Archived threads in /his/ - History & Humanities - 187. page
Images are sometimes not shown due to bandwidth/network limitations. Refreshing the page usually helps.
>your favorite period in history
>where would you be located
>what would you be (realistically) doing for fun?
For example, if you couldn't become a great general now, you wouldn't have been one back then either.
I would've probably joined the cult of Pythagoras, or some other edgy esoteric society.
>>1313790
>For example, if you couldn't become a great general now, you wouldn't have been one back then either.
says who, faggot?
>>1313822
I don't care about some anon's opinion on how differently he would've handled Germany as Hitler or France as Napoleon, the minutiae of history is what intrigues me most.
Could a Christian theocracy succeed, or would it be brought down by corruption and revolution?
>>1313650
Hasn't this question already been answered by stripping the Papacy of legal authority?
>>1313650
There will always be some form of corruption with human's leading other humans. Even if it was a theocratic system that ruled on faith there would be corruption and people not interested/rebellious of the order. Theocracy can't really work anymore in the West, since most formerly Christian nations are secularized now.
>>1313759
Perhaps someone should start over from scratch.
How much would it cost today to have a practical, intricate, and custom fitted suit of armor made for you /his/?
>>1313623
about 10-15k €
that's how much custom yorois cost I think plate would be in the same area
Google is your friend. Search for "pro fight armor" and you should find some stuff. Also watch some "knight fights" if your are into that kind of stuff.
>>1313623
Your dignity
what is /his/ opinion on bart erhman
>>1313463
It's interesting that people lose their shit over what he says when half of what he says is historically solid and the other half is backed by decent evidense. Most attacks I've seen him are character attacks but everyone with a real phd seems to think he is fine, if a little mediocre.
There is a push from theists that hate him to paint him as a lone gun man pushing his crazy theories when infact what he pushes doesn't deviate much from the normal historical understandings. When angry Christians...
Comment too long. Click here to view the full text.
>>1313463
A very unfortunate character.
He went into academia interested in the historicity of the Bible and eventually lost his faith because of it.
And then he gets shat on by the community he used to belong to.
His work is hella legit though.
I wanna get into philosophy so I can stimulate my mind and more importantly shit post.
What books should I start reading?
A classical mechanics textbook
>>1313367
None man, I shitpost all day and have yet to finish reading beyond the first chapter of The Ego and Its Own.
HRE is 100% holy, roman and an empire
you can't prove me wrong if you tried
It was pretty based imo I don't know why /his/ memes against it. Very sophisticated governmental and judicial structures.
Well done, OP. Very well done.
HOWEVER
>>1313307
>>1313322
First, was the Holy Roman Empire holy? It is hard to imagine that any worldly kingdom can be truly holy given the things that people have to do to stay in power. The Holy Roman Empire was certainly not holy. For example, the Holy Roman Emperor Henry IV was excommunicated by the pope for his role in the investiture controversy. In this controversy, the emperor wanted to keep appointing high church officials as emperors had been doing in the past. Appointing...
Comment too long. Click here to view the full text.
![Angry+feels+some+speeding+asshole+ran+over+my+cat+today_58163f_5507890[1].jpg](https://i.imgur.com/UffhcfF.jpg "Angry+feels+some+speeding+asshole+ran+over+my+cat+today_58163f_5507890[1].jpg")
MARK ANTHONY SHOULD HAVE WON
>>1313297
You mean Mark "ceaserfuckedhersoishouldtoo" Anthony?
What filthy pagan filth are you worshiping this time annon?
Marc Antony is like the reader insert beside the Mary-Sue. He's the Nick to Caesar's Gatsby.
>>1313297
To be quite honest here, Rome sucks.
t. Hellenophile
>There will never be anyone as based as Caesar again
I miss him bros
>>1313020
>Destroy a perfectly functional republic and turn it autocratic
>Not even a state of emergency in which all of Rome is in danger, just because it tickled his fancy
>Get stabbed to death for being a traitor
>Based
Brilliant sure, but not based. He started the empire, and with it a long trend of degeneracy and decline leading to the eventual collapse.
>>1313075
>i dont know history but am shitposting on /his/
Noted
>>1313075
>degeneracy
>social decadence contributes to political collapse
I'm not saying social decadence is good, but I won''t believe you on this without a source. I mean, I've never seen anyone explain the mechanism behind how this would even work.
Was the Soviet Union and other 20th century Marxist-Leninist states merely Positivist states without the economic imperialism?
I've been working on this question for the last day or so, since I started thinking about it.
>Concept of a Government of Experts planning the future of the country
>Building up industry
>Transitioning a "backwards" country to modernity
The real difference is that the Latin American countries that adopted Positivist governing...
Comment too long. Click here to view the full text.
>>1312985
Nothing wrong with foreigners investing. Sure they get the profits but you get to use/buy whatever they invest in which you didn't have the option to before. Now if you have a banana republic where they control the state that's bad, but the same could be said for any group holding the state not just foreign investors per se.
>>1313007
I'm not making an opinion on any ideology, this is merely a thesis, not a judgment on Leninism or Positivism or Stalin, just something I'd do for a Master's thesis if I were to go to grad school for Russian history (I'd focus on the early Soviet Union likely as the early 20th century and ideology are two things I'm really into
>>1313007
>being this defensive for capitalism that any discussion on development is seen as an attack on your ideology
class cuckery knows no bounds
This is not a bait thread, I'm not a fedora; I'm legitimately curious.
I've heard some theists say, in defense of the bible, regarding issues like rape and murder, that we cannot think of them with a "21st century moral mindset", or something to that effect.
