Archived threads in /his/ - History & Humanities - 632. page
Images are sometimes not shown due to bandwidth/network limitations. Refreshing the page usually helps.
How strong would be a united Italy in the middle ages?
>>910191
Probably as strong as Spain or Portugal. Tuscany would produce some of the best explorers, cartographers, sailors etc in Europe. My LARPey fantasy is to have Italy unite in like 900 AD and have an established Kingdom until the modern day.
>>910191
Italians are lazy so it's unlikely it would've done much
>>911300
Come again son?
Give me a tl;dr on Hinduism
>>910120
maya
Daily religious devotion to a special diety. Different from other religions because there were a shit ton of god's on earth at one point in history.
>>910120
There is only one Reality and we are it
You're free to take a piece of paper and do whatever you want with it. What do /his/?
I'd fold it into a bird.
Sell it to the Indians.
i choose not to tell you what i do with it
Here's what I think is going on bros:
I think existence is either
A) the Supreme Brute Fact, an irrational, inexplicable efflorescence of Something into Nothing, and when we die that's it and suffering is a sick joke made by a sick fuck who isn't even there
or
B) if we grant a primacy to consciousness, quality, meaning, beauty, love, whatever you want to call what it is that validates and justifies subjective existence, and if we recognize the remarkable congruence of spiritual testimony across all religions and wisdom traditions, then...
Comment too long. Click here to view the full text.
Can you rewrite that in a way that doesn't make you sound like a bellend, and why you believe these things?
>>909955
>big words must mean woo woo
B-b-back to plebbit
I don't get why A and B are mutually exclusive.
Even if A is objectively true, very few people are going to live their life as if it is true.
Why north africa has such a rich history (Carthage, moors..) when the sub-saharian part was stone age tier until the 19th?
>implying
West African trading empires, East African kingdoms, and the Swahili city states were pretty cool
>>909834
Because it was colonized by semites, greeks and romans and not sub-saharans
They are close to Europe, so trade. And they were part of the Roman Empire, so they experienced hundreds of years of relative peace. I don't know about the complexity of African governmental systems, but thanks to Rome they had a history of relatively good government.
>Said that America should be a nation of small farmers
>Across the sea James Watt had invented the Steam Engine, thus setting the stage for the Industrial Revolution which would make small farmers uneconomical and obsolete.
Tommy J. was a decent guy but he most definitely was not infallible or always right.
>>909707
Nobody's perfect.
TJ was a coward who couldn't fathom responsibility or destiny as a nation; he was a smallminded politician in ways that Hamilton, Washington, and Madison clearly were not. Easily in the lowest quartile of founding fathers.
>wanted to keep the country small
>proceeds with the Louisiana Purchase
If we're talking about presidents who said one thing and did the other, for the good or not, TJ has to be one of the worst
Did Christianity cause the fall of Rome?
Did Christianity contribute to the decline?
What else contributed to it?
If Christianity didn't cause the fall, what did?
no
yes, inasmuch most things contribute to most other things
loads of factors
loads of factors
>implying massive events like the falling of an entire empire have singular, simplistic causes
>implying these causes aren't far too complex for anyone to ever understand
>>909295
but muh immigration
Was he a good general ?
>>909134
he played with the tactics that others created.
He was never a bad general, but he was never a good one either. He was just known for trying to kill Hitler and beating the shit out of a horribly led army in North Africa. His escapades in Normandy weren't out of this world and probably sum up his skills best.
>>909142
The replies for these threads are so typical, always basically the same.
>no he was overrated shit and complicit in Nazi crimes
>yes he was best general of the war and supreme gentleman
Was Africa a mistake ?
Does evolutionary history count as history?
>>908886
Sure, I guess, it's anthropology right?
>mfw paranthrapoids
I would consider it biology and/or archeology, since early human evolution predates recorded history, therefore making it difficult to study history beyond theorizing when and how evolutionary advancements occurred.
>>908886
me bottom right
Was there any chance of the North Sea Empire surviving? Or was it only possible because of a sick Cnut?
