Archived threads in /his/ - History & Humanities - 4027. page

was it on polygenderqueer acceptance in nazi germany

>>572588
No

topic? as broadly put as you feel comfortable sharing

>>572567
the brain and nervous system

>>572567
this
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hard_problem_of_consciousness

File: Daniel-Dennett1.jpg (67KB, 2100x1397px) Image search: [Google]

67KB, 2100x1397px

>>572574
Fucking #rekt

It's awesome if you are into Catholic dinduism.
The guy that owns the channel fights really hard to combat his autism but sometimes it just spills out. His assasins creed video and the comments were cringe worthy.

Historically he just pushes catholic dinduism by manipulating the evidence, hiding the ones that do not support his argument, relating stuff that have no evidence of relation at all just to prove his point, citing scholars while ignoring the counter arguments or even a consensus refutation against them. etc etc.

Its pointless to argue though, he is a catholic his viewers are mostly catholics so its just pointless.Back in octochan few catholics called me out and I literally sat down and spent 2-3 hours to show how shitty his videos are and how his catholic bias really detrimental in adressing history.Its like debating real islamic history with a guy from sauidi arabia.

It's really bad history.

>>572514
I don't find Catholic bias inherently worse than secularist bias. The latter is pervasive, after all.
Whatever you think of his videos, he cites his sources and encourages viewers to read Crusades experts like Riley-Smith and Madden to form your own views.

https://www.youtube.com/user/TheGreatWar

The idea of this channel is pretty cool.

Lenin, among other things.

>>572434
1) Greeks got greedy
2) Greek allied support is largely moral & material. France and Britain are tired of war that it left Greece to it and cheered them from the sidelines.
3) The officer corps of Turkey actually survived WWI. Greece was up against WWI Vets.

File: 800px-ParisPeace-Venizelos-Map.png (165KB, 800x554px) Image search: [Google]

165KB, 800x554px

>tfw this could be greece after ww2 if greece didnt fuck up

Minnesota, Michigan, and Wisconsin have developed their own unique culture, yet all these maps lump them in with the East Coast for some fucking reason.Seriously, it's like two different worlds.

>>572396
Yankeedom needs to be split into New England and Northern Cities/New England, Upstate, and Midwest.

That Spanish caribbean thing in florida is horseshit

New Netherland has to have a little less of Jersey

I live in the Northwest so I might be wrong but I find it extremely hard to believe that "El Norte" extends that far north.

Did North America as it currently is nationally the most boring permutation of all the possibilities that could have been? I mean, there could have been a free Quebec, a free Texas, a free California

File: NT.jpg (1MB, 3508x2480px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 3508x2480px

>j-jesus didn't exist!
>there's no proof!

>>572397

this is the most stupid shit ive seen this month

>>572268
Successor states had bigger fish to fry (each other).

Also Alexander's Classic Macedonian Army wasnt used no more. It was mostly mercenaries and levies.

http://www.perseus.tufts.edu/hopper/text?doc=Perseus%3Atext%3A1999.01.0234%3Abook%3D18%3Achapter%3D31

>Why is it then that the Romans conquer? And what is it that brings disaster on those who employ the phalanx? Why, just because war is full of uncertainties both as to time and place; whereas there is but one time and one kind of ground in which a phalanx can fully work. If, then, there were anything to compel the enemy to accommodate himself to the time and place of the phalanx, when about to fight a general engagement, it would be but natural to expect that those who employed the phalanx would always carry off the victory. But if the enemy finds it possible, and even easy, to avoid its attack, what becomes of its formidable character? Again, no one denies that for its employment it is indispensable to have a country flat, bare, and without such impediments as ditches, cavities, depressions, steep banks, or beds of rivers: for all such obstacles are sufficient to hinder and dislocate this particular formation. And that it is, I may say, impossible, or at any rate exceedingly rare to find a piece of country of twenty stades, or sometimes of even greater extent, without any such obstacles, every one will also admit.

