Post historical inaccuracies that non-assburgers (i.e. normalfags) continue to believe. I'll start out with the basic ones:
>the Medieval period was a dark age of superstition and fanaticism where Europe fledged in every aspect until the 'Renaissance'
>The Renaissance was a period of learning, artistic and technological innovation, peace, and prosperity for all of Europe
>The Eastern Roman Empire was a weak and pathetic shadow of the Roman Empire that should not be considered a legitimate continuation
>The Spaniards brutally killed and enslaved the peaceful Amerindians on their own and then proceeded to exterminate them all
>the American Civil War was fought because Southern states wanted to keep slaves and the North just wanted to free them
Yes, I've actually heard normalfags/non-assburgers state these as fact.
>>65444
>>the American Civil War was fought because Southern states wanted to keep slaves and the North just wanted to free them
I mean...
It sort of was?
Slavery was the biggest and most pressing issue for the south, it was the basis for a large part of their economy, and they felt abolitionism was threatening their way of life.
I mean it's literally in their various declarations of secession.
>>65504
The issue was more one of states rights and voting issues (the 3/4s rule) than the North being so humanitarian to start a war just to free the dindus.
>>65444
>The British Empire was a centralized single empire, and not a company ran trade network that paid some money to the british royalty.
>The Dutch, the Portuguese and the Spanish empires werent as big nor as relevant.
>The Ottomans were never as strong as the western European states and they only beat the states in eastern Europe because people there are weak.
>Russia is some old country with great traditions and not USA tier in terms of history.
>Syria, the Levant and Anatolia are traditionally muslim land.
>Forgetting the role France played in American independence/French military vic-I mean defeats LOL
>Germans means the same as Germanics, French means the same as Franks, English means the same as Britons, Russian means the same as Slav, etc.
That last one comes up very often, and yet it always surprises me. For fucks sake, today's french was only spoken in a single district around Paris for the longest time. The "french people" are a recent invention, as are the "german people". When a source says that the germanics did this or that it doesnt mean the germans did it. There were no germans. Germans were invented by Prussia so they can grab land fast.
>>65561
>>The Dutch, the Portuguese and the Spanish empires werent as big nor as relevant.
I mean, they objectively were not.
>>65525
>The issue was more one of states rights and voting issues (the 3/4s rule) than the North being so humanitarian to start a war just to free the dindus.
I mean the north didn't start the war.
The south started the war, the south seceded and attacked the north.
They did so because they felt threatened over the slavery issue.
It's literally in their declarations of secession.
I know it'll get people mad, but back when I was in uni, I'd see the 'Diversity Club' on campus spreading flyers saying that the Ancient Egyptians were black Africans and that thus, they were the first 'civilized' culture.
I was too assburger to say anything, I just trashed the thing.
>>65623
But, all I see is that you're agreeing with me.
The OP says "historical inaccuracies that people believe." There are actual people who believe that the North started the war (solely) to free the slaves
>>65623
they were not as big but they were far from irrelevant
>>65623
>I mean, they objectively were not.
Only if you consider that the whole of the Indian subcontinent and the whole of China were part of the British Empire, which they were absolutely not.
Having control of a few ports and having a guy with a gun in the royal palace doesnt mean you rule the whole place, and certainly doesnt add all that land to your state.
I am sure most chinese/indian people werent even aware the british existed, and among those who were many were rebelling, and there were many autonomous provinces in the "british controlled" parts of China and India.
Google for a map of the British Empire, look at all that landmass, and consider rationally how much of that land was under direct british control, for it to be considered part of their emprie state.
Protip: if you add more than several big commercial ports, and those belonging to certain privately held trade companies, and not directly to the british crown, you would be wrong.
>>65629
I dont think many people actually believe that. They are just too socially aware and politically correct to say anything about it. Maybe tell a joke among friends, thats it.
>>65665
The OP is making it out to be that the war was not about slaves, it objectively was.
>>65675
No one ever claimed they were.
The word "as" was used anon.
>>65712
Anon, by any measurement were India was not part of Britain, New Spain was not part of Spain.
