Do you agree with this basic timeline of history?
What would you change?
needs more memes
arbitrary boundaries
i would stop thinking in epochs altogether
Also, shouldn't Prehistory say 3 million / 3000 AC in fact say 3 million / 3000 BC?
Its shit, also eurocentric as fuck. No mention of the great migrations, mongol-turkic invasions that fucked up pretty much the entire old world, industrial revolution, and Columbus discovering America should be "Eastern and Western hemispheres make contact"
>>288811
For literally the third time.
>>288816
>Implying "Contact" involves raiding and pillaging for a little bit and then going home
>Implying anyone believes the Japanese HUEHUEHUE theory
>>288821
>Migration period
>Not important
>>288773
>neololithic
>lolithic
That's what I would change. Neolithic doesn't contain 'lol'
>Paleolithic
>Neolithic
These are useful terms within Eurasia, but they start/end at different times in different places. Useless for Africa/Americas.
>Ancient
Completely useless.
>Medieval
Slightly useful for western Eurasia (alongside Late Antiquity), useless everywhere else.
>Modern
Probably the only good one, since it's the start of worldwide globalization on a new scale.
>Contemporary
Only useful in Europe.
>>288773
New age begins at the end of WW2, and I'd place the end of medieval age at 1453 because I'm a filthy Byzantineboo. Otherwise, pretty okay.
No.
Pre-Antiquity (most interesting stuff is still in the middle east)
Antiquity: 612 BC - 627 AD (Battles of Nineveh)
- 612 BC - 330 BC: Persian Dominance (middle east falls to invaders from the east)
- 330 BC - 146 BC: The Hellenistic age (middle east falls to invaders from the west)
- 146 BC - 627 BC: Greco-Roman VS Parthian-Persian shitfest in the middle east
Middle Ages: 627 - 1453 AD (middle east frees itself from the yoke of Indo-Europeans)
>>288773
Medieval age/modern age isn't really a set date but more of a gradual change. Realistically you can put it as early 1350 or as late as 1520.
>>288873
This is good. Would you define the "Ancient" (or rather, pre-antiquity) period as one of Middle Eastern ascendancy? And what about the period after 1453, is that defined entirely as the lifetime of the Ottoman Empire? If so, it would give even more importance to the First World War, even more so than it has in the West.
Not a bad scheme, desu sempai.
>>288773
>Vague boundaries with no explaination of what each period actually is or why it ends
>no context or brief summary of events
>Eurocentric as fuck
>Even then it acts as though Europe is a singular entity with a single historical timeline
>dismisses anything post-1789
Thats just from a glance senpai. its unsalvagable desu
>>288896
Yeah, Ancient history is basically agriculture and the first civilizations in the middle east.
After 1453 the history of the world shifts it's center from the middle east to Europe, which eventually lose their central position with the beginning of the world wars.
Why 1453? It's the end of the medieval Byzantine empire, but also the closing of another trade route to the east for Christian Europeans, putting more impetus on finding another way to Asian goods. The resulting exploration makes the middle east irrelevant for trade, and Europe the new center of the world.
What to call the historical eras after 1453 is hard, but definitely they are going to be Euro-centric.
Ottoman empire is cool, but not revolutionary. The printing press spread all over Europe in the 15th century, but the Ottoman empire banned it and had like 1 printing press in the 19th. Ottoman empire was doomed from the beginning.
>Not mentioning 1453
It's shit, that understanding of history literally dates back to the Middle Ages (the "three eras").
First of all history isn't linear. Different civilisations each have their own history, and you can't conflate them into the same periods.
Now you can do a periodisation for Western civilisation specifically for example. For the West, a good one would be:
486 - 800: Dark Ages
800 - 910: Carolingian Renaissance
910 - 1144: Romanesque Era
1144 - 1492: Gothic Era
1492 - 1637: Renaissance
1637 - 1789: Enlightenment
1789 - 1968: Modern Era
1968 - present: Postmodern Era
But again this only applies to the West. If you were to look at the East, or China, or India, or Greece/Rome, you'd have to make a different periodisation for each one.
>>288955
I'm pretty sure the shift away from the middle east occurred earlier.
>>288973
Middle east was the trade hub of Eurasia until Vasco da Gama found the way to India in 1498 and Albuquerque conquered the spice trade in the 1500s.
>>288968
This, I hate this kind of useless reductionism.
You're periodisation is good, but I think the Renaissance starts well before 1492.
>>288996
I am aware of that but the spice trade didn't make the middle east the center of world history did it?
