Hiya!
I love history and I am sure many of you do too. So let's talk about our favorite historical settings!
My favorite historical setting is the Migration Period and early European Middle Ages (roughly 400-1000 AD), the time period which is sometimes referred to as "the Dark Ages". This is a really broad period that covers exciting stuff like the gradual collapse of the Western Roman Empire, the great migrations and the establishment of various Germanic and Slavic kingdoms that form the foundation of many modern European nations, the rise and fall of the Carolingians, the Christianization of Europe, the Rise of Islam, the Viking raids, the foundation of the feudal system etc. It is a very transformative period that sees the transition of the Europe of Classical Antiquity into the more familiar Europe of the later Middle Ages and Early Modern Period. Yet at the same time it is also a period about which relatively little is known due to a scarcity of written records. This gives the period a sense of mystery. It isn't surprising then that a lot of legends (such as those of King Arthur or Beowulf) have their roots in this time period. I like this period for its dynamism, its sweeping narratives of rising and falling nations and its shroud of mystery. And I am a big sucker for ancient legends, so that means I am naturally attracted to the Dark Ages.
But of all the exciting events that took place in the Dark Ages, my favorite has got to be the Battle of the Catalaunian Fields in 451. This was a massive battle involving many different peoples from all over Europe in a titanic clash between a coalition led by the Roman Empire and a coalition led by the Huns, who by then ruled roughly half of Europe. The Romans and their allies seem to have won a narrow victory and succeeded in fending off the Hunnish invasion, but their losses were so great that the Romans (and many of their allies, such as the Visigoths) never really recovered from the blow to their military capacities which facilitated their eventual collapse. This battle really presents a crossroads for European history. If the Huns had won, or if the Romans had won a decisive victory, it is likely that Western civilization would have developed quite differently. It is also the first documented conflict in European history that really involved nations from all over the continent, something which would not be seen again until the 30 Years War over a thousand years later.
So, what about you? What is your favorite historical period/setting, why do you like it and what is it about that period that attracts you? And what is your favorite event or person from that time period? Anything history-related you want to share?
I for some reason beyond reason, find Imperial Japan fascinating. It's like someone went back in time and created that 'hyper-competent' military super state so many fantasy and sci-fi series dream of and then the whole thing burns to the ground cause any society that completely revolves around its military is the opposite of competency but no one is listening so the whole thing is just a massive succession of disasters and bad decisions that seem sensible at the time and eventually end in the only thing a militaristic society can do (a war with lots of dead people).
More seriously, the history of Imperial Japan is like studying explicitly what causes societies to rise and fall. In less than a century, Imperial Japan rose to the status of world power, hit a high water mark that left it with territorial holdings on par with any empire in history, and then collapsed in spectacular fashion. The story is a bizarrely amazing and heart breakingly tragic display of human virtue and failings as various figures with very different perspectives on what constitutes good governance. They spend a half century butting heads only to rapidly end up in a situation that none of them can really control, that feeds on itself in a self-destructive cycle, and finally burns the entire house down.
The drama of Imperial Japan is just fascinating, though I doubt anyone alive at the time felt that way by any margin. That stuff needs to be an HBO series. You wouldn't even remotely need to embellish.
For wargames I find the Macedonian and Hellenistic period to be interesting and fun. You have traditional hoplite armies, innovative like armies, elephants everywhere, what's not to like?
For historical interest I like the period from 1640-1720 where there was a revolution in warfare and politics, certainly in the British Isles and the Baltics.
For literature I would go for early imperial Rome and Martial, Ovid, Tacitus and Pliny. Enough there with scathing social satire, mythology, history and sheer eccentricity. Throw in some mucky poems by Catullus and you're set.
I don’t have a favourite as such. But I am off to Orkney on Friday, and will be visiting Skara Brae on Sunday.
My Dad’s side of the family is from Orkney, so far as records exist. And his DNA profile thing, assuming those are truly reliable shows no Viking DNA in his side of the family.
So it’s quite possible I’m a massively remote relation to the original inhabitants of Skara Brae.
I’ll never be able to prove it, but equally there’s no solid evidence against it.
Automatically Appended Next Post: Though I do want to learn more about China. It’s not a subject that was ever touched on whilst I was at School, yet it covers millennia.
The desire isn’t so much “gosh I admire China” type stuff, just that it’s a massive gap in my knowledge I’d like to fill.
Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote: I don’t have a favourite as such. But I am off to Orkney on Friday, and will be visiting Skara Brae on Sunday.
My Dad’s side of the family is from Orkney, so far as records exist. And his DNA profile thing, assuming those are truly reliable shows no Viking DNA in his side of the family.
So it’s quite possible I’m a massively remote relation to the original inhabitants of Skara Brae.
I’ll never be able to prove it, but equally there’s no solid evidence against it.
Given the amount of time that has passed and the degree of population mixture that has occurred, if your family has lived on Orkney for a significant amount of time then you pretty much certainly are descended from both the original inhabitants of Orkney as well as the Norse settlers. That a DNA test doesn't detect any "Viking DNA" is not that strange. You only inherit DNA from a fraction of your countless ancestors, most of them don't contribute to your DNA, and the farther back they are the less their contribution is. It is pretty random. Those DNA tests can't really show you your entire ancestry, and they also aren't really reliable afaik when it comes to differentiating people with very similar genetic profiles (such as people from Scandinavia and the British Isles).
And Skara Brae dates all the way back to the Neolithic, so pretty much everyone with European ancestry is almost certainly descended from that population (assuming they did not die out somewhere along the way). You only need to go back 1000 years before all Europeans are related to each other (meaning that every person with European ancestry alive today is descended from all Europeans who lived 1000 years ago and had children). What I am trying to say is that it is incredibly likely that you are directly related both to the Neolithic inhabitants of Skara Brae as well as the Vikings. The evidence for that relation is a lot stronger than the evidence against it.
Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote: Automatically Appended Next Post:[/size]
Though I do want to learn more about China. It’s not a subject that was ever touched on whilst I was at School, yet it covers millennia.
The desire isn’t so much “gosh I admire China” type stuff, just that it’s a massive gap in my knowledge I’d like to fill.
Oh, Chinese history is massively fascinating! It is huge, and because the Chinese have always been a highly literate culture, it is also relatively well-recorded even going thousands of years back.
I used to play the Dynasty Warriors games as a kid (and more recently Total War: Three Kingdoms), so I am a big fan of the Three Kingdoms period especially. All of the intrigue, betrayal and massive battles puts even fantasy series like A Song of Ice and Fire to shame.
You might be interested in the 2010 Three Kingdoms TV series. It is pretty good (at least if you can get used to the differences between Western and Chinese acting) and you can find most if not all of the episodes on YouTube and other video hosts. The best version (in HD and with accurate English subtitles) was made by Jiang Hu.They get removed and re-uploaded a lot though, so it can be difficult to find a version that is complete, in the correct order and in HD. But with a bit of Googling you should be able to find them.