The Indian system was a system of viceroyalty and fealty being declared by natives. Britain was even able to conscript Indian troops.
China was a puppet state after the opium wars.
>>66006
>>66006
>Anon, by any measurement were India was not part of Britain, New Spain was not part of Spain.
Right, all I am saying is that the empires I listed were composed of a European base and a bunch of port cities worldwide, that were ran by privately owned companies and only paid tax to their respective royalty.
Both the indian and chinese monarch could and did pass laws that went against british agenda, and got the british garrisons and diplomats mad.
They had enough sovereignty to not be considered part of the british state.
You cant possibly believe that the king of England commanded the same power in northern India as he did in London. It wasnt part of the state. It was a zone of influence at most, and both China and India were at a state of constant civil war because of it.
>>65525
>The issue was more one of states rights
To own slaves and to expand slavery into new territory.
>and voting issues (the 3/4s rule)
Which was about using slaves as political power while denying slaves themselves any.
In short, it was about slavery.
Dumb Southern apologists are dumb.
The Holocaust was no where as near as is reported
6 million is impossible, it was around 270,000
>>66080
>Both the indian and chinese monarch could and did pass laws that went against british agenda, and got the british garrisons and diplomats mad.
Of course the Brits also ended Indian monarchies that didn't tow the line.
They were not sovereign in any meaningful way.
>You cant possibly believe that the king of England commanded the same power in northern India as he did in London. It wasnt part of the state. It was a zone of influence at most, and both China and India were at a state of constant civil war because of it.
Actually at various point the British monarch would have significantly more power in India than in Britain, because of the constitutional limits on his power within Britain.
>>66232
That is a good example of an inaccuracy anon.
"Holocaust denial by changing the numbers".
Good work.
Slavery actually improved the conditions of blacks over those who stayed in Africa
Too many people think it was bad
>>66263
Go back to /pol/.
>>66263
>No denial
>Diff numbers
>Oy vey Holocaust denier plz die
>>65525
Slavery was the reason for the slave economy that the South had which in turn was the reason for all the problems that lead up to the civil was
They're economic prosperity and political leverage came from depraving the freedoms of others which is why their "muh freedoms" arguments fall short
no coincidence that they succeeded when the country voted and abolitionist in (people who actually wanted to end slavery for the moral reasons though Lincoln wanted to be moderate until the last half of the war).
>>65561
>The "french people" are a recent invention
Well, Philip Augustus centralized the state fairly early on. Even if there were a lot of dialects, the people did have a shared history to speak of.
>>66263
There are plenty of source that show that a slaughter that large would have been impossible to begin with
>>65444
dat comic tho
>>65561
>>Syria, the Levant and Anatolia are traditionally muslim land.
What do you mean by that? Whether or not they used to be Christian is irrelevant, Muslims have been the majority in those areas for centuries now. Do you believe Scandinavia is "traditionally catholic land" because they were Catholic before they were Protestant? Or is it "traditional norse land" because they were pagan before Catholicism?
>>66006
Wrong, the South may have seceded over slavery, but the war was not begun over it. There were several months between the states seceding and Fort Sumter. Do not conflate these two occurrences.
>>66397
Holocaust denial is a strange thing, considering how well it's been recorded by its perpetrators.
And, you know, photographs.
This wasn't some kind of obscure long-past event we only have unreliable stories passed down by previous generations about.
>>66739
People don't want to believe that other humans and their own government could be capable of such a thing.
>>66232
How is 6 million impossible? Mao managed to accidentally kill 20 million of his own people by fucking with the sparrow population.
>6 million
Biggest inaccuracy of all
its actually 270,000 and they all died of typhus due to the allies cutting off german supply lines.
There was no gas chambers or schindlers list bullshit. Auschwitz had a pool, a theater, a library and a top tier hospital.
>>66853
Thanks for posting those informative sources.
>>66517
>"arabic numerals"
That is what they are, though. Yes, they based on number systems from India, but that doesn't change the fact that the current system comes from the Arab world.
