header pic

Perhaps the BEST B1G Forum anywhere, here at College Football Fan Site, CFB51!!!

The 'Old' CFN/Scout Crowd- Enjoy Civil discussion, game analytics, in depth player and coaching 'takes' and discussing topics surrounding the game. You can even have your own free board, all you have to do is ask!!!

Anyone is welcomed and encouraged to join our FREE site and to take part in our community- a community with you- the user, the fan, -and the person- will be protected from intrusive actions and with a clean place to interact.


Author

Topic: OT - Weird History

 (Read 168564 times)

Cincydawg

  • Oracle of Piedmont Park
  • Global Moderator
  • Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Default Avatar
  • Posts: 71627
  • Oracle of Piedmont Park
  • Liked:
Re: OT - Weird History
« Reply #1162 on: October 28, 2022, 10:22:09 AM »
I don't think the natives in the East were nomadic very much at all, they had settled towns and villages and stayed there, and built the various "mounds" hither and yon, which indicates they resided in the same place for long periods.  The Aztecs and Mayans clearly settled in one place and built impressive cities.

They certainly had government, totalitarian apparently.  Mexico City at that time was very impressive.

medinabuckeye1

  • Legend
  • ****
  • Default Avatar
  • Posts: 8906
  • Liked:
Re: OT - Weird History
« Reply #1163 on: October 28, 2022, 10:35:00 AM »


A thing that surprised me back when was that Germany and Italy are relatively new countries. 

I also learned that Swedes and Danes still don't like each other.
This "late to the scene" issue massively contributed to both World Wars in the 20th Century.  The history of how Germany was formed is a long and complicated one but the short version is that up until Napoleon they had been a collection of minor "kingdoms" or "duchys" that were at least nominally independent but frequently allied together into larger groups out of necessity.  Thus the Hanseatic League and the Holy Roman Empire.  

The Holy Roman Empire was famously neither holy nor roman nor an empire.  Rather, it was a loose alliance of minor Germanic kingdoms and it was nearly always dominated by the Austrians.  

As Prussia grew in size and power there came to be a conflict between two most powerful Germanic kingdoms, Prussia in the north and and Austria in the south.  Adding fuel to the fire of this conflict was the fact that most northern Germans were Protestant Lutherans while most Southern Germans were Catholics.  Prussia and Austria fought a war in 1866.  This war was right after the American Civil War which ended in 1865 and just before the Franco-Prussian War of 1870.  The fact that it came before the Franco-Prussian war is not coincidental.  Bismark HAD to secure his southern flank before he could take on France.  Then he goaded the famous Napoleon's nephew into declaring war on Prussia and promptly kicked the living crap out of the French.  

The German empire was declared IN France at the conclusion of the Franco-Prussian War.  Then, finally, the bulk of the German people were united into one nation but there were two major problems that would cause issues going forward:
  • Most of the rest of the European peoples had already formed nation states years earlier.  England, France, and Russia had existed for centuries by the time Wilhelm I was crowned Emperor of Germany.  Thus, those other nations had already had the opportunity to lay claim to border areas and to acquire foreign colonies while Germany had not.  
  • The German people still were not actually united anywhere near to the degree that the English, French, and Russians were.  Austria was still independent of Germany as part of the Austro-Hungarian Empire and there were also a lot of ethnically German people living in other parts of the Austro-Hungarian Empire outside of Austria and in areas even beyond the Austro-Hungarian Empire.  

The established powers (England, France, Russia) formed an alliance to maintain their power and the less established powers of Germany and Italy formed their own alliance.  The Austro-Hungarian Empire was more-or-less forced into the German/Italian camp because the established powers saw them for the fading military power that they were and weren't really interested in allying with them.  The Germany-Austria-Italy alliance, however, was always tenuous at best.  Italy and Austria had territorial disputes all along their border most notably South Tyrol and Trieste and there were always a large number of people in the German Empire who wanted to unite all Germans into ONE Germany.  This, of course, was problematic for the Hapsburgs as they ruled a substantial number of Ethnic Germans in Austria and beyond.  Worse for the Hapsburgs, there were a lot of German people within their own lands who felt more loyalty to their Germanic cousins in the German Empire than to their own perceived foreign rulers.  One example of this is a certain Austrian who joined not he Austrian but the German Army in WWI, rose to Corporal, and later became infamous.  

When WWI came, the Italians bowed out and eventually joined the other side through a treaty that looks more like a Real Estate Contract because it was.  The British and French wanted to endanger the Southern flank of the Austrians and they traded land to Italy to accomplish that goal.  