>>908692
That really doesn't have anything to do with the North Sea Empire, the Vikings of Dublin/Isles weren't really related to Cnut.
Anyway, Cnut was the sole reason the NSE survived at all, the rights of succession doomed any long term success. By the time Harald Hardradda tried to reform it, the Kingdoms where too independent.
>>908688
>Was there any chance of the North Sea Empire surviving?
Nope. It was kept together by Cnut, his underlings were incompetent and unpopular. Cnut kept the whole thing stable but even he wasn't well liked. If he had more time to stabilize his empire it might have survived, but very few states survived due to one mans will alone.
What is the most convincing argument against solipsism?
>I'm a god mind floating in the void that thought up the entire universe
lel
>>908598
There is no point in using language if yours is the only mind.
>>908600
The world is way too oddly specific for me to have thought up.
Only way I'm gonna buy it is if someone else though up this shit, because I sure didn't.
Did soldiers of ancient battles get ptsd? Or medieval or renaissance times warriors? Or is ptsd a modern warfare phenomenon?
>>908505
Yes. Shakespeare's Hotspur clearly has it, as do several ancient heroes.
Prior to the development of modern medicine you're going to find it very difficult to find modern medical definitions for illnesses. Obviously.
>>908507
Who were the ancient heroes you mentioned? Are they from ancient myths and stories like Shakespeare or historical records and documents?
What would the world be like today if "Communism" had continued to spread and the U.S. hadn't have intervened? Which nations would still be Capitalist, and which nations would still be "Socialist"?
Would all of Africa and South America have adopted Marx if Guevara was never killed? Would South Korea be Socialist and possibly Japan and all of the Southern Asiatic nations?
It just means more North Koreas. Period.
>>908415
Nothing would have happened except Dow Chemicals would make a few billion less.
The CIA and the Americans in general couldn't stop shit.
By 2016? All countries would be "capitalist" as every Communist nation would ditch Marxism by now or have collapsed.
If we're taking US Intervention literally, the USSR wouldn't have survived WWII (No US Intervention means no US feeding the USSR, arming it, and funding it to stop Hitler). If we take "no intervention" even further the USSR doesn't even form because Britain and Germany don't fund Trotsky and Lenin.
So why did Hitler let the Brits escape?
>>908374
Cause he was not the genious that some people seem to believe.
Did this meme start because nobody can believe that French soldiers defended Dunkirk?
>>908385
> le ebin surrender monkey maymay
Is anyone else utterly unconvinced by the idea that the middle east would be peaceful if states were created along "natural" borders after WW1? Considering the amount of mixed ethnic areas, especially in big cities, surely there'd still be ethnic conflict. And even if the resulting states were fairly homogenous, an ethnic group happening to sit on a lot of resources will cause inter-state ethnic violence. The middle east would still be violent but in a different way.
>>907037
It's about more than just natural borders, but the administrative system in each state. The issue with the borders today is that they were drawn at the political convenience of London and Paris, which delegated their rule to their outposts in Damascus and Baghdad.
London and Paris came to dominate their respective nations through several centuries of political, cultural, economic, and military influence, but Damascus and Baghdad spent most of that same time as one of several competing cities all serving distant masters in Turkey, and later Europe.
So rather than leave behind a federal system like the U.S. where each state in the union handles its own affairs, the French and the British made nation-states in their own image where one capital city bent all others to its will.
This worked in smaller sized states like Jordan, where the capital was the nation more or less, but in Syria you have Damascus, Homs/Hama, Aleppo, and Raqqa and Deir-ez-zor, all cities that could be capitals in their own right but suddenly had to bow to the will of Damascus and its political elite. Same thing with Iraq. Strongarm dictators forced the arrangement to work with lots of bloodshed and under the table dealing, but now it's impossible.
>>907037
The question isn't whether it would eradicate violence, its would it be better or worse than it is right now? Considering that much of the conflicts are over land and territory, yes.
>>907037
They need some nationalism