>>572268

one part of is was that all the successor states did not want to rely on their non-greek populace for their armies, preferring to draw them from Greek colonists. This kept their armies much smaller then you would expect.

Another part is that the whole Macedonian style of warfare was incredibly effective and pretty much unmatcched at the time - as long as you have the institutionla knowledge and training to properly support it - i.e. know how to effectively coordinate the various parts of it in a battle to cover eachothers weaknesses and play to eachothers strenghts. most of the successor states gradually lost this, as old knowledge was lost and training standards began to relax.

>>572234
This is going to sound bullshit BUT.

It's probably ahistorical. Multiple cultures demonstrate the knowhow of blowjobs. So its not just the French.

I think its a holdover from the 19th Century in which France *was* the place to be in Europe for sexual shit due to the Liberal lifestyle that took hold there during the 18th Century after the Revolution.

I read a book once on Urban France and Women for one of my classes and on sexuality, there was a bit there that shows a lot of Single French Women-workers in the 19th Century are pretty much some man's kept woman.

I knew the answer but I forgot. Completely srs.

File: Thaler.jpg (67KB, 854x480px) Image search: [Google]

67KB, 854x480px

>>572234
A curious question indeed.
The problem is, tracing this myth back only gets you in the 16th to 17th century, when france was a big player in continental Europe.

So the dialogue in Tudors is ahistorical.

>Was the blowjob associated with France IRL?
Not really, more like english slander.

>Why are blowjobs associated with the French?
Probably because like anything sexual, you use stuff like 'xy nationality likes to do z' as way to demean your opposition.
Like lazy italians, cowardly frenchmen and so on.
>Are they good at it?
>Why?

No clue, but Louis XIV centered the whole court life around his persona. It would be a clever conjecture to also apply it to all things sexual in the aristocracy at the time.
Since roman times a fellatio was considered a one sided act. The receiving end(woman or guy who sucks dick) and the empowered end (guy who gets sucked off).

So yeah, I hoped I could anwser a few questions, but sexual history is really iffy.

You have hardly any sources and those who exist are locked tight because old laws against indecency were never updated.

>>572161
>ottomans fought it
But they didn't; the Empire had fractured into several smaller dynastical successor states which were all competing for power and prestige. The Ottomans filled a vacume which came about from the collapse of the Seljuks.

The Ottomans only "fought" the Seljuks insofar they fought the Sultanate of Rum, which was a successor just like the Ottomans were.

>>572161
The other anon is right, the Seljuks had more or less vanished by the time the Ottomans rose to power. But to address your question about fellow Turkic Muslims fighting one another, one could say it's the Seljuks themselves that popularized the idea.

Before the Seljuk conquests, Muslim internecine violence was only justified against heterodox movements and rebels. In the 11th century the Seljuk court compiled a series of dynastic histories and political thought, drawing from 9th and 10th century Ghulam Turkic predecessors as well as the likes of Mahmud of Ghazni, to spread throughout the Middle East the cyclical destiny of Muslim Turkic dynasties. There is first the founding figure, the ascetic border warrior who experiences religious revival or rebirth and forges a kingdom through war against pagans or decadent Muslims. Then his son becomes the serious lawmaker who adopts the trappings of high court, turning the dynasty into a royal line in contrast with the humble origins of the father. Finally the grandson squanders the kingdom by living soft and impiously, wastefully even, and weakens the dynasty leaving it vulnerable to another poor warrior to forge a new dynasty over the crumbling remains of the last.

The Ottomans were only following this narrative trope when they fought and conquered other Anatolian Muslim princes.

i see, thanks lads

Nips can't read

>>571941
Traditional sentiment and rigid control structures kept anything close to socialist or communist organization from springing up.

Look at Mishima for example.

Communism is socialism.

Socialism isn't communism.

Use terms correctly.

