What went wrong other than Islam?
It clearly started declining before islam showed up.
>>14679
Islam wasn't that bad in it's early stages. The crescent just got massively fucked by the black death, especially Egypt.
>>14679
>What went wrong other than Islam?
Wow, starting off the thread with some heavy loading there guy.
Literally a desert
Who was the last true Roman?
>>14648
Cato the Younger.
Romans exist today.
Why the Turks trigger the crusaders and how come they easily beat the crusaders?
Because Papal state saw they was next in line to get raped by the Turks.
And because Muslims were overwhelming the entire region and groups of men coming from long distances couldn't effectively stop them for long.
>>14359
The Crusades were launched to curb Islamic aggression. Most of them weren't succesful because of bad organisation, commitment, Arab terrain advantage combined with the logistical nightmare of getting all the crusaders there in the first place.
>>14359
>easily beat
Not really, Crusaders did bretty good for being a continent away and still keeping them at bay. They literally made the place better too
No Crusade thread?
I recently finished 'The First Crusade: A New History' by Thomas Asbridge. Would highly recommend, it gives a brief account of the Crusader's motivations, but in general it mainly talks about their battles and journey to Jerusalem. It's well written and easily accessible.
Now I want to move on to the Iberian Reconquest because 'muh heritage', but I don't know what book to start with.
Oh, and are there any apologists for the Reconquista and Spanish Inquisition?
Heretics and moors not welcome.
What about pic related?
It's obviously biased, but how's the accuracy of the author's claims?
What is the best book on the Third Crusade? Richard the Lionheart is my favorite figure in medieval history.
>>15742
Not a clue how to pick favorite books, but its a tossup between Baldwin IV or Godfrey of Bouillon.
Mostly for acting the most Christian in what turned into a very brutal campaign/s.
was 50s America the peak of human civilization? What went wrong? Was it the [spoiler]socialists[/spoiler]?
>>14169
no
>>14169
How would one measure a level of civilisation or decide when it has peaked?
>>14169
By "peak", you mean constant nuclear war and commie paranoia, then yes.
Do you believe that if all humans and animals (things that undergo experience/sensation) ceased to exist, there would still exist something?
As in, do you believe in a mind-independent world?
If so, how is it you know?
And, what is the nature of this thing that exists? (eg, atoms, platonic forms, etc)
If no, would you describe yourself as an idealist? Explain your views.
Basically this is a thread to discuss your thoughts about the structure of reality.
>>14128
>Do you believe that if all humans and animals (things that undergo experience/sensation) ceased to exist, there would still exist something?
>As in, do you believe in a mind-independent world?
Yes
>If so, how is it you know?
Because if I exist now, and if I know that there are things I am perceiving that are external to me, me dying won't change that fact.
>And, what is the nature of this thing that exists?
Atoms and such presumably. Maybe also "souls" for "living things" and/or consciousnesses
>>14255
>external to me
>>14599
Do you imply I need to prove that everything I experience is not a mental construct or some sort of self-produced illusion generated by my existance?
This board is irrelevant. /pol/ is the board for history, philosophy, etc. It's all tied to politics.
It would be like splitting /s/ up into sub-boards for specific fetishes (boobs, butt, feet), there's literally no reason to.
>>13750
>/pol/ is the board for philosophy
>not /lit/, the place with graduates from Oxford university
>>13750
>not wanting /ass/
>/pol/ is the board for history, philosophy, etc. It's all tied to politics.
Good one anon
/pol/ is just for shitposting tangentially related to politics. Some examples
>I feel sorry for manlets, it's like being emasculated 24/7
>R: 176 / I: 30
>>>/pol/54809119
>Ask an Israeli ex-IDF troop anything.
>R: 217 / I: 49
>>>/pol/54808525
>Crackers BTFO: This is what they think a characterization of white people is. What do you think /pol/? Did this gay nigger in white-face nail it?