Do you think it's wrong to call the Latin alphabet Latin, since it's based on the Greek one, which is based on the Phoenician one, and so-on?
>>66397
Upvoted :)
Bartozewski thread
>>65712
no, the black egyptian dudes are definitely a thing
no one takes them seriously tho, not even other black people
>>66847
This.
Stalin killed one million Kazakh just by trying to make them sedentary. I should probably also mention the time he wanted to reform the agriculture.
>>65444 (OP)
How can you look at the period from the fall of Rome to Galileo as anything but the biggest hiccup in history and progress? The only thing it really produced was some good folklore.
>>66739
Find one picture
>>66925
hehe putas
>>66847
There weren't even that many jews to kill
>>66933
There is evidence, back to /pol/ with you
Here we go again.
Pretty good thread,
>MUH STATE RIGHTS aside
Then /pol/ comes in and starts shitting it up, and now we count down and wait for this thread to get pruned.
If you want to shitpost about holocaust denail, go to /pol/. This is actual history and humanities board, not a naziboo safespace.
>>66962
Wincyj Esesmana
>>67029
wew lad
>china did nothing for all of its history until communism
>germany started ww1
>slave trade was only done by whites
>mongolian empire was unimportant
>Italy, England and Holland weren't Jewish states.
Yeah I actually heard that more than once.
>civilisation stems only from Sumer
>neolithic revolution happened only once
>most of the world's languages could be grouped into big language families before the civilisation began
>Americas were illiterate before Columbus
>>66853
Why, exactly would such a nice place with a pool, theater and library available to its prisoners have 3 crematoriums?
You'd almost think it may have been designed for mass extermination.
>>67305
>most of the world's languages could be grouped into big language families before the civilisation began
You don't agree with the Whole Indo-European stuff?
>War ever being fought for religious purposes and not economic ones
this one always gets me
>>67235
>germany started ww1
It's kind of true. Britain only joined the war because Germany attacked Belgium, which led to the USA and other joining.
Had that not happened, the war wouldn't have been a "world" war, just another major European conflict similar to the Crimean War or the Napoleonic Wars.
>slave trade was only done by whites
Slaves have existed in every region of the world for as long as humans have existed there, but it is true that the slave trade didn't become hugely lucrative until European colonization of the Americas and the trans-Atlantic slave-trade. Of course, many of the slaves bought from Africa did come from black slavers, but it was still the Europeans who provided the economic incentive that allowed the slave trade to flourish.
>>67415
History noob here.
What was the economic stressor of the crusades?
Just land grabbing?
>>67471
The Arab slave trade was pretty important.
>>65623
>The south started the war, the south seceded and attacked the north.
The south seceded. The north started the war.
>>67333
Indo-European expansion is legit, but it was an exception (due to the domestication of horse). I'm talking about people trying to shoehorn e.g. languages of the Neolithic Europe into one big family. Just look at Amazon Andes or New Guinea to see why it's bullshit. Tens of language families with no visible relation to each other.
>>67110
There isn't evidence to support 6 million deaths. Stop being such a reactionary queer and post something to prove your assertion.
>>67479
The Levant was one of the richest areas in the known world, and there as also a lot of money to be made via pilgrimages.
The Knights Templar, or example, provided a sort of banking service to the pilgrims, where pilgrims would give their valuables to the Templars before leaving, so as not to provide incentive bandits whilst travelling to the Holy Land. Then, when the pilgrims arrived, the Templars would give them local currency roughly equivalent to the valuables sold to the Templars.
>>67229
Google is not a primary source, anon - nor is it even a secondary or tertiary source.
> Here, near the Jordan, in 1810, you'll see the occupied territory of Israel.
> Occupied territory of Israel.
> Israel.
> 1810.
> Occupied territory.
>>65561
>>Syria, the Levant and Anatolia are traditionally muslim land.
that's pretty dumb, most "christian" lands in europe today are traditionally pagan.
although the rest of your post is spot on
>>67479
Western Europe was a complete shithole compared to the Levant at the time, and the church wanted a slice of the pie.
