[a / b / c / d / e / f / g / gif / h / hr / k / m / o / p / r / s / t / u / v / vg / vr / w / wg] [i / ic] [r9k] [s4s] [vip] [cm / hm / lgbt / y] [3 / aco / adv / an / asp / bant / biz / cgl / ck / co / diy / fa / fit / gd / hc / his / int / jp / lit / mlp / mu / n / news / out / po / pol / qst / sci / soc / sp / tg / toy / trv / tv / vp / wsg / wsr / x] [Settings] [Home]
Settings Home
/his/ - History & Humanities

4chan Pass users can bypass this verification. [Learn More] [Login]
  • Please read the Rules and FAQ before posting.

05/04/17New trial board added: /bant/ - International/Random
10/04/16New board for 4chan Pass users: /vip/ - Very Important Posts
06/20/16New 4chan Banner Contest with a chance to win a 4chan Pass! See the contest page for details.
[Hide] [Show All]

[Catalog] [Archive]

File: foucault.jpg (19 KB, 210x282)
19 KB
Why is french philosophy so gay?
4 replies omitted. Click here to view.
*teleports behind you*
They are french
>Foucault: everything is control and fascism
>The guy was literally a faggot masochist who traveled around the world to get fucked
I'm sensing a pattern here
The French fell in love with some weird combination of nihilism and deconstructionism. They don't create anymore just exist while their culture slowly rots away and dies. In part I think it is related to a French desire to always experience somethimg new.
The French exist to surrender, it's all that they know.

File: old nosey.png (110 KB, 233x300)
110 KB
110 KB PNG
>"After beating him at Waterloo, Wellington slept with two of Napoleon's mistresses and hung a picture of Boney's sister in his bedroom"
Yes and they were both traps.

File: napoleon-i-9420291-2-402.jpg (242 KB, 1200x1200)
242 KB
242 KB JPG
Why didn't the Americans help him fight the British in 1812
3 replies omitted. Click here to view.
At this time the US was a weak and had no real army
Actaully we just covered this in my college Us history' class
It was more useful for America to stay out of the war and supply the French army with food rather than being blockaded. And then dying.
This, but replace army with navy.

Despite not having a real army, it was their lack of navy that was the primary reason they couldn't help.
War of 1812 was only an extension of the Napoleonic Wars because it was casus belii'd on how England was forcing American citizens into its navy to fight France. They didn't really care about what was going on in continental Europe, they just wanted to take territory from British Canada and the natives.
>implying the blockade didn't stop the food transportation

File: ww1 french trooper.jpg (151 KB, 500x750)
151 KB
151 KB JPG
Poilu uniforms are absolutely god-tier beautiful.
only a kraut would disagree
48 replies and 21 images omitted. Click here to view.
What’s the better WW1 helmet? Pickelhaube or Stahlhelm?
Stahlhelm of course, there's a reason why it replaced the Pickelhaube. In terms of aesthetics - inconclusive, I'd say.
File: WW1 French pepe.png (211 KB, 980x1100)
211 KB
211 KB PNG
on ne passe pas?
File: French WW1 uniform.jpg (146 KB, 905x2048)
146 KB
146 KB JPG
File: MfDl1NWbdKI.jpg (55 KB, 500x337)
55 KB
RIA tunics >everything else

Stop being protestant.
way ahead of ya
nice skirt you inbred faggot.
*unsheathes longsword"
I'm eastern orthodox though
After you stop being a Neoplatonist.

File: MyAncestor.png (1.18 MB, 3840x2400)
1.18 MB
1.18 MB PNG
what the fuck was their problem?

