Archived threads in /his/ - History & Humanities - 4118. page

>>475283
Of course.
Where'd objective meaning come from? God or something?

what's your point, buttboy? you wanna point boys in the butt and get away with it?

>>475283

In the absence of any other information and without the vast academic industry and scientific and philosophical canon we have now, it was as good an answer as any.

It's servez a purpose nowadays for oldies cramming for the finals and for reactionary edgelords reaching for ideological justification for their sense of superiority in the face of overwhelming evidence to the contrary.

Religiose edgelords are just as bad as their atheist counterparts in terms of shitting up a discussion.

He was so furious he had to sit down.

Probably not much.

>>475282

It was an election year and popular opinion wanted this to be done.

War is hell ain't it?

>tfw your nice defensive wall turns into a slightly sloping hill

>>>/lit/ is for fiction

File: amazed-Neil-cillian-murphy-31977298-279-273.png (148KB, 279x273px) Image search: [Google]

148KB, 279x273px

>>474343
it looks so right... pax europa

>>474343
Polishfag detected

File: 1430864262658.jpg (51KB, 480x446px) Image search: [Google]

51KB, 480x446px

He certainly believes so, which goes hand in hand with him being very cult-leader-ish

Not a chance.

He's not really a philosopher in my opinion, more like a propagandist for a very narrow political group.

I've never heard of him, in what subjects do he publish?

Turco-Mongols happened, and plague

>>473947
>Then around 1600 they surpassed thier Asian masters in Persia, China, etc
>around 1600
The Herodotus at the top of the board is weeping....

Muslim Enlightenment, Islamic retention of Greco-roman greats, Islamic green revolution.

File: 1418104060075.png (120KB, 486x417px) Image search: [Google]

120KB, 486x417px

Where's your dress, faggot?

>>473932

wut

>>473929
straya plz

File: 1435605941476.jpg (24KB, 288x499px) Image search: [Google]

24KB, 288x499px

>talking about fiction on a historical board

>>473721
Preferably a documentary without Hollywood money thrown at it.

>implying the jews in Hollywood would let this happen
It takes away their social capital

>>473366
Yes.

>>473366
plenty actually senpai. blackbeard. calico jack. claas compaan.black sam bellamy idk those are just off the top of my head

Look into Exquemelin. He was an indentured servant who ended up in the ownership/employ(?) of I believe Henry Morgan, and he somehow got back to Europe and wrote a book about 17th century piracy and Caribbean colonial life as a whole.
There's some crazy stuff in there.
Buccaneers were all crack shots with muskets because they tended to blow their loot on ammo and booze. They'd pack into a quick, tiny boat, head for a merchant ship and pick everyone off they could from a distance and then rush aboard. Often somebody would drill a hole in the bottom of the boarding vessel so there would be no option but to take the other ship.
Upon taking a ship and its cargo, they'd head for a town and party it up, spending all their cash on booze, women and ammo until they were penniless and had to do it all over again.

>>472890
>https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Nj43X-VBEPE [Remove]

Pretty impressive to do it in one take

>>472931
What is with the weird American flag?

>>472890
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hWTFG3J1CP8

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eFTLKWw542g

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=me4E5wDCK2Q

>>472525

www.google.com

>>472525
>communists
>Slavs
>Jews
Literally everything he hates

>>472525
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t6o84NU9Ees

>>471996
No, iron and steel naturally being much much denser than water people wouldn't be able to swim in armour.

However, in armour made from wood like the samurai wore it is possible to swim.

File: late_for_arms_and_armour_thread.webm (2MB, 794x472px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 794x472px

>>471996
>chainmail
I know who you are

>>471996
I've heard that one of the German tribes could, and the Romans used them to attack across the Rhine against some other Germans.

This thread is relevant to my interests. I never really thought about it till now, but now I am curious too.

