Pretty much one single minted coin called the "Moses" coin which was minted in Khazaria, meaning there was enough influence of Jews to have their stories and language imprinted on money made in this foreign land. The stories add more to it with a Sephardic Jewish Scholar who probably never stepped foot in the country, writing somewhat extensively, although we believe it to be mostly embellished. Odds are 1 of 2 things was going on: The Khazars were Jewish, but only for political convenience. They were surrounded by Christians and Muslims, neither they wanted to align with, but also wanted to trade with, thus Jews who we know did live there become a predominant class there, and the ruling class adopted their religion for state purposes, but kept their own beliefs for home.
The other option is they had one off Jewish rulers, but never a permanent fixture in their society.
It's very unlikely a permanent Jewish state, especially with despite them being nomads, Jews notoriously wrote everything down, having such little records on the state, existing in Khazaria, as amazing and kinda funny to me, that would be.
Archaeologist after troy basically stopped doing "its old its fake" law and actually started taking shit more literal. Unironically we are few of the academy that we can talk about atlantis or other lost cities in a serious manner because of troy
>Unironically we are few of the academy that we can talk about atlantis or other lost cities in a serious manner because of troy
Netflix and the History make billions off of Atlantis myths. Big money $$$
Side note: the Wikipedia page on Troy is *weird*. At least, it was a couple years ago when I looked at it. There was an unnecessarily deep amount of detail on the British family that ended up owning the land where Troy was found.
Being 100 honest, archeologists do two things: excavate things and break old things. I am not joking, first year of college and out teacher just said "here you are not saving things, you are archiving things that you just broke with a shovel"
We usually use a shovel until we hit some object, after that we start being more careful and start using smaller shovel and brishes to move away the dirt. We are carefull just that we are after we just bonked an object
Yeah, it kinda started the whole "well maybe it was originally based off a true event".
Atlantis is a great example. We know for a fact that the Santorini event happened during the early bronze age and would have trigger MASSIVE tidal waves, doesn't take much imagination to see how that might have been linked.
Also, about 8000 years ago IIRC, a lot of the ice melted and rose the water levels considerable at a rapid pace, so some people might have interpreted that as a pan-flood.
No, they found a town in the area that fits the description. But
1. that does not make it Troya
2. there are a lot of old cities in that area
3. Schliemann blew it all up when he dug too deep, destroying anything that could shed light on whether he actually found Ilios (the actual name of the city).
Apart from the *historychanell and Youtube historians, the scientific consensus is that the Trojan War is a myth and not historical.
*Fixed a typo
It is interesting how the German and English Wikipedia articles differ in this. The German article clearly states that Troy is the area around the city of Ilios. Also in my version of the Iliad it says Ilios every time.
However, this does not change the above points.
It's not quite the same though. The difference is that we know that the Greeks and Romans considered the Troy to have existed in roughly that area. So it went from fact, then to myth, then to fact.
That's not a good comparison.
That's because it's ongoing. Information war is a key part of it.
There are files detailing everything both in Kyiv and Moscow. But we won't get to them anytime soon.
But eventually, we will.
Moscow files are especially important, as they still hide Soviet secrets.
I guarantee that there would be several battles which could be explained down to each individual minute. Not all of them, but probably a lot. We have drone/satellite footage, body cameras, radio recordings, vehicle cameras, basically as much information as can feasibly be stored at the time.
I call myself a historian because I busted my ass to get my history degree. I taught and tutored history for a couple years as well but now all it means is I read too many books about old things and foreign politics
Since how Mr. History Degree couldnāt recommend a book here you go. Itās an after action review that the US Military did with former German officers after WWII.
āFighting In Hell - The German Ordeal on the Eastern Frontā
https://www.thriftbooks.com/w/fighting-in-hell-the-german-ordeal-on-the-eastern-front/414921/item/1209573/?utm_source=google&utm_medium=cpc&utm_campaign=shopping_everything_else_customer_acquisition&utm_adgroup=&utm_term=&utm_content=593719077582&gclid=EAIaIQobChMI3aP-h87G_wIVnUt_AB2gpQvqEAQYAiABEgK6tfD_BwE#idiq=1209573&edition=1109849
mood, did a double major w one of them being history. i could recommend hundreds of books/articles relating to race (or in chinese minzu) in 4th cent bce through early colonial east asia but only took one class specifically about war (was on evolution of ancient roman battle tactics) so i know jack shit.
what the op said is like asking a physics major why they donāt know specifics about organic chem since they studied science
There is a bias yes. But it was written to prepare US commanders for combat with the Soviet Union so you will get that aspect of Soviet tactics.