Interestingly, when the Austro-Hungarian Empire was collapsing the Germanic portions of it declared their independence as the "Republic of German Austria" with the stated goal of merging with Germany.  Ie, Anschluss wasn't something that Hitler dreamed up on his own, it had been the express goal of Austria as formed.  Additionally, the Republic of German Austria also claimed all of the German Speaking areas of the old empire which included a number of areas that would become problematic a quarter century later when the Nazi's claimed them.  

medinabuckeye1

  • Legend
  • ****
  • Default Avatar
  • Posts: 8906
  • Liked:
Re: OT - Weird History
« Reply #1164 on: October 28, 2022, 10:40:58 AM »
Ottoman Empire enters the First World War - The Ottoman Empire | NZHistory, New Zealand history online

A few days later the German battlecruiser SMS Goeben and the light cruiser SMS Breslau appeared off the Dardanelles, after evading the French and British fleets in a daring dash through the Mediterranean. They requested passage through the straits to Constantinople. After delicate negotiations – and over Sait’s objections – they were allowed to proceed. A week later the two warships – complete with their German crews – were officially ‘transferred’ to the Ottoman Navy and renamed the Yavuz Sultan Selim and Midilli. The British refused to recognise the transfer unless the German crews were removed, and the Royal Navy blockaded the entrance of the Dardanelles to enforce this demand.
Kaiser Wilhelm II visits The Dardanelles title=Kaiser Wilhelm II visits The Dardanelles
Kaiser Wilhelm II visits The Dardanelles

This rapid escalation in tension quickly led to the withdrawal of the British mission to the Ottoman Navy. In late August, General Liman von Sanders, head of the German military mission to the Ottoman Empire, was appointed commander of the Ottoman First Army (whose remit included the Gallipoli Peninsula). Rear-Admiral Wilhelm Souchon, the German naval commander of the Goeben and Breslau, was appointed by Cemal Pasha to command the Ottoman Navy. Although the Ottoman Empire was still ostensibly neutral at this point, Cemal then appointed German Vice-Admiral Guido von Usedom as ‘Inspector-General of Coastal Defences and Mines’. Von Usedom’s job was to help the Ottoman Army strengthen the coastal defences along both the Bosphorus and the Dardanelles. He arrived in Constantinople on 19 August with a specialist military team of 500 German officers and men. These actions did not go unnoticed in the Allied capitals.
The pro-war faction in the Ottoman government knew that the Germans wanted to bring the empire into the war as quickly as possible. Through such blatant manipulation of the military mission arrangements in favour of Germany, Enver, Cemal and their supporters were clearly signalling where their sympathies lay. By provoking an increasingly belligerent response from the Allied powers, they made it harder for Sait to argue the case for continued neutrality.
Ottoman Empire declares war, November 1914 title=Ottoman Empire declares war, November 1914
Ottoman Empire declares war, November 1914

But as the weeks dragged by, Enver grew impatient. On 25 October 1914, without consulting any of his ministerial colleagues, he ordered Admiral Souchon to take the Ottoman fleet, including the German-crewed ships, into the Black Sea to attack the Russians. The fleet carried out surprise raids on Theodosia, Novorossisk, Odessa and Sevastopol, sinking a Russian minelayer, a gunboat and 14 civilian ships. On 2 November, Russia declared war on the Ottoman Empire. France and the British Empire, Russia’s wartime allies, followed suit on the 5th. Enver Pasha had succeeded in bringing the Ottoman Empire into the First World War on the side of the Central Powers, Germany and Austria-Hungary. Whether he would be as successful in achieving his principle war aim – pan-Turkic expansion into Central Asia at Russia′s expense – was another question.
This is a rare example of both a German diplomatic success and a British diplomatic failure.  

The German gift of Goeben and Breslau to the Turks effectively cost the Germans nothing as the ships otherwise would have been trapped in the Mediterranean where the British would have eventually found and destroyed them.  Coincidentally, at the exact same time the British in a VERY uncharacteristically undiplomatic move notified the Turks that several warships the Turks had ordered from British Yards and PAID FOR would NOT be delivered because they had been taken into service in the Royal Navy due to the conflict.  The Turks were understandably furious that the ships they had paid for were summarily stolen by the British and that contributed to their goodwill toward the Germans who gave them the warships they wanted.  

It didn't change the outcome of the war but it certainly made things more difficult for the Allies as their Dardnelles campaign (one of Churchill's least successful ideas) was a catastrophe.  

medinabuckeye1

  • Legend
  • ****
  • Default Avatar
  • Posts: 8906
  • Liked:
Re: OT - Weird History
« Reply #1165 on: October 28, 2022, 10:52:54 AM »
He discovered a land already populated by people.
He discovered a land already discovered hundreds of years earlier.
He never actually set foot on the mainland of North America.
He labeled native Americans 'Indians,' despite being over 7,000 miles from India.
.
But he's so cool and due solely to ignorant tradition, we should celebrate him.
That about sum it up?
These are just silly arguments:

"He discovered a land already populated by people."  
During the age of discovery the Europeans mapped the world.  It is true that the lands that they "discovered" had obviously already been "found" by the people living there but prior to the 15th century the people living in the Americas had no idea that there were other continents with people living in them and vice-versa.  By the end of the 16th century there was a fairly accurate world map and educated people anywhere in the world could read about most of the other people in the world.  

