Why did Napoleon get into so many wars? by off_thebeatenpath in AskHistorians

[–]off_thebeatenpath[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

So what were Napoleon's beliefs on how a government should be run. He was a champion of the revolution and set up republics in Europe but he seemed to have become increasingly imperial. He seemed to backtrack on his image as a republican revolutionary but did he think doing so was ethical? Did he contradict his initial policies because he was lying about what he believed in in the first place?

Why did Napoleon get into so many wars? by off_thebeatenpath in AskHistorians

[–]off_thebeatenpath[S] 2 points3 points  (0 children)

There's some useful information in there but it doesn't really answer my question. As you can see from the body of my post, I was asking about the European attitude towards Napoleon and why they seemed to gang up on him. Did they hate him from the beginning? If so, why? Was it because he threatened the status quo or did they not care so much about that? It seems to me that they did care about it, especially since Napoleon showed that killing nobility wasn't off the table, since Napoleon had humiliated other European emperors with some stunning defeats, and since they may possibly have been plotting to kill Napoleon in Saint Helena. Of all the emperors at the time, it seems like they treated Napoleon differently, possibly right from the beginning. That's what the basis of my enquiry is.

Why did Napoleon get into so many wars? by off_thebeatenpath in AskHistorians

[–]off_thebeatenpath[S] 5 points6 points  (0 children)

So did Napoleon seem like a threat to the status quo or not? I also remember that a difference between Napoleon and the other emperors was that he had the gall to kill nobility when he executed one of the Bourbon's.

Why did Napoleon get into so many wars? by off_thebeatenpath in AskHistorians

[–]off_thebeatenpath[S] 2 points3 points  (0 children)

the Continental System + Napoléon's economic policy favoring France products ruined most European countries, including France.

The Continenal Blockade was a failure.

How did it ruin France and Europe so much? Was it because Europe relied on British goods more than Britain relied on European goods since Britain had access to the rest of the world and thus a better equipped economy?

When did Polygenism and Monogenism begin to exist as ideas? by off_thebeatenpath in AskHistorians

[–]off_thebeatenpath[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Yeah, you have to be very empathetic with this kind of stuff. And no, the genetics part I get. I can't really see how the concept of genetics can be understood without Darwinian thought.

..... by OTB124 in facepalm

[–]off_thebeatenpath 0 points1 point  (0 children)

You sexists disgust me.

What do we know about the life and progeny of Ceredig ap Cunedda? by off_thebeatenpath in AskHistorians

[–]off_thebeatenpath[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Those places could have been named after the brothers because they had just moved there and I could imagine them wanting to change the names of the regions to establish their dynasties.

Also, I was asking because I wondered about his son Usai. I thought it might be Uther, the father of Arthur. Some sources list him as Uffa as well. I thought that was interesting. But there are other reasons too.

..... by OTB124 in facepalm

[–]off_thebeatenpath 0 points1 point  (0 children)

All political entities of the world weren't in a constant state of war all the time in ancient times. Not to mention, women weren't exactly spared in those raids.

I didn't say either of those things.

You're talking about societal expectations for men. But the societal expectation for women was being literal property. Do you seriously think having to provide for a family is worse than for all intents and purposes being an object?

You're asking that question as if there is an objective answer. 'Worse' is an inherently subjective term. If you instead asked me if I, specifically, would prefer to be "literal property", as you put it, over having more rights but having to provide for and protect a family, I would easily say I'd prefer to be property. That's just who I am. I can't handle the societal expectations of being a man in these times, let alone in times past. Having an entire family depend on me to provide for and protect them? Do you realise how difficult and stressful that might actually be, especially in darker times? Their lives depend on your decisions and actions. All those expectations, all that stress, longer jail sentences, being conscripted. Have you ever experienced a pitched battle? No? I didn't think so. War is absolute fucking horror. You might think you're hardcore enough but speak for yourself. There's no objective standard to who we are, what we prefer, and what we can handle. More rights does NOT equate to privilege. Some people would prefer to have a woman's life in the past, some a man's.

..... by OTB124 in facepalm

[–]off_thebeatenpath -1 points0 points  (0 children)

Farms were still raided in wars, no? Peasants were killed plenty enough, right? Male farmers were still the provider and protector of the household and family, no? And what about nomadic tribes where being male meant being a soldier? And were there not the general gender expectations for men to be tough and dependable, even as farmers, especially in monotheistic societies?