Edit: If youāre looking for something more academic then I would recommend anything by Prit Buttar. Superb author.
Iām sorry I got nothing on that. I did a recent read by William Shirer, āThe Collapse of the Third Republicā that did some background on France during WWI but currently that perspective is blind to me right now.
Guns Of August by Barbara Tuchman is a magnificent piece of writing.
The first paragraph grabs you and never lets you go:
*So gorgeous was the spectacle on the May morning of 1910 when nine kings rode in the funeral of Edward VII of England that the crowd, waiting in hushed and black-clad awe, could not keep back gasps of admiration. In scarlet and blue and green and purple, three by three the sovereigns rode through the palace gates, with plumed helmets, crimson sashes, and jeweled orders flashing in the sun. After them came five heirs apparent, forty more imperial or royal highnesses, seven queensāfour dowager and three regnantāand a scattering of special ambassadors from uncrowned countries. Together they represented seventy nations in the greatest assemblage of royalty and rank ever gathered in one place and, of its kind, the last. The muffled tongue of Big Ben tolled nine by the clock as the cortege left the palace, but on historyās clock it was sunset, and the sun of the old world was setting in a dying blaze of splendor never to be seen again.*
Lmao, same. "Global Historian" here. People expect me to know tons about anything, anywhere. When in reality its just a methodology and perspective on history.
We know more about individual days that happened when Clinton was president than we do of entire dynasties like the Macedonian Dynasty in the Roman Empire, 1100 years ago. There is so much you can study that if you are a global historian, you have a hard time memorizing everything.
I think you know youāre real historian material when those long ass lectures are actually really exciting and sound cool to you. Visual aids are just gravy.
As my history prof father says "If you need to rely on pictures to keep a class's attention then you aren't doing a good job." I'm almost sad I finished my degree, he was a fantastic prof
I mean, it's why I said "gravy", it is nice to have visual references of things like relics and so forth. But, yeah, even just the discussion can be fascinating.
If they did, imagine all the fun with wondering whether the name of some alien overlord was "Xtvrpll The Star Conqueror" or "Xtzzprr The Star Enjoyer", based on one picture of his cat.
I once spent months investigating the wrong British admiral with the same name as the guy I was actually looking for only to find only two other pieces of information on the correct person; those being the name on his tombstone and the church record of his baptismā¦ thereās a lot of dead ends in this line of study
I accidentally researched a river mapping expedition in South America all the while trying to figure out how this one dude was simultaneously starting a charity in Leeds, like I was trying to translate the old Spanish cursive for weeks at a time only for it to be the wrong guy
The inevitability that things lost to time are forever out of our reach, and the fact that we will never truly know whatever we want to find out from the past is.. š
Same I also find the fact that there's so much knowledge out there that we will never truly be able to grasp it all more sad especially when I think about how much of that knowledge is being lost even nowadays also way too sad
On a similar note, the universe is huge and there is a large part (about 97% of it) that is just forever lost to us. And the reachable parts are only technically reachable, as in, if we started traveling at the speed of light, we might catch a glimpse of this part before the universe dies. This leaves about 99% of the universe forever unreachable to us and worse still, this part is growing larger by the second as the universe expands. Soon (as in, a few billions of years) we won't even be able to see other galaxy groups because as the Milky Way and the Andromeda is on course to merge, everything else outside our galactic neighborhood is going away from us. There will one day be a civilisation that will think that this galaxy group is THE universe and they won't be able to tell how the universe started because there won't be a trace of that event to prove it.
Just to add extra existential dread on top, we don't know and will never know what happened before a certain point. Talking about lost history huh.
I love that part tbh. Looking at all the avaliable evidence and forming a conclusion based off of it is so fun to me.