Also check out this video if you are interested in a brief summary of the history of the period:
I really enjoy the Diadochi period to wargame, and learn more about. I also am drawn to Classical Greece, early conquest of Italy Romans, and the Bronze Age Collapse.
However, I am by no means knowledgeable or an expert on any of these areas.
Depends on the country, but usually very specific periods or events.
I’ve taken quite an interest in the history of Iran, especially the transition from the (at the time) Persian Qajar to Pahlavi Dynasty and the subsequent transition from this dynasty to where it is today. I’ve been trying to work backwards, but books on Qajar history are difficult to find.
With regards to China, I’m quite fascinated by the 1700-1900s. Not that it was a particularly pleasant time, but it was certainly eventful. On a lighter note, I have found the Tang period quite interesting as well.
To a lesser extent, Rome during the republic period and Greece during the Pelponnesian Wars.
All of ancient history from earliest Sumer up to and including emperor Trajanus. Great artwork, great monuments, great kinds of warfare, gutsy ways of thinking and colourful cultures and personalities.
Great Northern War (1700-1721). A conflict that may be described as an ancient tragedy of epic quality. Truly something out of the ordinary.
Otherwise I am interested in all history between heaven and earth, from all continents, regardless of era. Special mention to all of Chinese history (not least because of the sheer scale and numbers, which by the way is excellent inspiration for 40k), the Viking age and the mess-up of the First World War. As a Roman fan I often find that the most enjoyable yet also bittersweet way to experience the Middle Ages is through the eyes of Constantinople.
And obviously the Mesozoic if we were to include natural history. Dinosaurs forever.
I guess I’m mostly interested in any non or pre-Christian history.
Not for any snobbishness about religion and persons of faith, just that the history I was taught at school was Christianity heavy. I know more about those countries and empires than I do their contemporaries, such as the Moors and Ottoman Empire (which might be the same thing, behold my ignorance!)
So to break out of that, and look into things such as pre-Colonial Asia and Africa I think would be well worth it.
Welcome back Iron Captain! I enjoy reading about all facets of history, there is always something more to find out. Like layers it gets more deliciously complicated the deeper you get. I have lately dived into the Eastern Roman Empire after 1025 and all the things that happened in the eastern Mediterranean at the time. I GM a game set in the period and was frankly amazed at the depth you need to go in order to portray a culture 1000 years old.
Now however i am binging a podcast about the Congress of Europe 1815- 1914. Bismark, Wellington, Disraeli. Fascinating stuff!
konst80hummel wrote: Welcome back Iron Captain! I enjoy reading about all facets of history, there is always something more to find out. Like layers it gets more deliciously complicated the deeper you get. I have lately dived into the Eastern Roman Empire after 1025 and all the things that happened in the eastern Mediterranean at the time. I GM a game set in the period and was frankly amazed at the depth you need to go in order to portray a culture 1000 years old.
Now however i am binging a podcast about the Congress of Europe 1815- 1914. Bismark, Wellington, Disraeli. Fascinating stuff!
Having a bit of trouble finding this podcast you mentioned, though it does sound fascinating. Is it available on a specific platform or website?
It was an offshoot of the "when diplomacy fails podcast". It had a series called Britain goes to war in referring to the 1st world war, and in the background section are the episodes with Disraeli. Yeah crazy detail. I found it on Spotify.
Also if you are interested in the 19th century Europe, Mike Duncan, of History of Rome fame, has a series called Revolutions and in the segment about 1848 revolutions talks a fair bit about the concert .
konst80hummel wrote: It was an offshoot of the "when diplomacy fails podcast". It had a series called Britain goes to war in referring to the 1st world war, and in the background section are the episodes with Disraeli. Yeah crazy detail. I found it on Spotify.
Also if you are interested in the 19th century Europe, Mike Duncan, of History of Rome fame, has a series called Revolutions and in the segment about 1848 revolutions talks a fair bit about the concert .
hmm, not sure how to interpret "favorite." The time periods I know the most about are ACW and WWII, with a generally American centric, western POV survey of the rest.
The ACW is probably easy to figure out: it's the first huge war with photography and mass literacy, so there are reams of primary sources available, and many of the battlefields are preserved. WWIII also makes sense, as my granparents fought in it, and I was teen during the 50th anniversary. It's also a neat bookend to the civil war: the logical endpoint to industrial warfare.
This is the history version of saying your favorite author is Tom Clancy or favorite singer is Taylor swift: not indefensible, but it is super basic.
Pre- WWI Diplomacy I (used to) know a lot about, BUT I do not game it at all. I am not into Colonials that much, and gaming WWI has never really grabbed me. So, from a book knowledge that is one of my favorites, the Struggle for Mastery of Europe; but not for gaming purposes.
That is ancients, with a lean towards the Diadochi.
With regards to historical study my favourite period is the century long fall of the Roman Republic, from the Gracchi and the rise of Marius through to the reign of Augustus.
For historical gaming in general it is a choice of WW2, Sengoku Jidai or American Civil War.
For paper study gaming/Kriegspiel my favourite hands down is the 1982 Falklands War, as it is very balanced, well researched, recent and has wide appear for combined arms.
Iron_Captain wrote: Hiya!
I love history and I am sure many of you do too. So let's talk about our favorite historical settings!
My favorite historical setting is the Migration Period and early European Middle Ages (roughly 400-1000 AD), the time period which is sometimes referred to as "the Dark Ages".
I like to Fast Castle into Knights.
Edit: Apologies in advance. I laughed hard at that thought. I had to say it.
The Age Of Strife is pretty cool...
but seriously, you've convinced me about the Dark Ages, is that the period Robin Hood is from? Or was that Medieval?
Robin Hoods was concurrent with the 3rd Crusade circa 1189-92. So rather highish Middle Ages. As far as literary heroes go Beowulf is full on Dark Ages.
I'm an archaeologist so my job kind of revolves around knowing a broad aspect of most history, particularly prehistoric material.
I love the Iron Age of Europe, its fascinating and its weird and theres a wonderful air of mystery to it that we get beautiful insights into on a particular site.
Basically anywhere from anywhere up until about the 16th century is interesting. After that is all boring.
Iron_Captain wrote: Hiya!
I love history and I am sure many of you do too. So let's talk about our favorite historical settings!
My favorite historical setting is the Migration Period and early European Middle Ages (roughly 400-1000 AD), the time period which is sometimes referred to as "the Dark Ages".
I like to Fast Castle into Knights.
Edit: Apologies in advance. I laughed hard at that thought. I had to say it.
Heh, I like RTS games but for some reason never got the hang of that game. I usually just turtle up and then get stomped by my friends who are an age ahead of me. Doesn't help that my friends play a lot more than I do.