File: Fredrick The Greats Army (2) infantry (missing cover)-28.jpg (263KB, 1200x1589px) Image search: [Google]

263KB, 1200x1589px

>>471779
In short: a lot of factors
1) Visibility. Age of Black Powder. Shit created lots of smoke. Had to identify your troops with a bright, singular color in the battlefield
2) Identification. Obviously
3) Yes, some countries did base it off their flags. See Sweden's yellow and blue uniforms.
4) Identification of soldier types. Often enough cavalrymen and infantrymen wore different colors. Hell some regiments even had a different color.
5) Other factors. For example: the British Red Coat is red because red was the cheapest, most visible. dye color in England.

Oh and a lot of people had overlapping uniforms. France and Austria were both white actually. A lot of German states wore blue.

File: z62.jpg (41KB, 293x513px) Image search: [Google]

41KB, 293x513px

>>471779
>was there a cunt going around saying "you guys will be blue, and they're red" or something?

Honestly, that's probably actually the most accurate answer. There's no absolute scientific reason why certain countries preferred certain colors for their troops. There's about as much reason to it as why a certain style happens to appeal in that country. It all comes down to who is designing the uniforms, and whatever designs the military decides to accept. As to the question of why they would consistently choose the same color scheme, it's likely simply a matter of tradition.

Not absolutely.

There's nothing wrong with knowledge, provided you keep in the back of your head that all of it is potentially fallible

File: peirce tsundere.png (183KB, 297x504px) Image search: [Google]

183KB, 297x504px

Logical positivism is stupid and dead.

However science is pretty great because scientific truth is determined by something outside of humans so there can't be any disagreement.

Basically it was a big joke and the landed elites had all the power.

>>483077
How did the HRE work? It didn't. Full stop. Did not work.

Depending on the individual power the prince, things could very a great deal. The Elector of Brandenburg/King in Prussia, along with the other secular Electors- Brunswick-Luneburg (also called Hannover or Lower Saxony), Saxony, Palatinate, Bavaria- also had a great deal of independence. These guys could pretty much declare war on each other or foreign nations whenever, especially after Westphalia, but the Emperor usually tried to mediate (unless they declared war on him, which happened often). Two Electorates- Cologne and Mainz weren't secular, but owned by the Catholic Church, along with many other bits of territory. These Sovereign bishoprics had various degrees of autonomy and local government, many functioned like Imperial cities, some served as proxies for the families of the secular Electors, some "civil administrators" in the Northern ones were the Danes and Swedes using Protestantism to get footholds in Germany. The rest of it's seperated into Imperial Cities and Principalities, a few of the Duchies like Pomerania, Mecklenburg, Wurtemburg, Baden-Baden, etc. were more like the secular electorates, but others were little proxies or ruled by minor gentry. Imperial cities were just free cities that usually were governed like mercantile republicans, with a nod to the Emperor.

The Habsburg lands are the awkward squad of areas that would be powerful and independent, but have been conquered (usually by a Habsburg heir and a pretty daughter) and merged into a great monstrosity known as the Crownlands- including several "Austrias"- Inner, Outer, Further, Upper, Lower; as well as Tyrol, Silesia, Bohemia, Moravia and Hungary. Most had local estates that constantly wrestled with the Habsburg Emperors until Ferdinand and Wallenstein generally put a stop to that business.

>>483105
Cont.

So, pretty much the whole mess was theoretically governed by the Imperial Constitution, built upon since Charlemagne and by the 18th century, was literally impossible to compile (I'm not kidding, a guy wrote 150 volumes wasn't near done). What was important about the Imperial Constitution is not the powers it granted the Emperor, but the powers it granted everyone else. Much like Ancien Regime France, everyone had their own little rights and privileges that completely hampered reform in any war, barring war.

As for your question about a bunch of nation states (not a thing yet, but you'll get a pass) banding together when someone else threatens them...well, no. The only exception to that is the Turks, which the Emperor did play up to get war taxes in his military zones in Croatia (yes, also a Habsburg Crownland). Usually, everyone provided men and money against the Turks. There was a big exception at the beginning of the 30 Years War, where Bohemia and Hungary offered themselves as Turkish Protectorates as long as they could keep their Protestant Kings (Frederick, Elector Palatine and Bethlen, Prince of Transylvania).

Every other war was basically like that, with a few states actively working against the Emperor and the majority not really giving a rat's ass about what the Emperor did as long as he left them alone.