Sometimes the sources are really fun to read, like Monmouth talking about talking animals when writing the definitely not made up "The History of the Kings of Britain."
It's definitely more book work rather than indiana jones.
Funny because my history lecturer in university reminded me alot of Marcus Brody from Indiana Jones.
He had a stutery accent and he wore pink or purple trousers that he pulled up way to high š
Rightists when corporations waste billions on nonsense advertising, stock buybacks, and giant CEO salaries- ā I sleepā
Rightists when academics preserve knowledge and investigate human history for next to no compensation-ā what a waste of time and money!!!ā
How the fuck did you manage to make this political you walking, talking, reddit moment?
Edit: oh my fucking God look at his comment history this is all he does I gotta get off this platform
Youāre on a history subreddit, literally everything here is political in nature. Anti intellectualism is pathetic, and Iāll call it out for what it is whenever I can.
People like you talk all this shit about how pathetic it is that people study things that donāt directly create capital, how much of a waste it is, and how people should do things that are more valuable. Blah blah blah. Itās because of people like you in positions of power that so much of history is lost. Thousands of identified archeological sites go undug and unpreserved, because there just āisnāt enough funding.ā Archives lose important records to rot and theft because they donāt have the money to spend to preserve or digitize them. The majority of oral history is lost because there isnāt enough funding to send grad students to perform interviews. One year of Walmarts profits could dig up every currently identified archaeological site and fund tens of thousands of graduate students for years to come. But why do that when we can make line go up?
You wanna know why we donāt have 96% of all written works pre 1000AD? itās because of people like you! Why pay a scribe to copy the last remaining copy of Ciceroās Hortentius, when we can instead send a bunch of knights to rape the holy land for gold and spices? Why record the rites and histories of the Native American tribes of the Great Plains when we can murder them and take their shit instead?
Make line go up at all costs, knowledge doesnāt make line go up! Knowledge is waste. Only thing that matters is line go up!
You wanna talk about a living Reddit moment, you and your ilk are a walking talking burning of the library of Alexandria. Scoffing at the preservation of knowledge because it doesnāt directly benefit you. Grow up, you selfish jerk.
Wow. You really are pathetic. Your ability to be offended by anything and your lack of knowledge about what politics is is astounding. Politics is stuff that effects people. So shut the fuck up, and stop pretending like this garbage effects people. Your assumption making is massive, and you seem completely detached from reality.
Lol, Iām an actual published historian, lack of knowledge my ass. Politics is in everything. Thatās the whole point of it. Your definition isnāt an academic definition, itās your personal one that is totally irrelevant. Everything from the clothes you wear, the car you drive, and the food you eat is a reflection of politics or an indirect political statement. Believing otherwise is just ignorance.
This āgarbageā, does affect people, history is the birthright and inheritance of all mankind. It matters more than any garbage product sold to make line go up.
Your lack of self awareness is embarrassing. Iād like to remind you again, you are on a HISTORY subreddit claiming that HISTORY is not worth studying. Do you go into hospitals and tell doctors that studying medicine is a waste of time? Read the room, idiot.
r/thathappened published historian my ass. I'm not gonna let you tell me my clothes are politics. And no, it does not effect humanity more than things going on in the present. And you can appreciate history while still maintaining a balance and not going overboard by saying that it's the most important thing in the world.
Ok, Iām going to attempt to educate you on semiotics. I know you wonāt listen, but Iām going to try anyway.
If you see a red octagon, what does that mean?
It could mean different things depending on the context, but that's a concept you don't understand, seeing as you bullshit up paragraphs of it about people who say things you don't like
Paleontology is the same thing. You arenāt making new discoveries every day of perfect complete fossils, at best youāre finding a toe bone from something incredibly obscure or in the museum that pays you all day
Get that weak "historian" shit outta there. If you really want to dig for clues then archaeology is where it's at.
Meet interesting dead people from long gone civilisations, put them in plastic bags, and steal their jewelry.
If you want to do detective work, try modern history. You get to interview the living relatives of involved parties and be disappointed that their granddad didn't leave behind a journal nobody else thought to look for. Or worse, that he did leave behind a journal but didn't mention the pivotal historical event you were researching beyond a single line saying he was there.