PaddyMick wrote: The Age Of Strife is pretty cool...
but seriously, you've convinced me about the Dark Ages, is that the period Robin Hood is from? Or was that Medieval?
The story of Robin Hood is set in the later Middle Ages, around the 12th-13th centuries (most commonly, the story is set during the reign of Richard I, but a lot of historical references point to the reign of Edward Longshanks instead).
Thanks! I have been getting back into the hobby again a bit (I had to pretty much put it on hold during my study) so I thought I might as well check in here again too.
First batch are from Skara Brae. Believed to date from 3,000 BCE, it predates the Pyramids, and is Northern Europe’s oldest known settlement. Evidence suggest the inhabitants did some farming, but also relied on hunting and fishing. Seems to have been occupied for around 600 years, before being abandoned.
Nobody is sure why it was abandoned, and there are various theories I’ll let you look into for yourself.
Then there’s a funny church name, because I’m a child.
Then? Something interesting. Kilbuster Farm, a traditional Orcadian farming homestead. First buildings date to approx 1700, and was occupied through to the early 20th century.
What’s remarkable when you visit is just how close it is to Skara Brae. The rooms have become squared, with gable roofing and mortar used in the construction. But the layout is practically identical, down to the stone box beds, and sideboards etc being built into the wall. Given Skara Brae wasn’t rediscovered for another couple of centuries or so, it gives you an idea of the traditional Orcadian building techniques, and how far they go back.
Super fun fact? My distant relatives on my Dad’s side (common Great Great Grandfather, who had 14 kids…..) own a farm just the other side of the fence from Skara Brae.
As kids, they used to play hide and seek in it. Which I have to say sounds a pretty ace childhood!
Iron_Captain wrote: Hiya!
I love history and I am sure many of you do too. So let's talk about our favorite historical settings!
My favorite historical setting is the Migration Period and early European Middle Ages (roughly 400-1000 AD), the time period which is sometimes referred to as "the Dark Ages".
I like to Fast Castle into Knights.
Edit: Apologies in advance. I laughed hard at that thought. I had to say it.
Ha! Had a double take there. I wonder if the black powder rocket launchers were actually a thing though. Seemed a bit too game-y to be historical fact.
I'm an archaeologist working on ancient socialisation processes in West Asia, primarily in the late Early Bronze Age to Middle Bronze Age in North Mesopotamia and Anatolia (kinda 2500-1800BCE-ish) and Iron II Southern Levant (mostly the Kingdom of Judah, so 8th to early 6th centuries BCE). The excavations I work on stretch from the Chacolithic to the Roman period, though they're dominated by the Late Bronze and Iron Age.
I dunno if I have a favourite period as such. Probably the Iron Age Levant because I've been working on it longer. The material culture is interesting and the textual sources are cool - plus I can read them whereas I don't read Sumerian or Akkadian.
I have 2 fairly distinct facets to the history I love reading.
First is the time period of the 1400s-1600s. I found that basically all of my uni courses in European history tended to end at the beginning of the 30 years war, or they started just at the conclusion of it. Its a massive conflict that have profound effects on our world. Sort of secondary piece to that are things like the Italian Wars and the Peasant Revolt of 1525. Reading of the Landsknechte and the Swiss Mercenaries, and the Spanish Tercios and all of them I find fascinating.
The other distinct area I enjoy reading, on the surface sounds dumb, but is becoming quite an in depth area of respect in academia, and that is sports history. In undergrad I did a research paper on Irish Football (it became both Association and Rugby very quickly) and social attitudes. Other books on my shelf relating to sports history include volumes on the history of the Le Mans 24h race, rugby, cycling and the Tour de France, and, because I'm American, books on baseball and american football.
First batch are from Skara Brae. Believed to date from 3,000 BCE, it predates the Pyramids, and is Northern Europe’s oldest known settlement. Evidence suggest the inhabitants did some farming, but also relied on hunting and fishing. Seems to have been occupied for around 600 years, before being abandoned.
Nobody is sure why it was abandoned, and there are various theories I’ll let you look into for yourself.
Then there’s a funny church name, because I’m a child.
Then? Something interesting. Kilbuster Farm, a traditional Orcadian farming homestead. First buildings date to approx 1700, and was occupied through to the early 20th century.
What’s remarkable when you visit is just how close it is to Skara Brae. The rooms have become squared, with gable roofing and mortar used in the construction. But the layout is practically identical, down to the stone box beds, and sideboards etc being built into the wall. Given Skara Brae wasn’t rediscovered for another couple of centuries or so, it gives you an idea of the traditional Orcadian building techniques, and how far they go back.
Thanks a lot for sharing the photos! Skara Brae is such a cool site. It is pretty much every archaeologist's dream to discover something like that.
Also, that church really does have an unfortunate name
nfe wrote: I'm an archaeologist working on ancient socialisation processes in West Asia, primarily in the late Early Bronze Age to Middle Bronze Age in North Mesopotamia and Anatolia (kinda 2500-1800BCE-ish) and Iron II Southern Levant (mostly the Kingdom of Judah, so 8th to early 6th centuries BCE). The excavations I work on stretch from the Chacolithic to the Roman period, though they're dominated by the Late Bronze and Iron Age.
I dunno if I have a favourite period as such. Probably the Iron Age Levant because I've been working on it longer. The material culture is interesting and the textual sources are cool - plus I can read them whereas I don't read Sumerian or Akkadian.
That is a really interesting field. I'd love to do field work in Anatolia or the Levant some day, but I am probably going to be stuck in the thick clay and mud of northwestern Europe for the foreseeable future. The archaeology here is interesting enough, but glacial soils are just the worst! Even just thinking about having to dig through thick layers of boulder clay makes my back hurt.
That is a really interesting field. I'd love to do field work in Anatolia or the Levant some day, but I am probably going to be stuck in the thick clay and mud of northwestern Europe for the foreseeable future. The archaeology here is interesting enough, but glacial soils are just the worst! Even just thinking about having to dig through thick layers of boulder clay makes my back hurt.
I'm sure nfe will agree with me but back pain will never leave you when you're an archaeologist. I'm 6'3 so I'm constantly bending over to dig. There's a reason why dwarves are always good miners because it's far less distance to the bloody ground.
Closest a society ever came to Capitalism. Unrestrained minds catapulted individuals to the greatest humanity has ever seen. We've been in a slow slide back into the dark ages ever since.
Closest a society ever came to Capitalism. Unrestrained minds catapulted individuals to the greatest humanity has ever seen. We've been in a slow slide back into the dark ages ever since.
I think the elimination of slavery and sweatshops and child labor, and establishment of worker safety laws and such have been overwhelmingly positive developments even if it’s made us less “capitalistic”.
Closest a society ever came to Capitalism. Unrestrained minds catapulted individuals to the greatest humanity has ever seen. We've been in a slow slide back into the dark ages ever since.
