|
https://twitter.com/NotBrunoAgain/status/1262888892241494016?s=19
|
#
?
May 20, 2020 13:51
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 19, 2024 17:12 |
|
|
BRB, changing my business cards to read Cyrano4747, PhD Loremaster
|
|
#
?
May 20, 2020 14:20
|
|
|
Master of the Ancient Egyptian Sperm Glyph Lore
|
|
|
#
?
May 20, 2020 15:48
|
|
|
Go
|
|
#
?
May 20, 2020 17:39
|
|
|
i mean lol, but honestly same. if some series i like does a event/time period thats interesting. i will read about it. hell one of the reasons i like games/media with deep lore is because i am a history nerd.
|
|
#
?
May 20, 2020 19:01
|
|
|
I asked about the Byzantine Empire because of Crusader Kings 2.
|
|
#
?
May 20, 2020 19:42
|
|
|
Dapper_Swindler posted:i mean lol, but honestly same. if some series i like does a event/time period thats interesting. i will read about it. I know about Egypt now specifically because of AssCreed Origins. The Rise and Fall of Ancient Egypt by Toby Wilkinson was the tome I tackled because of that game.
|
|
#
?
May 20, 2020 19:48
|
|
|
Look Sir Droids posted:I asked about the Byzantine Empire because of Crusader Kings 2.
|
|
#
?
May 20, 2020 19:48
|
|
|
Not gonna lie, CK2 got me to read a solid handful of books on wtf was going on in Germany between Charlemagne and the HRE.
|
|
#
?
May 20, 2020 19:51
|
|
|
Dapper_Swindler posted:i mean lol, but honestly same. if some series i like does a event/time period thats interesting. i will read about it.
|
|
#
?
May 20, 2020 19:59
|
|
\
|
Look Sir Droids posted:I asked about the Byzantine Empire because of Crusader Kings 2. I didn't know Songhai existed until I played Civ5.
|
|
#
?
May 20, 2020 20:58
|
|
|
I learned what showers are from The Sims
|
|
#
?
May 20, 2020 21:17
|
|
|
I guess I have a bachelor's of lore?
|
|
#
?
May 20, 2020 23:00
|
|
|
Minenfeld! posted:I guess I have a bachelor's of lore?
|
|
#
?
May 20, 2020 23:07
|
|
|
Smart move even if you had to pay to take the lore exams.
|
|
#
?
May 21, 2020 00:03
|
|
|
Yeah, it just came naturally. I have always loved lore. I was that nerdy kid that liked to go to the lore museum, and was the only one in my class who liked field trips to the lore village. The blacksmith there was super cool.
|
|
#
?
May 21, 2020 02:06
|
|
|
Minenfeld! posted:I guess I have a bachelor's of lore? same. pissed away my BA and probably my possible future masters on it too. to bad it doesnt get good jobs. Deptfordx posted:If you're ok with podcasts "The British History Podcast" is very highly regarded and extremely comprehensive. ill give it a shot but any books. outside a cheap Ben thomas pop history book for teens, i havent had much luck.
|
|
#
?
May 21, 2020 02:26
|
|
|
personally I only have time for audio grimoires anymore
|
|
#
?
May 21, 2020 07:47
|
|
|
stealie72 posted:I used AP American lore and AP European lore credits to help graduate early with a political science degree. This explains your posting lore.
|
|
#
?
May 21, 2020 13:25
|
|
|
Cyrano4747 posted:This explains your posting lore. I've got nuthin
|
|
#
?
May 22, 2020 00:56
|
|
|
stealie72 posted:Look pal, just because you've got a lore PhD... I just wanted to make a posting lore joke 
|
|
#
?
May 22, 2020 01:06
|
|
|
*social historian kramers into the thread* actuallly I'll have you know my research is not lore, it's data
|
|
#
?
May 22, 2020 01:21
|
|
|
vyelkin posted:*social historian kramers into the thread* It's all Soong-type in the end, isn't it? I have been waiting a day to figure out a joke in this vein
|
|
#
?
May 22, 2020 03:34
|
|
|
Cyrano4747 posted:It's all Soong-type in the end, isn't it? This is the post you should've probated yourself for. 
|
|
#
?
May 22, 2020 03:59
|
|
|
Anyone have good English language recommendations about the political history of the Grand Duchy of Lithuania? Particularly the early centuries, from the initial consolidation and expansion in the 13th century, up to the Union of Lublin?
|
|
#
?
May 24, 2020 00:23
|
|
Yes, it's like a lava lamp.
|
Hello, history book thread. Currently, monarchism has become a popular political stance in the doomsday economics thread. But I don't agree with the monarchy or the divine right of kings and I would like it to not be re-instituted. Can anyone give me some good recommendations for books that cover particularly bad monarchs, so that I can approach their perspective from a more informed place?
|
|
#
?
