which was more important to the rise of Europe?
>>441487
Germany
France because they started WW2
The UK by far, because not only did she spawn some great Enlightenment philosophers such as Locke, but the British Empire was way more successful than the French. I would say the French should receive credit for their contributions towards British culture (Norman Conquest of 1066 brought French to Britain and improved the English language) but Britain really took the seed of success and went with it on a larger scale.
>>441502
Germany started World War II by invading Poland and impinging on the treaty of Versailles.
>>441498
Eagle totem. Again. Imp. Damn. So mush eagles of labels on this planet. Eagle is bird aggressive as Cerberus.
UK, no question. France was instrumental in the downfall of Europe though, and that is certainly noteworthy too.
>>441490
Germany may be my favorite European nation, but they didn't bring Europe to prominence.. rather they were originally the ones who ruined European empires like the Romans.
France obviously.
The only time when England wasn't totally overshadowed by France was after Napoleon.
>>441490
Germany ruined Europe.
France creates, England corrupts, Germany destroys.
France, England was mostly a second-tier player in Europe for most of its history, only being of equal importance with French come the time of industrialization and colonialism, when they were arguably a bit more important.
But as far as their historical relevance goes, I'd say France has the edge.
france
not even a question
>backwards inbred island meddling with continental affairs
>always making clear they are BONGs not YUROPEAN
opposed to
>french thinkers, artists, military contributions
>literally giving half of the world codification
>bringing freedom and justice
baka senpai, this board is down the shitter because of angloshits and their lack of knowledge about anything but shagging sheeps
>>441487
England of course. Frogs can't into Industrial Revolution
>>441487
France was definitely more important for inner development in Europe and overall until 19th century. Britain spent time building their colonial empire not caring about continent.
Eh I have nothing better to do, so let's recap by eras of Western history, even though I’m pretty sure nobody will read this:
Dark Ages:
There's some disagreement on whether or not to call it France, but the only relevant part of Western Europe at that time is Gaul, where Francia becomes the only Dark Age kingdom to survive, and the foundation of Western Christendom and what will become Western civilisation.
Carolingian Renaissance:
Francia now also includes much of Germany and Northern Italy, but England is still outside this reconnection to civilisation.
Romanesque Era:
Cluny is the origin of the rebirth of the Catholic Church and of the first original Western art style, the cathedral schools of Northern France are the centres of scholastic thought, and the feudal system is created in France, with the French nobility becoming the most powerful force in the West, leading the Crusades as well as the conquest of England itself.
Gothic Era:
The Gothic style is known as the "French work", and the University of Paris is the centre of all intellectual life and of the beginnings of a scientific revolution. French is a lingua franca all across the West, most kingdoms of Europe are ruled by family or vassals of the French king, and all the great works of literature, and the codes of chivalry and courtesy originate in France. France itself is now centralised and very powerful.
But England for the first time starts being relevant in matters of philosophy and science, with Oxford becoming the second most important university after Paris. It is however culturally indistinguishable from most parts of France, with a French-speaking nobility and intellectual class until the Hundred Years War, and its achievements in that time are probably a reflection of that.
(1/2)
Renaissance:
Both France and England are not terribly relevant. France mostly plays an important role as the main opponent to overwhelming Habsburg power, and as the first country to expand the Renaissance out of Italy.
Enlightenment:
Enlightenment and the Scientific Revolution are primarily French movements, but British thinkers definitely come in second. Culturally France completely dominates Europe as everyone else imitates it in everything, and politically as well where it treats Germany as its protectorate and regularly defeats large coalitions assembled by Britain. Britain starts building a colonial empire though, which by the end surpasses France’s, though mostly because of a lack of interest on France’s part, more focused on continental expansion.
Modern Era:
The founding event of this era is the French Revolution and it continues to form the basis of modern politics. But after Napoleon’s defeat Britain for the first time replaces France as the dominant Western power, and controls a superior colonial empire. France holds on to its cultural dominance though, and produces most of the great inventions of this era, although it is in Britain that these are first effectively used for profit and where the Industrial Revolution begins.
Postmodern Era:
The philosophical basis for this era is yet again French with the post-structuralists, but otherwise it is completely dominated by America, with France and Britain about equally irrelevant.
(2/2)
>>441487
The question is would France have industrialized without Britain
>>441531
What are you on about now?
Colonialism
>>442865
Would Britain have ever industrialized without France?
I think not, without the French, the inhabitants of Great Britain would still be a bunch of Elvish-speaking barbarians. France civilized Britain.
>>442998
England was much more developed than France in 1066, who's king didn't have any authority outside of Paris.
>>442881
>MUH EMPIRE
>R-RULES THE WAVES
>>442465
Germany IS Europe. Britain is a tumor on Europe, constantly trying to keep Europeans down.
>>441487
The UK, how is this even a question? Home to both the enlightenment and the industrial revolution
>>443019
The Normans cucked france and became English.
>>443034
>Germany is Europe
>>443115
Are you implying the enlightenment and the industrial revolution did not originate in the UK?