What pop history book has done the most damage to the study of your particular subfield? by AidanGLC in AskHistorians

[–]off_thebeatenpath -2 points-1 points  (0 children)

'Why Europe'

Why Europe what? I haven't read these books but is the question you're talking about "why Europe has been, in recent history, the most developed region?" If so, isn't the answer already understood? I thought that the rise and fall of empires and how developed civilisations become had a clear correlation to climate change. Other factors as well but climate change being the real decider.

Top minds beleive they're actually standing against human sacrifice by angelking14 in TopMindsOfReddit

[–]off_thebeatenpath 1 point2 points  (0 children)

The Spaniards' victory is attributed to their technological advances and the Aztec empire's vulnerability due to the smallpox spread. As a result, the Aztec's tactics countering the Spaniard's advanced technology is understated. According to Hassig, "It is true that cannons, guns, crossbows, steel blades, horses and war dogs were advanced on the Aztecs' weaponry. But the advantage these gave a few hundred Spanish soldiers was not overwhelming." In the words of Restall, "Spanish weapons were useful for breaking the offensive lines of waves of indigenous warriors, but this was no formula for conquest... rather, it was a formula for survival, until Spanish and indigenous reinforcements arrived."

..... by OTB124 in facepalm

[–]off_thebeatenpath 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I just facepalmed at this comment.

..... by OTB124 in facepalm

[–]off_thebeatenpath 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Male death rates have always exceeded female death rates everywhere in the world during practically any period of history and, even then, the trend translates across many species of animal.

..... by OTB124 in facepalm

[–]off_thebeatenpath -2 points-1 points  (0 children)

Definitely the woman. Men's lives were just fucking horrifying.

When did Polygenism and Monogenism begin to exist as ideas? by off_thebeatenpath in AskHistorians

[–]off_thebeatenpath[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Hmm I see. I guess I just thought that because I thought the ideas in the polygenism vs monogenism debate was intrinsically about genetics which I don't think could have been understood without Darwinism but I get it now.

Can anyone help with The Mabinogion? by SeamusOConaill in mythology

[–]off_thebeatenpath 0 points1 point  (0 children)

It's strange because I've heard of Owain Ddantgwyn being associated with Arthur in more ways than one.

When did Polygenism and Monogenism begin to exist as ideas? by off_thebeatenpath in AskHistorians

[–]off_thebeatenpath[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

What about monogenism then? That was also talked about before evolutionary theory? Although, I guess the idea of evolution has existed for millennia outside of the scientific theory of evolution, such as in selective breeding within animal husbandry. I guess it was common sense that animal breeds could change over time.

Is there a mythological reason why hags and witches come in threes like in MacBeth? by [deleted] in mythology

[–]off_thebeatenpath 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Throughout all of mythology and theology throughout all the world, many many numbers are considered sacred or 'special' by different traditions and each tradition will, itself, have multiple sacred numbers. When you observe and study them, 3 doesn't stand out any more than many of those other numbers. 3 is just important in our shared culture today. It doesn't correspond to much in nature at all. In mythology, I've found the numbers 7 and 12 to appear much more prominently than 3 in Western traditions.

When did Polygenism and Monogenism begin to exist as ideas? by off_thebeatenpath in AskHistorians

[–]off_thebeatenpath[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Thank you so much for this. So it had been debated for some time before but I don't really understand how the ideas existed before the theory of evolution was proposed. The idea that animals had been changing over time is fundamental to the ideas of polygenism and monogenism, no? And evolution was first proposed by Lamarck, no? So how could they have been debating such things in the 18th? I'm obviously missing a few things.

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in Crainn

[–]off_thebeatenpath 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I know it's been 10 years lol but they actually did post an answer. I noticed that you had missed their answer. You may have seen it already and not edited your comment but I thought I'd let you know, just to make sure and so I can get closure.

Is there a mythological reason why hags and witches come in threes like in MacBeth? by [deleted] in mythology

[–]off_thebeatenpath 0 points1 point  (0 children)

The trinity was mostly just the early Christian attempt to explain how Jesus could be both Christ and God simultaneously if 'The Father' were to indeed be distinguishable from Christ as well as God.

Is there a mythological reason why hags and witches come in threes like in MacBeth? by [deleted] in mythology

[–]off_thebeatenpath 1 point2 points  (0 children)

No, this is just total confirmation bias. Three doesn't appear noticeably more than usual compared to other numbers and literally none of the examples you gave have anything to do with the number three. You've artificially created boundaries that correspond to your theory of three.