Byzantium was also weak, and all of that sweet sweet turkish land was up for grabs.
Of course, there were definitely religious reasons as well but you have to understand that the idea of "Religion" as this separate thing from our secular reality is relatively new. Back then everyone was religious, it was just something you were, like race or nationality today.
>the Medieval period was a dark age of superstition and fanaticism where Europe fledged in every aspect until the 'Renaissance'
>The Renaissance was a period of learning, artistic and technological innovation, peace, and prosperity for all of Europe
These two so much.
Also, related:
>the Catholic Church oppressed science
Also
>France never won a war
>Hitler was democratically elected
I'm not sure why people keep repeating this one. It's usually used as a criticism of democracy.
>>67305
>civilisation stems only from Sumer
>neolithic revolution happened only once
Are there really people who believe this? Clearly it began independently at least in Mesoamerica, and you could also make a case for it being independently started in a lot of other areas, as opposed to being spread, as well. The Andes, Cahokia, China, Kongo, the Indus Valley, etc.
>>67647
The last one is just trolling
>>66517
it is arabic numbers though. they modified hindu numerals, which look distinct
>>67705
Yeah, they won the French wars of religion
>>67661
He wasn't directly elected, but NSDAP got the biggest percentage, so it was expected that he'll become the new kanzler. But him also becoming president was pretty much a coup.
>>65444
That was one of the worst comics I've ever read.
>>67705
Not really, there are people who have constructed a whole parallel universe based on that notion.
Pic related, check out the top right response.
>>67780
>hundred years war
>"""mostly""" lost
:^)
>>67780
>dien bien flu
Not sure whether to cringe or laugh
>>67845
I'm not too well versed in it but didn't they literally push England out of mainland Europe?
>>67888
No, that wasn't done until the 1550s when England went to war with France with the Habsburgs and Finally lost Calais.
>>67888
Yes, other than Calais which was lost 100 years later
The 100 years war was really a series of conflicts, though, England won two and Framce won two, France coming up decisively on top in the end
>colonialism was bad and decolonisation was the right choice
>empires are inherently bad, inefficient, and evil
>the great empires were all doomed to fail
>the French revolution was a positive event for humanity
>>68030
Those are opinions, not inaccuracies
>>67000
with medieval ages most People meant Charlemagne (800 AC) until the fall of constaninople(1453)
But the dark ages and the incredible fallback in science, philosophy and economy happened during the barbarian Invasion causing and following the fall of Rome. The minority of People already considers this the medieval.
In fact humanity in Europe started again with charlemagne, with him bringing the feodal some Kind of order back on the continent, and admirating the Roman empire.
The medieval times were a time of slow but constant Progress, how else would you explain Buildings like Notre-Dame in Paris. Or soldiers having more and more sophisticated weaposn and heavy armour, even the Romans didn't think of
>>68138
The Arabs had innovations in that field too, though. They invented decimals, for example.
>>68146
No one claims the middle ages were completely void of knowledge and learning, the point is that scientific and cultural advances came more slowly than they did in the time of Rome or the Renaissance.
>>68197
The Renaissance is wildly overrated. The greatest "scientific minds" of the 15th century were mystical hacks like Marsilio Ficino, Pico della Mirandola and Paracelsus.
Late Medieval scientists like Nicolas Oresme and Jean Buridan were way more interesting, they were the first ones to break with Aristotelian concepts and reach into a mathematical understanding of physics. Unfortunately, the Renaissance with it's obsession with the greeks put an end to that, it was only 200 years later, with Galileo, that the advances pioneered by these Medieval scholars were resumed.
>>68197
Not sure about that.
The Romans themselfes took most of their Knowledge from the Greeks. Their cultures are directly linked. I don't even know if they were many Roman Platons or Phytagoras.
Anyway the ancient Greeks needed centuries to build up all their Knowledge until the Romans took over. Roughly the period of beginning of Hellenism until the fall of Rome went from 500 BC until 500 AC.
1000 years. Rome literally wasn't build in one day. It took them several centuries, too.