Probably Three Kingdoms era of China overall and aye the novel has probably tainted the perceptions of the actual history of the time, but its still a damned interesting period.
Also interested in the Hundred Years war, Napoleonic era, WW2 and to a lesser degree the English Civil War and the War of the Roses.
Removing conflict, period wise for the style of buildings, I am a big fan of Medieval castles (Castles of all types really) and Tudor Architecture.
Closest a society ever came to Capitalism. Unrestrained minds catapulted individuals to the greatest humanity has ever seen. We've been in a slow slide back into the dark ages ever since.
I think the elimination of slavery and sweatshops and child labor, and establishment of worker safety laws and such have been overwhelmingly positive developments even if it’s made us less “capitalistic”.
Especially since if we're considering 'free market' part of the capitalist ideal, no point in that time range was even close. If anything the entire later half of that range was defined by pervasive corruption, bribery, and a very unfree market (not to mention a peak era in political rigging). Turns out you can get ultra rich really fast if you're just willing to bribe politicians with no scruples and own a newspaper that will defend you from anything cause you pay the bills. This statement is not applicable to the present. No sir. That would break forum rules
After my visit to Orkney, I’m increasingly fascinated with Neolithic Scotland.
I mean, it’s hard not to be. Not only am I likely related to them, however distantly, we know so very little I’ll seize on any scrap of knowledge to understand where it came from, and why it’s accepted or not accepted in suitably educated circles.
To revisit my initial source of interest? Skara Brae was seemingly abandoned in a hurry. Yet, following proper excavation, there were no signs of weapons.
Now given the site was looted (possibly by direct ancestors of mine…..) in 1913, it is of course possible any weapons or traces thereof were removed or destroyed in the effort.
But let’s say for the point of interest there were none? That’s a very interesting thought. It strongly suggests that Neolithic Orkney was a veritable Horn of Plenty, where the various communities (Ring of Brodgar’s 60 original stones are from the same number of different locations, suggesting the same number of communities coming together to build it) live in peace together.
This is particularly appealing having visited Orkney. Regardless that sea levels and the landscape have changed since Neolithic times, it was still dotted with salt water bays, freshwater Lochs and brackish water meeting points between the two, seafood would likely have been plentiful.
Even today, the land is pretty rich for growing crops. And back then, there’s strong evidence of plentiful and pretty standard European Game Species.
Plentiful food. Plentiful fresh water. Relatively few humans living on the main Island (there’s only 25,000 or so even in the modern era). No real casus beli. Especially as given its quite small size, it seems entirely possible the various communities had ties of blood as well as trade.
Of course that state of affairs could never last, even without external actors. And again, the lack of weaponry found at Skara Brae is hardly proof that human on human violence was unheard of.
But it’s still an interesting thought.
The most amazing thing to me? The Ring of Brodgar is surrounded by a Henge (ditch)….which was excavated using tools no more sophisticated than a Deer Antler on a Stick. And it’s flipping huge.
If anyone has even a passing interest in anything Neolithic, Orkney is most definitely the place to visit these days. More so when COVID restrictions are fully lifted in Scotland.
One thing I didn’t get to see is The Tomb of the Eagles This site is, or more accurately was, genuinely run by a (again distant) family member. Due to COVID they just couldn’t use the wee trolley thing to let people in, rendering the whole thing moot, especially as can’t be bothered to re-open it right now*. And given the wounds detected on the Skellingtons found therein rather scotches (lol. No seriously. Never, ever refer to anything as being scotch when in Scotland. Just….don’t.) my “lovely hippie pacifist Scotland drivel just above )
*reckon I could swing a visit, but you’re poop out of luck, my friend!
Automatically Appended Next Post: And to be honest, the highlight of the various guides to the places I visited were the honest “well we don’t know, and we’ll likely never know” type answers.
That’s not to say they’re not aware of various suggestions and theories. They’re just being completely honest about what is Detective Work, what is an Informed Guess, and what is “well, it’s a good story…..” about such things.
And if you’re lucky enough to visit Kirbuster Farm Museum, enjoy the hosts thick Orcadian accent.
Here’s the man himself. I’m a Scot, born and bred (though lived in England for 30 years less a month or two), and I have to concentrate. And yes, this is him doing a guided tour of Kirbuster Farm (which is very generously lit for the video! It’s proper dark and smoky in real life)
Of course that state of affairs could never last, even without external actors. And again, the lack of weaponry found at Skara Brae is hardly proof that human on human violence was unheard of.
Yeah, afaik there is little evidence for large scale violence in the Neolithic, but that doesn't mean it didn't happen. The same was once thought of the Bronze Age in northern Europe, that it was a peaceful time with people mostly concerned with farming and trading and no real reason to wage war. But increasing finds of weapons and fortifications made that hypothesis less and less tenable, and the discovery of sites like the Tollense battlefield completely shattered it. Tollense was once the site of a massive battle between thousands of combatants from all over Europe. Pretty epic stuff: https://www.sciencemag.org/news/2016/03/slaughter-bridge-uncovering-colossal-bronze-age-battle
Also, from that article:
An experimental archaeologist also plunged recreated flint and bronze points into dead pigs and recorded the damage.
Experimental archaeologists really do the wackiest stuff in the name of science
This is why I love Time Team, a British archeology show.
It’s coming back on YouTube, which is nice.
It was massively successful because it kept things informative, but in an accessible way.
Tony Robinson hosted, and would ask pertinent questions as the audience’s proxy. So when someone pulled out a piece of pottery, and dated it there and then “oh come on, how could you possibly know that”. Then would come a pretty decent explanation of the ins and outs.
That is a really interesting field. I'd love to do field work in Anatolia or the Levant some day, but I am probably going to be stuck in the thick clay and mud of northwestern Europe for the foreseeable future. The archaeology here is interesting enough, but glacial soils are just the worst! Even just thinking about having to dig through thick layers of boulder clay makes my back hurt.
I'm sure nfe will agree with me but back pain will never leave you when you're an archaeologist. I'm 6'3 so I'm constantly bending over to dig. There's a reason why dwarves are always good miners because it's far less distance to the bloody ground.
Who knows? It's been years since I've done substantial digging. I point lasers, take photos, and wander around with an RTK, these days!
Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:
One thing I didn’t get to see is The Tomb of the Eagles This site is, or more accurately was, genuinely run by a (again distant) family member. Due to COVID they just couldn’t use the wee trolley thing to let people in, rendering the whole thing moot, especially as can’t be bothered to re-open it right now*.
It's closed permanently. The kids don't want to take over and HES don't want it apparently. A real shame because there's not much else to take tourists out to that part of Orkney.
It was massively successful because it kept things informative, but in an accessible way.
Tony Robinson hosted, and would ask pertinent questions as the audience’s proxy. So when someone pulled out a piece of pottery, and dated it there and then “oh come on, how could you possibly know that”. Then would come a pretty decent explanation of the ins and outs.