File: pyramids.jpg (93 KB, 800x532)
93 KB
Jews likely had nothing to do with the construction of the pyramids. The traditional dates held by most Egyptologists and archaeologists for the construction of the Egyptian pyramids are from 2630 to 1814 BC. According to the Hebrew calendar, the enslavement of the Israelites in Egypt lasted from 1429 to 1313 BC (or 2332 to 2448 on their calendar). The Hyksos whom some historians associate with the Israelites had nothing to do with the pyramids either. They did not appear in Egypt until 1800 BC and were ultimately expelled in 1560 BC.
6 replies and 1 image omitted. Click here to view.
No one ever said the jews had something to do with the construction of the pyramids.
Anyway there's no solid mention of the jews before -900/-800.
Everyone already knows this. This is just another Jew thread with no real aim.
It's been proven the pyramids was built by Egyptian citizens during the time the fields were flooded and such, not slaves, Jewish or otherwise
>Jews likely had nothing to do with the construction of the pyramids

Obviously, the whole of Exodus is complete fiction.
The Jews building the pyramids is stated nowhere in the Bible, it was invented by Hollywood in the 50's so they could shorthand a bunch of Egyptian periods into singular movies.

File: IMG_0981.png (643 KB, 1022x731)
643 KB
643 KB PNG
>God doesn't need a creator, he was always there
>lmao the universe can't just have always been there, it needs a creator, checkmate atheists
11 replies and 3 images omitted. Click here to view.
That doesn't seem like a paradox to me.
Rather, the secular view doesn't postulate an answer to something it has no evidence for. That's typically the realm where religion steps in, so it's kind of a tautology what you explained.
>brainlets don't know about eternalism
It doesn't really seem to matter where the argument comes from though. The implication in the OP was that the religious point of view is inherently hypocritical and all I'm trying to argue is that it isn't. Secularism and religion operate on two totally different planes. Apples to oranges and all that.

Could you elaborate a bit?

The argument is that, when discussing the origin of the universe, secularists tend to argue that some unidentified event spontaneously caused everything to come into existence from nothing. While very few secular people actually believe this theory or claim to know how everything came into being, that's pretty much the best argument to arise from that side of the debate. So it isn't so much of a "this is what secularists believe" scenario but rather a "this is the best answer secularists have" scenario.
The answer to this issue is provided by Plato & Aristotle.

All hail the Twin Gods, Plato and Aristotle, who so loved us that they wrote down the mysterious foundations of reality and the moral rules we must follow.

83 replies and 4 images omitted. Click here to view.
Stop posting ridiculous counterfactuals like this

The Sahara can't be green due to multiple factors

So shut the fuck up

If it was, by some miracle, green, then it would be densely populated by humans
>archaelogist find some Roman-inspired Architecture in the Green Sahara
>scriptures tells of how Romans interacted with North Africans and West Africans
>archaeologist digs in Italy uncovers goods found in Ancient Africa while the Roman goods would be found in the Sahara digging sites
File: image.jpg (202 KB, 604x574)
202 KB
202 KB JPG
>all this racism ITT
Sahara was green. Long time ago. Maybe humans did chopped trees on the fuel for the bonfires.
Seeking for attention for this question, What if Africa was several enormous islands or had inland seas or was a weird mix of both?
Would we see more trade and other crazy shit like several African Navies?
Same shit with middle-east and Central Asia?

File: Hameau_de_la_Reine_16.jpg (504 KB, 1024x768)
504 KB
504 KB JPG
What was up with the faux peasant cottages and villages that nobility were building in the 18th century? especially in France?
Look up romanticism.
File: 31dc6c53.jpg (131 KB, 964x740)
131 KB
131 KB JPG
European palaces are grand, but not comfy
They compensate by going to extremes instead of making humbler home
File: Saar-Moselle-area.jpg (36 KB, 560x275)
36 KB
Nothin' personnel, non-Roman.
In regards to France in particular, and especially OP image of the Queen's Hamlet, French philosophers of that period encouraged women cultivate a female domain in the countryside, where they would be in charge of managing dairies, farms and gardens, rather than "meddling" in spheres where it was considered inappropriate for women to be, like political and philospohical salons.

File: 1600's Armor.jpg (354 KB, 683x1024)
354 KB
354 KB JPG
How come maces, axes, and war hammers/picks weren't used in the late 1500s and 1600s anymore considering heavy armor was still around in the battlefields of the Europe?
6 replies and 4 images omitted. Click here to view.
Because most who wore heavy armor were kings and high-rank knights who were pussies who hung in the back and off the battlefield while letting their armies of peasants in leather vests for armor fight it out.