May 27, 2020 23:41
|
|
|
Pick posted:Hello, history book thread. Currently, monarchism has become a popular political stance in the doomsday economics thread. But I don't agree with the monarchy or the divine right of kings and I would like it to not be re-instituted. Can anyone give me some good recommendations for books that cover particularly bad monarchs, so that I can approach their perspective from a more informed place? Come again?
|
|
#
?
May 28, 2020 00:55
|
|
|
I'd like to have a strong argument to combat views like these:Tunicate posted:monarchy is the last resort of the normal, average person. Monarchs are selected by random accidents of birth, while our current political process instead selects for the most sociopathic backstabbers. But I mostly only read political history that is more recent than the monarchy, or I should say, substantial political power held by an absolute monarch. So I would appreciate learning more. E: also, I'm suddenly realizing I forgot to list off the shipwreck books somebody requested! I'll get to that once I get home.
|
|
#
?
May 28, 2020 00:59
|
|
|
Pick posted:Hello, history book thread. Currently, monarchism has become a popular political stance in the doomsday economics thread. But I don't agree with the monarchy or the divine right of kings and I would like it to not be re-instituted. Can anyone give me some good recommendations for books that cover particularly bad monarchs, so that I can approach their perspective from a more informed place? Check out something on the latter stages of the Hundred Years War if you want some interesting, accessible monarch stories. The French side has Charles the VI, who inherits the throne at age 11, has all of his uncles financially ruin the Kingdom during their regency, then develops recurring bouts of mental illnesses, during the first of which his various relatives kick off a full blown civil war over control of the government. On the English side you have a highly effective and centralized monarchy, that upon the accession of Henry VI finds itself with a king 9 months old. Without an effective monarch at the helm, the government slowly began eating itself, and by the time he's in his thirties (and also suffering various sorts of mental illness) England descends into - you guessed it - full blown civil war over control of the government.
|
|
#
?
May 28, 2020 01:25
|
|
|
Pick posted:I'd like to have a strong argument to combat views like these: You'll never be able to combat views like that because that person is impervious to reason and likely knows less than you do about monarchy as a form of government or in practice. As for your original question, what do you mean by bad monarch? Bad as in a murderous tyrant? Bad as in a poor steward of the country? What do you need them to be bad at for your arguments with people that refuse to be convinced?
|
|
#
?
May 28, 2020 01:36
|
|
|
Monarchs, famous for never being power-hungry backstabbing sociopaths. 
|
|
#
?
May 28, 2020 02:03
|
|
|
Grand Fromage posted:Monarchs, famous for never being power-hungry backstabbing sociopaths. Hello, my name is Ivan Grozny. I believe you have a letter for me.
|
|
#
?
May 28, 2020 05:21
|
|
|
Pick posted:I'd like to have a strong argument to combat views like these: Just show them a picture of the Hapsburg family tree with portraits. I showed it to my 8th graders to illustrate the downsides of hereditary monarchy and they immediately grasped the implications of allowing anyone that inbred into power. For book recommendations The March of Folly by Barbara Tuchman is not just about monarchies but about how people in power come to make incredibly idiotic decisions and is very interesting. That might fit the bill.
|
|
#
?
May 28, 2020 06:07
|
|
|
It might be the weed but what strange turn has the thread taken I can't really parse it
|
|
#
?
May 28, 2020 07:01
|
|
|
Bilirubin posted:It might be the weed but what strange turn has the thread taken I can't really parse it I think the monarchy is bad, but I'm not that experienced with the monarchy (much less absolute monarchy) because I mostly read history books that are like 1850 onward. So when someone says you can outflank from the left with the divine right of kings, there are some obvious dunks but I don't have the same kind of specifics I would if it were about an era I know better. But now that it's piqued my interest I'm happy to learn more and solicit some recommendations. But as earlier promised--shipwreck books! I already mentioned Batavia's Graveyard, my personal gold standard. (I love Mike Dash.) For short and sweet, Narratives of the Wreck of the Whale-Ship Essex is as advertised: firsthand accounts of being aboard a whaling vessel that the whale capsized. Men in the lifeboat did, in fact, draw lots--so that is not a fictional phenomenon. Wreck of the Medusa by Alexander McKee is all right, but I've never found a book that sufficiently focuses on the Medusa and its raft per se. However, the Medusa is also amazing to me because people did not wait around before they started doing various atrocities. Dead Wake is something everyone and their cat has read, about the Lusitania, but I thought it was as good as I've ever read about it, so why go obscure? (Same with Endurance: Shackleton's Incredible Voyage for the Endurance, Shakleton's ship.) Island of the Lost is another favorite, really about two shipwrecks, that were so, so similar but... ended very, very differently. Basically an examination of what will really save you in a pinch. Shadow Divers is more about exploring a wreck than the U-boat as such but hell, if you're into boats with corpses on them, this is that. Into the Raging Sea about the El Faro. There, there's some shipwreck books. I'm forgetting some since they're not on my shelf because my mom is bored, bored enough to raid my bookshelves, so they're all swiss-cheese'd at the moment. e: I've still got a bookmark partway through Every Man Will Do His Duty about the Royal Navy by Dean King and it seems all right as well. But none of the ships are wrecking particularly. Pick fucked around with this message at 07:30 on May 28, 2020 |
|
#
?