It is both very good and also not good at the same time
To be honest the only real concerns are from a professional point of view, for people genuinely interested it's a great resource. Very relaxed show, at one point some really good people on there.
The reason it wasn't reproduced is because of the law regarding archaeology in other countries, which is considerably different to the UK.
!950s America, because men were men and women were women, plus the prospect of nuclear destruction made everyone secretly horny (or so I am told). Maybe I've just been seduced by Fallout games. To be really honest, I'm more intrigued by the future and our potential colonization of other parts of space (if humanity doesn't die first).
Tazok wrote: !950s America, because men were men and women were women, plus the prospect of nuclear destruction made everyone secretly horny (or so I am told). Maybe I've just been seduced by Fallout games. To be really honest, I'm more intrigued by the future and our potential colonization of other parts of space (if humanity doesn't die first).
Well, to the first part, the Friends of Dorothy give an adorable wave.
To the second, I'm sure the remote controlled drones will have a nice life as interplanetary litter.
From a military perspective, I find the 16th century absolutely fascinating.
There is just something that grabs me about knights wearing (mostly) bulletproof armour leading units of arquebusiers and archers. With massed ranks of pikeman fighting next to halberdiers and soldiers with greatswords. There is this great mixing of the early modern style of pike and shot fused with the late medieval combined arms of armoured melee and archers. Obviously, over time it shifted more to the pike and shotte as the socioeconomic situation in Europe in particular changed, but it took awhile for the elite infantry and cavalry to die out. Even as late as Francis Drakes raids on the Spanish Main, a large component of the marines on his ships were still longbowmen.
Plus, some of the siege weapons are nuts- all kinds of wacky pyrotechnic weaponry was used in the Great Siege of Malta, for example. There is also some other aspects that are quite surprising when compared to later, more well known periods, like 16th century musketeers being snipers armed with monstrous firearms designed to pierce plate- sometimes sniping at over 100m accurately!
To top it all off, it is basically the closest era to actually having the playground "how would X warrior fight Y soldier" stuff, especially in South East Asia. You get madness like Spanish colonial troops fighting alongside Aztec warriors against Japanese ronin pirates.
From a more socioeconomic perspective, I think the 19th and 20th centuries are very interesting, but I can't really go into more detail as it is intrinsically linked with modern politics.
It’s probably also interesting because it’s so well documented.
Given the reason the Dark Ages are called so, the 16th Century is the first time we would have reliable and reasonably accurate historical notes and queries on why one tactic or another came and went out of use. Likewise weapons and that, it’s the first properly documented Arms Race, which I suspect went on to this very day (firearms becoming the winner, and the ongoing development thereof from exceptionally basic “tube wot you put the fire in a wee hole” to modern assault rifles, via incremental improvements, which I understand we can document more or entirely.
Given the reason the Dark Ages are called so, the 16th Century is the first time we would have reliable and reasonably accurate historical notes and queries on why one tactic or another came and went out of use. Likewise weapons and that, it’s the first properly documented Arms Race, which I suspect went on to this very day (firearms becoming the winner, and the ongoing development thereof from exceptionally basic “tube wot you put the fire in a wee hole” to modern assault rifles, via incremental improvements, which I understand we can document more or entirely.
See, that is one of the aspects I find most fascinating. It appears to be a socioeconomic, strategic arms race more than a tactical one. People were still making "proofed" plate armour that could resist most firearms in the 17th and even 18th and early 19th centuries, and it isn't until rifles and especially "smokeless" powders that wearable armour stops being able to compete. On the other hand, such plate was expensive, so as the socioeconomic conditions changed, armies got larger and elite units gradually shrunk or disappeared. At the beginning of the 16th century, most combatants in Europe were armoured to a fair extent, with entire units of elite troops wearing high-quality plate. By the end, armour was massively on the decline, but officers were still wearing proofed plate.
You see this mirrored in the firearms. The 16th and early 17th centuries see massive muskets requiring a stand to effectively shoot. These were designed to combat good plate. However, arquebuses (generally more common) usually could not pierce proofed plate except maybe at point blank or in weak points. The later muskets people are generally familiar with essentially combine these two into one firearm with the general size and portability of the arquebus with a calibre in line with early muskets. However, these don't have the penetration of those large muskets, so proofed plate was actually still fairly effective until point blank range, but incredibly rare. By the Napoleonic wars, it is basically just Cuirassiers still using it.
A lot of the weapons and tactics that disappeared also have a larger training premium. A halberd or greatsword is harder to train a conscript in than a pike. Likewise, the effectiveness of good, armoured heavy cavalry never really disappears, as evidenced by examples like the charge of the Polish Hussars at Vienna, or the aforementioned French Cuirassiers, but it becomes increasingly uneconomic to maintain such forces when losses take so long to replace.
Artillery had a bigger impact than small arms though, a cannon cares not if it hits a conscript or a fully armoured knight.
But there’s also Artillery and Effective Artillery.
I fully accept the first cannon ever fired in anger almost certainly scared the pants off those it was roughly aimed at, but might not have been particularly effective.
Certainly it’s my (limited and almost certainly incorrect!) understanding that early black powder weapons were apt to spook Horses, which if it’s a destrier being ridden toward your line probably had a strategic value all its own.
I do know that into the modern day Police horses need specific training to ignore bangs, pops, flashes and smoke. Exactly when that training was adopted and indeed created is of interest to me!
In pop culture (yes, I know), I first saw that in one of the early Sharpe TV movies, where the Rockets are primarily used to terrify and corral the French into a tight pack, where the Rifles could have a field day. Is that historically accurate? I dunno, I’ve never looked into it. But it seems largely plausible to me.
Been a Roman era and Crusades history fan all my life. Presently listening to the History of Byzantium podcast that starts off where Mike Duncan's History of Rome left off (fall of the Western Empire).
Currently listening to the History of the Crusades podcast that has branched out into the the fall of Visigothic Spain, Muslim rule and the birth of the Reconquista.
I’m most interested in the Bronze Age and the great civilizations that rose and fell in antiquity. I’m also interested in a lot of the historical periods and places that were never covered in school, such as China, the Americas, Australia and Africa, as well as Eastern Europe. I covered the Greeks and Romans in several classes, but there are aspects to be history I still find interesting.
Ancient Greece. Sparta, to be specific - so much so that I've ended up doing 2 degrees to study it.