>>288847
>muhhh eurocentrism
Is this the hip new meme?
>>288834
>I'm counting the initial gooks that walked over the landbridge
No contact if there's nobody to contact with.
>and the vikings getting fucked over by Skrælings
Historically insignificant and anecdotic, it had literally zero transcendent results.
But I agree that we should just say something "Columbus travels to america".
>>289007
What the fuck are you even trying to say?
>>288773
If you mean to place the start of the modern age coinciding with the start of the discoveries I'd go with Vasco da Gama reaching India by sea as the event that got that age off the ground, since the discovery of the Americas was Spain's plan to find another route to India
>>288968
>1968 - present: Postmodern Era
How can we be living in a postmodern era when today is modern?
>>289007
>ignoring 90% of world history is good
Shit tier opinion senpai. regretting asking Hiroshima for this board desu its turned into a real shit show
>>289003
That and the silk trade was the only thing tying the very separate civilizations of the Eurasian continent (and most of the world's population) together from the Confucian civilization in the far east to the Western European civilization in the far west.
We call Indian numbers for Arabic numbers you know, and that is because the Middle East controlled what arrived in Europe and what didn't.
>>289015
Hey there John, I mean to say that ever since antiquity up until the cold war Europe has been the figurative center of the world since the large majority of history defining events started there so it's not off base to ue it's history to mark the beggining and end of epochs
>>289021
History that while it existed had a very small impact compared to the way things that went down in that small continent shaped the history of thw other 90% of the world
>>289001
Thanks. You're correct for the Renaissance, except that at the start it was really limited to a couple of cities in Northern Italy. It really only started spreading to all Western Europe around 1492 (which is coincidentally also the date of the discovery of America and of the final expulsion of Muslims from Spain).
Though the border between Gothic and Renaissance is also not quite as clear as we used to imagine.
>>289019
Well the term modern was already used in the 19th century, and time keeps moving forward. I think it still applies though, since everything that still structures our world today, be it nations, states, laws, ideologies... are modern in the sense of being creations of the Modern Era.
>>288773
It's ok for teaching at schools but antiquity should be divided between the age of oriental hegemony and the age of romano-hellenistic hegemony. Also, between ancient history and medieval history there should be Late Antiquity (maybe with a different name to not confuse the kids) from the 3rd century crisis to the rise of islam. The "Modern" period that starts in 1492 or 1453 should end more or less in 1914, and it should be divided in two periods with the start enlightement separating them. We call post world war 1 contemporary history, a rather short period of barely a century, but time will tell if some of those years should be recolocated into the previous era of the enlightement or a new long era of mysterious name.
Dates are not monolithic and it should be understood that they may vary depending on the specific region. It should be also understood that you cannot make a division for the history of the whole world, so eurocentrism is a virtue here (if you're gonna study Europe).
>>289034
>the Middle East controlled what arrived in Europe and what didn't.
And China/India/Europe controlled what arrived in the middle east didn't they?
contemporary age begins with the Restoration.
>>289056
What about the Northern Renaissance though?
>>289067
Europe was basically throwing their cash at it, if that is what you mean. Gold and silver was continuously gushing out of Europe to the middle east like an open wound.
>>289071
There was great art, but is it really a break from the Gothic? The first artist to paint realistic faces in what would become Renaissance style was Giotto, and that's 13th century, definitely still Gothic Era.
I think other factors have to come into play to define an era, like the intellectual dominance of Humanism, the Protestant Reformation, the beginning of colonialism, the rise of the Habsburgs...
What date would you pick?
>>289092
Yes? They wanted that shit but what does that have anything to do with it? They were a conduit not some sort of central organ organizing world trade at that point.
I still don't see why that makes the middle east the center of world history before 1453.
>>289121
Jan van Eyck and his contemporaries were a pretty huge break from Gothic. It's pretty clear when you compare Early Netherlandish painting with contemporary International Gothic, which is somewhat naturalistic but a very different style.
Personally I don't think any singe date can be called the start of the Renaissance, since like you said there are a lot of different factors. I tend to just leave it at 'the 15th century', since it doesn't seem possible to narrow it down any more than that.
>>289035
Is your entire thought process shaped by memes?
>>289176
When I'm posting in an imageboard I tend to use them, yes
>>289121
I don't know if I would call the period renaissance. Antiquity is determined by the fall and rise of an empire, the industrial age by the invention of a bunch of machines and the renaissance (primarily) because of art.