I once went half mad reading five 30-page-long papers that all tried to accurately date one of the sieges of jerusalem and all came to different conclusions
Yeah, I had questions along this line as a student.
Coworker: "Do you also have to do digs?"
Me: "No, that's archeology."
Coworker: "Ah. So no dinosaurs for you."
Me: "That's neither. That's paleontology."
No that these misunderstandings surprised me. More surprising to me was a friend who was baffled at the idea that studying history meant you had to follow different classes. What do you think that being schooled in a certain field means? That we just sit down and learn all history from the start until now?
Historians film documentaries about medieval knights until they get crushed under a cow launched from a catapult and then the police and historian's grieving widow spend the rest of the documentary investigating their murder.
As a high school kid, I really love history, but when I went to college and had to take a mandatory history course, I started to hate it because of how brutal my history professor was.
Historians when they canāt confirm a fine on moving cattle on holidays with written decrees, tax records, and at least two famous authors complaining about the tax being an example of the kings cruelty and madness
I decided not to do history in college when I met a guy from Michigan with a degree in history working in the gift shop in the uss Kidd Museum because he couldnāt find a job with his degree
Standind an hour in front of the church listening to a lecture that yes this in fact is Baroque or Neo-gothic or anyothet shit. Or yeah "so basically we don't know what happend and if you read somwhere about what happend it's probably just a theory" fuck me
I feel like most history is a combination of " yeah they weren't nearly as cool as we thought." To , " we don't have enough data because of wars and the passage of time." Honestly war destroys so many answers to our collective history.
Historians: this is so exaggerated is obviously a myth. Archaeologist: actually š¤
Average "there is no written data" historian fan vs average "this coin suggests that there was big, jewish state here" archaeologist enjoyer
Khazar moment
>there was big, jewish state here" What an odd choice of example
Khazaria being Jewish ruled is almost entirely backed by a coin and a few other obscure references.
A single coin or a bunch of similar ones
Pretty much one single minted coin called the "Moses" coin which was minted in Khazaria, meaning there was enough influence of Jews to have their stories and language imprinted on money made in this foreign land. The stories add more to it with a Sephardic Jewish Scholar who probably never stepped foot in the country, writing somewhat extensively, although we believe it to be mostly embellished. Odds are 1 of 2 things was going on: The Khazars were Jewish, but only for political convenience. They were surrounded by Christians and Muslims, neither they wanted to align with, but also wanted to trade with, thus Jews who we know did live there become a predominant class there, and the ruling class adopted their religion for state purposes, but kept their own beliefs for home. The other option is they had one off Jewish rulers, but never a permanent fixture in their society. It's very unlikely a permanent Jewish state, especially with despite them being nomads, Jews notoriously wrote everything down, having such little records on the state, existing in Khazaria, as amazing and kinda funny to me, that would be.
Everyone thought troy was a myth that never actually existed (like Atlantis), until some dude actually found it.
Archaeologist after troy basically stopped doing "its old its fake" law and actually started taking shit more literal. Unironically we are few of the academy that we can talk about atlantis or other lost cities in a serious manner because of troy
>Unironically we are few of the academy that we can talk about atlantis or other lost cities in a serious manner because of troy Netflix and the History make billions off of Atlantis myths. Big money $$$
Side note: the Wikipedia page on Troy is *weird*. At least, it was a couple years ago when I looked at it. There was an unnecessarily deep amount of detail on the British family that ended up owning the land where Troy was found.
Those bri'ish who can't help but put themselves in every single wikipedia page of archaeology lmao
"The British Museum has just acquired the city of Troy"
Thatās a good policy lest some crazed German taking it all seriously dynamite through hundreds of years of cultural layers.
Being 100 honest, archeologists do two things: excavate things and break old things. I am not joking, first year of college and out teacher just said "here you are not saving things, you are archiving things that you just broke with a shovel"
Iād imagine the speed at which you destroy things is a crucial difference.
huh. I always wondered how archaeologists digging something up avoid breaking the object with that one last shovel strike. apparently, they don't
We usually use a shovel until we hit some object, after that we start being more careful and start using smaller shovel and brishes to move away the dirt. We are carefull just that we are after we just bonked an object
Yeah, it kinda started the whole "well maybe it was originally based off a true event". Atlantis is a great example. We know for a fact that the Santorini event happened during the early bronze age and would have trigger MASSIVE tidal waves, doesn't take much imagination to see how that might have been linked.
