Archived threads in /his/ - History & Humanities - 1175. page
Images are sometimes not shown due to bandwidth/network limitations. Refreshing the page usually helps.
What would the Muslim world and population be like today if it didn't get BTFO by the Mongols? What would Baghdad be like?
>>5490
Baghdad would be amazing to be at. All that knowledge.
>Mongols
Pretty sure Prester John BTFO their empire
>>5490
It would be top civilization. I would move back.
Please post all debate over the Holocaust in this thread.
Mods, I understand generals are discouraged but I doubt anyone's going to mind this being restricted to one thread.
It happened, it was pretty bad, but no point in keep whining about it. the end
>>5594
Some would argue that reminding people of it could prevent it from happening again.
Happened but 6 million is a ridiculously over exaggerated number
Post photographs from the nineteenth century
The earliest photo of a human.
![Borki_train_disaster_1[1].jpg](https://i.imgur.com/O5oNYUf.jpg "Borki_train_disaster_1[1].jpg")
What do you think of the moorish medieval civilization and empire?
>>5181
I've always wondered, are they the ones who introduced rice into Spain?
I'm moor ask me anything bro
>>5215
How based were the Romans?
Greatest Frenchmen itt
>>5163
Napoleon was a Corsican born of Tuscan decent. Even France's greatest Frenchmen weren't French.
>>5311
He was french you kek
>flag cancer removed
Thanks mods. It was a retarded to even think about adding it in the first place. It's one of the main reasons /pol/ is garbage.
Also, what's your opinion on Garibaldi? Did he ruined Italy by unifying it?
>IDs removed
And the board is shit again.
>>5098
Italian unification was bound to happen anyway.
Italy could be stronger today if Garibaldi didn't back down because of Camillo and flat out started as a republic instead of a monarchy.
>>5098
>Main reason /pol/ is garbage
I think it is more than the flags.
I've seen the comparison that the American is like a chess setup with one line of queens, while the Soviets had two lines of rooks and bishops. The Americans were more focused on making smaller numbers of all-purpose weapons and vehicles, while the Soviets had more specialized units.
tl;dr Who would win in a fight?
>Who would win conventionally
The soviets had a period in around 1945-1965 where they likely would have won or at least been able to contest allied forces on somewhat even terms, past that america and NATO began to slowly gain a technological advantage that they maintained and grew upon until the soviet collapse. Soviet Deep Battle was a brutal slow crushing machine that was intended to use wave upon wave of mechanized troops to wear down NATO defenses, again it was a doctrine that would have been much more effective in the early 50's along with the experienced generals that russia could draw on post WW2, sophisticated ATGMs and much more effective CAS would've done pretty terrible things to such an advance in 1975 and onward.
Realistically things would've gone to the nuclear table before long in a conventional conflict, I doubt either side would back down if the soviets are steaming right across west germany in force and american casualty figures on the news start to show up back home. In a purely conventional slugging match, the soviets would probably have been able to push through west germany but it's hard to see a situation where they could ever possibly keep up that momentum. Eventually the advance would be bogged down and NATO would go into a full gear war footing and successfully push back, much like the german advance into russia.
>>5955
NATO doctrine and conventional weapons were terrible until AirLand Battle. The main weapon of war being the tank, the Soviets held a massive advantage in armored technology until the Leo 2 and M1 Abrams. Even the Abrams didn't really grow into what it is today until the M1A1 upgrade.
Until AirLand Battle Europe was considered essentially indefensible with conventional weapons and despite all the political handwaving of no first use policy the plan was always to use tactical nuclear weapons to slow down the Soviet advance.
>>5095
No nuclear weapons used, the Warsaw Pact would have steamrolled all Europe with ease. They had overwhelming armoured and infantry superiority.
However, NATO doctrine was fir using nuclear warheads once the soviet had overrun the defenses in the Fulda gap and Hannover. It was also French doctrine to tactical nuke anything coming close to their Rhine border in that scenario.
Thoughts on this country? How could a country with a modern-day population of 8.4 million (probably ~2million in the actual duchy of austria region) conquer such vast tracts of land and become one of the most unique empires in history?
>>5091
They didn't conquer anything, besides arguably Bosnia. Most of it was acquired through royal marraiges and other diplomatic agreements.
>>5091
shithole
>>5251
Sounds like my kind of empire
Why are you not a Stoic?
Within this book lies 95%+ of everything you will ever need to know about life.
I am a Stoic.
>>4947
take it to /lit/
>>5457
Sorry this is also a humanity like that "discipline" history
Back in the 1400s-1500s when Venice was a republic at the height of it's power, why didn't the Venetians unify Italy?
>>4939
No as they were jews who ruined Constantinople.
>>4939
The rest of Italy would have never bowed to those swamp niggers
>>4960
desu Constantinople killed catholics then stopped trading as much with venice
Daily reminder that 4chan is a Catholic Image Board.
/his/ is dedicated to the discussion of Catholic empires and kingdoms.
Thank you for your cooperation.
Any "empire" that wasn't Christian was just a bunch of savages tbqh
I've always felt the unitarian church best reflects the ideals of Christ more than any other christian denomination.
>>4973
>Catholic
>Christian
One and one only senpai
Post your favorite gods, creatures, whatever.
Mythology was totally a big part of ancient history so, this is cool, right?
>>4952
Care to elaborate?
INCOMING SPOOPY AFRICAN MYTHOLOGY
Egyptian! Nubian! Whatever! Let's talk about what I feel is one of the least discussed regions.
Seriously I know all sorts of history info regarding various places around the world but aside from Egypt, Africa as a continent is rarely discussed.
>>4856
>inb4 we wuz kings
Stuff was pretty impressive given the region and it being the late Iron Age.
Anyone have any suggested reading for the region/periods?
>>4856
You know, the problem with discussing African history as a whole is that we barely have any sources (except for the northern parts of course, but those are never really meant when talking about African history). Many parts of the continent were never populated by high cultures and therefore never had writing or any sort of historiography.
The source situation gets better once the age of colonisation starts, but even then our sources are one-sided and mainly written from outside perspectives.
CHANGE THE STICKY PICTURE RIGHT FUCKING NOW
>>4850
Yeah, American history sucks ass, do a historical figure not a general.
t. american
Flags when
>>4888
Historians can't seem to get enough of the civil war from what I can tell, they love that shit. Fitting sticky image. (They also love Hitler, but unfortunately so do the neonazis)
TALK ABOUT POLAND AND ITS NUMEROUS CONTRIBUTIONS TO WESTERN CIVILIZATION
JUST
DELUGE
MY
COUNTRY
UP
>>4742
This is pretty much it desu
>>4742
Thank you poland for