If I wanted to pick something really setting the medieval period apart from another period it would be the end of a certain empire, demographic change or and industrial/urbanization level.
The end of the Crusader kingdoms, the Black Death, the abolition of serfdom, the beginning of European exploration, centralization of states and more changes like that.
Europe after the crusading era wasn't drastically different but post Black Death Europe was. The abolition of serfdom in France was also a rather weird yet unremarkable process and hardly revolutionary in any way.
I'd say the black death changed the social and economic setting of Western Europe enough for it to provide a reason to explore new trade routes. The conquest of Ceuta (1415) can be seen as the first step in European colonial empires and the black death was around 1350. You also get things like large scale usage of gunpowder weapons, plate armor and such from the 1350s onward.
>1453-1648: (European) Renaissance
1648 - Peace of Westphalia
>1648-1789: Enlightenment
>1789-1914: ???
>1914-1945: The World Wars
>1945-1991: The Cold War
>1991-Current year: Manifest Destiny
The Peace of Westphalia is a nice pan-European moment when modern diplomacy and statehood was born and the "end" of "religious" wars.
>The treaty did not entirely end conflicts arising out of the Thirty Years' War. Fighting continued between France and Spain until the Treaty of the Pyrenees in 1659. Nevertheless, it did settle many outstanding European issues of the time. The principles developed at Westphalia, especially those relating to respecting the boundaries of sovereign states and non-interference in their domestic affairs, became central to the world order that developed over the following centuries and remains in effect to this day (as of 2015).
>The Peace of Westphalia established the precedent of peaces established by diplomatic congress, and a new system of political order in central Europe, later called Westphalian sovereignty, based upon the concept of co-existing sovereign states. Inter-state aggression was to be held in check by a balance of power. A norm was established against interference in another state's domestic affairs. As European influence spread across the globe, these Westphalian principles, especially the concept of sovereign states, became central to international law and to the prevailing world order
I think it is a nice place to separate the Renaissance era from the Enlightenment one.
>>289225
Last religious war in Europe to IIRC.
1969 - Today
1991 - Today
2001 - Today
Contemporary age should have ended in one of the years above.
>>288773
i'm pretty sure "history" only starts with the invention of writing since badly drawn ambiguous shit on caves can't be considered historical evidence...
but if not i would add the domestication of animals because without them we would still be living in small villages - not only those used for meat but also dogs and horses.
>>288811
again this shit? europe was where most shit happened.
and only the roman empire empire and the french revolution are something europe-related and the discover of the americas if you push it enough...
>>289236
Why 1969?
>>289281
moon landing
>>289288
>muh mooooon
Yes we planted a flag on it and took pictures purely for the sake of giving the soviets the middle finger, whoopdeefuckin doo, call me when we invent fusion or something.
>>289208
Well the Black Death and the Hundred Years War really put an end to the most brilliant part of the Gothic. But it's more an end than the beginning of something new, so I wouldn't go that far back. I'd definitely say 15th century.
And I actually think art periods are quite useful since they reflect a change that affects all facets of culture. Which is why I went with "Romanesque", "Gothic"... Enlightenment could just as easily be referred to as "Baroque".
I would change medieval to 1453 because it's cooler
>>289296
it changed everything. landing on the moon became irrefutable proof that man can leave the earth entirely and-someday-permanently.
People used to think the planets were gods and the stars were the heavens or something. Actually landing on one of those changed everything for human psyche.
>>289288
Go eat a burger.
>>288856
>New age
lel
So it should go like this:
modern era -> contemporary era -> new era
What happens when we run out of words to say "now", will we abandon this retarded naming scheme?
>>289307
If you're one of those people that thinks we'll be on Mars and have a transhuman utopia 100 years from now then boy do I have some bad news for you.
>>289298
I agree the reflect the culture behind it for a part but in that regard it's more of a product than an indication of events that happened.
Van Eyck is also rather weird because he pops up out of nowhere with pretty much photo-realistic paintings, no precedents or anything no slow evolution just bam and there it is. The duchy of Burgundy though is quite a key player in post black-death Europe and in many regards they together with France and England signaled what was to come, stuff like a central government, standing army etc etc. Maybe we should pick international gothic as art movement?
>>289333
Its hilarious how "basic timeline of history" excludes the two richest and most prosperous countries in the world for 8/10th of the last 2000 years.
Aka India/China.
>>289351
Yeah 1415 has some good events. Conquest of Ceuta and beginning of European colonization, birth of the first Habsburg emporer, burning of Jan Hus at the stake.