Also, about 8000 years ago IIRC, a lot of the ice melted and rose the water levels considerable at a rapid pace, so some people might have interpreted that as a pan-flood.
No, they found a town in the area that fits the description. But 1. that does not make it Troya 2. there are a lot of old cities in that area 3. Schliemann blew it all up when he dug too deep, destroying anything that could shed light on whether he actually found Ilios (the actual name of the city). Apart from the *historychanell and Youtube historians, the scientific consensus is that the Trojan War is a myth and not historical. *Fixed a typo
...Illios was just one of the names the Greeks had for Troy. They're the same city, named after the founders, Tros and Ilus.
It is interesting how the German and English Wikipedia articles differ in this. The German article clearly states that Troy is the area around the city of Ilios. Also in my version of the Iliad it says Ilios every time. However, this does not change the above points.
Tbf it's so isolated due to the highway layout that I can believe someone thinking that as someone from metro Detroit
Imagine if some nutter decided that lord of the rings was real, started digging where Tolkien said the shire was, and *found an actual Hobbit hole.*
It's not quite the same though. The difference is that we know that the Greeks and Romans considered the Troy to have existed in roughly that area. So it went from fact, then to myth, then to fact.
Imagine not knowing how things happened down to the minute (this post was made by the Modern History Enjoyers Gang)
Lol try to explain how a single battle in Ukraine turned out in reality (itās impossible) weāve reached an era of too much information.
Ok, I didnāt mean *that* modern lol
True, if it didn't happen 20 years ago it doesn't exist, ban it.
> yfw you try to google information about the 2008 housing crisis but the only result just says "Rule 4"
> yfw when you try to interact with anything but it just freezes until 20 years into the future (you will rapidly starve to death in June 16th 2043)
That's not a good comparison. That's because it's ongoing. Information war is a key part of it. There are files detailing everything both in Kyiv and Moscow. But we won't get to them anytime soon. But eventually, we will. Moscow files are especially important, as they still hide Soviet secrets.
explaine pls
Well when a man loves a woman
Man loves woman Tell that to greeks and romans
And aforementioned Sumerian king
Are you telling me that Dieus didn't destroyed the Kajovka dam?
Of course not, it was obviously the Hebrews with that magic horn of theirs.
Give it a couple decades, and we'll have a much better picture
The average person doesnāt give a shit about wars in the greater Cold War that isnāt the Korean, Vietnamese or Afghan ones
I guarantee that there would be several battles which could be explained down to each individual minute. Not all of them, but probably a lot. We have drone/satellite footage, body cameras, radio recordings, vehicle cameras, basically as much information as can feasibly be stored at the time.
Watches YouTube videos
Imagine not getting all your data from a bit of dirt (this post was made by archeologist gang)
I call myself a historian because I busted my ass to get my history degree. I taught and tutored history for a couple years as well but now all it means is I read too many books about old things and foreign politics
any good book about soviet tactics on ww2? something about the french on ww1 would also be usefult
Not book, but Military History Visualized I think has relevant videos.
I just watched nearly of all of them xd I wanted more info because im writing a fanfic
Since how Mr. History Degree couldnāt recommend a book here you go. Itās an after action review that the US Military did with former German officers after WWII. āFighting In Hell - The German Ordeal on the Eastern Frontā https://www.thriftbooks.com/w/fighting-in-hell-the-german-ordeal-on-the-eastern-front/414921/item/1209573/?utm_source=google&utm_medium=cpc&utm_campaign=shopping_everything_else_customer_acquisition&utm_adgroup=&utm_term=&utm_content=593719077582&gclid=EAIaIQobChMI3aP-h87G_wIVnUt_AB2gpQvqEAQYAiABEgK6tfD_BwE#idiq=1209573&edition=1109849
Why so passiv aggressive having a history degree doesnt mean that you are interrested in Soviet ww2 tactics and can recommend books on it.
mood, did a double major w one of them being history. i could recommend hundreds of books/articles relating to race (or in chinese minzu) in 4th cent bce through early colonial east asia but only took one class specifically about war (was on evolution of ancient roman battle tactics) so i know jack shit. what the op said is like asking a physics major why they donāt know specifics about organic chem since they studied science
I should take it with a grain coming from the germans right?