>>68293
>The greatest "scientific minds" of the 15th century were mystical hacks like Marsilio Ficino, Pico della Mirandola and Paracelsus.
How about Da Vinci, Galileo, Kepler, Compernicus?
>>68343
>The Romans themselfes took most of their Knowledge from the Greeks.
Graeca capta etc etc. You know the quote.
>>67229
Nice internment camps, USA had them at the exact same time for Japanese people.
How bout those mass exterminations though?
>>68356
Da Vinci was a painter, not a scientist. Galileo, Kepler and Galileo are from a later period.
I grant you are right on Copernicus, though.
>>65561
>>Germans means the same as Germanics, French means the same as Franks, English means the same as Britons, Russian means the same as Slav, etc.
>That last one comes up very often, and yet it always surprises me. For fucks sake, today's french was only spoken in a single district around Paris for the longest time. The "french people" are a recent invention, as are the "german people". When a source says that the germanics did this or that it doesnt mean the germans did it. There were no germans. Germans were invented by Prussia so they can grab land fast.
Do you not know what nationalism is?
>>68394
da Vinci may be more famous as an artist than a scientist, but he did plenty of work with the sciences and invention as well.
Galileo (1564-1642), and Kepler(1571-1630) are still within the Renaissance, as well, assuming you're going with the 1400-1600 definition.
You also have to remember that the Renaissance wasn't just about science, but also the arts, philosophy, and politics.
>>68394
Da Vinci was the Definition of a Polymath
>>68482
Originally, the definition of Renaissance was the 14th and 15th centuries, specially in Italy. It later was extented to include the 16th and even the 17th century when they realized was embarassingly bad everything outside of painting was during the original period.
>>65525
>more of states rights
What was the biggest issue of the day?
Slavery. Checkmate revisionists.
>>68482
Leonardo was completely irrelevant for science. He kept his notebooks secret and they were only discovered in the 20th century.
>>66292
>>66323
Walked around a minor jewish cementery. Every other grave had an inscripiton like:
>Murdered from the hands of Gestapo
>Killed by hitlerist bandits
>slain in his home by German murderers
and usually three or four names under that.
I always see it funny, that all the Holocaust deniers come from USA and UK, but never from actually ocuppied places. Places, where hiding Jews was punished by death. No one here doubts the Holocaust, and I live literally 20km from Auschwitz. We lost 20% of our population, 200.000 civilians perished only in Warsaw uprising. Jews in most major cities, including my own, would fight Germans with everything they had during the ghetto liquidations. We've seen it and we still feel it.
>There are plenty of source that show that a slaughter that large would have been impossible to begin with
Well, a guy actually went there and guess what he said?
>>67510
this
>>68961
You know what's more disgusting than a holocaust denier?
A country that denies the right to expression of their ignorance.
>>66847
Seriously? Jesus, how do you even fuck up that badly?
>>65623
>The south started the war, the south seceded and attacked the north.
I'm not going to get into a game of semantics, but if you believe blockading a port is an act of war then yes; the North did start the war.
>>65504
>>65525
The war started more on the grounds of states' rights, but for the most part the core issue was really slavery.
The South never developed a balanced economy of food production, an industrial sector, and commerce like they thought it would by the early nineteenth century. Instead, Eli Whitney's cotton gin and "King Cotton" entrenched itself in the South, making the region's entire economy and way of life based around cash crops, upon which the slave system was key to running.
In order to preserve the Southern way of life (white Southern planter class minority), slavery had to be kept. As a result, any federal legislation or issues that threatened the peculiar institution were fought over in the arena of states' rights.
Slavery wasn't always the direct cause or instigator of conflicts or issues of the day, but it was the core issue that was behind all of them.
>Caesar was an emperor
>Nero was retarded and played his lyre when Rome was burning
>every emperor had fucked-up fetish parties forever
>[spoiler]Romans were straight
>The US won Vietnam.
>>69964
Well actually the US BTFO the Tet offensive and most of Vietnam. On numbers we won, but the real reason, to stop communism, was a fail.