>>443127
Enlightenment originated in France, this is pretty obvious even to most English people.
jews are more important because they fled to other countries and made them prosperous first italy->spain->france->the netherlands->england->USA
Iluminati confirmed :)
>>443034
>Germany
>Doing anything other than destroying europe and western culture
Just fuck off stormweenie
>>442478
This.
>>443138
The actual enlightenment was Scottish.
>>442491
Industrialisation and colonisation were the main reasons that Europe was able to be economically superior and exert its power globally and the UK unquestionably had a much greater contribution in both of these fields. So much of what made industrial development possible was pioneered in England and Scotland.
>>441511
This explains quite well how did Britain contribute to itself (and maybe India), not to Europe.
>>443170
The term "Scottish Enlightenment" is only relevant for Scotland. It means that Scotland graduated from being totally irrelevant shit-eating savages to actively participating in Western civilisation. Doesn't change that the heart of Enlightenment was France.
>>442859
>as the first country to expand the Renaissance out of Italy.
Absolute twaddle. The Hungarians, Germans, and Burgundians were all greater patrons and revelers in the Renaissance far before France. The Northern Renaissance, the actual expansion of the Renaissance outside of Italy, does it include France as a primary contributor in its beginnings. France started as periphery and largely as patron to the Netherlandish and Italians.
>Enlightenment:
This entire section is an enormous generalization. You're correct about France's medieval relevance, but the breadth of the enlightenment is far broader than you purport it to be.
>Culturally France completely dominates Europe as everyone else imitates it in everything
Early-modern French artistic movements are effectively derivative imitations.
Also you sound like you have cognitive dissonance about France's ultimate colonial irrelevance relative to Britain.
>France holds on to its cultural dominance though, and produces most of the great inventions of this era
Such an enormous generalization, just like the enlightenment, you're simply attributing too much to France at this point.
Not to mention, you're compelled to mention the Habsburgs but completely leave out the objectively recognized dominance of German philosophy in the modern era.
Poor show/10
You're better off running with the Frankish-Medieval dominance, because your claims about their modern relevance is overwhelmingly biased. Also that Frankish (which unquestionably led to medieval) dominance was initially quite contingent on what the Roman's left behind, something you fail to mention.
>>443195
Even assuming the Anglocentric myth that the highest purpose of Western civilisation is to spread into malaria-infested swamps, Cluniac Christianity, the Age of Discovery, the Scientific Revolution, and Enlightenment were all more relevant to achieving that than the Industrial Revolution.
>>443218
>Renaissance
The spread of Italian Renaissance is generally considered to begin with the Italian Wars. It's pretty minor though and I marked France as relatively irrelevant in that period.
>Enlightenment
Well there needs to be some generalisation to answer the question of which country was more relevant, but for this period I think it's pretty clear that it's France.
>Early-modern French artistic movements are effectively derivative imitations.
You mean the Baroque? Secular baroque architecture did start in France. But I was thinking more of how in every European country the elites spoke French, read French authors, followed French fashions and lifestyle. France was to that time what America is to ours. And no idea what cognitive dissonance you're referring to.
>you're simply attributing too much to France at this point.
I'm not seeing any argument here.
>completely leave out the objectively recognized dominance of German philosophy in the modern era.
This thread is about comparing France and Britain.
>contingent on what the Roman's left behind
I don't see how.
>>443217
>Hume, Smith etc.
>only relevant to scotland
>>443259
They're certainly not as relevant as Rousseau, Voltaire, Montesquieu, Diderot or d'Alembert, not to mention Descartes.
>>443257
>The spread of Italian Renaissance is generally considered to begin with the Italian Wars.
The spread of 'Italian Renaissance' and Renaissance expansion are two different things.
>the first country to expand the Renaissance out of Italy
Is horribly inaccurate. The French were great patrons of the Italians, but the Northern Renaissance had already begun for decades beforehand.
>but for this period I think it's pretty clear that it's France.
>Secular baroque architecture did start in France.
And the relevance of 'secular baroque' is completely dwarfed by Dutch Golden Age baroque and the origins of the architectural style in Italy. And Rococo is just derived from baroque.
>But I was thinking more of how in every European country the elites spoke French, read French authors, followed French fashions and lifestyle.
Massive, biased generalization, you forget to what extent France has been culturally influenced by the rest of Europe at this point. Not to mention who the great musicians and artists of the era are. (hint: not French)
> And no idea what cognitive dissonance you're referring to.
Sour grapes about how France had better things to do than pursue a colonial empire, when there's far more too the context than that.
>I'm not seeing any argument here.
Because your bias is transparent, there's no need to argue against something as ridiculous as claiming France 'produced most of the great inventions' of the modern era, and while England's writers and artists were flourishing, that France still maintained a cultural dominance.
>This thread is about comparing France and Britain.
Then why did you bring the Habsburgs up?
>I don't see how.
So you don't know basic Frankish history?
The infrastructure, social systems, and intellectual legacy of the Romans was quite important for the Franks.
