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

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

08/21/20New boards added: /vrpg/, /vmg/, /vst/ and /vm/
05/04/17New trial board added: /bant/ - International/Random
10/04/16New board for 4chan Pass users: /vip/ - Very Important Posts
[Hide] [Show All]

Janitor acceptance emails will be sent out over the coming weeks. Make sure to check your spam box!

[Advertise on 4chan]

[Catalog] [Archive]

File: satanism.jpg (22 KB, 378x386)
22 KB
i freely dedicate my soul to the dark lord satan. 666 please take my soul straight to the depths of hell
No, do it yourself. Stop hitting on me.

File: 1673799753506437.jpg (226 KB, 800x549)
226 KB
226 KB JPG
What was the turning point where the nobility had to stop risking their lives in campaigns to keep their status and could just sit on their titles?

I know Richard III spearheaded a vanguard and died as a result. Henry V went hand to hand combating on campaigns.

In France, the Saint King Louis IX (I believe) died from wounds he got while campaigning.

So when has the public stopped requesting the nobles to actually be warriors? What changed?
3 replies omitted. Click here to view.
The other factor would be professionalization of armies, keeping discipline became easier with lieutenants at a certain point
But the king/prince can still become a fighter pilot or infantry man...

Didn't prince Andrew, despite being called not to, fly in an attack helicopter during the Falklands thing?
It really depends a lot on the place and culture.

But overall the shift took place with rise of concept of “The State” in the 1600s and around the time of the Peace of Westphalia that ended the 30 Years War.

Feudalism was out the door, absolutism creeping in, and European monarchs were quite satisfied with their current borders — the main focus began shifting to capitalism and colonialism. The emergence of importance of ambassadors and treaties to prevent war. The Balance of Power was important.

The stereotypical Renaissance king relied on the pen more than the sword.
Generally the more centralized rule became, the less the monarch needed to personally demonstrate his valor. Back when armies were largely made up of personal retinues going to war meant calling in a bunch of people who promised to fight for you, personally, so if you didn't show up personally to fight, they might not even bother themselves. As armies became less focused on retinues and more on mercenaries and conscripts, there was less need for a monarch to really be present except for satisfying their own need to be seen as a heroic warrior king. But as warfare became more lethal, being a warrior king fell out of fashion.
This makes sense, I guess they amassed enough power that even if the public cared they couldn't force them to risk their lives.
>their own need to be seen as a heroic warrior king.
It shouldn't be their own need, like if a roman emperor didn't go campaigning he would get thrown out of his post and exchanged by one willing to take the risk.

why do they cry about the fall of rome?
i thought rapin' n pillagin' was based?
3 replies omitted. Click here to view.
You're ignorant of history.
You're ignorant of history.
You're ignorant of history.
You're ignorant of history.

File: Crowley magick.jpg (24 KB, 393x465)
24 KB
Is Thelema just rebranded Hinduism? The concept of True Will and Dharma strike me as very similar and I know Crowley spent some time in India.
41 replies and 1 image omitted. Click here to view.
File: pepe10.jpg (16 KB, 392x375)
16 KB
I'm really glad my thread on Thelema and Hinduism could turn into a grammar discussion, thanks guys.
File: syncreticwith.png (6 KB, 375x97)
6 KB
You can go to /x/, find the /omg/ thread and ask them, but something tells me you'll get a similar response

The khabs is in the khu anon.
You look more dumb with every post.
Not an argument. Cope harder.

File: cd34nk76nbs81.jpg (68 KB, 640x663)
68 KB
Why did blacks in South Africa start killing and violently assaulting foreign Africans after the end of apartheid?
wypipo did dis
blacks have never stopped killing each other since the dawn of history
post-toba humans are like that

File: Election_MG_3455.jpg (1.6 MB, 4368x2912)
1.6 MB
1.6 MB JPG
Was universal suffrage really born out of the elites fearing pleb revolts, or was there some other motive? Doubly so for women's suffrage, I can't imagine the ruling classes being afraid of women actually doing a revolution or some shit.
Goal is to institutionalize capitalism or communism, because both view the human being as an industrial unit. Identity politics only exist for us to keep eachother down out of spite, meanwhile we all work/produce for some kind of hierarchy (whether corporate capitalist or state communist). Universal suffrage is a crumb compared to the cookie that elites control: monetary influence over public policy. We literally live in techno-feudalism, politics is just a honeypot to get us looking to the government to solve our problems; but as you can see, the real issues get equal support across party lines, and never to the benefit of the common person. That’s why modern blacktivists rely on government lip service, and they’re free to have parades to “create awareness” as if that is comparable to getting hosed down during the civil rights movement.