"He discovered a land already discovered hundreds of years earlier."  
Yes, the Vikings did get to North America.  This was long rumored and finally proven a few decades ago through an archeological dig that conclusively proved a pre-Columbian Viking presence in North America.  The problem with this as an argument is obvious by the need to prove their presence through archeological digs.  The Vikings got here but they didn't tell anybody and they themselves only had a vague oral-tradition rumor.  When Columbus found America it stayed found.  

"He never actually set foot on the mainland of North America."  
So what?  He conclusively proved that if you sailed West from the Canary Islands you WOULD hit land before your supplies ran out.  That opened up the exploration that followed.  

"He labeled native Americans 'Indians' despite being over 7,000 miles from India."  
Columbus had substantially overestimated the distance across Eurasia and underestimated the circumference of the Earth.  The combination of the two errors led to him believing that by the time he had crossed the Atlantic he was somewhere in the vicinity of China or India.  Yeah, he was off by ~7kmi but the point is that he got here and showed others that you could do it and he was followed by a wave of exploration like nothing the world had seen before.  

medinabuckeye1

  • Legend
  • ****
  • Default Avatar
  • Posts: 8906
  • Liked:
Re: OT - Weird History
« Reply #1166 on: October 28, 2022, 10:58:38 AM »
At any rate, Columbus had an enormous impact on global history.  Someone else would have managed it later obviously.  The Portuguese were already making great strides on navigation and shipping.  The Chinese had a great fleet around that time as well that they basically abandoned, they might well have done it.
I assume you know this but the whole reason the Spanish financed a Westward exploratory voyage was because the Portuguese had already locked them out of the Southern (around Africa) route.  The spice trade with China in those days was lucrative but difficult.  Trekking from Europe through the Khyber Pass and all the way to China and back would make a man a lot of money but it took years and there was a substantial chance that he would die either of disease or in a conflict with thieves or hostile natives on the way.  Additionally, wagons could only carry so much.  By that time the Europeans were capable of building ships large enough to make the voyage much more profitable than the wagon-trek.  

medinabuckeye1

  • Legend
  • ****
  • Default Avatar
  • Posts: 8906
  • Liked:
Re: OT - Weird History
« Reply #1167 on: October 28, 2022, 10:59:43 AM »
(not to sound like a hippy or whatever). 
Of course you do, we're used to it ;)

medinabuckeye1

  • Legend
  • ****
  • Default Avatar
  • Posts: 8906
  • Liked:
Re: OT - Weird History
« Reply #1168 on: October 28, 2022, 11:02:07 AM »
Erasing 99.9% of any population from a continent is bad (unless you meant Aztecs, specifically).
.
I think to this day, a majority of people think 'less advanced' = worse
And in terms of comfort, sure.  That's accurate.  But our comfortable, advanced lifestyles aren't sustainable without major changes.  We're quick to innovate and slow to mitigate. 
Personally, I value tribal peoples simply due to the fact that while we can damn rivers and clear-cut forests, we don't have to.  We can live in harmony with nature (not to sound like a hippy or whatever). 
First of all, it wasn't 99.9%.  

Second, I'm simply not going to hold this as a unique sin of the Europeans.  In all of world history when populations have bumped up against one-another there have been winners and losers.  This same process was occurring within the Americas all the time and had occurred in Europe and elsewhere as well.  

The more advanced people won.  Surprise, surprise.  

847badgerfan

  • Administrator
  • Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Posts: 25280
  • Liked:
Re: OT - Weird History
« Reply #1169 on: October 28, 2022, 11:16:22 AM »
Medina's new title is going to be "Smartest Guy in the Room".
U RAH RAH! WIS CON SIN!

Cincydawg

  • Oracle of Piedmont Park
  • Global Moderator
  • Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Default Avatar
  • Posts: 71627
  • Oracle of Piedmont Park
  • Liked:
Re: OT - Weird History
« Reply #1170 on: October 28, 2022, 11:22:20 AM »
Humans are aggressive take when they are able.  I don't see a reason to run down Columbus, nor hail him as a hero either.  History is history, except when it isn't, and much of what we were taught back in the day isn't.

One difference that is important, I think, is wars fought between armies, and wars fought to eradicate or subdue civilians.  The Israelites, according to the Bible, took Canaan (and had it taken from them a few times) and eradicated those living there often as not.  The Mongols had an interesting approach and would lay waste to entire cities if they didn't surrender.  South Africa has some interesting history.  Even in the US before colonization, whole peoples rose and disappeared over time, replaced by others.