General perception of Sparta may just be Gerard Butler in an oiled thong with a pointy stick, but the real Sparta (Lakedaimon to be accurate) was an infinitely fascinating place utterly unlike anything Hollywood portrays. Intense militarism and a singular focus on skill-at-arms vied with accomplished diplomatic skill and philosophic contemplation. The mass enslavement of a whole population (the Helots) is curiously weighed against itself - in a system which simultaneously appeared to offer anything from the harshest of sanctions and persecution, to security, cooperation and even significant prosperity for slaves (which was generally unheard of, even in 'democratic' Athens). Education was compulsory for the elite - teaching every male Spartiate self-sufficiency, personal discipline, restraint and resourcefulness. The rejection of money and love of honour, religious dutifulness and community spirit, love of music, dance, debate and athletic competition all speak of a society which was highly complex, and a strange blend of conservatism and liberation (for the fortunate elite that is).
Even the women had significant freedoms (at least for the times). They retained the ability to own property (so much so that male citizens increasingly lost their status through women accumulating land), practice sport and 'male' pursuits such as horse-breeding and hunting, and gained an education alongside their male peers. And they weren't shy about it either! 'With your shield, or on it' wasn't a bashful recommendation - it was a direct command from a woman to her son. Better to die than to disgrace your mother.
Sparta was a strange and wonderful place. It certainly wasn't without dark or oppressive aspects, especially for the poor Helot slaves, but the Spartans could probably teach us a great deal about leading better lives too.
Warpig1815 wrote: Ancient Greece. Sparta, to be specific - so much so that I've ended up doing 2 degrees to study it.
General perception of Sparta may just be Gerard Butler in an oiled thong with a pointy stick, but the real Sparta (Lakedaimon to be accurate) was an infinitely fascinating place utterly unlike anything Hollywood portrays. Intense militarism and a singular focus on skill-at-arms vied with accomplished diplomatic skill and philosophic contemplation. The mass enslavement of a whole population (the Helots) is curiously weighed against itself - in a system which simultaneously appeared to offer anything from the harshest of sanctions and persecution, to security, cooperation and even significant prosperity for slaves (which was generally unheard of, even in 'democratic' Athens). Education was compulsory for the elite - teaching every male Spartiate self-sufficiency, personal discipline, restraint and resourcefulness. The rejection of money and love of honour, religious dutifulness and community spirit, love of music, dance, debate and athletic competition all speak of a society which was highly complex, and a strange blend of conservatism and liberation (for the fortunate elite that is).
Even the women had significant freedoms (at least for the times). They retained the ability to own property (so much so that male citizens increasingly lost their status through women accumulating land), practice sport and 'male' pursuits such as horse-breeding and hunting, and gained an education alongside their male peers. And they weren't shy about it either! 'With your shield, or on it' wasn't a bashful recommendation - it was a direct command from a woman to her son. Better to die than to disgrace your mother.
Sparta was a strange and wonderful place. It certainly wasn't without dark or oppressive aspects, especially for the poor Helot slaves, but the Spartans could probably teach us a great deal about leading better lives too.
What are your thoughts on the progression of the Agoge? Now, I've read some stuff recently strongly suggesting that, by the time of the later Roman periods, it was basically, for lack of a better term, a masochists abuse palace. Like, there developed a reputation for harsh conditions and harsh treatment, and over time, it just sorta ramped up the extreme activities to sort of justify the reputation.
But at the same time, my own history degree did NOT involve the classics nor anything to do with the ancient peoples, so I don't really have a dog in the fight on this one, i am curious on what you may have come across.
Warpig1815 wrote: Ancient Greece. Sparta, to be specific - so much so that I've ended up doing 2 degrees to study it.
General perception of Sparta may just be Gerard Butler in an oiled thong with a pointy stick, but the real Sparta (Lakedaimon to be accurate) was an infinitely fascinating place utterly unlike anything Hollywood portrays. Intense militarism and a singular focus on skill-at-arms vied with accomplished diplomatic skill and philosophic contemplation. The mass enslavement of a whole population (the Helots) is curiously weighed against itself - in a system which simultaneously appeared to offer anything from the harshest of sanctions and persecution, to security, cooperation and even significant prosperity for slaves (which was generally unheard of, even in 'democratic' Athens). Education was compulsory for the elite - teaching every male Spartiate self-sufficiency, personal discipline, restraint and resourcefulness. The rejection of money and love of honour, religious dutifulness and community spirit, love of music, dance, debate and athletic competition all speak of a society which was highly complex, and a strange blend of conservatism and liberation (for the fortunate elite that is).
Even the women had significant freedoms (at least for the times). They retained the ability to own property (so much so that male citizens increasingly lost their status through women accumulating land), practice sport and 'male' pursuits such as horse-breeding and hunting, and gained an education alongside their male peers. And they weren't shy about it either! 'With your shield, or on it' wasn't a bashful recommendation - it was a direct command from a woman to her son. Better to die than to disgrace your mother.
Sparta was a strange and wonderful place. It certainly wasn't without dark or oppressive aspects, especially for the poor Helot slaves, but the Spartans could probably teach us a great deal about leading better lives too.
What are your thoughts on the progression of the Agoge? Now, I've read some stuff recently strongly suggesting that, by the time of the later Roman periods, it was basically, for lack of a better term, a masochists abuse palace. Like, there developed a reputation for harsh conditions and harsh treatment, and over time, it just sorta ramped up the extreme activities to sort of justify the reputation.
But at the same time, my own history degree did NOT involve the classics nor anything to do with the ancient peoples, so I don't really have a dog in the fight on this one, i am curious on what you may have come across.
I should preface my thoughts by saying that my studies have focused on Archaic/Classical and Hellenistic Sparta. By 195BC and the fall of Nabis (the last King/Tyrant of Sparta), we essentially know nothing about what is going on there. The records are very sparse anyway, but as Greece in general becomes eclipsed by Rome, Sparta drops off the radar almost entirely. It becomes, essentially, an archaic curio for the Romans. I'll put my thoughts in a spoiler tag, so the thread isn't cluttered.
Spoiler:
However, the idea that the agoge was inherently brutal is perpetuated more in Roman era texts, such as Plutarch, than it is found in contemporary texts for Classical Sparta. It's one of the greatest difficulties of researching them that we have nothing from a Spartan viewpoint (And don't even get me started on how Spartan and Lakedaimonian differ. Whole can of worms). Which means for every anecdote or piece of information about Sparta/Lakedaimon, we first have to sift out author bias. So, in the case of Plutarch, we have an author who is supremely concerned to demonstrate moral virtue and how he considered life should be led. He explicitely states his intention to only present the sources he considered agreeable. But his sources, especially for Lakedaimon, are Polybius and Phylarchus.
Now, Polybius hated Sparta. Intensely. The reason being is that he came from Megalopolis. That city was founded as a political reaction to Spartan expansion. His very identity is anti-Spartan at it's inception. His father, Lycortas, served as the strategos (top general) of the Achaean League, as did his idols - the statesmen Aratus of Sikyon and Philopoemen. Both of those made their names fighting against a Sparta that was attempting to recover it's power after having been defeated by Thebes. So naturally, Polybius portrays Sparta very poorly - he is not just politically opposed to them, it is integral to who he is. There are also a whole host of other complex themes to Polybius' Histories - but not least, he is an Arcadian Greek who is making his way in a Roman world. It's fair to say his account is not impartial. He wants to justify Greek defeat, mitigate Roman rule, and climb up the political ladder. So a definite theme there is also 'the glory of Rome'.