>>69964
>North Vietnam sues for peace after realizing the US media is entirely against the war
>we accept, basically agreeing to a stalemate.
>wait a few months and invade again
>we choose not to participate
we 'lost' because of fuckers like John Kerry.
>>70154
It was also to preserve the Union. Lincoln could give two shits about blacks, he wanted to do whatever was necessary to preserve The Union.
>>70154
People should read some memoirs of Union soldiers, most of them had never even seen a black guy.
>>70190
Lincoln gave a shit
but he was a "lets listen to both sides of the argument" kinda guy
too bad the other side decided to bail making his side win by default
>even then try to restore the other side's power
>get shot
>>70306
>Lincoln gave a shit about Reconstruction
>>65444
This board isn't designed to be /pol/ 2.0. You've got your own shithole, now go back to it.
>>69708
Most post-colonial countries start life with a massive industry left by the colony but little infrastructure due to it being handled by another country, hence why most self-destruct after independence. it wasn't so much about keeping he status quo, although it may have played a big part in the personal aspects, but about trying to control the massive powerhouse that was southern USA. the US thankfully handled its independence incredibly well ,(compared to others) and actually utilised the industry to the point where it became a threat to the political stability of the country. Slavery wasn't the core issue as it could just as well have been white poor folk on the plantations, the economics alone caused the rift and ironically to prevent chaos a war erupted.
>>68099
they are retarded and just plain wrong opinions, though.
>>66552
I would like to interject, four slave states (maryland, missouri, delaware and kentucky) fought for the north during the war. Delaware and Kentucky remained slave states until the thirteenth amendment was passed.
It should be noted that slavery -was- a major topic for the war, but things like unequal tariffs were a bigger cause (in the south) than slavery at the beginning of the war. Some view the emancipation proclamation as a way to get Europe to stop helping the south (they had already outlawed it, and it would be hard to justify buying goods from a rebelling country fighting for it).
It should also be noted major riots were thrown by the working class in the north because newly freed slaves would take up precious jobs.
>>68099
bait ,time
>>70204
good read. source? got any more to share?
>>72017
yuval noah harari
Renaissance war memoirs. He also wrote another book titled Special operations in the time of Chivalry. Great read about medieval special ops.
>>72017
Oh fuck nevermind that's from another book.
brb ill find it.
>>72017
>>72110
http://www.amazon.com/Yankee-Privates-Military-History-Weapons/dp/0486497135
That's the one.
There's way more fun and shenanigans in it but I don't have those screencapped.
>>72171
Logistics used to be a bit more improvised back in the day.
>>72256
>>65444
>The Medieval Church was anti-science
>Colombus set sail to prove the world wasn't flat
>Cleopatra an heroed using a snake
>Cleopatra was an Egyptian
>Vikings had horned helmets
>Marie Antoinette said "Let them eat cake"
>Julius Caesar said "et tu Brutus"
>Thomas Edison was anything but a patent thief and a fraud
>>68197
>the point is that scientific and cultural advances came more slowly than they did in the time of Rome
>Rome
>scientific advances
That is one thing the Roman empire is not really known for. They merely copied the greeks before them and did little to advance the Greeks science.
>>72372
>>Julius Caesar said "et tu Brutus"
He said (transliterated) "Kai su, Brutus", right?
>>70306
If Lincoln had his way all of the Africans would have been sent to Liberia.
He's probably the most misunderstood figure in American history, heralded as a champion of freedom despite being just as racist as was normal during the period and being the only president to declare martial law. As dumb as the states rights meme is regarding the cause of the civil war, one thing Lincoln did do was decisively crush the hundred year old federalist debate.
>>65444
Implications 1 and 5 are basically correct though.
>>72372
>Thomas Edison was anything but a patent thief and a fraud
This sentiment is actually becoming pretty popular, especially on the internet (Reddit) everyone is pro-Nikola Tesla and dislikes Edison.
And I was taught in high school that 'Let them eat cake' was a misconception responsible for a lot of anti-royal sentiment at the time.
