| Boris rewriting history - quite literally… 20:40 - Oct 31 with 3211 views | ElderGrizzly |
|  | | |  |
| Boris rewriting history - quite literally… on 12:41 - Nov 1 with 842 views | leitrimblue |
| Boris rewriting history - quite literally… on 12:34 - Nov 1 by factual_blue |
And of course art and culture was flourishing in other parts of the world at this time.
But of course the predominantly German classicists and historians of the 19th century were Eurocentric.
I remember my introduction to all this being The Barbarian West 400-1000 by J M Wallace-Hadrill |
Exactly Factors. I feel your pain having to read that awful dry book. |  | | |
| Boris rewriting history - quite literally… on 12:43 - Nov 1 with 837 views | factual_blue |
| Boris rewriting history - quite literally… on 12:38 - Nov 1 by leitrimblue |
Don't get me wrong, there is absolutely nothing wrong with concrete. It's just that Romans have managed to blag it that they were the greatest empire the world is ever seen when in reality their greatest achievement is undoubtedly producing a product that gives you a flat surface for building on. |
Most of the blagging came in the 18th Century, led by Edward Gibbon and his Massively Swollen Testicles. |  |
| |
| Boris rewriting history - quite literally… on 12:45 - Nov 1 with 834 views | factual_blue |
| Boris rewriting history - quite literally… on 12:41 - Nov 1 by leitrimblue |
Exactly Factors. I feel your pain having to read that awful dry book. |
At my first tutorial I can recall being the first asked to give my views on the book.
I resisted my urge to say 'it was a load of turgid crap, and I gave up after fifty pages', and instead opted for 'I found it a bit confusing in places, perhaps reflecting the confusion of those times.' | |
| |
| Boris rewriting history - quite literally… on 15:09 - Nov 1 with 785 views | leitrimblue |
| Boris rewriting history - quite literally… on 12:45 - Nov 1 by factual_blue |
At my first tutorial I can recall being the first asked to give my views on the book.
I resisted my urge to say 'it was a load of turgid crap, and I gave up after fifty pages', and instead opted for 'I found it a bit confusing in places, perhaps reflecting the confusion of those times.' |
The correct answer  | | | |
| Boris rewriting history - quite literally… on 15:28 - Nov 1 with 756 views | Ewan_Oozami |
| Boris rewriting history - quite literally… on 12:45 - Nov 1 by factual_blue |
At my first tutorial I can recall being the first asked to give my views on the book.
I resisted my urge to say 'it was a load of turgid crap, and I gave up after fifty pages', and instead opted for 'I found it a bit confusing in places, perhaps reflecting the confusion of those times.' |
You were identified as top Civil Service material after that point I presume? |  |
| |
| Boris rewriting history - quite literally… on 16:00 - Nov 1 with 739 views | factual_blue |
| Boris rewriting history - quite literally… on 15:28 - Nov 1 by Ewan_Oozami |
You were identified as top Civil Service material after that point I presume? |
Well before then..... | |
| |
| Boris rewriting history - quite literally… on 16:03 - Nov 1 with 738 views | chicoazul |
Just checking you boyos do know history gets rewritten quite a lot as this very thread proves. |  |
| |
| Boris rewriting history - quite literally… on 17:02 - Nov 1 with 718 views | WeWereZombies |
| Boris rewriting history - quite literally… on 16:00 - Nov 1 by factual_blue |
Well before then..... |
And is your meeting with Lord Strafford subject to the Official Secrets Act* or can you regale at length with tales of it?
*1889 |  |
| |
Login to get fewer ads
| Boris rewriting history - quite literally… on 17:41 - Nov 1 with 702 views | You_Bloo_Right |
| Boris rewriting history - quite literally… on 17:02 - Nov 1 by WeWereZombies |
And is your meeting with Lord Strafford subject to the Official Secrets Act* or can you regale at length with tales of it?
*1889 |
Rumour has it that Facters gave young Strafford short shrift. |  |
| |
| Boris rewriting history - quite literally… on 18:11 - Nov 1 with 675 views | Bluedicea |
| Boris rewriting history - quite literally… on 07:26 - Nov 1 by DanTheMan |
"One of the reasons it was called the dark ages and lots of people died was down to several major volcanic eruptions on the other side of the world."
I've never come across this interpretation. The original reason it was called a dark age was because of lack of records and an erroneous idea that during the period civilisation went backwards. Also, have you got claims on this (the mini ice age) lasting 400 years? I've read about the fog that came about during 536 but it seems it may have lasted 18 months or so and not been as big of a deal as some make out (usually people crossing their specialism into History).
An example of this would be David Keys, whose ideas aren't exactly mainstream.
To quote Antti Arjava.
The literary sources that record the darkness of 536/37 all seem to consider it a
temporary misfortune. Among the innumerable earthquakes, droughts, plagues,
swarms of locusts, and slaughters that are listed by the historians of this time,
the dark cloud was not considered a particularly severe catastrophe. Shortage
of food was recurrent in the ancient world, and people were used to it, however
intense the short-term suffering might be. Even if the eruption of Etna really
caused a food crisis in Egypt and perhaps elsewhere in the Mediterranean after
44 BCE, no one would claim that Egyptian society or the Roman Empire suffered
any long-term harm from it-possible short-term political implications aside.