>R: 168 / I: 38
>>>/pol/54805029
In the hour I've posted on /his/ I've seen more moderation than being on /pol/ in a year
So what year did the British Empire stop existing?
>>13481
1997
It's called America and friends now
>>13596
So that would make the British empire the latest empire?
Unless you count the EU
Was Japan getting nuked twice justified?
>>13357
yes
Shit sucked, but whatever. Stopped the war.
No one cares desu
It was still better than what happened to Detroit
Who's Baal, /his/?
>>13356
poor babylonians
Ba'al just means 'Lord' in Northwest Semitic languages (Ugaritic, Phoenician, Hebrew)
It actually isn't a single god, there's Baal Hadad, Baal Hammon, Baal Haramun, et cetera. But the Baal that is generally referred to as just 'Baal' is Baal Hadad. Baal Hadad was the storm god in a lot of Semitic pantheons. Think of him as semitic Zeus. He's sort of the big player, but he's not actually the creator (El is). Like how most people think Zeus has feuds with Hades, Baal has a feud with Mot (Death) in something called the Baal cycle.
There's a Baal we're all familiar with, actually, Beelzebub. Beelzebub is from the Hebrew 'Baal al Zevuv', or if you speak Arabic, Ba3al adh-dhubab, literally 'The lord of the flies'. It's a word with a good history behind it, some semitic pagans worshipped a god named Ba'al Zebul (Lord of the manor), and the Israelites would mockingly call him Ba'al Zebub (Lord of the flies, pests, et cetera).
>>13356
Is he Baal?
Post things about the past which you think were misconstrued or wrong. i.e. Nero never burned Rome or played the fiddle.
Also anything regarding events or people during WW2 is forbidden!
Bush knocked the towers
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6bdr_2IAJWU
>>13314
bro it has to be before '91
>>13314
jet fuel cant melt dank memes
This religion has always fascinated me. It only seems to exist in the public consciousness now through weird fetishisms and orientalist caricatures, or in the echoes it left in the big Abrahamic religions. But it was the major religion of many of the longest lasting and most powerful and influential empires of all time, in the cradle of civilization.
Anyone any more than a wikipedia expert here who could help explain what the basic theology was?
>>13241
It still kinda exists in India
Look up Parsis community. They are direct descendants of these guys
A lot of people I see on the internet associate it with incest because of the game Crusader Kings 2 in which the defining feature or Zoroastrianism is the ability to have marriages in your immediate family.
In what cursory research I did, I could find virtually no reference whatsoever to incest being actually practiced as part of Zoroastrianism. The only source seems to be a history book by an Iranian muslim which purports that Zoroastrian priests in the Sassanid empire encouraged incest in the royal family because the combination of royal blood was considered 'sacred' and 'produced stronger children'. He goes on to claim that the populace didn't like this and it was a major reason that people were willing to convert to Islam.
This sounds really dubious, especially coming from an author with a marked bias against Zoroastrians. Anyone have more info or want to offer some insight?
This man's philosophy and government structure killed 10's of millions of people and set back a large portion of the world technologically. He was a lazy bitch who never held a real job and mooched off his friend. The only thing more delusional than him is his supporters. Prove me wrong.
>protip: you can't
Can't argue with you there.
excuse me but withhout this SAINT we would not be able to admire this work of art
>>12916
Religions have provoked more deaths than anything, and despite of that, the people still praising their gods
>inb4 dank memes from /pol/
Who was the greatest philosopher?
>>12865
his philosophy is pretty questionable but he was breddy fucking funny to read about
Russell Brand
>>12865
Aristoteles.
In this thread we try to find our way past historical revision and get an idea of what really happened. History is offensive, it is not kind, your feelings will be hurt, but it is important we see things for how they really happened and not for how we want them to have happened!
>>12829
stalin wasnt that bad
>>13930
Kill yourself
![ahura210[1].gif](https://i.imgur.com/I8xTwIw.gif "ahura210[1]")