>>72372
>Vikings had horned helmets
THIS
AARRRGHHHHHH
>>72445
this, they did more with engineering than science
>the Iron Maiden was actually used and isn't a modern invention
>>72687
They didn't?
>>72680
Edison may have been a dick but he did so much to advance science and make it so people could have access to those new inventions. I have no idea how the "Edison bad Tesla good" meme got started
>>73434
They did have horned helmets but for burials mostly, the image of the Vikings wearing horned helmets comes from the 19th century when archeologists uncovered their graves and thought that's what they always wore or from artists who added the helmets to make them look cool
>>66006
>The Indian system was a system of viceroyalty and fealty being declared by natives. Britain was even able to conscript Indian troops
>China was a puppet state after the opium wars.
Both of these are incorrect.
>>73625
>I have no idea how the "Edison bad Tesla good" meme got started
>>69420
How could blockading a port not be considered an act of war? Taken further, it would be like surrounding some city with siege equipment and starving them out, then saying you didn't start it when a fight inevitably erupts. Once a group uses military force to deprive another group of trade goods, surely that's an act of aggression. And between two "nations" (I also dislike semantics, so hopefully you take my meaning) it would be an act of war.
this whole board is just bait, isn't it?
>>70033
I've always wondered / been ignorant about this. I get the idea behind the "domino" theory of communism, and I understand the notion of using proxy wars combined with more economic prowess to "bleed" an enemy. It's difficult to argue a contrapositive, but did the US' wars against communists contribute to the system's downfall? I mean surely it deprived them of some resources, either directly or indirectly by depriving them of some territory they might have conquered. But then if you look at the fall of communist regimes, they were clearly pretty poor regardless of our interventions, so maybe they didn't matter. Anyone have any insight?
>>73726
welcome friend
>>73625
The horned helmets were from the bronze age and as you said, were used for burials. It was the rise of nationalism in the 19th century when the image of vikings wearing horned or winged helmets became popular. Wagner loved his fearless viking imagery.
Both normies and autists alike still believe that the katana was some god like blade and the samurais were the greatest warriors, the amount of times people look at me like I'M the idiot because i say a knight from medieval europe could defeat a samurai from feudal japan is astounding
>>72483
I thought Lincoln only mentioned the idea of e.g. Liberia a few times. It seemed more like him spitballing than actually committing to relocation of freed slaves. In truth no one seemed to have a good idea of what to do about them.
>>73960
I'm with you; some trolling aside there have been some pretty decent discussions here regarding states' right vs slavery; Rome; the dark ages; etc. I would say pretty good for an anonymous image board.
>>73986
Fuck off. Katana weren't the best swords ever but neither were they pieces of shit.
In context they were good, now stop trying to pull people into this infantile 'but muh ancestors did better!' shit.
>Spend like 2-3 months on the history of Norway over the course of all my education
>Little Ice Age is never mentioned, EVER
>How some shithead died result in Oslo being capital is never mentioned, ever
>All that lack of effort in explaining basic shit
>>65504
No, the quotas imposed on the Southern states threatened their way of life. Slavery only affected 4% of the population or so economically.
I mean, Lincoln fighting to free the slaves due to a moral calling while at the same time using Chinese "slaves" to build a rail way?
More like, wage work = economic activity = economic growth.
Slaves = 15% of American population. Abolishing slaves would increase the working class by 15%, which the US obviously continued to exploit after the Civil War.
>>66080
Fun fact, the East Indian company was at times more wealthy than the British state itself.
>>72372
>The Medieval Church was anti-science
This is so wide spread here in Norway it ain't even funny.
>>68894
He worked as a military engineer for the Borgia family m8.
>>74073
That's what 4chan is though. Dank memes and learningful discussions. That's the way it should be, but /his/ should provide more sources to increase the credibility of each argument.
>>74488
I'm not from Europe, I'm just saying the European knights were better not only because of their better weapons and armor, they were better swordsman considering they were as skilled and way more physically superior.
You are all normalfags too, you just suck at it.