The murder of Caesar had been planned before the eruption, but if the Roman
sources were as inaccurate as they are for most regions and historical periods,
someone would certainly be tempted to connect the natural phenomenon with
political change
As for the mini ice age part, 5-10 degrees would be an insane level of cooling. I did find a source claiming it would have caused 2 degrees of cooling, but nothing even approaching 5-10c. Even if it did approach that, it would not cause a long term effect on the climate.
If we look at the global averages, we can see that even the most severe little ice age is nothing compared to what we are seeing now:
 [Post edited 1 Nov 2021 8:14]
|
I'll look for the exact article but it was over a decade ago I read it. But here's one on the volcanic eruption that pushed the world into a cooling trend in midway through the 1st millennium, with some graphs and charts showing how it pushed global temperatures down by 5 - 10 degrees.
https://www.nature.com/articles/news.2008.665
https://www.lanl.gov/orgs/ees/geodynamics/Wohletz/Krakatau.htm [Post edited 1 Nov 2021 18:23]
|  |
| What is the use of knowing about everything else, when you do not yet know who you are. |
| |
| Boris rewriting history - quite literally… on 18:34 - Nov 1 with 639 views | GeoffSentence |
| Boris rewriting history - quite literally… on 12:32 - Nov 1 by WeWereZombies |
Think you are being very unfair on concrete, can send it out of the workshop in any length or width without the need to saw or plane, no need to wait around for it to age beyond a bit of setting time, no risk of getting splinters either. Bit of a challenge for French Polishers though... |
Not so. Polished concrete is quite the thing. Check out this shiny floor.
 |  |
| |
| Boris rewriting history - quite literally… on 18:42 - Nov 1 with 625 views | Bluedicea |
| Boris rewriting history - quite literally… on 07:35 - Nov 1 by DanTheMan |
Going to have to question this as well, the Holy Roman empire was "on the wane" when the Mongols "overran" the empires eastern front? There were some small incursions but they really did not get very far past Bohemia or Austria.
Even so, that happened during the 13th century. The Holy Roman Empire would continue for another 6 centuries, and it wasn't a slow drawn out death either.
Have you got a source on the 100k Mongolian immigrants in Europe? That seems an awfully high number given the likely size of any Mongolian force at that time. |
The size of each Mongolian army in each invasion was different. Some of the dozen invasions only consisted of 60 -70k troops, the larger ones were 160k + troops. This doesn't include the families and supporters that followed them to war, a conservative estimate of the amount of soldiers and ancillary people, that stay after any war or invasion is between 10- 15%. DNA records show that there are strong link between the mongols and those of Eastern European heritage. So over the 100+/- years they sent their invasions across, you can do the math. Obviously it's only estimated, as no passports or proper records were kept.
They killed many people and displaced millions of people who fled to the more western countries which is called uncontrolled immigration.
https://military.wikia.org/wiki/Mongol_invasion_of_Europe
https://www.nature.com/articles/srep25606 | |
| What is the use of knowing about everything else, when you do not yet know who you are. |
| |
| Boris rewriting history - quite literally… on 23:25 - Nov 1 with 559 views | Eireannach_gorm |
| Boris rewriting history - quite literally… on 07:26 - Nov 1 by DanTheMan |
"One of the reasons it was called the dark ages and lots of people died was down to several major volcanic eruptions on the other side of the world."
I've never come across this interpretation. The original reason it was called a dark age was because of lack of records and an erroneous idea that during the period civilisation went backwards. Also, have you got claims on this (the mini ice age) lasting 400 years? I've read about the fog that came about during 536 but it seems it may have lasted 18 months or so and not been as big of a deal as some make out (usually people crossing their specialism into History).
An example of this would be David Keys, whose ideas aren't exactly mainstream.
To quote Antti Arjava.
The literary sources that record the darkness of 536/37 all seem to consider it a
temporary misfortune. Among the innumerable earthquakes, droughts, plagues,
swarms of locusts, and slaughters that are listed by the historians of this time,
the dark cloud was not considered a particularly severe catastrophe. Shortage
of food was recurrent in the ancient world, and people were used to it, however
intense the short-term suffering might be. Even if the eruption of Etna really
caused a food crisis in Egypt and perhaps elsewhere in the Mediterranean after
44 BCE, no one would claim that Egyptian society or the Roman Empire suffered
any long-term harm from it-possible short-term political implications aside.
The murder of Caesar had been planned before the eruption, but if the Roman
sources were as inaccurate as they are for most regions and historical periods,
someone would certainly be tempted to connect the natural phenomenon with
political change
As for the mini ice age part, 5-10 degrees would be an insane level of cooling. I did find a source claiming it would have caused 2 degrees of cooling, but nothing even approaching 5-10c. Even if it did approach that, it would not cause a long term effect on the climate.
If we look at the global averages, we can see that even the most severe little ice age is nothing compared to what we are seeing now:
[Post edited 1 Nov 2021 8:14]
|
Thats one scary graph. |  | | |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