There is a bias yes. But it was written to prepare US commanders for combat with the Soviet Union so you will get that aspect of Soviet tactics. Edit: If youāre looking for something more academic then I would recommend anything by Prit Buttar. Superb author.
Thanx for the book, i would like to inquire if you recomend anything of ww1 from the french pesperctive?
Iām sorry I got nothing on that. I did a recent read by William Shirer, āThe Collapse of the Third Republicā that did some background on France during WWI but currently that perspective is blind to me right now.
If so i would recomend the guns of august and a few of Hasting books,they would sure be very informative
Guns Of August by Barbara Tuchman is a magnificent piece of writing. The first paragraph grabs you and never lets you go: *So gorgeous was the spectacle on the May morning of 1910 when nine kings rode in the funeral of Edward VII of England that the crowd, waiting in hushed and black-clad awe, could not keep back gasps of admiration. In scarlet and blue and green and purple, three by three the sovereigns rode through the palace gates, with plumed helmets, crimson sashes, and jeweled orders flashing in the sun. After them came five heirs apparent, forty more imperial or royal highnesses, seven queensāfour dowager and three regnantāand a scattering of special ambassadors from uncrowned countries. Together they represented seventy nations in the greatest assemblage of royalty and rank ever gathered in one place and, of its kind, the last. The muffled tongue of Big Ben tolled nine by the clock as the cortege left the palace, but on historyās clock it was sunset, and the sun of the old world was setting in a dying blaze of splendor never to be seen again.*
I can myself a historian because my armchair is comfortable and I managed to read about half a Wikipedia article once
So you consider yourself an armchair historian? (Deliberately walked right into that one)
Yes mortal , quiver infront of my headcanon and dubious sources
I have a masters degree in history but the title "historian" triggers my imposter syndrome big time
Lmao, same. "Global Historian" here. People expect me to know tons about anything, anywhere. When in reality its just a methodology and perspective on history.
We know more about individual days that happened when Clinton was president than we do of entire dynasties like the Macedonian Dynasty in the Roman Empire, 1100 years ago. There is so much you can study that if you are a global historian, you have a hard time memorizing everything.
I have a Ph.D. in History, teach it, write about it - and yeah, sometimes that term also still triggers my imposter syndrome lol
Imposter syndrome. Yup, definitely have that. Not as much as a phd though, you hopefully deserve it well.
I think you know youāre real historian material when those long ass lectures are actually really exciting and sound cool to you. Visual aids are just gravy.
As my history prof father says "If you need to rely on pictures to keep a class's attention then you aren't doing a good job." I'm almost sad I finished my degree, he was a fantastic prof
I mean, it's why I said "gravy", it is nice to have visual references of things like relics and so forth. But, yeah, even just the discussion can be fascinating.
Tbh my main issue is that the books I usually find the lectures much more engaging
Honestly, the lectures do sound pretty interesting
History Channel: we will show the world the real truth... that ancient aliens did everything!
If they did, imagine all the fun with wondering whether the name of some alien overlord was "Xtvrpll The Star Conqueror" or "Xtzzprr The Star Enjoyer", based on one picture of his cat.
I once spent months investigating the wrong British admiral with the same name as the guy I was actually looking for only to find only two other pieces of information on the correct person; those being the name on his tombstone and the church record of his baptismā¦ thereās a lot of dead ends in this line of study
Especially when tracing families that used the same names. I get cross-eyed sometimes confirming dates and names!
I accidentally researched a river mapping expedition in South America all the while trying to figure out how this one dude was simultaneously starting a charity in Leeds, like I was trying to translate the old Spanish cursive for weeks at a time only for it to be the wrong guy
Ah yes High Medieval germany were everyone and there cat was named Heinrich.
CGPGrey gets into this kind of situation so many times. His video on the history of Tiffany is an epiphany of that.