May 28, 2020 07:19
|
|
|
Thanks everyone for your responses! March of Folly is on the shortlist, and these topics look stellar:PittTheElder posted:Check out something on the latter stages of the Hundred Years War if you want some interesting, accessible monarch stories. The French side has Charles the VI, who inherits the throne at age 11, has all of his uncles financially ruin the Kingdom during their regency, then develops recurring bouts of mental illnesses, during the first of which his various relatives kick off a full blown civil war over control of the government. (So if anyone has any recommendations for that period, specifically, let me know, otherwise I'll just poke around and try to find some applicable titles.) I have definitely meant to learn more about the Hundred Years War, since it's one of those "wars I know of but know little about", and last time I dove into one of those I hit the jackpot with the Boer wars, which I found really... astonishing. Look Sir Droids posted:As for your original question, what do you mean by bad monarch? Bad as in a murderous tyrant? Bad as in a poor steward of the country? What do you need them to be bad at for your arguments with people that refuse to be convinced? Honestly, mostly bad as in a bad steward of the country, not so much a "bad person" although one could argue those can overlap a decent amount anyway. I never really expect anyone to be convinced as such, but I like to scoff from a place of at least some information and I'm just realizing that I have been lax in learning history outside of my relative comfort zones.
|
|
#
?
May 28, 2020 07:26
|
|
|
why do you want to argue sincerely with total clowns with nonsense views. like you don't need an argument you can just start laughing at the dude who wants to reinstate the divine right of kings
|
|
#
?
May 28, 2020 07:40
|
|
|
I don't really, I would just like to be confident that I'm informed enough I could have, and then also it gives me an excuse to check out a topic where my historical knowledge is deficient. I did make some lazy dunks, but for my own self-satisfaction I would like to be knowledgeable enough that I could have constructed a more thorough one. I mean, it's that or more shipwrecks, so why not? E: I can, for example, make a very good argument for why you would not want to be on a vessel that had drawn the attention of a really angry and persistent whale. Pick fucked around with this message at 07:49 on May 28, 2020 |
|
#
?
May 28, 2020 07:47
|
|
|
Tell them to read Common Sense. Thomas Paine does a pretty good job obliterating the idea of heredity monarchy.
|
|
#
?
May 28, 2020 12:23
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 19, 2024 17:12 |
|
|
There's ongoing contemporary commentary throughout history as well on the hazards of monarchy, even during historical periods we associate most strongly with monarchy. In Plato you see the philosopher king as ideal but there's clear awareness of the risks of tyrants and a clear design for the kingship to be non-hereditary. In Aristotle it's apparent that kingship has a huge risk of becoming tyranny and that monarchical modes of government limit the opportunities for human flourishing derived from the shared participation in government. And besides, if you think the people best fitted to rule should rule, what are the chances that one person so much surpasses everyone else in virtue that they should be in charge? Cicero sees the same risks as Aristotle that monarchy will just always tend to turn in to tyranny, so you see this embrace of the idea of mixed government that occurs in Polybius and originates in Aristotle. And besides, even though Rome becomes an empire, the Roman concept of freedom depends upon the idea of the individual as the giver of their own law. After Aquinas and the rediscovery of Aristotle, you see the development of concepts of popular sovereignty as in Marsilius of Padua's defensor pacis, but there's always clear concern in medieval political writing before that about how to constrain tyrannical monarchy. Aquinas is very clear, for example, that you have huge rights of resistance to tyrannical government. What I'm getting at is even people not named Hobbes who supported the idea of monarchy in general in history saw that it, at a bare minimum, turned in to tyranny at a moment's notice. Virtually every major commentator has thought at a minimum there needed to be some form of popular or elite representation in government to balance the constitution or strong ethical and legal standards that hold monarchy to account at risk of rebellion. We got done with this mode of government for a reason. Disinterested fucked around with this message at 12:31 on May 28, 2020 |
|
|
#
?
May 28, 2020 12:28
|
|