Archived threads in /his/ - History & Humanities - 386. page
Images are sometimes not shown due to bandwidth/network limitations. Refreshing the page usually helps.
>England
>Scotland
>Naples
>Portugal
>Castille and Leon
>Sicily
>Cyprus
>Jerusalem
>Aragon
>Navarra
>Hungary
>Latin Empire
Why were french dynasties so good at worming their way into monarchies?
France is the bull who basically cucked the whole Europe for centuries.
>>1153824
France was the most populated nation in Europe for a long period of time.
>>1153824
>worming
They literally conquered England
Why did even the Nazis not want Finland? Are the Swedish memers right?
>>1153770
Hitler was sympathetic for Finland's loss in the Hyper War and sought to recreate the Ancient Finnish Empire, integrating Finland in as the capital after the fact.
>>1153770
The Swedes were very cautious about Hitler and Nazism while the Finns allied themselves with Hitler after the Soviets fucked with them.
>>1153778
/thread
How does /his/ feel about the Celts?
>>1153712
They were in the wrong place at the wrong time.
>>1153712
The Celts are basically the Wojaks of Europe with Latins being Pepe and Germanics as Spurdo.
t. Meme historian
>>1153712
They were what the Aztecs were to Cortes
Gold laden bitches that Caesar thought needed a conquering
Can we all agree that the Protestant Reformation was a capitalist plot to destroy Christian morality?
pic related
>>1153684
No, but we can all agree that the Protestant reformation is the biggest heresy outside of Orthodoxy being a bitch.
Yes.
>"Christ committed adultery first of all with the women at the well about whom St. John tells us. Was not everybody about Him saying: ‘Whatever has He been doing with her?’ Secondly, with Mary Magdalen, and thirdly with the women taken in adultery whom He dismissed so lightly. Thus even, Christ who was so righteous, must have been guilty of fornication before He died."
t. Martin Luther
>"If your papist annoys you with that word (i.e. alone), tell him straightaway: Doctor Martin...
Comment too long. Click here to view the full text.
>>1153684
>being closer to god is a plot against morality
And paying money to get to heaven is perfectly moral, right?
![decolinafrica2[1].jpg](https://i.imgur.com/cesmx8s.jpg "decolinafrica2[1].jpg")
Why did the post-independence African civil wars kill more people than the anti-colonial independence struggles in the 1950s-1970s between European powers and Africans?
Take for example the death count in the Mozambican War of Independence vs. the Mozambican Civil War:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mozambican_War_of_Independence
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mozambican_Civil_War
Historically, when less organized tribes had disagreements they just migrated away from each other
More organized tribes went to war
Post colonial leaders didn't want to let go of both their territory and resources to dozens of autonomous states
>>1153623
It's a power settling process. It took Europe from antiquity to WW2 basically to go through this process. Give it time.
Oh right, but to answer your question
Imperial europeans were unwilling to put up resistance against African independence movements
And WWII made imperialism uncool
Much easier to install puppets, kill opposition, saddle them with debts, and leave maybe 5 loyal people who can actually read
how the fuck can the ottomans pull hundred thousands men out of their asses everytime /his/? it seems like in every battle they always won with huge numbers and huge casualities even though the enemy killed shitloads of them. where did these all these manpower come from? how did their logistics work with these huge ass armies?
Turks love to fight.
I guess you get lazy and brute force after your empire has access to tons of territories with people available to enlist as troops
>>1153477
arent their empires full of non-turks and non-muslims? how did they get these people to fight for them? and how did they supply their 100.000+ armies everytime?
Is atheism necessary for the unique one?
No. Stirner doesn't attempt to disprove God at all, and doesn't see that as a worthy project. Stirner instead argued that regardless of whether or not God exists (which Stirner doesn't care about), he'd be an egoist himself, and any following of him or lack thereof could only be driven by egoism.
Following religions are not compatible with Stirner's philosophy, but believing in them is totally acceptable. The Devil, for instance, obviously has faith (or belief, same word in the Bible), but he doesn't care to follow the religion.
No, but the idea of a "God" as the source of "good" is not comptable with it.