>pierre the baguetteboo has shown up
>again
>writing the exact same things like no one will notice
France and the Italian city-states developed european high-culture.
Britbongs are the ones who spread it all over the world.
The sole purpose of England was to cockblock France every once in a while.
Fuck the eternal Anglo and vive le Roy
>>443324
>France, Italy, Germany, Holland, and Britain developed European high-culture
Fixed.
>>443296
>Dutch Golden Age and German music
I'm not seeing anything about Britain here.
>to what extent France has been culturally influenced by the rest of Europe at this point
So? Everything is a product of its environment, that's a completely meaningless statement.
>Sour grapes
I get you've been brainwashed by 200 years of Anglocentrism that places colonialism as the highest possible human achievement because it's the thing Britain managed to be the best at, but at that time colonies were a consolation prize for a country that was unable to expand in Europe. Before the 19th century French colonies were entirely private enterprises and the French king didn't lift a finger to protect them. France was all about expanding its continental borders. It's only after Napoleon when it could no longer do that that France started caring about colonies as a substitute.
>something as ridiculous as claiming France 'produced most of the great inventions' of the modern era
Which other country can top the steam engine, the internal combustion engine, the aircraft, photography, and cinema (just to list a few that come to mind)?
>while England's writers and artists were flourishing, that France still maintained a cultural dominance
Are you serious? I can't think of a single relevant English artist other than Turner, or of a modern English author other than Dickens and possibly Byron. The only possible rival you could argue for French culture at the time would be Germany. There's a reason that all relevant American intellectuals of any kind spent their youths in Paris, not London.
>Then why did you bring the Habsburgs up?
Can't you read? I said France was the main opposition to Habsburg power.
>The infrastructure, social systems, and intellectual legacy of the Romans was quite important for the Franks.
No, all those things were abandoned during the Dark Ages. And if Roman heritage was the defining factor, why didn't Italy become the heart of the medieval West?
HABSBURG SPAIN
/THREAD
>>443371
>I'm not seeing anything about Britain here.
Neither did I see anything about Britain
>But I was thinking more of how in every European country the elites spoke French, read French authors, followed French fashions and lifestyle.
There. Because you've clearly gone beyond France relative only to Britain in your arguments, so I'll respond in the same manner.
>So? Everything is a product of its environment, that's a completely meaningless statement.
Aha but it's not, because the degree to which you see France as this sole region of spawning amazing things above all others.
>I get you've been brainwashed by 200 years of Anglocentrism that places colonialism as the highest possible human achievement because it's the thing Britain managed to be the best at
No, I think colonial empires are boring, opportunistic, hollow imitations of ancient empires. And I don't particularly care for Britain either.
>Before the 19th century French colonies were entirely private enterprises and the French king didn't lift a finger to protect them.
And? Britain's largest colonial armies weren't British. Britain didn't pay for its primary colonial armies. Britain let private enterprises run free until around the 19th century too. Not a surprising phenomenon.
>Which other country can top the steam engine, the internal combustion engine, the aircraft, photography
England and America, since both of those countries have inventors considered to be pioneers of those things, are you actually retarded enough to claim that France and French inventors were the sole creators of those things? You're literally irrational if you are.
>I can't think of a single relevant English artist other than Turner, or of a modern English author other than Dickens and possibly Byron.
Of course you can't, your world doesn't exist outside of France apparently.
>I said France was the main opposition to Habsburg power.
Again, why did you bring the Habsburgs up?
>>443371
>No, all those things were abandoned during the Dark Ages.
Absolutely not.
God what the fuck are you smoking, serving as a primary basis hardly classifies as abandonment.
> why didn't Italy become the heart of the medieval West?
Because Italy had been irrelevant for centuries and sacked by Goths who were then themselves destroyed, unlike the Franks and Frankish Gaul.
>>443150
>implying Britain hasn't been sabotaging the largest economy for over a century just to stay on top
You can really tell that Britain has been doing the history writing.
>>443371
>Which other country can top the steam engine, the internal combustion engine, the aircraft, photography, and cinema (just to list a few that come to mind)?
>Are you serious? I can't think of a single relevant English artist other than Turner, or of a modern English author other than Dickens and possibly Byron.
too much wine, pierre?
>>443371
>Which other country can top the steam engine, the internal combustion engine, the aircraft, photography, and cinema (just to list a few that come to mind)?
>implying France invented any of those
>>443371
>Which other country can top the steam engine, the internal combustion engine, the aircraft, photography, and cinema
Is this bait
Are you for real
>>442478
France is the Wyld, Germany is the Weaver, England is the Wyrm.
Britain wins
>>443432
France definitly invented steam engine, aircraft and cinema
Rest is bs though
SMITTEN BY BRITAIN
M
I
T
T
E
N
B
Y
B
R
I
T
A
I
N
>>443572
Taking into account that Switzerland, the better part of Belgium and the Netherlands acutal belong to the German cultural sphere, 'Germany' wins.