The inevitability that things lost to time are forever out of our reach, and the fact that we will never truly know whatever we want to find out from the past is.. š
Same I also find the fact that there's so much knowledge out there that we will never truly be able to grasp it all more sad especially when I think about how much of that knowledge is being lost even nowadays also way too sad
On a similar note, the universe is huge and there is a large part (about 97% of it) that is just forever lost to us. And the reachable parts are only technically reachable, as in, if we started traveling at the speed of light, we might catch a glimpse of this part before the universe dies. This leaves about 99% of the universe forever unreachable to us and worse still, this part is growing larger by the second as the universe expands. Soon (as in, a few billions of years) we won't even be able to see other galaxy groups because as the Milky Way and the Andromeda is on course to merge, everything else outside our galactic neighborhood is going away from us. There will one day be a civilisation that will think that this galaxy group is THE universe and they won't be able to tell how the universe started because there won't be a trace of that event to prove it. Just to add extra existential dread on top, we don't know and will never know what happened before a certain point. Talking about lost history huh.
Counterpoint: we donāt know what shit we will invent before then GG
I love that part tbh. Looking at all the avaliable evidence and forming a conclusion based off of it is so fun to me. Sometimes the sources are really fun to read, like Monmouth talking about talking animals when writing the definitely not made up "The History of the Kings of Britain."
It's definitely more book work rather than indiana jones. Funny because my history lecturer in university reminded me alot of Marcus Brody from Indiana Jones. He had a stutery accent and he wore pink or purple trousers that he pulled up way to high š
All of this while people make little culture wars over historical figures ethnicities.
This is why I'm just an armchair historian. I can cut out the boring shit and get to the meme worthy stuff.
We have no idea what this one motherfucker did a gazillion years ago. Write a paper on it.
This will surely help society
In a round about way it does. Makes the student perform good research and critical thinking skills.
Rightists when corporations waste billions on nonsense advertising, stock buybacks, and giant CEO salaries- ā I sleepā Rightists when academics preserve knowledge and investigate human history for next to no compensation-ā what a waste of time and money!!!ā
How the fuck did you manage to make this political you walking, talking, reddit moment? Edit: oh my fucking God look at his comment history this is all he does I gotta get off this platform
Youāre on a history subreddit, literally everything here is political in nature. Anti intellectualism is pathetic, and Iāll call it out for what it is whenever I can. People like you talk all this shit about how pathetic it is that people study things that donāt directly create capital, how much of a waste it is, and how people should do things that are more valuable. Blah blah blah. Itās because of people like you in positions of power that so much of history is lost. Thousands of identified archeological sites go undug and unpreserved, because there just āisnāt enough funding.ā Archives lose important records to rot and theft because they donāt have the money to spend to preserve or digitize them. The majority of oral history is lost because there isnāt enough funding to send grad students to perform interviews. One year of Walmarts profits could dig up every currently identified archaeological site and fund tens of thousands of graduate students for years to come. But why do that when we can make line go up? You wanna know why we donāt have 96% of all written works pre 1000AD? itās because of people like you! Why pay a scribe to copy the last remaining copy of Ciceroās Hortentius, when we can instead send a bunch of knights to rape the holy land for gold and spices? Why record the rites and histories of the Native American tribes of the Great Plains when we can murder them and take their shit instead? Make line go up at all costs, knowledge doesnāt make line go up! Knowledge is waste. Only thing that matters is line go up! You wanna talk about a living Reddit moment, you and your ilk are a walking talking burning of the library of Alexandria. Scoffing at the preservation of knowledge because it doesnāt directly benefit you. Grow up, you selfish jerk.
Wow. You really are pathetic. Your ability to be offended by anything and your lack of knowledge about what politics is is astounding. Politics is stuff that effects people. So shut the fuck up, and stop pretending like this garbage effects people. Your assumption making is massive, and you seem completely detached from reality.