>>571877
It wasn't useless. Keiser Willy's horrible diplomacy pitched it against the world's strongest navy. It was first the rivalry and later the fight that KM could never win.

>>571887
It was used once during 4 years of war, excluding one-ship raids and submarine warfare. It looks useless for me

"dreadnoughts have no wheels!" - Willy II

The plan was to clobber France, turn east and rout the Russians, and be home in time for tea long before the naval blockade could make any difference.

>>571830
Feudalism is the great equalizer.

1. slavery was practiced
2. it was gradually abolished in different places throughout the medieval ages and then in the Renaissance
3. The difference between colonial slavery and previous slavery is that it was specifically done in the colonies. You wouldn't find slaves in Britain in the same sense that you'd find them in its colonies; what happens in the colonies, stays in the colonies.

>>571830
The collapse of long distance heavy bulk trade for one. Slavery is an expensive business. You have to procure some slaves to begin with, which has substantial cost whether you're raiding for them yourselves or buying them from someone else. To make up for that expense, you need to sell them at an even higher price, and for that you need a market. Only, you have to ship these slaves to said market, and unless you have plenty of bulk shipping driving down costs you'll be limited to markets within a small radius from where you acquired the slaves. This wasn't sustainable, as much of Europe after the fall of Rome was still undeveloped, with little material wealth outside of the elite who, having plenty of manpower at their disposal in the form of the native population reduced to serfdom, had little need for slaves at least on a large scale.

File: Western roman empire.gif (3MB, 145x83px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 145x83px

>>571739
I can't answer the last question (I think it has something to do with Frisians) but I can answer the first one as best I can.

Romans left a power vacuum in their European holdings that was replaced with irrelevant, short lived states that were almost unanimously conquered by Germanic Barbarians, the Franks being the conquerors of France just as the Saxons/Jutes/Angles conquered England, Visigoths conquered Spain, etc etc. The Franks are probably the most successful example of this.

>How did they manage to be from a small irrelevant germanic tribe to conquering most of what is today X European country?

A variety of factors led to x German tribe conquering x former Roman province to become x modern European country, but the factors are usually agreed upon as primarily this

>overpopulation
>huns
>political instability within tribes
>climate change ( http://www.pbs.org/wnet/need-to-know/environment/was-the-roman-empire-a-victim-of-climate-change/6724/ )

The fall of the Roman Empire was so perfect you could have thought that God had to have connected all of the pieces himself.

>>571739
>Also why isn't Nederlands called Frankia since that is their ancestral tribe name and language?
Frisians

>>571739
>Also why isn't Nederlands called Frankia since that is their ancestral tribe name and language?

Because the Netherlands isn't the ancestral land of the Franks. Tht Netherlands were originally Frisian lands, slowly conquered, settled and assimilated by Frankish speaking peoples.

>>571672

>So do theists believe a singularity is god

Yes

There is nothing to believe, this universe started from a singularity, and the rapid expansion of space and time from that point is what we call the Big Bang.

This has been proven without a shadow of a doubt.

>>571672
>Atheists believe
Just stop. This shit needs to stop. The amount of religious shit-posting is just staggering.

Atheists don't believe in God. That's it.

> So how do they think the universe was created

Some probably don't care and will claim they don't know but that some scientist some day will find out. But it's not something you can say "atheists believe" any more than "Christians believe you shouldn't eat dogs".

File: US forces in Vietnam.jpg (466KB, 2099x1422px) Image search: [Google]

466KB, 2099x1422px

>>571638
I'll do some of my Vietnam War folder now.

File: SVA Gen. Nguyen Ngoc Loan executes VC officer in Saigon. 2:1:1968.jpg (284KB, 1600x1154px) Image search: [Google]

284KB, 1600x1154px

>>571656
Here's one we've all seen, still a good one.

File: ogjohn.jpg (103KB, 650x494px) Image search: [Google]

103KB, 650x494px

>>571658
No background on this picture unfortunately.