In contrast, Phylarchus apparently loves Sparta (Unfortunately, we lack his works so we can't solidly refute Polybius' criticism of Phylarchus). However when Plutarch is weighing up the two against each other, he has a choice of accepting Phylarchus who supports a representation of free Greece, or going with Polybius - a writer of morals like himself, pro-Roman (to an extent) and one who claims to be thoroughly impartial (He isn't, but a very long story to tell there). You can guess who Plutarch chooses as his 'credible' source. The same sorts of choices exist for how Plutarch uses Thucydides, Aristotle, Isocrates and Xenophon (All Athenians, and living during the time where Sparta was top-dog and thoroughly loathed by Athens).
How this all circles back to the agoge is because you can now see that when Plutarch talks about the agoge of AD46-AD119, he is leagues removed from when the agoge was genuine. We don't know that it still existed in his lifetime, or if his reports are anecdotal. And, he is operating from sources who had clearly anti-Spartan motivations. His reports of Spartan boys having their insides chewed out by foxes, or whipped at the altar of Artemis to get to cheese are likely either outright fabrications, retellings of traditions poorly understood in his time, or a spectacle instituted to captivate visitors. Bear in mind, in Roman Greece, the city-states were still around and had to secure Roman patronage to survive. What better way to secure patronage in the military world of Rome, than to demonstrate your martial toughness? This evidently had resonance with the Romans, because Caracalla raised a 'Laconian and Pitanate Lochos' in 214AD to fight the Parthians - the name is a direct reference to a squabble between Thucydides and Herodotos over whether Pitane raised a formation for the Battle of Plataea in 479BC. He's referencing obscure Spartan history nearly 700 years before his time.
So essentially, I can't answer your question. Nobody really knows if it's a literary invention, or a reality. I would be inclined to consider the agoge as perhaps less brutal than Plutarch reports, but likely harsher or more rigorous than anything undertaken in other city-states at the time. Just keep in mind that modern scholars have their biases too. All historical writers, even me sat here, are reflecting our own personalities and our own interests. Sparta is especially polarising because it can be either used as an example of a utopian community (Which the Nazis horrically latched on to, to justify the Master-Race/Perfect-Community), or it can be thoroughly denounced as a racist, abusive, totalitarian power (Equally problematic, because it ignores all other Greek powers at the time (Yes, shiny, wonderful, democratic Athens also did horrible things)).
EDIT: Should have said - if you want to learn more than my wild rambling, check out Jean Ducat's 2006 publication: Spartan education : youth and society in the classical period. His opinion is worth more than mine (and mine is probably wrong ), and he likely touches on how the Romans perceived the agoge.
I love ancient Rome as a setting for fiction, though I give Romaboos a wide berth, as a lot of them are white supremacists (or at least white supremacist-adjacent).
The Golden Age of Piracy, especially the time of the pirate republic of Nassau. I highly recommend Black Sails. I give it a C+ in terms of historical accuracy, but I don't know a lot of multi-season TV series that are as consistently good. 38 episodes and not a single one that I'd skip on a rewatch.
Early aerial warfare (WWI). I wish there were more movies about that. Recent ones, that is.
The Spanish Civil War. Especially when it comes to the International Brigades and other foreign volunteers. While the Western democracies were still trying to appease the fascists, those guys knew what was up.
-Guardsman- wrote: I love ancient Rome as a setting for fiction, though I give Romaboos a wide berth, as a lot of them are white supremacists (or at least white supremacist-adjacent).
The Golden Age of Piracy, especially the time of the pirate republic of Nassau. I highly recommend Black Sails. I give it a C+ in terms of historical accuracy, but I don't know a lot of multi-season TV series that are as consistently good. 38 episodes and not a single one that I'd skip on a rewatch.
Early aerial warfare (WWI). I wish there were more movies about that. Recent ones, that is.
The Spanish Civil War. Especially when it comes to the International Brigades and other foreign volunteers. While the Western democracies were still trying to appease the fascists, those guys knew what was up.
.
While I can’t speak for the accuracy of this source, I recall reading a book called The Republic of Pirates by Colin Woodward. The book is non-fiction, but the reading experience was weirdly similar to an adventure novel. If you’re looking for a book that focuses primarily on Nassau, I’d highly recommend it.
-Guardsman- wrote: I love ancient Rome as a setting for fiction, though I give Romaboos a wide berth, as a lot of them are white supremacists (or at least white supremacist-adjacent).
The Golden Age of Piracy, especially the time of the pirate republic of Nassau. I highly recommend Black Sails. I give it a C+ in terms of historical accuracy, but I don't know a lot of multi-season TV series that are as consistently good. 38 episodes and not a single one that I'd skip on a rewatch.
Early aerial warfare (WWI). I wish there were more movies about that. Recent ones, that is.
The Spanish Civil War. Especially when it comes to the International Brigades and other foreign volunteers. While the Western democracies were still trying to appease the fascists, those guys knew what was up.
.
If you're interested in ancient Rome fiction I can recommend Simon Scarrow's series about Macro and Cato. Pretty decent.
-Guardsman- wrote: I love ancient Rome as a setting for fiction, though I give Romaboos a wide berth, as a lot of them are white supremacists (or at least white supremacist-adjacent).
The Golden Age of Piracy, especially the time of the pirate republic of Nassau. I highly recommend Black Sails. I give it a C+ in terms of historical accuracy, but I don't know a lot of multi-season TV series that are as consistently good. 38 episodes and not a single one that I'd skip on a rewatch.
Early aerial warfare (WWI). I wish there were more movies about that. Recent ones, that is.
The Spanish Civil War. Especially when it comes to the International Brigades and other foreign volunteers. While the Western democracies were still trying to appease the fascists, those guys knew what was up.
.
On Rome and Black Sails?
I’m guessing you’ve also watched the Starz Spartacus shows?
Like Black Sails, they’re of frankly dubious historical accuracy. However, a wise man once said to me that for all they play fast and loose with historical still precisely the sort of TV we might expect to have been made in Ancient Rome
Rome, Spartacus and Black Sails all amazing shows. I asbolutely loved those tv series. None of them is historically accurate though, not in the slightest.
-Guardsman- wrote: I love ancient Rome as a setting for fiction, though I give Romaboos a wide berth, as a lot of them are white supremacists (or at least white supremacist-adjacent).
The Golden Age of Piracy, especially the time of the pirate republic of Nassau. I highly recommend Black Sails. I give it a C+ in terms of historical accuracy, but I don't know a lot of multi-season TV series that are as consistently good. 38 episodes and not a single one that I'd skip on a rewatch.