>>289356
After the Mongol conquest India and China weren't that well off were they? Wasn't the early Ming with Zheng He the last peak of power they had?
>>288773
>inb4 butthurt non-whites claim it's eurocentric even though Europe is factually the only continent that mattered outside of its borders
Remember that time when China did relevant stuff outside of China?
Neither do I
>>289367
Both India/China were well off into the late 1600s , far ahead of everyone else, including Europe as a continent. China's economy (and cultural/technological production) easily dwarfed Europe till 19th century.
>>288773
Mesopotamians were using writing in the 5th millennium BC equivalent to early Hieroglyphs.
>>289376
>>289385
What am I looking at? Number of candies per person?
>>289333
>I agree the reflect the culture behind it for a part but in that regard it's more of a product than an indication of events that happened.
That's a materialistic view that I disagree with. I think events are more the product of cultural evolution than the other way around (though it's obvious they both influence each other).
Nobody ever talks about how remarkable it is that an entire civilisation like Western Europe (but the same applies to any other) will at almost any given time in its history all do art in the same style, with only marginal regional variations (until the Modern Era of course, when art styles started to fragment, eventually into nothingness). This is something that can't be explained purely materialistically
>>289396
I believe it's GDP per capita.
>>288773
apart from atrocious spelling and inappropriate images (no mammoths in Pleistocene Africa) the 'ancient, medieval and modern age' don't exist as academic principles, Thomsen had his way with the three age system based of stone and metal technologies.
>>289412
>per capita
>relevant to empire level economic output
>>289425
Muh Luxembourg
>>289405
>I think events are more the product of cultural evolution than the other way around (though it's obvious they both influence each other).
You can't start producing oil paintings without oil paint being invented nor can you paint without having an income or a patron commissioning work.
Same goes for the voyages of exploration, the only reason people even tried to find another route was because there was an economic inventive.
>>289425
>>289356
>the two richest and most prosperous
>per capita
>relevant to empire level economic output
A country or empire isn't prosperous if 99% of the people are dirt poor farmers is it?
Anyways following your train of thought regarding empire/country level economic output France has been the premier European country for the past 1000 years making the Italian city states, Flanders and the Dutch republic completely irrelevant.
>>289454
Anyways here is the paper.
http://www.nuffield.ox.ac.uk/users/broadberry/China8.pdf
>>288773
>AC
What the fuck does this mean?
>>289454
Nice stats.
Holy shit, was Song China that good? I once read that Song China was a good candidate for industrialization, is that true?
>>289543
They had quite a lot of good shit like the Blast Furnace, irrigation and more. I reckon they got close.
>>289520
Eh thanks?
here is Adam Smith on China.
>China has been long one of the richest, that is, one of the most fertile, best cultivated, most industrious, and most populous, countries in the world. It seems, however, to have been long stationary. Marco Polo, who visited it more than five hundred years ago, describes its cultivation, industry, and populousness, almost in the same terms in which they are described by travellers in the present times. It had, perhaps, even long before his time, acquired that full complement of riches which the nature of its laws and institutions permits it to acquire. The accounts of all travellers, inconsistent in many other respects, agree in the low wages of labour, and in the difficulty which a labourer finds in bringing up a family in China. If by digging the ground a whole day he can get what will purchase a small quantity of rice in the evening, he is contented. The condition of artificers is, if possible, still worse. Instead of waiting indolently in their work-houses for the calls of their customers, as in Europe, they are continually running about the streets with the tools of their respective trades, offering their services, and, as it were, begging employment. The poverty of the lower ranks of people in China far surpasses that of the most beggarly nations in Europe.
>>289566
>In the neighborhood of Canton, many hundred, it is commonly said, many thousand families have no habitation on the land, but live constantly in little fishing boats upon the rivers and canals. The subsistence which they find there is so scanty, that they are eager to fish up the nastiest garbage thrown overboard from any European ship. Any carrion, the carcass of a dead dog or cat, for example, though half putrid and stinking, is as welcome to them as the most wholesome food to the people of other countries.Marriage is encouraged in China, not by the profitableness of children, but by the liberty of destroying them. In all great towns, several are every night exposed in the street, or drowned like puppies in the water. The performance of this horrid office is even said to be the avowed business by which some people earn their subsistence. China, however, though it may, perhaps, stand still, does not seem to go backwards. Its towns are nowhere deserted by their inhabitants. The lands which had once been cultivated, are nowhere neglected. The same, or very nearly the same, annual labour, must, therefore, continue to be performed, and the funds destined for maintaining it must not, consequently, be sensibly diminished. The lowest class of labourers, therefore, notwithstanding their scanty subsistence, must some way or another make shift to continue their race so far as to keep up their usual numbers.