There are such things as amoral Gods.
depends on how consistent your will is with the moral code of whatever religion, Stirner would probably say make use of the parts you like and discard the rest
why didn't I learn about the Umayyad Caliphate in high school? It seems like they royally BTFO everyone for like 300 years.
What was going on in 700 AD?
>What was going on in 700 AD?
They built a lot of cool stuff in the Levant around that time. Also everyone hated them.
>>1153178
>for like 300 years
I don't think they lasted more than 200. Otherwise, it's because we know a lot less about them than we do the Abbasids, and they're in that span of time between the fall of Rome and Charlemagne that even most people who actually care about the early Middle Ages just don't care.
I remember learning about them in 10th grade world history. They were mentioned passingly along with the Abbassid's
Generally these days, the only history that's taught extensively in the U.S. is Enlightenment ----> American Revolution ---> Slavery ---> Segregation ---> Civil Rights Movement ---> Vietnam ---> 9/11
what is history?
is history a science?
believing history is science is supreme autism.
However, scientific methods are used to find as best a picture as we can know about the past.
Science creates falsifiable, objective conclusions.
History is an art.
There is nothing empirical going on.
Fortunately there's enough tradition and review going on that it doesn't get fucked in the ass as hard by dumb college cunts like other soft sciences.
who the fuck was he
The proto-fedora
>>1152838
A new ager who's been misunderstood by both left and right
>>1152852
>evola
>new age
Kill yourself you mong
Will warfare ever be this stylish again?
>>1152789
You mean flamboyant.
>>1152795
No difference
>>1152789
Where is the bottom middle pic from?
Hey /His/ just signed up for an archeology course at university. What am I in for?
>going to college
You already fucked up
>>1152764
this
>2016
>falling for the education meme
Like what are the lectures interesting? Or how are the laboratories?
Was there a culture in history that was accepting of the bride not being a virgin? Obviously I don't mean widows of divorced women, but a first time bride having had open sexual relationships with other men before her husband, and the community being a-ok with it.
Also this is a legit history thread, not an /r9k/-related thing at all, so don't you dare delete this, mod. And if you don't listen - well, to hell with you!
Yeah, virginity wasn't a concern in a lot of non-western societies. Egyptian culture never placed any value on female sexual purity, and the same is generally true of most Polynesian and North American peoples.
In Japan, sexual modesty was important but defined through behavior rather than sexual history. Being a rape victim was less dirty than being sexually forward with one's own husband.
>>1152639
Non-europeans are cucks
>>1152639
So you're telling me Native American women could openly have sexual relationships and then marry someone else with the whole tribe knowing about it?
What is the most important 50-year gap in human history?
I'd say 1913-1963
>>1152516
Gotta be 1919 to 1969
>>1152516
1941-1991
>>1152519
what about world war one?
I guess you fit the treaty of versailles in there
Is there any known connection between the cossacks and the vikings?
The vikings were known for their exceptional ships, which were quite fast and good at navigating inland seas and rivers. The Kievan Rus was formed by vikings, and we know that a substantial part of their economy was derived from trade along the rivers near the Black Sea.
The Kievan Rus lasted until the Mongol invasion in the 1240s, and there are few records of Slavic people in the region between the Dniester and the Volga for a number of reasons.
By the 15th century, less than 200 years...
Comment too long. Click here to view the full text.
If anything, they were more simillar to mongols and tatars
>>1152474
The Cossacks were a response by local slavs to the threats posed to them by steppenegroes.
They're basically Slavs larping as Turkics to fight Turkics. You can see it in their equipment and dress. The topknot being the most glaring. Not to mention their free-floating lifestyle to enable them to travel in bands and fight the enemies of Christendom wherever they raid.
The fucking name is from a Turkic word meaning "Freeman" to begin with.
So in short: no.
>>1152484
Naturally they would have been heavily influenced by Tatar and Mongol tactics, as these groups had occupied the region for over a hundred years. Culturally and ethnically they were predominantly slavic, no doubt about that.
I am wondering if there is any recorded connection at all between nordic/ viking society and the cossacks, even in such little details as their ship design.
The fact that the cossacks practiced democracy is also quite interesting. It is known that the nordic societies were among the...
Comment too long. Click here to view the full text.