Early aerial warfare (WWI). I wish there were more movies about that. Recent ones, that is.
The Spanish Civil War. Especially when it comes to the International Brigades and other foreign volunteers. While the Western democracies were still trying to appease the fascists, those guys knew what was up.
.
If you're interested in ancient Rome fiction I can recommend Simon Scarrow's series about Macro and Cato. Pretty decent.
+1 for that. Excellent stuff. And Christian Cameron's Killer of Men series is similar/also excellent (and pretty well researched) peek into Classical Greece for those interested.
-Guardsman- wrote: I love ancient Rome as a setting for fiction, though I give Romaboos a wide berth, as a lot of them are white supremacists (or at least white supremacist-adjacent).
The Golden Age of Piracy, especially the time of the pirate republic of Nassau. I highly recommend Black Sails. I give it a C+ in terms of historical accuracy, but I don't know a lot of multi-season TV series that are as consistently good. 38 episodes and not a single one that I'd skip on a rewatch.
Early aerial warfare (WWI). I wish there were more movies about that. Recent ones, that is.
The Spanish Civil War. Especially when it comes to the International Brigades and other foreign volunteers. While the Western democracies were still trying to appease the fascists, those guys knew what was up.
.
If you're interested in ancient Rome fiction I can recommend Simon Scarrow's series about Macro and Cato. Pretty decent.
+100 for the sugestion. The series is absolutely amazing.
Its an amazing story which depicts a single persons life/career in the roman legions and obviously inadvertent machinations of the imperial machine towards the end of Claudius; reign.
Also, Empire series by Anothony Riches which focuses more on the auxiliaries and the Mithraic cult.
Another honourable mention is Vespesian series by Robert Fabri
All of these are good quality historical fiction sword and board hack and slash books if that's your jam
Some more book recommendations for fans of Ancient Rome.
I Claudius and Claudius the God by Robert Graves. Astounding, and the books that led to one of the best TV series ever created, called I Claudius, late 70s BBC.
Could not recommend the books or the TV show with mote enthusiasm.
I like a lot of historical periods, but two of them really stuck with me.
The Spanish Civil War fascinated me when I was in college, and a couple of decades later, I wrote a book about it. It's called "Long Live Death: The Keys to Victory in the Spanish Civil War" and you can hit the link in my sig and get to it.
I also wrote a military history of China ("Walls of Men: A Military History of China 2500 B.C. to 2020 A.D.") because I wanted a compact military history and couldn't find one. So I wrote it. It's only 350 pages because I have a short attention span.
Spain fascinated me because of the era, the politics, and the fact that so much of what is considered part of the "official" history isn't quite right. Franco has been derided as a poor general, but if you dig into it, he did really well. I'll leave it at that.
China is just...different. Immersing myself in the culture, philosophy, history...it's something else. Key takeaway: in the long view of history, mounted archers were the most successful weapon system ever devised.
Another key finding: the Nationalists put up much more of a fight against Japan than I knew. American histories focus on the Flying Tigers, but China had some big wins.
I can't claim to be super knowledgable about it, but I find Prussias history quite interesting. Rising from a mediocre at best regional power in the mid 17th century to one dominating and unifying the countless german states and going toe to toe with France in 1870/71. Through a mix of massive focus on military and discipline, opportunism and often enough blind luck. Loosing half the population in some early wars but popping up again. Sometimes incredibly "modern" (religious tolerance act) oftentimes warmongering, mostly very very different then the other german states and quite successful this way.
The Victorian era is also pretty interesting, as that’s when the world as we know really started to get going.
Telegraph enabled swift communication. Railways enabled swift and affordable transportation. Steam rather than sail shows enabled swift and reliable global trade.
There was also an awful lot of Awful Things, such as the largesse of Imperialism, pseudoscience based racism to justify the treatment of “lesser species” and so on.
But in the UK at least, the first tentative steps of universal education of children. The roots of modern medicine and modern science.
The period arguably got more wrong than it did right. But the world we have now still got properly going in that period, for better or worse.
Which is why I find steampunk such a hideously lazy trope. The period is more than interesting enough in historical fact than it ever will be by adding moronic steam powered lasers and that.
Korean War is something I find fascinating. The world realigning from WW2 to the Cold War and (in a sense) where we find oursleves now.
Plus the juxtaposition of Shermans fighting T-34s, Mustangs taking on early MiG jets, the retreat to Pusan and the 1000-1 Inchon offensive... and how easily it culd have escalated as no one really understood nuclear weapons at that time.
I wonder if 70 years from now our grandchildren will view Ukraine in the same way.
My wife and I are both History fanatics and I don't know that we could pick a favourite period.
The Egyptians, the Romans and Greeks, the ancient world fascinates!
My wife is hugely into Asian histories and mythology and has gotten me hooked a little bit.
Honestly, though, my 2nd favourite period is likely the Victorian era (which is why I hunt out with the Goths and the Steampunks a lot) and I own a small wardrobe of neoVictorian clothing.
My favourite is the first half of the 20th century, particularly the massive socio-political and economic changes.
I collect vintage menswear and accessories, generally focusing on the 1920s to 1940s. Eventually I may open a shop and sell as well but until then I simply collect, a lot.
I also enjoy the movies and a lot of the music of that period.
The Younger Dryas Period because that's when Atlantis was around Following that though it would be the Neolithic age. I dunno why but I'm just fascinated by cavemen lol.
Late 19th century into the early 20th century was insane.
There was a massive technological revolution beyond anything the world had ever seen and a lot of talk in the west about how they were living in a more sensible, modern era governed by rational thought and science. Despite this talk utterly insane scams like seances were all the rage and modern cults and magickal practices took off during this time frame. Crowley undoubtedly had some degree on the development of Scientology.
The political events that went down in this time frame were shattering. Germany was formed and promptly alienated half of Europe. Russia went from being a rival to the British Empire in central Asia to getting their teeth kicked in by Japan. It might be a stretch, but I think that loss was the last straw before the 1905 revolution. The Russian surface navy has never recovered.
Also, the disgusting Scramble of Africa and abuse of China were going on as well America's emergence as a global power with "economic" interests of its own. 1870-1914 was mad.
Lathe Biosas wrote: The Reagan Era. Cold War joy mixed with mecha on television and Star Wars and Star Trek movies in the theaters.
Plus, all the previous eras frighten me when you mix the Era and the phrase "medical science in the Era of..."
And I’m sure in 100 years time, a bunch of our modern medical science will considered primitive. Such is science and its ever advancing nature. And yes, that might even extend to ethical considerations, as those evolve over time too.
Not to get heavy, but consider right to die, and people being kept alive solely through technology. I’m not presenting or arguing for either side, but just because we can, does it mean we should? That’s a moral and ethical quandary we’ve traditionally shied away from, and not without reason.
)