>>443408
>>443416
>>443426
>>443432
>>443444
>>443576
Haha oh wow...
>>443576
Nicéphore Niépce.
>>441487
oh boy
The histories of Britain and France are so hopelessly intertwined that you really can't describe one without the other. The rivalry between the two was arguably the primary driving force in Europe's development.
However, if I was forced to choose, I must choose Britain. The Empire was simply so vast and wealthy that it had some influence on virtually every country on Earth.
When European politics finally came to a head during the Great War it could be said that the United Kingdom was the most advanced military force in the world.
>>443675
If British influence on the world was greater than France's, why do most countries practice civil law rather than common, use the metric system rather than imperial, drive on the right rather than the left, and are organised as nation-states with constitutions and principles of egalitarian democracy?
>you really can't describe one without the other
You can't describe England without France.
>>443576
>who are the wright brothers
>>443675
>The Empire was simply so vast and wealthy that it had some influence on virtually every country on Earth.
Actually, the British Empire (the one we all know, the 19th century one) had very little DIRECT influence
It only comprised either countries that are now shitholes (Suda, Zimbabwe, Burma..) or irrelevant as fuck (Canada, Australia, NZ)
Even at the peak of the British Empire in 1914, French was still the international language, and English was irrelevant.
The Empire did have a lot of INDIRECT influence though, thank to the USA
After WW2, the US became a superpower and spread English language and Western value to the rest of the "civilized" world (Europe, East Asia, South America).
They accomplished what the British Empire failed to do
>>443683
People who improved the French invention
>>443665
If that guy had been British, English people wouldn't stop masturbating to him and everyone in the world would know his name.
Instead nobody knows him even in France.
>>443683
Heavier than air is what.
Political power:
Britain between 1815 and WW2.
France at every other point in history.
Cultural influence:
France until WW2.
Britain since then, but only through America.
Art and architecture:
France, no contest.
Literature and philosophy:
Probably France, but some room for discussion.
Music:
About on par.
Science:
Probably France, though again Britain is close.
Inventions and engineering:
France.
>>443699
I blame US hegemony (caused by France's superiority over Britain in 1783)
Are the English the most self-righteous faggots in history? They've done so much harm to the world yet persist in thinking they're the peaceful equivalent of Mongols spreading change around the world.
The English have historically tried to deny self-determination to a variety of peoples, including the peoples of France, Germany, and the US. Luckily, in the case of the US, they failed and the world is better for it. And in the case of the Irish, the English were almost barbaric in their mishandling.
>>441487
Spain
>>441511
I like how you didn't even mention the most significant thing here: the Industrial Revolution. All good that we had some decent philosophers, but the Industrial Revolution set us apart from the rest.
>>443949
As might be suggested by your use of "English" when you actually mean "British", you are woefully ignorant of the actual history and you ought to stop embarrassing yourself.
>>443835
>Britain between 1815 and WW2.
Kingdom of England had more influence in Europe than France in the period between the Hundred Years War and Italian Wars. Otherwise correct.
>Inventions and engineering:
>France.
Rest you'd be right, but Britain had some of the most important modern inventors and engineers.
Ironically about everything listed here
>>443371
>steam engine, the internal combustion engine, the aircraft, photography
Was also developed by British engineers/inventors.
>>443630
Whatever you say Klaus.
>>445230
>This
as an american, I can say our anglo brothers are fucking based as hell.
>>445253
>dirty Englishman hiding behind the Union Jack as if nobody knows England rules the Union and always has
>>441487
Those arent Spain or Portugal, OP
>>442857
>England is still outside this reconnection to civilisation.
Hahahahaha
No
Europe legacy is like this:
Rome -> France -> HRE -> Spain -> France
So pretty much France yeah, Britain pretty do nothing for Europe, just parasite from us.
>>442441
Nah mate, War of Spanish Succession left Great Britain on top by the end too
>>447065
>Britain pretty do nothing for Europe, just parasite from us.
>can't even speak English
>negatively criticizes the English anyway
>>445403
Steam engine is Denis Papin, but it's often attributed to Britain because the first practical use of it was in Britain.
No idea how you could make the others British though. Nicephore Niepce invented photography and made the first internal combustion engine. The aircraft was the Montgolfier brothers, and heavier than air flight was a highly incremental development, but all the increments were French except for the Wright brothers and Alberto Santos Dumont (who was only half French). Similarly, all the incremental work in early photography and cinema happened in France.
>>447098
>No idea how you could make the others British though.
Because the pioneers of those things were American and European, note that I said 'developed' and not 'invented', because most of those things were developed and pioneered and not singularly 'invented'. It's a completely misguided notion to think those things, apart from one, were singularly, relatively suddenly 'invented' by a single person/country.
>The aircraft was the Montgolfier brothers,
Case in point, Wright brothers disagree with you there, bud.
>>447098
>No idea how you could make the others British though.
lol you really didn't look into the history of the combustion engine before listing that one did you
>>447112
You know blanket platitudes aren't substitute for facts. The first aircraft was made by the Montgolfier brothers, this isn't remotely controversial.