And for peasant-on-peasant fighting, pointed sticks, farm tools like scythes, and other simple weapons were all that was needed.
Hey it's Lapp the Amnesiac aka Patches the motherfucker
because older styles of combat were being replaced with better and more standardized units.

A tightly packed unit with pikes and guns is far more effective against the elite than a group armed with shields and maces.
File: warpic.jpg (8 KB, 236x405)
8 KB
Because they were still in use by that time. Seriously where have you heard that they just quit using them. Sure, infantury might have gone from halberd to pike because the choping part is less important, so they changed it and increased the length instead. But sidearms such as warpicks were still very common, especially for the cavalry, all the way up to the mid 17th century.

File: STOP.webm (2.44 MB, 640x360)
2.44 MB
2.44 MB WEBM
>Dresden was a war crime
93 replies and 16 images omitted. Click here to view.
>believing in the Hoaxtyn massacre
When will this board go back to its roots of historical skepticism?
>bomb the shit out of london, rotterdam, warsaw and a dozen other places
>but dresden is a war crime
cry harder wehraboos, 99% of you are mongrel burgers with more polish than german ancestry
This post is a blatant fucking lie.
>Not complaining about alleged war crimes against "Aryans"
Odd choice of OP image.
>Believing in Hoax War II

File: images (3).jpg (10 KB, 196x257)
10 KB
4 replies and 2 images omitted. Click here to view.
Charlie was a Hapsburg
File: perfect europe.png (759 KB, 1888x1640)
759 KB
759 KB PNG
Go hard or go home.

File: Edward_Emily_Gibbon.jpg (95 KB, 450x538)
95 KB
Thoughts on his work?
7 replies and 5 images omitted. Click here to view.
The benchmark of work relating to the Roman empire at the time, especially through to late antiquity. Before him nobody had done as thorough a job collecting the information he had and though its a bit dated and his bias is clear, it's still a great read and a classic in the field.
>a private organization
You don't seem to realize how deeply integrated the Church was into the imperial hierarchy both in the West and the East by the 5th century, it was basically a branch of government, and it provided it's full support for the Emperor, considering all the enemies of the empire were either pagans or heretics.
File: b7d(2).png (66 KB, 1000x1000)
66 KB
>Maxentius could destroy boulders with his bare hands
>Rome's walls were 60 feet high
>what we think are Byzantine artifacts are really Italian
>Rome started losing battles because their soldiers forgot how to put armor on
>Theodosius' victories over the Goths didn't actually happen
what did Gibbon mean by this?
At least he's not Peter "Late Western Roman antique was a rebirth and not a decline" Brown
Although I don't have much problem with his religion books tbqh.
>it's a historian takes Flavius "I've never even seen a soldier but I'm pretty sure I know how this army stuff works" Vegetius at face value episode

File: John-Lennon-Wink.gif (436 KB, 240x180)
436 KB
436 KB GIF
"We're more popular than Jesus now."
Why did Lennon's comment get such a strong reaction in the (primarily southern) United States but was relatively unnoticed anywhere else?
If he were still alive and made the remark for the first time yesterday, would it have brought out the same response?
1 reply omitted. Click here to view.
Dixies think playing D&D makes you become satanic.
They are kinda dumb
Amerifats are fucking retarded, that's why
It was an obvious jest from Lennon who was known for his wit and they couldn't get it
religious people have a paranoid persecution complex against "the culture" so when they get directly bantzed in the pants, they lash out by condemning whatever they don't like as "pure evil"
But that comment just wasn't funny in any way

Unless this is the British "humor" I have heard so much about
yeah, it wasn't funny, but he wasn't serious about it

Delete Post: [File Only] Style:
[1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] [8] [9] [10]
[1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] [8] [9] [10]
[Disable Mobile View / Use Desktop Site]

[Enable Mobile View / Use Mobile Site]

All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective parties. Images uploaded are the responsibility of the Poster. Comments are owned by the Poster.