>>70379
>WWAAAAHHH
>People talk about history I dont like
>WAAAAAAHHHH MODS PURGE THE THREAD OF THINGS I DONT LIKE
>WAAAAAAAA
Grow up
>>69392
You have your fanatically dedicated peasants kill or drive out the sparrows. The sparrows eat the bugs. The bugs eat the crops that you eat.
>>66266
How did it improve them?
>>80204
The were given constant food and shelter, and they no longer had to fear tribal warfare
And today they get to live in the Western Hemisphere instead of Africa
>>69708
The South didn't give a shit about states' rights when it came to runaway slaves.
>>68546
basically a meme who didn't really excel in any area
>>72372
>Cleopatra was an Egyptian
That depends on who is an egyptian.
>>73726
New boards are always shit. The worst is that a couple of months from now there will be people saying
>hurr durr /his/ used to be better hurr durr
>>80363
They also had to work much more and went from being normal people to being inferior, and you are forgetting the terrible voyage.
>>81094
Only one generation in a blood line had the voyage
Even if the were inferior to whites they were still superior to Africans
>muh Wehrmacht was clean and dindu nuffin wrong waffen ss did all crimes
>>81219
The enslaved africans didn't have any reason to think their descendants would do any better, and I don't really think they considered themselves superior to other africans.
>>66266
You're joking right?
Ever heard "rather die a free man than live a slave"? Also known as, the rallying cry of the white patriots in America during the Revolution? Fuck off.
>>67661
His party got like 40% of the votes, which is a fucking landslide in parliamentary politics with more than 2 parties.
>>68030
>literally states nothing but opinions
>historical inaccuracies
>>81456
>it is my personal opinion that slavery was better
>historical inaccuracies
>>78547
Not that guy, but it's more like
>racism and revisionism everywhere without any sources and only perpetuated by a hivemind/hugbox that accepts the racism and revisionism at face value
>>67415
Muslim conquests
>>81806
A bunch of Arab tribes set themselves up as military aristocrats hoarding taxes and tributes, not building religious structures or willing to convert anyone unless they agree to become subservient client tribes. They didn't even care enough to tell anyone about their religion, which is why all the early non-Arab sources seem barely aware they had a religion at all until like the third Umayyad Caliph.
>>81926
oww butt mad Persian/franji detected
>>65561
German was not a Prussian invention. Nationalism is a recent invention but to say that Prussia created the German nation is swinging way to far the other way.
>>81926
ever hear of umar(ra) and his trip to Jerusalem or muayiyah(ra) building mosques all over Damascus
Fight in the way of Allah", says the
Quran, " against those who fight you, but do not transgress." [Quran 2:190] "And
fight them until mischief is no more and religion is all for Allah." [Quran 8:39]
neighbouring settlements where other idols were known to exist in local temples. Khalid
was sent to Nakhla to destroy Uzza, the most important of the goddesses. He set out with
30 horsemen. 2
It appears that there were two Uzzas, the real Uzza and a fake. Khalid first located the
fake and destroyed it, then returned to the Prophet to report completion of duty. " Did you
see anything unusual?" asked the Prophet. "No." " Then you have not destroyed Uzza" ,
said the Prophet. "Go again." Angry at the mistake that he had made, Khalid once again rode to Nakhla, and this time he found the real Uzza. The custodian of the temple of Uzza had fled for his life, but before forsaking his goddess he had hung a sword around her neck in the hope that she might be able to defend herself. As Khalid entered the temple, he was faced by a naked woman who stood in his way and wailed. Khalid did not stop to decide whether she was there to seduce him or to protect the idol, but drew his sword and with one powerful
stroke cut the woman in two. He then smashed the idol, and returning to Makkah, gave
the Prophet an account of what he had seen and done. " In about the third week of March 633 (beginning of Muharram, 12 Hijri), Khalid set out
from Yamamah. But before doing so he wrote to Hormuz, the Persian governor of the
frontier district of Dast Meisan:
Submit to Islam and be safe. Or agree to the payment of the Jizya, and you and your
people will be under our protection, else you will have only yourself to blame for the
consequences, for I bring a people who desire death as ardently as you desire life.
>>83492