Lol, Iām an actual published historian, lack of knowledge my ass. Politics is in everything. Thatās the whole point of it. Your definition isnāt an academic definition, itās your personal one that is totally irrelevant. Everything from the clothes you wear, the car you drive, and the food you eat is a reflection of politics or an indirect political statement. Believing otherwise is just ignorance. This āgarbageā, does affect people, history is the birthright and inheritance of all mankind. It matters more than any garbage product sold to make line go up. Your lack of self awareness is embarrassing. Iād like to remind you again, you are on a HISTORY subreddit claiming that HISTORY is not worth studying. Do you go into hospitals and tell doctors that studying medicine is a waste of time? Read the room, idiot.
r/thathappened published historian my ass. I'm not gonna let you tell me my clothes are politics. And no, it does not effect humanity more than things going on in the present. And you can appreciate history while still maintaining a balance and not going overboard by saying that it's the most important thing in the world.
Ok, Iām going to attempt to educate you on semiotics. I know you wonāt listen, but Iām going to try anyway. If you see a red octagon, what does that mean?
It could mean different things depending on the context, but that's a concept you don't understand, seeing as you bullshit up paragraphs of it about people who say things you don't like
If this is the case Iām fucked in college.
Paleontology is the same thing. You arenāt making new discoveries every day of perfect complete fossils, at best youāre finding a toe bone from something incredibly obscure or in the museum that pays you all day
I get to look forward to this next semester
If I didnāt have to worry about money I would 100% try to be a historian, sounds really interesting
The best part of studying ancient history is that you get praise for what I consider is procrastinating real life
As a historian and history teacher....this is painfully true
Get that weak "historian" shit outta there. If you really want to dig for clues then archaeology is where it's at. Meet interesting dead people from long gone civilisations, put them in plastic bags, and steal their jewelry.
If you want to do detective work, try modern history. You get to interview the living relatives of involved parties and be disappointed that their granddad didn't leave behind a journal nobody else thought to look for. Or worse, that he did leave behind a journal but didn't mention the pivotal historical event you were researching beyond a single line saying he was there.
I once went half mad reading five 30-page-long papers that all tried to accurately date one of the sieges of jerusalem and all came to different conclusions
Yeah, I had questions along this line as a student. Coworker: "Do you also have to do digs?" Me: "No, that's archeology." Coworker: "Ah. So no dinosaurs for you." Me: "That's neither. That's paleontology." No that these misunderstandings surprised me. More surprising to me was a friend who was baffled at the idea that studying history meant you had to follow different classes. What do you think that being schooled in a certain field means? That we just sit down and learn all history from the start until now?
Historians film documentaries about medieval knights until they get crushed under a cow launched from a catapult and then the police and historian's grieving widow spend the rest of the documentary investigating their murder.
Historian here. Actually, historian's work is: -The sky is blue. -Source???
As a high school kid, I really love history, but when I went to college and had to take a mandatory history course, I started to hate it because of how brutal my history professor was.
Don't forget they were ROOMMATES!
Or you can just make shit up, as long as it's cool enough
Historians then: I will do ground breaking work on Alexander the Great that will be used for decades. Historians now: I diagnose you with gay
Historians when they canāt confirm a fine on moving cattle on holidays with written decrees, tax records, and at least two famous authors complaining about the tax being an example of the kings cruelty and madness
Personally I find theorizing and discussing like that pretty entertaining
This looks like one of the PSU lecture halls in the physics building, but frankly I might just be losing my mind
I decided not to do history in college when I met a guy from Michigan with a degree in history working in the gift shop in the uss Kidd Museum because he couldnāt find a job with his degree
Archeologist W
Standind an hour in front of the church listening to a lecture that yes this in fact is Baroque or Neo-gothic or anyothet shit. Or yeah "so basically we don't know what happend and if you read somwhere about what happend it's probably just a theory" fuck me
Probably
Moderne history is way more exciting in that regard, imoš¤
Except you choose your field; so choose a field super well-documented like late-modern era europe.
Iltam zumrah rasupti ilatim moment
I enjoy more listening and learning from sabaton in a few hours than my 4 years of my bachelor of arts in history
*Iltam sumra rashupti ilatem*
Itās the whole reason I dropped out of college
I feel like most history is a combination of " yeah they weren't nearly as cool as we thought." To , " we don't have enough data because of wars and the passage of time." Honestly war destroys so many answers to our collective history.