when ever a Christian commit adultery, theft, lie/fraud, supplant the highest authority as your own, and murder, its only through secular influence.
Therefore, secularism is most dangerous ideology known to man.
>>920263
the ten commandments comprised the mosaic law, which became defunct with the establishment of the new covenant ("spiritual Israel").
so no, you've shown yourself incredibly ignorant to how Christianity functions in modern times
>>920381
>the ten commandments comprised the mosaic law
>comprised
Stop using words if you don't know what they mean
>>920403
verb: comprise; 3rd person present: comprises; past tense: comprised; past participle: comprised; gerund or present participle: comprising
1. consist of; be made up of.
2. make up; constitute
Not sure what you thought I meant.
Christian art thread? Christian art thread.
>>920204
>>920206
>>920216
was it winnable?
>>920186
If the bulk of German forces either took the Moscow-Leningrad railways or took Moscow, then yes. The problem originated with the splitting of forces attempting to complete each at once. If the entire force attacked only one object, then it would have been possible.
>>920233
That do depend heavily on.
The Soviets had been bulking up their armed forces near Moscow, so if the Germans had attacked their they may very well just have ran into a wall without making much progress. Even if they would have reached Moscow it don't mean they would have taken it, just like they didn't take Stalingrad and I am rather sure that city was in a shakier position.
Not advancing towards the Caucasus may actually have crippled the German war engine as they then would have been without the large amount of oil sources they conquered on the way,
Is it true that after 1453, Russia has become the true heir to the Roman Empire?
>>920116
What the fuck is a "true heir"
>>920116
They aren't even the most Orthodox country in the world.
>>920116
So he's pretty much the greatest political theorist of the modern (read: post-Machiavelli) era, right?
>>919938
Machiavelli wasnt even a good political theorist.
literally who
>>920320
What did he do right?
What did he do wrong?
Everything.
He didn't live forever.
what are some events in history with cool sounding names?
Like The Halloween Massacre?
its really just when Gerald Ford fired a bunch of people at once and replaced them with others he liked instead though.
>fired Kissinger, put H.W Bush in charge of the CIA, made Rumsfeld the secretary fo state
>>919767
Boston Massacre
You see that and you assume rivers of blood, the dead and wounded laying all over the street. Instead, you get 5 deaths, 2 of them occurring afterwards from wounds, 6 other people hurt and the first guy shot is someone who basically only exists as a folk legend beyond his name.
The Berlin Airlift
The Beira Patrol
The Red Scare
all good band names
The Hundred Days.
The Reign of Terror and the Red Terror.
Battle of the Nations.
Spring of Nations.
The Black Legend (not an event but still sounds cool).
La Noche Triste
Was he unprepared to face an organized enemy? Or did his luck just run out?
>>919589
Sick meme brah
>>919576
He was just a dumb contrarian who didn't have the sense to realize that paganism wasn't cool anymore. Much like today's nationalists
/his/, what was the actual point of the Winged Hussar's Wings?
I assume it was to look equally awesome, terrifying and impractical.
Aerodynamics
first air force
The wings were actually black and attached to the saddle, not white and attached to the rider's back. That is how it is depicted in virtually all period art. Unfortunately I can't remember where I have all of it saved.