>>443034
>Germany
>Europe
pick one my barbaric friend
>>447130
>You know blanket platitudes aren't substitute for facts.
I can see your butthurt already.
A blanket platitude is calling the development and pioneering of a technology a blanket platitude, you historically illiterate slime.
Yeah impressive hot air balloon, the first airPLANE, you know, the most produced, widely used, and relevant aircraft in history, was by the Wright brothers, with various, enormous additions throughout the 20th century.
And so in the history of aircraft, the Wright brothers are considered initial inventors themselves, of a different kind of aircraft, and one that isn't a novelty or weather tool today.
>>447121
Alright the combustion engine is another steam engine type deal where the first industrial use of it was British.
>>447149
and you still think the french invented it?
or is your omission of that conceding to the fact that it was developed throughout europe?
>>447148
Maybe you should try to calm down, and look up the definition of the word aircraft.
As for the airplane (that is powered and heavier than air flight), as I explained in my earlier post, it was a highly incremental development, but it happened mostly in France, with the major breakthroughs being the work of Du Temple, Le Bris, and Ader. The Wright brothers didn't even achieve an actual breakthrough, just incrementally longer flight and better control, and they only demonstrated it after Santos Dumont had already demonstrated the same in Paris. The Wright brothers cult is mostly American mythology.
>>441511
Had the 7 years war gone differently, the Empire part (at least) would be reversed.
>>447153
The first internal combustion engine was built by a Frenchman.
If you remember my original post, I said that France contributed more in the way of inventions, but Britain was usually first to apply them industrially. This is a perfect illustration of that.
>>447172
>The Wright brothers cult is mostly American mythology.
>The Wright brothers didn't even achieve an actual breakthrough
>practical and operational success isn't an actual breakthrough, just mostly American mythology
>while pushing the mythology that the French developed the aircraft all by themselves, and the Americans just took the credit for it
>when, again, there where developments made throughout Europe and America
Yeah, okay, it's too much.
Why do you worship France so delusionally?
>>447179
>was built by a Frenchman.
belgian*
kek you're the same guy that gives the french the credit for flemish illuminated manuscripts
>>447173
Unlikely. France didn't care about colonies enough to bother defending them, except maybe Haiti which was the only profitable one. It didn't even take a war for the British to snatch Dupleix's empire in India.
We've been conditioned by centuries of British bragging into thinking that colonial empires are the best thing ever, but at the time European land was considered infinitely more valuable that colonies, and unlike Britain France was still in a position to acquire it.
>>447179
No it wasn't.
>>447198
>and most of those increments happened in France.
Why don't you go and list them then?
Because it seems more like most of those increments happened throughout Europe and America.
>>447207
i can see how this will turn out
>this happened in france
>this happened in france
>this happened in france
>implying anything didn't happen in france
>voila the airplane
>>447207
First self-powered lighter than air flight
First controlled self-powered lighter than air flight
First heavier than air flight
First powered heavier than air flight
First self-powered heavier than air flight
(Also modern parachute, the helicopter, and many other flight related things)
The Wright claim is that their flight was sustained and controlled, but those are a question of degrees and the first clearly sustained and controlled flight was demonstrated by Santos Dumont in Paris. The Wright brothers claimed they had achieved it first, but only made a successful public demonstration two years later. Even assuming they did achieve it, it was only one step of many.
>>441487
both. You wouldn't have one without the other.
Without English colonists, America wouldn't exist. Without French philosophy, the United States wouldn't exist.
And yes, the United States is important to the rise of Europe, as it was its most successful product.
>>447268
Yeah, why don't you list when and by who, and we'll see how that stacks up against a global list.
>helicopter
Germans made the first operational helicopter.
>Even assuming they did achieve it, it was only one step of many.
As is the entire history of aircraft and their development.
>>441490
>>443630
This.
Despite being divided more than most other European states, the German speaking peoples are an underrated contributor to European high culture... but no thread discussing their contributions cannot be without recycled old memes and shitty bait.
Retards who spew the meme about them ending Rome ignore that the real fall of the Roman empire was infighting, corruption, an influx of people immigrating and moving throughout the empire at a large rate, over-stretching of the empire itself, and finally Attila the Hun; with German tribes (Saxons and Franks included) fighting on both sides for their survival.
The rest of them can be summarized as "we dindu nuffin, we gud bois" on the world wars.
>>447278
Montgolfier brothers, 1783
Henri Giffard, 1852
Jean-Marie le Bris, 1856
Felix du Temple, 1874
Clement Ader, 1892
Alberto Santos-Dumont, 1906
Louis Breguet achieved the first helicopter lift-off in 1907, and Paul Cornu made the first stable helicopter free flight later that year.
>>447314
>The airplane was a highly incremental invention, and most of those increments happened in France.
>airplane
>list those increments
>Montgolfier brothers, 1783
Nice list retard.
>Louis Breguet achieved the first helicopter lift-off in 1907, and Paul Cornu made the first stable helicopter free flight later that year.