What I'm interested in is how historically true that is? Was rape and the like so common-place in the era the bible is referencing as to not cause a negative reaction?
>>1312908
Rape and murder are pretty bad no matter what "centuries moral mindset" you reference, so I'm not quite sure what you are asking.
Generally, where there is a population of uneducated poor people, there will likely be more rape and murder, so some periods of history may have been rappy-er than others. But the universal disgust toward the actions were almost always the same.
I can't think of any society that viewed rape as anything but evil.
Murder, as libtards call it, is actually killing and murder, or, in Greek from the time of Luke, "" and "". Obviously there were other distinctions. Today we have degrees of manslaughter and murder, as one example of modern distinctions formalized over centuries of informal argument and linguistic development.
Now you ask about the difference between modern and ancient morality. You make a mistake in claiming frequency of an event ever integrates itself into morality; that...
Comment too long. Click here to view the full text.
>>1312990
That's the same sort of retardation that leads to people blaming proactive defense practitioners and calling them murderers, even though the murderee wou'd have been the murderer if the critic had his way prior to the murder evwnt, suggesting the critic can percieve his interference as willful contribution to a society in favor of free murders, ergo he's a hypocrite, more commonly explained by the critic's terminal retardation. And just as terminally retarded people often go on to great heights...
Comment too long. Click here to view the full text.
Recently I came upon this article that states there is little to no evidence of the one handed military flail being an actual weapon used in the middle ages.
http://www.publicmedievalist.com/curious-case-weapon-didnt-exist/
In one of the sources cited (Kelly DeVries and Robert Douglas Smith, Medieval military technology) it is writen that there is some scholarly debate on if these things existed at all. They do not give any sources for this though.
My question to you /his/ is wether any of you are familiar with this debate and what are your thoughts on...
Comment too long. Click here to view the full text.
>>1312779
>>>/k/ please
>>1312809
No this is a thread about the historicity of a medieval object and scholarly debate about said object. Is this not a board to discuss the science of history and other humanities
Makes sense.
There isn't a lot of advantage in terms of kinetic energy, and it makes it harder to hit.
Was the French revolution a failure?
>Allowed for radical factions to take over
>Allowed for Napoleon to take over
>Made any future government in France unstable.
>>1312766
The revolution failed, but things were never quite the same after so you could argue that it won in the long run/in the world of ideas.
![paix_amiens[1].jpg](https://i.imgur.com/MyRt9cr.jpg "paix_amiens[1].jpg")
>>1312766
>Allowed for radical factions to take over
>Allowed for Napoleon to take over
Pretty much any political movement will split off into radicals and moderates. That's not a failure per se. There was literally nothing wrong with pre-1804 Napoleon. There's also a contradiction in these statements: you're at the same time complaining about the radical AND the moderate elements.
>Made any future government in France unstable.
That was the Coalition. That same Coalition that violated the Treaty of Amiens. The one treaty that was supposed to bring peace to Europe and give France the stability it needed after a chaotic revolution. And the stability it was never given, paving the way for the empire.
>>1312766
>Was the French revolution a failure?
>a failure?
at what?
You have provided an incomplete question. As it stand any answer would rest on the value judgments of the answerer. May as well as 'how do you feel about the French Revolution' rather than couching it in a pretension of objectivity.
What is the difference between communism and socialism? There seems to be a great deal of confusion between these two terms for Amerifats for some reason.
>inb4 they're both the same
Socialism still has private property
>>1312414
Socialism grows out of Capitalism and is a system of production based on public ownership of the means of production (Anything from Soviet-style central planning to worker-controlled industrial democracy), Communism is a further development of this, also known as the 'higher stage' of Socialism, with no state, no money, no class system etc.
It would be correct to say that the USSR was a Communist state (They at least claimed to be developing Socialism in anticipation of transitioning to Communism),...
Comment too long. Click here to view the full text.
>>1312414
>for some reason.
Because both were equated with the Iron Curtain and thus everything that used to be considered unamerican.
You have to choose to join the Democratic-Republicans or the Federalists.
Which one do you choose?
Bonus Points: Which one aligns with modern day Republicans and which one aligns with modern day Democrats?
>>1312393
>Bonus Points: Which one aligns with modern day Republicans and which one aligns with modern day Democrats?
Why the fuck do Americans always try to shoehorn everything into their retarded political system where not even red is left wing.
>>1312393
Democratic-Republicans, Hamilton was a shit
>Bonus Points: Which one aligns with modern day Republicans and which one aligns with modern day Democrats?
That's easy, the Democratic-Republicans align with modern Republicans and the Federalists with Democrats. Not that they're actually similar but hey you asked the question.
>>1312393
Pretty sure this pic is a French Revolutionary Cockade
Why can't Americans invent their own symbols?
I see both factions being equally vehement about the others being absolute barbarians
who are the aggressors? Was the Azeri invasion this year justified?
>>1312328
I'll sum it up: The land has always been Armenian and was over 90% Armenian at the end of WW1 when both countries were annexed by the Soviet Union. Before then the British Allied forces had betrayed the Armenian forces who controlled the area by saying it would be given to them at the Paris Peace Conference, but in actuality wanted to give it to the new Tartar state called "Azerbaijan", taking the name of the Iranian province it is not part of, in order to access their Caspian oil reserves in return....
Comment too long. Click here to view the full text.
>>1312328
>Israel
Azerbaijan was in the wrong
>>1312328
Armenia.
Nice to see them not get absolutely annihilated for the first time in history