Cincydawg

  • Oracle of Piedmont Park
  • Global Moderator
  • Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Default Avatar
  • Posts: 71627
  • Oracle of Piedmont Park
  • Liked:
Re: OT - Weird History
« Reply #1171 on: October 28, 2022, 11:26:50 AM »
This is not so well known today.

William the Conqueror was an innovator in government. He built a strong centralized administration staffed with his Norman supporters. He was also not about to put up with any backtalk from the newly conquered English.

He subdued the south and east easily, but the north rose in rebellion. William's response was the ferocious "Harrying of the North" (1069-70), which devastated the land in a broad swath from York to Durham. The results of this burning and destruction left much of the area depopulated for centuries.

Hereward
Following on the heels of northern resistance the most famous English rebel of them all, Hereward the Wake, stirred up resistance to the Norman conquerors in East Anglia from a base at Ely, deep in the fenland. Eventually Hereward, too, was subdued, perhaps bought off, and the land was William's to hold.
Early Castles
One of the ways he ensured that he held it was to build castles everywhere. These were often hurried affairs in a continental "motte and bailey" design, usually in wood, only later replaced with stone. Most were built with forced local labour on land confiscated from English rebels. The castles were given to Norman barons to hold for the king.
In theory, every inch of English land belonged to the Crown and William's vassals had to swear fealty directly to the Crown. Contrast this with the earlier Saxon practice where each man swore allegiance to the person of his lord (click here to review). Now William was making loyalty to the nation, in the form of the Crown, supersede loyalty to the individual person of a lord.



Gigem

  • Starter
  • *****
  • Posts: 2144
  • Liked:
Re: OT - Weird History
« Reply #1172 on: October 28, 2022, 01:21:34 PM »
TBH the whole pre-Germany Prussia, Holy Roman Empire, and all of that really confuses me, and I suspect that it's not something you can understand without a lot of due diligence and studies.  That was a great breakdown.  

medinabuckeye1

  • Legend
  • ****
  • Default Avatar
  • Posts: 8906
  • Liked:
Re: OT - Weird History
« Reply #1173 on: October 28, 2022, 01:39:34 PM »
TBH the whole pre-Germany Prussia, Holy Roman Empire, and all of that really confuses me, and I suspect that it's not something you can understand without a lot of due diligence and studies.  That was a great breakdown.
It really is a confusing mess involving not only the ethnically German people in the area but also Swede's, Dane's, Lithuanians, Poles, etc.

Eventually it crystallized into essentially "two germanys" being the Hohenzolleren ruled Prussians in the North and the Hapsburg ruled Austrians in the South. As nationalism grew (not only in Germany but across Europe) a lot of Germans wanted a united "One Germany" but obviously this was problematic because both the Hohenzollerens and the Hapsburgs saw themselves as the logical and rightful future rulers.

The Hapsburg claim was based mostly on history. They had dominated the old Holy Roman Empire for Centuries.
The Hohenzolleren claim was more recent but they had the stronger economy and military by the later half of the 19th Century.

Then there was the religious divide. Other European nations had Jewish minorities and either Protestant, Roman Catholic, or Eastern Orthodox majorities with one or both of the other two in the minority but in each of the other European nations there was a clear and dominant majority. England was almost all Protestant with only a few jews and Catholics. Russia was almost all Eastern Orthodox with only a few Jewish, Protestants, and Catholics. Same for France, Spain, and Italy with their substantial Catholic majorities.

Germany was different. The Catholic/Protestant divide was close to even with a few Jews in the mix. This was probably mostly responsible for the lack of an eventual unification.

medinabuckeye1

  • Legend
  • ****
  • Default Avatar
  • Posts: 8906
  • Liked:
Re: OT - Weird History
« Reply #1174 on: October 28, 2022, 01:39:51 PM »
Medina's new title is going to be "Smartest Guy in the Room".
LoL, thanks.

Cincydawg

  • Oracle of Piedmont Park
  • Global Moderator
  • Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Default Avatar
  • Posts: 71627
  • Oracle of Piedmont Park
  • Liked:
Re: OT - Weird History
« Reply #1175 on: October 28, 2022, 01:51:08 PM »
The history of France is a bit of a mess also.  The French king was at war with the Burgudians for a while, as well as the English.  The Pope lived in Avignon over a century.  Alsace/Lorraine of course has switched, and today many place names there are  Teutonic.  Brittany is related to the term "Britain".  Normandy of course is where the old kings of England came from, and the "Nor" means "north" because it was settled by Danes etc.  Belgium has parts that are French speaking and parts where that is eschewed and they speak Flemish.  My notion before I got into reading all this was these countries had been sort of like they are for centuries.

 

Support the Site!
Purchase of every item listed here DIRECTLY supports the site.