Cool, Germans made the first operational helicopter.
>>447327
Why are you so butthurt? Honestly curious.
>>447336
>asks the one pushing the French exceptionalism mythology
Just stop posting baguetteboo.
>>447372
Try to make an effort, I'm curious to know what it is exactly that makes you so angry.
Is it because of an interaction you've had with something French in real life? Or is it something you associate with France? Or something else entirely?
>>447383
Why do you push the French exceptionalism narrative in every thread you post in, Pierre? Did another idealized country hurt your feelings?
>>447383
chavs get really nasty if you try to appeal with reason to them
>>441487
UK had industrial revolution and shit, but it would have stayed a shithole dominated by the vikings if the French weren't there
>>447404
I post on a variety of subjects, but not even religion/fedora talk produces the kind of visceral anger that you see from some posters ever time there's a vaguely positive mention of France.
I'd say from the posting style it's pretty clear that you're the one who is emotionally invested in this, but apparently you're not the only one with those issues, so I wonder where they come from. Is it just because you associate France with snooty waiters from American movies, or is there something else?
>>447428
>that you see from some posters ever time there's a vaguely positive mention of France.
That's because you never mention France in a 'vaguely positive' manner, your mentioning of France is this ridiculous idealization that ignores and trivializes every event that occurs outside of France. It's incredibly delusional.
>lol umad
Okay mate, but why are you compelled to perpetually glorify France on an anime imageboard? Are you okay?
>>447437
All I said was that France contributed more to invention than Britain. To justify this I cited a series of examples, one of which was the history of aviation, where the majority of breakthroughs happened in France. I even listed those breakthroughs for you.
All of this is factual, and the conclusion is perfectly reasonable. You seem to be offended on an emotional level by the idea of French people inventing more than the British.
>>447450
>You seem to be offended on an emotional level by the idea of French people inventing more than the British.
I don't even care about the British. I'm more disgusted by the fact that you're constantly putting France above all, and not just Britain. You make yourself way too obvious.
Like how France is the only powerful region of the medieval period, contributed all culture to Europe, the Renaissance is irrelevant because it wasn't Gothic, and so on, all done by itself, right?
And listing the first hot air balloon to try and link the history of the airplane back to a completely separate French aerial achievement was just pitifully desperate too.
>>447476
I never claimed any of the things you just said.
And you really need to look up the word "aircraft". It's not the same thing as "airplane". That's why the words are different.
>>447490
>I never claimed any of the things you just said.
;)
>And you really need to look up the word "aircraft". It's not the same thing as "airplane". That's why the words are different.
>>447198
> The airplane was a highly incremental invention, and most of those increments happened in France.
>>447207
>Why don't you go and list them then?
>>447268
>First self-powered lighter than air flight
>>447278
>when and by who
>>447314
>Montgolfier brothers, 1783
Let's sum up.
You claim
>most of those [invention of airplane] increments happened in France
Then you continue to list the hot air balloon as one of those increments.
Really strange and pathetic.
>>447498
So skip the two mentions of lighter than air flight, is that really beyond your mental capabilities?
>>441517
France started it because of Versailles. They were butthurt that Germany got back a German-speaking area from them in 1870.
>>447518
Not sure if bait.
>>443257
>You mean the Baroque? Secular baroque architecture did start in France
wtf
>>447551
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Baroque_architecture
>By the middle of the 17th century, the Baroque style had found its secular expression in the form of grand palaces, first in France—with the Château de Maisons (1642) near Paris by François Mansart—and then throughout Europe.
>>447563
>grasping at straws this hard
>t-they still invented baroque! (just the secular one though)
Started in Italy. That's not even controversial.
>>447563
secular baroque architecture started in Italy, fucktard. Unless you decide to call the french bastardization secular baroque architecture.
>>447630
>he still doesn't get it
do you get off on making such a shameful display of french grandeur, pierre?
>>447633
He will never learn.
He has literally done this since /his/ began.
Might as well wear a trip at this point, I feel sorry for whatever board has contained him until recently.
>>447633
Baroque architecture started in Italy, secular baroque started in France. The "secular" isn't there for no reason.
>>441487
UK internationally without a doubt, but quite possibly France at some points in History - the Napoleonic era in particular had a major impact on a lot of Europe in the early 19th Century, although it was Britain and the Grand Alliance who defeated him (twice) and so it could be said that the UK played just as important a role as France.
Really depends what time period you're looking at
>>447654
It's not about evidence. The problem is the mention of France.
>>447659
Kind of hard not to mention France in a thread about England vs France.
>>447662
I think the answer they were looking for is "England is superior in every way and France is irrelevant".
Holy Roman Empire ---> most beautiful empire
>>447656
>although it was Britain and the Grand Alliance who defeated him (twice) and so it could be said that the UK played just as important a role as France.
The previous part of your post showed great uneducation but this one is just hilarous
Did you get on this board by mistake?