To answer the question: suffrage was our gold star for being good goys and not enforcing our right to overthrow the government

The nationalism/revolution phase was a detachment of the nobility from direct control over the masses, but now they’ve figured it out and know that they don’t need to be directly lording over the commoners to get their work and money.
Literally caused the french revolution.....

File: 1658862262223.png (288 KB, 1280x657)
288 KB
288 KB PNG
>first world empire
>born from a petit crusader kingdom
>"The Sun Never Sets on the Spanish Empire"
>built almost every city in the new world, just 700 were built at 16th century
>30 UNESCO World Heritage sites built in America
>first cowboys
>maintained a maritime monopoly in the atlantic and pacific oceans for 3 centuries
>leaded countereformation
>spreaded christianity and western culture as no empire before them
>breed entire new races & cultures by muh dick force
>lasted much more time than rest of colonial empires despite lacking of modern technology, railroads, telegraph, etc
>centuries later still cause butthurt, controversy and admiration
82 replies and 22 images omitted. Click here to view.
The first world empure was Portugal not Spain.
When Spain arrived in the Americas Portugal already had various colonies in Africa and had cornered Africa and entered in the Indic ocean.
Portugal were more advanced than anyone else in that time and were only held back by the need of manpower and still conquered one of the largest empires in history.
Its african americans. America is where you go when you want your culture to die. Its why i advise all hispanics not to move here.
their skin is their culture. they can't build empires because the moment they mix it's over for them. Their culture is individualist so they can never unite under one identity. Even Britain tried and they sill larp as different groups of people. Scots especially.
>he wrote, in a "snownigger" language
spics are retarded mutt golems that worship their masters, what else is new?

File: palmyra.jpg (168 KB, 600x450)
168 KB
168 KB JPG
Why did paganism fail?
28 replies and 1 image omitted. Click here to view.
Reported for false info
Because they're stupid.
Either that or destroyed religious sites, kill off figures of authority or religious knowledge or make staying pagan/heathen so punishing that you have to convert and/or practice the juju on the down low.
Also in some areas imbue the concerts with an extremely hilarious over the top hate of local religions
>somewhat exclusive
One of the initiation rites for Mithraism was the progressive sacrifice of larger and larger livestock until it culminated in a bull (not an ox, an actual bull, or even an aurochs) which was a prohibitively expensive burden to most initiates, much like scientology asking Tom Cruise for a ten million dollar donation. Every single mystery cult we know of (besides Christianity) was this exclusive, which is exactly why any given branch only ever numbered their adherents in the tens or hundreds, culled exclusively from the wealthiest of aristocrats, generals, and statesmen.
It is impossible to expect that kind of practice to compete against an organization whose most onerous burden is the commandment "thou shalt not kill."

File: 26EJh4V.jpg (890 KB, 1596x5000)
890 KB
890 KB JPG
Historically and genetically speaking why is facial attractiveness way more important to women than a man's overall shape and form? Face is but one element of a person's body but women place great emphasis on it. Consider that neither of the men from pic related would be considered conventionally attractive by female standards even though they have well developed musculature whereas females would swoon over a skinny/dadbod type of guy provided he has a good facial structure. Another thing to consider is that men have a name for a woman whose face is generally unattractive but who has a stunning body (butterface) and these girls tend to be also popular with men but women don't have an equivalent and a guy who has a nicely built body but an ugly face will be doomed to loneliness
21 replies and 5 images omitted. Click here to view.
No one likes you, phrenologyfag
File: 1675542369220.jpg (41 KB, 500x360)
41 KB

Physiognomy is real
That said, women are not particularly good at selecting 'fit' men, according to the Darwinian definition of fitness.
This is a mtebid
These are armenoids

Modern Germans are Celts who larp as Germanics. Who imposed Germanic language on their ancestors?
5 replies omitted. Click here to view.
Is it true that people tricked him into posting his pictures by pretending to be gay men?
why are obsessed with white men sex darkwitch?
File: 1675542860324.png (1.69 MB, 4500x3500)
1.69 MB
1.69 MB PNG
Darktroon, did you crush in me? Why are you still keeping all these my photos on your PC?
File: Barmstedt.jpg (183 KB, 800x1067)
183 KB
183 KB JPG

File: JapanCath.jpg (1.8 MB, 4096x1885)
1.8 MB
1.8 MB JPG
Was it just a coincidence that the nuclear bombs were dropped on the cities with the biggest % of Christians in Japan?
I hope not.
Supposedly Stalin uttered the idea while FDR was sucking him off under his desk.

