Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you:
No adverts like this in the forums anymore.
Times and dates in your local timezone.
Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance.
Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely.
Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net.
If you are already a member then feel free to login now.
AngryAngel80 wrote: I don't know, when I see awesome rules, I'm like " Baby, your rules looking so fine. Maybe I gotta add you to my first strike battalion eh ? "
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.
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2021/07/26 10:39:55
ChargerIIC wrote: If algae farm paste with a little bit of your grandfather in it isn't Grimdark I don't know what is.
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.
Fed up of Scalpers? But still want your Exclusives? Why not join us?
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.
ChargerIIC wrote: If algae farm paste with a little bit of your grandfather in it isn't Grimdark I don't know what is.
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.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2021/08/02 16:57:56
Fed up of Scalpers? But still want your Exclusives? Why not join us?
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.
"Sometimes the only victory possible is to keep your opponent from winning." - The Emperor, from The Outcast Dead.
"Tell your gods we are coming for them, and that their realms will burn as ours did." -Thostos Bladestorm
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.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2021/08/20 01:39:48
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.
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2021/08/20 11:56:51
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.
.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2021/08/20 20:13:15
-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.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2021/08/22 22:12:17
Faithful... Enlightened... Ambitious... Brethren... WE NEED A NEW DRIVER! THIS ONE IS DEAD!
-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
Fed up of Scalpers? But still want your Exclusives? Why not join us?
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.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2021/08/24 20:35:35
-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
AngryAngel80 wrote: I don't know, when I see awesome rules, I'm like " Baby, your rules looking so fine. Maybe I gotta add you to my first strike battalion eh ? "
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.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2022/02/10 23:07:50
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.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2025/02/12 00:36:49
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.
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2025/02/12 07:16:37
~7510 build and painted
1312 build and painted
1200
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.
Fed up of Scalpers? But still want your Exclusives? Why not join us?
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.
Skinflint Games- war gaming in the age of austerity
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.
The only way we can ever solve anything is to look in the mirror and find no enemy
Eldar- 4436 pts
), and he likely touches on how the Romans perceived the agoge.
Faithful... Enlightened... Ambitious... Brethren... WE NEED A NEW DRIVER! THIS ONE IS DEAD! 
~7510 build and painted
1312 build and painted
1200 