>>447659
No it's the
>I'll just post 'secular baroque' and ignore that baroque actually originated in Italy!
>that will show those naysayers of le grande empire
Just as much of a joke as posting the Hours of Berry as if the French commissioning the Flemish makes it a French work.
>>447656
>although it was Britain and the Grand Alliance who defeated him (twice) and so it could be said that the UK played just as important a role as France.
So a country that takes part in a coalition with dozens of countries is as important as the country that faces this coalition alone?
What's the logic behind this?
>>447656
>although it was Britain and the Grand Alliance who defeated him (twice) and so it could be said that the UK played just as important a role as France
THIS
LEVEL
OF
DELUSION
K E K
>>447989
You sound like you have some issues.
He said secular Baroque architecture is French, and it is French.
>>447688
le pointy architecture
>>448613
>secular baroque
>relevant
>an amazing cultural achievement
>when it's a direct derivative
No.
Britain is in fact a French colony.
>>450280
It's ruled by a German dynasty. It'd be a German colony, using your logic. At least make your bullshit half true.
"the rise of Europe"? What the fuck does that even mean? France led to the rise of France and Britain led to the rise of Britain. I'm pretty sure British presence in India meant jackshit to the daily lives of a Montenegrin, Norwegian, or Russian.
>>443034
>Europeans ARE Europe. Europeans are a tumor on Europe, constantly trying to keep Europeans down.
This is literally what people who think Europe is anything but a geographical space and instead think it is some set of ideals sound like.
France by a long shot.
Clovis I, Charles Martel, Charlemagne, William the Conqueror, Louis XIV, Napoleon.
Completely indispensable.
>>443270
Also, de Sade.
>>450450
>Clovis I, Charles Martel, Charlemagne, William the Conqueror
>French
>>443572
go ahead and qualify "significant"
I'll wait.
>>445253
don't try to drag Wales into this you pickled prick
>>450450
>I equate people who were from historic states that occupied the space that now makes up a modern country as members of said country
Get out, pleb.
>>450469
>muh Normans weren't French, even though it was their primary language
Yes actually they were.
Precisely when did French people pop into existence then?
english posters are literally the worst
>>450563
If you want to be pedantic, French nationalism really kicked off with the Revolution.
But around the Hundred Years War was the early signs of a French identity.
>>450563
No, it wasn't, they spoke Norman.
>>450568
That's arbitrary, and I don't understand why you have a problem with this considering the word France stems directly and obviously from Franks.
>>450585
It's not arbitrary though. The concept of a state and a national identity was not the same in the Middle Ages as it is today.
>>450577
>Old French totally isn't French guys!!
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Norman_language
>For the most part, the written forms of Norman and modern French are intercomprehensible.
>>450598
>african countries still speak french
>must be french too
>>450593
Then for that matter we might as well ignore the fact that the word England comes from the Angles since apparently French people didn't exist until they invaded themselves.
>>450598
Normans were a distinct ethnicity from the French and spoke a dialect distinct enough to be called a separate language. Not only that but they lived in a separate country from France and even more importantly did not consider themselves French.
>>450608
Yes we might as well. I never argued English nationalism was in full swing in the Anglo-Saxon era.
>>447518
hello /pol/
>>450602
Do you know what two centuries of interbreeding does to an ethnic population?
>>450618
>separate country from France
Normandy is literally a region of France and was a fiefdom of Charles III and their language was an obvious dialect within and of Old French.
>did not consider themselves French
proofs, you have none.
>>450624
You don't have to be nationalistic in order to exist you know.
>>442881
Whilst true, in terms of creating the world as it is today, the Industrial Revolution and Imperialism were pretty big deals
>>442599
Twenty miles of water that had so much impact of history
>>450647
>Do you know what two centuries of interbreeding does to an ethnic population?
Not much if it's French and Africans, apparently.
>Normandy is literally a region of France
And the Norman conquest of England was a Norman conquest; not French, deal with it.
>>450647
>Do you know what two centuries of interbreeding does to an ethnic population?
less than what one decade of interbreeding with immigrants has done to france kek
>>450618
>and spoke a dialect distinct enough to be called a separate language.
That's false though
Norman dialects is Old French with a few words having different spelling
Unless you're willing to call US and British English different languages, this doesnt apply to Norman either
The only reason the wiki page calls it a language is because buttblasted Englishmen in denial like you use it as an argument to go full revisionist over the French colonisation of their island
>>450667
The Normans were French, deal with it.
You want to know how many French words there are in the English language? Want to know how they got there?
>get colonised by French people
>w-we'll just call them "Anglo-Norman"
lol brits
>>450686
>The Normans were French, deal with it.
Norman conquests weren't French, how buttblasted do you have to be to not be able to deal with it, oh lawdy.
>m-muh language!
What language are you speaking right now, Pierre?
>>450687
>get colonized by vikings
>w-we'll just call them "French"
lol frogs
>>450697
Not even the same guy, you sound like a broken record.
Why would I be buttblasted over the flower of the Anglo nobility being crushed underfoot and their lands being given over and over again to the French conquerors?