File: IMG_1671.png (221 KB, 1258x1175)
221 KB
221 KB PNG
How are present-day tankies different from fascists in the 30s and 40s?
2 replies omitted. Click here to view.
Everything written in that image is unironically true
There is no such thing as a modern left-wing movement. Lol. Everyone you /pol/ thinks is a “commie” is actually a “socially liberal, but economically conservative” type. Which is the long way to say “capitalist”.
both tankies (communists in general really) and fascists are psychological operations spread by elite wasp/Jewish american universities to diffuse any rebellions against the leftist state
communists are for permanent revolution strategy, whereas tankism/fascism are the witches for the mob to burn
go ACK to reddit
I don't use reddit, incel.

File: lol.png (1.56 MB, 1668x1282)
1.56 MB
1.56 MB PNG
Post incels
9 replies and 1 image omitted. Click here to view.
if these were actual "nationalists" like they pretend to be, they would be consistent with eugenics and celebrate that the weak link exited itself from the genepool. LOL@anyone that takes the neo """right""" of any country in the modern era seriously
Im betting these are not real Armenians but shitskin mixed diaspora in the new world (read: JewSA). One of them even says “repat”
I'm sure that you're right because Armenians are white skinned blond people with blue eyes for sure.
Every single Armenian is like that. The ones in America are mixed with shit and piss right?
ottomans use to see turks as lesser than them. A derogatory term. Funny how things changed.
Nationalists don't have to be pro eugenics strictly speaking. They might be isolationists but not otherwise pro eugenics.

File: 1675214329487410.jpg (25 KB, 353x600)
25 KB
How do you start loving what God loves and hating what He hates?
27 replies and 3 images omitted. Click here to view.
You must eat Jesus. Every Child of God understands that there is no rat race when it comes to receiving the mind of Christ. Approach this with a carnal mind and you will get slapped.
you're in for a rough ride when you learn what jesus actually taught
It is a matter of ongoing spiritual discipline, of putting on the mind of Christ.

Which is the task of a lifetime.

A practical approach is to read an accessible guide to the effective practice of the spiritual life such as St. Francis de Sales, Introduction to the Devout Life.


Thomas a Kempis, The Imitation of Christ

Garrigou-Lagrange, The Three Conversions in the Spiritual Life

Dietrich von Hildebrand, Transformation in Christ

Comment too long. Click here to view the full text.
How is god not a natural process
The concept of god itself is the accumulated psychic focus of tens of thousands of years of mental evolution. It’s such a prevalent part of the mind that only regional brain damage can disrupt spiritual thought. At a sociological level, it manifests in reality through the actions of humanity, and informs their responses to natural phenomena.
The ability to even perceive this concept is also an inexplicable product of consciousness, which all we can say for sure is that it evolved out of neurons doing *something*.
We can’t even perceive the future, outside of assuming that certain causes will have repeat effects; god is the ultimate abstraction of man with the ability to not only see the future, but with wisdom enough to affect it (i.e. butterfly effect type actions)

Humble yourself, if you’re an atheist that believes that you’re no more than an animal, then youve already resigned being able to converse with human beings
No argument heard, nice self portrait

How do "biblically accurate angels" nerds cope with the Heavenly Host existing?
There is a half-truth to the "biblically accurate angel" meme. Angels in the Bible are described as eldritch abominations in certain books, specifically Ezekiel and Revelation. The problem is they think that ALL angels in the Bible looked like this and forgot that there is a hierarchy of Angels described in both Jewish and Christian literature. The truly eldritch angels are the ones at in God's inner circle. The ones who give messages to humans are not described but probably looked like androgynous humanoids with wings similar to beings from Mesopotamian and Babylonian mythology that held a similar purpose.
It's not a "half-truth", it's the entire point. Artists took liberties picturing cherubim as chubby winged babies (cupids) and so on.
Even the properly humanoid angels are frequently pictured as women when there's very good reason to conclude from scripture that angels are all sexless and look like men if anything.
what's that?
Why are you all such Christfags on this board
The Heavenly Host, obviously

[Advertise on 4chan]

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.