Are there any well-documented cases of excessive individual human suffering? It doesn't matter if it's man-made (acute radiation syndrome, specific examples of torture) or natural (epidermolysis bullosa), it just has to explain the pain that's being experienced.
So how exactly Greece was able to defend against Persia which was able to field 300k soldiers but got conquered by Rome?
1. The number was substantial but not that large
2. Strategically, it's far easier to defend than conquer
3. Darius and Xerxes were literal retards who thought spamming their enemies with troops was a foolproof strategy, and the Greeks used that retardation to their advantage
Are there any leaders who are more meme than leader? Boudica was a massive failure, and yet she's revered by so many people for her failed rebellion. Even Vercingetorix is less of a meme than Boudica, and yet she's hailed as the greatest of the Celtic peoples.
Why is Boudica such a meme, and is there anyone who is a bigger meme than she?
People are enamored with leaders that rally revolutions within an occupied people. William Wallace and Judah Macabe are similar figures in that regard.
I need to write an essay (4-8 pages) for my History of Africa (V to XIV centuries) about literally ANYTHING. Can be a essay about a fact, a culture study or even an essay about the historiography discussion on the subject. I'm looking to use African's writers such as Mbokolo or Paulin Hountondji, so please be criative 'cause I don't have any.
PIC not related
>The empire became renowned for the wealth of its rulers, especially Mansa Musa.
>The life of Mansa Musa, the richest person in history
Can God create a rock so heavy that he himself can't lift it?
No, because the existence of such a rock would entail that he is not omnipotent. God cannot do things that entail a lack of power on his part. Certain activities are the result of lack of power, as opposed to an abundance of power. For example, you can only be healed if you can be damaged, God also lacks the ability to be healed, because to be healed requires that he first be hurt, which would be a negative attribute to him that would entail a limitation on his power. There are some things God cannot do, as a result...
Comment too long. Click here to view the full text.
No he can't because God doesn't exist.
Was H.M.S. Pinafore the first real worldwide blockbuster sort of sensation?
Consider how it was initially staged in London to modest audiences, but seemed to explode all at once in America, Australia, and London again after awhile.
I'll come out and say I'm a Pinafore-fan, but I'm really curious as to why Pinafore in particular seemed to get everybody so excited across the globe, what is it about Pinafore that made it so universal that other G&S Operas (Trial by Jury, Iolanthe, the Gondoliers) might have lacked?
Also one more question,...
Comment too long. Click here to view the full text.
Yes. It's probably the closest earliest analog to it.
It's popularity was probably due to it portraying a dysfunctional state in a way that the others didn't quite do so.
>Pinafore and light Opera in general was the unique expression of nationalism that the U.K. seemed to express
I wouldn't quite go that far. It was light satire only.
Water Margin actually.
First Fanboy Fiction phenomena too (started the Elaborate Tattoo Craze among East Asian Criminals)
Were knights on foot feared/intimidating to the average man-at-arms, foot soldier etc? 14th-15th century era. Was much effort done to avoid them or deal with them?
Depends on your man at arms, some where mostly security guards of a castle who most harassed peasants, some where mercenaries who were criminals during peacetime and fought for pay during times of war and some where serfs who could barely hold a spear and point it in the right direction
Not really, infantry of the time still relied heavily on densely packed formations. Individuals, regardless of how well equipped and trained, would be pretty ineffective against a shield-wall of mass of pikes unless the knights had appropriate numbers, and the average soldier would know this.
A man-at-arms denoted someone who had access to the same kind of equipment as a typical knight, it wasn't a literal term, there is no way a serf could ever be one.
Louis XVIII invited Wellington as guest of honour to a Ball in Paris. When he arrived the Marshals of France whom he had so resoundingly beaten in previous campaigns turned their backs on him. A blushing Bourbon king apologised for their rudeness but the Iron Duke just shrugged his shoulders and said
>Tis of no matter your Highness, I have seen their backs before.
>about to say there's too many 'I's buddy
>remember Louis XVII
>After the battle the 1st Foot Guards were given the title “the Grenadier Guards” to commemorate the regiment’s role in overthrowing the French Grenadiers of the Old Guard. All ranks were given the bearskin cap to wear.
In 63 BC, Servilia contributed to a scandalous incident during a debate in the Senate over the execution or imprisonment of the Catiline conspirators, when someone handed Caesar a letter and it turned out that it was a love letter from her, after her half-brother Cato, who was on the opposing side in the debate and horrified by the ongoing, had accused Caesar of corresponding with the conspirators and demanded the letter to be read aloud.
What is the philosophical origin of what modern globalists consider centrism? Which thinkers gave us NAFTA and the EU?
I mean... it's capitalism. If you want one word to describe it, without getting spooky, without making up a new term, it's capitalism.
Just because it doesn't look like a free market doesn't make a difference, the thing we call capitalism doesn't require them.
how the hell is philosophy a thing, like, get a fucking job
philosophy majors usually end up as lawyers, policy analysts, editors, writers, professors, psychologists, whatever. being able to read difficult texts thoroughly, extract important information, and think logically and comprehensively are incredibly important skills.
source: math major lmfao
ITT: Controversial historical figures who LITERALLY did nothing wrong.
Hey /his/,at what point do you think the fall of the Ottomans start?
The whole Islamic world went to shit after 1700.
How do you go from this...
>[IDEOLOGY] killed millions
>[WEAPON] killed millions
I can't tell.
Either instance attempts to push the burden of responsibility off of humans and onto something more abstract.
Ideology always because without the idea the weapon would never be used to enforce the ideology. Without the weapon the followers of the ideology would adapt to find a new weapon or way to get what they want.
I was asking which implication was worse, hence the greentext. You guys are saying that ideology actually kills people, not that the implication that ideology kills people is dumb, which was the quesiton.
Which implication is more stupid?
Ideas kill people.
Objects kill people.
I think both are rooted in a fundamental fallacy that attributes the responsibility of actions to forces outside of the people committing the action.
What are the best /his/torical movies and television shows?
Posting the GOAT.
The Adventures of Asterix.
Was it ever feasible?