>>289433
Oil paint existed in the Middle East since the 7th century. Why didn't they make Renaissance or Baroque or Impressionist paintings? Everyone had economic incentive for trade, why didn't anyone sail West before?
The human mind isn't an automaton where you input resources and economic pressure and it computes art and philosophy.
>>289570
It actually is. You just have to set the right condition and everything falls into place.
Put a human in a fear ridden environment and they will begin fearing. Put them in fun ridden environment and they will begin having fun. Same thing applies to being innovative, creative, etc.
There is nothing special, nothing god given, about whites that other countries can't emulate or create with right conditions.
>>289580
>Put them in fun ridden environment and they will begin having fun
If you've just learned that both your parents have died while you're at a theme park, will you be "having fun"?
>>289570
Well I must agree with you on some things yes. Certain art styles are part of cultural movements and not so much technical capabilities. That said I do think cultural environments are shaped by outside forces.
>>289590
>changing input
Like automation, if you change the conditions, the results would differ.
This doesn't prove your point, it further proves mine. :^)
>>289373>Remember that time when China did relevant stuff outside of China? Neither do I
Except everything China did affected the countries around it to some extent considering it was (And is) the dominant power in East Asia. Every country there started off copying China.
>fall of Rome mentioned
>Bronze Age collapse not mentioned
Utter shite picture
>>289597
>>changing input
But I'm not. I'm just saying that despite being in a fun environment (a theme park), if you learn that both your parents have just died you probably won't be having much fun, thus proving that "environment" doesn't dictate what the individual feels, thus refuting your whole moronic post.
>>289601
Still believing in Egyptian calendar fuckury
>>289605
You changed the initial default conditions to a specific condition.
You changed the input.
>>289621
You didn't precise any "input". Your words literally were : " Put them in fun ridden environment and they will begin having fun", independently of "default conditions", which by the way you did not define.
Anyways, stop being an autistic fucktard.
>>289606
>BEC is only based on Egyptian timelines
Well memed.
>>289373
remember the time when Japan did relevant stuff outside of Japan?
I do
>>289628
>lose argument
>call autist
lel, its okay. You're dumb I still accept you.
>>289639
/his/ is full of autism, but it's not noticed because people here try to be serious lol, it's like a reddit 2.0
>>289543
Here is a wikipedia article giving some of the song advances.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Economy_of_the_Song_dynasty
>>289639
>>lose argument
How the fuck did I lose the argument?
You saying "lol u lose" doesn't make me lose the argument you know. You're supposed to argue my points (which you can't, because you're a fucking moron).
Anyways, go kill yourself, you won't be missed.
>>288773
REMOVE HUMAN
>>289668
so, that leaves 0 credit to the japanese? god you are fucking retarded
>>288773
>writing 3000 BC
Generous number, and writing didnt spread much at all for the longest time.
Basically you had history in a very limited space, and prehistory else around the world.
Thats the problem, not everybody moves at the same pace.
>>288821
>(migration period is) not exactly that important in my opinion.
Your opinion is shit.
>>289772
beating the russians, colonizing korea, fighting china isn't that much?
>>289772
anime
>>289791
>beating the russians
In Asia
>colonizing korea,
In Asia
>fighting china
In Asia
>>289772
Its continent is half the world's resources, people and a vast chunk of its land.
Europeans have a small peninsula, of course they moved out to be relevant. Japan didnt need to.
>>289810
all of them, outside of their borders
>>288773
WTF is this AC/BC crap? This is a history board, use AUC please.
>>288773
I completely agree with that periodization.
>>289040
>this idiot doesn't realize that he's saying the only time period worth studying is late 1800s to now.
>actually believing "very little impact" meme
>>289580
>literally believing all humans are identical automatons
I can't even imagine what level of alienation you have to reach to believe something this retarded.
>>289288
>>289307
Then you need to set the clock back to 1961 when Gagarin successfully orbited the Earth.
>Americans will never stop claiming space exploration for their own glory when all they did was piggy-back Soviet ingenuity and bravery and the only reason Americans did it was for anti-communist ideology, not for scientific progress
Pisses me off desu.
>>291670
If the conditions are same, the results would be same.
There is nothing special about humans that makes them defy laws of causality.
>muh human exceptionalism
>muh souls