>>450647
>is a region of France
>is
In 1066 it was not, if you want to discuss current international affairs there are other boards for it.
Reminder William the Conqueror literally genocided Northern England
>>450701
>beat viking invaders and hire them to beat other vikings
>cvck them secretly and tadpole their progeny
lol snow niggers
>>450724
It was certainly a fief in 911, so you can't say it was a separate country being that they owed fealty to King Charles III of France.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Siege_of_Chartres_%28911%29
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Treaty_of_Saint-Clair-sur-Epte
It's pretty hilarious how buttflustered brits still are about their own history almost 1000 years later.
>>450717
>you sound like a broken record.
Having to repeat basic facts to retards does that.
>Why would I be buttblasted over the flower of the Anglo nobility being crushed underfoot and their lands being given over and over again to the French conquerors?
I don't know, I don't even like the English, their royalty has always been way more mongrel than the French and Germans, but the Norman conquest of England was objectively Norman and not French. It's really that basic.
In the same way, kingdoms existed and interacted in the Holy Roman Empire.
>>450730
sounds about right desu, vikings are gross
>>450793
mate anglo history is gross and way harder to be proud of than french history, but the inflation of french history in this thread is off the charts
>>450794
>basic facts
You have literally zero evidence backing you up.
The fact that the Normans spoke Old French and intermarried with the indigenous population for two centuries prior to William's invasion cannot be disputed, and I question what arbitrary criterion you feel the Normans lack that would qualify then as French.
>>450805
>the inflation of french history in this thread
the inflation of english history is far worse
>>450861
>You have literally zero evidence backing you up.
Except for the historical consensus and the title 'NORMAN conquest of England' and not 'French conquest of England', that is a basic fact.
> and intermarried with the indigenous population for two centuries prior to William's invasion cannot be disputed
And were inherently ethnically different regardless of intermarriage, you're grasping at straws.
>and I question what arbitrary criterion you feel the Normans lack that would qualify then as French.
>their name
>their ethnicity
>their conquest recognized as their own and not France's collectively
>arbitrary criterion
You're denying reality.
Insanely delusional.
>>450915
>ethnically different regardless of intermarriage
do you know where babies come from? Do you know what separates ethnicity from culture?
>their name
So the English aren't British? The Welsh aren't British?
>consensus
I don't care if lots of english historians what to revise the truth. 500 screaming people will not make 2 and 2 into 5.
>the title 'NORMAN conquest of England' and not 'French conquest of England'
Again, the Normans were French. They spoke Old French and were interbred with the locals for two centuries before William's conquest. Your denial of the significance of 10 generations of intermarriage shows clear bias.
All Normans are French, but not all French are Normans.
>>451034
Norman conquest wasn't French, boy-o.
Gunna have to deal with it one day.
>>451064
Normans were French kiddo
>>451089
Not their conquests, kiddo
>>442491
>>441487
If you look at Europe, and only Europe with a political perspective, France was The main player that lasted, was always in concurence with the other main player of the day, spain, HRE, somes italians states, Austria, ect.
England was mainly allying with one player to stop the other player, but never really a player itself. They never had a big focus on their army or conquering european clay.
>>443195
>>443231
If spreading into malaria-infested swamps was a competition, I think spain would had won this one. They tried to conquer and convert the natives, not exterminate them, also.
But for industrialisation, he is right. because the 2 fucking napoleon were not very technologicaly inclined UK took a head start, and his Industrialisation turn it to a industrial power superior to France, when earlier it was inferior.
>>443408
>But I was thinking more of how in every European country the elites spoke French, read French authors, followed French fashions and lifestyle.
>There. Because you've clearly gone beyond France relative only to Britain in your arguments, so I'll respond in the same manner.
Honhonhon.
"I speak Spanish to God, Italian to Women, French to Men, and German to my Horse." you remember ?
French was the language of the nobles in Europe for centuries. I think this may make at least visible the cultural relevance of a certain country, more than yours endless quotes.
>>443682
Would have to agree.
Pre-modern time, England history of Europe is to cockblock France. France history of Europe is... well all Western Europe history.
>>450568
French nationalism kicked with the english "chevauchée" in the hundred years war and Charles V countering the chevauche by protecting the population and starving the english, and conquering clay back with no bloodshed after the siege, when the angloking promised to murderfuck every city that switched to him,
When one kings rape and pillage your country, then threathren you and the other protect you, you kinda identify with him.
>>451331
That has nothing to do with going beyond discussing France relative only to Britain.
And speaking of language, what's the most widely spoken language in the EU now?
Protip: it's not French and it's in the OP.
Honhonhon.
>>451475
>And speaking of language, what's the most widely spoken language in the EU now?
Because the US became a superpower after WW2
Even when the British Empire was at its peak in 1914, French was still more relevant than English
Remember how German diplomats adressed British ones in French (chiffon de papier)?
And if you're going to count US achievments after their independence as yours because former colony, you may as well count your own achievements as French because 1066
