Veeky Forums, what's your unpopular opinion on historical events? I'll start

Should have paid the debts

Wait, the sack of Constantinople was due to denbts??

Hahahahaha never change, gayreeks!

correct

Then why didn't they stop when they got enough money to cover the debt + interests? Nah, it is obvious Venice had ulterior motives.

It was just about as justified as any non-domestic thing a state does purely for self interest.

It was actually more like that some random pretender promised the crusaders more money than the Byzantines could afford, and when some guy who actually controlled Constantinople tried but failed to pay all the money needed the Crusaders decided to sack it.

The fact that and the way Catholicis try to defend the sack in have probably made me lose more respect for the sect than the sack itself ever could.

The M4 Sherman was one of, if not the single best tank in WW2.

That's factual wrong, if the Empire weren't created the Republic would've simply torn itself apart again and again by its own internal struggle

>Then why didn't they stop when they got enough money to cover the debt + interests?
Because when you make someone come and FIND the money themselves, and risk their lives doing it, it pisses them off.

Egyptians were proto-furries.

>Because when you make someone come and FIND the money themselves, and risk their lives doing it, it pisses them off.

Nah. Stop being naive. Venice had strategic interests in destroying the Byzantine Empire, nothing else nothing more.

Majority of people who learned history from other sources than hitlery channel won't find it unpopular opinion.

>most pre-1500 history is quite literally fake or based on pure conjecture and "holy" myths

also:
>catholics and freemasons fabricated history to erase all traces left from all-powerful slavo-mongolian horde ruling the world.

automobile was a mistake

Robespierre was possibly on the autism-spectrum but also one of the closest things the French Revolution had to a hero. I think he was right about virtually everything and was forced to adapt to impossible circumstances due to the incompetence and corruption of those around him.

I admit that's turbo WeWuzism, and Fomenko probably knew it was a big fat lie.
But the other other things may have been correct
>catholics and freemasons fabricated history
Yes

Ideas similar to Formenko's had some factual evidence, mostly when talking about history, especially ancient Egyptians but it mostly resulted in splitting rather than merging various pharaohs.

I'm interested in this stuff. What are some particularly notable fabrications?

Was Charlamagne real? Did the battle of 1066 happen? Did England get Common Law from the Saxons? Are Caesar's commentaries on the Gallic War a fabrication?

How deep does this go?

I wrote a paper on this. I went back to the primary source material, and I think that both the deviation to Zara and later the conquest of Constantinople were the result of opportunism - not financial, but spiritual. I believe that in both cases, it was believed that the course of action taken would ultimately help the Crusade to carry on to its final destination as a success. Baldwin's first encyclical upon becoming emperor explicitly states that he hopes to carry on on Crusade. Things just didn't pan out that way.

As for the Venetians, they get an awful rap for a lack of genuine spiritual commitment to the crusades. But they had been involved in crusading endeavours from the time of the first crusade, even when doing so was harmful to their economic interests in the near east, suggesting that their motivations were not purely financial. To say otherwise is always to gloss the Venetian people and their leaders with the sort of 'realpolitikal' vision that historians possess with hindsight, and to believe that they did not share (without explaining why) in the religious conviction common in the rest of the west.

As for Dandolo's part in the fiasco - he had been given what turned out to be an unrealistic assessment of the number of ships needed for the crusade, and had monopolised the Arsenal to provide ships for over a year, badly damaging the city's finances. When a far smaller number of crusaders turned up, Zara was an obvious way to make good Venetian losses - it must be remembered that a doge's autocracy was significantly more limited than that of a contemporary king - he had a number of 'constituents' that would need to see him make some good of the Crusade.

Just my revisionist two cents. Feel free to shit all over it like people on here always do.

Catholic here. It's honestly the biggest tragedy in human history. The Angeloi ran the Empire into the ground in only 10 years, but what the Venetians did was shameful. #NotAllCatholics

Zimbabwe would have been better if it stayed as Rhodesia

Pretty sure the entire planet has realized that by now. Even Robert Mugabe probably wishes he could undo his reign.

Formenko basically states that the history before 1500 is almost completely false.

There are other who assume that dark ages of any kind didn't exist as a whole. That is that bronze era collapse and post roman collapse didn't happen etc.

Google new chronology, there's really no reason to write lengthy post about it.

>Angeloi
>ran the empire into the ground
I am starting to see a pattern.

So are they claiming that all scientific archeology like I don't know carbon dating if that applies is just some big conspiracy?

Maybe not necessary a big central conspiracy with some clear goal bu reptilians, just each religion, dynasty, country inventing myths to justify their past.
And the way objects are interpreted by archeologists is ultimately based also on what they expect to find.
Sure the object might really be from around 500 BC, but it nothing to do with whatever the official explanation is.

Zimbabwe would have been better if Rhodesia simply had dropped White minority rule

>google new chronology
Okay I'm back. That was one hell of a trip. I think it's quite hard to believe anything that the man wrote but at the same time I won't absolutely reject it because the methods he used to reach those conclusions are well beyond my understanding.

I'll keep that stuff in my mind's back pocket but I think it would be more practical to assume that the general narrative is correct unless it becomes generally accepted that it isn't.

I'd honestly rather believe even if none it ever happened

Wow, did I just find religion?

Ayshit can't wait for the institutionalized church of medieval history

Julius Caesar did nothing wrong

The Byzantine Empire was "Roman" in-name-only after the rise of Islam. Hell after the death of Justinian II I would say it ceased being "Roman" culturally.

The conquest of the Native Americans was no different than how any other nation in the past would have acted. To call it "Genocide" is a political machination at best, vae victus

The Mongol Empire was the worst thing to ever happen to the Far and Middle East.

Martin Luther was a mistake

The Southern US did everything wrong

On Veeky Forums in general: Racism is a foolish idea that only drives to seperate people. The cultural superiority is where it is at

Do you really meet people who disagree with these ideas?

>Do you really meet people who disagree with these ideas?
Republic fanboys, Byzantineboos, Natives and Leftists/SJW's, Mongolboos and John Green fans, Protestants and germans, the southern US and /pol/ would all disagree with me vehemently

>The Crusades were clearly a Christian holy war of aggression, if it was self defence it would have happened centuries before and been mostly aimed at Spain
>The holocaust happened but the numbers are exaggerated, i dont mean it in a malicious way, it's just what happens, like major battles, and everyone is too PC to revise it
>Vikings are overrated but they still quite cool and dont deserve to be endlessly shitted on
>Rome ended in 476 AD
>
>get ready for it
>
>
>Europe would have been better Islamic than Christian in the middle ages, there would have been major peace and unity across Europe and Asia resulting in massive trade bonuses while still having the same healthy competition and probably renaissance even sooner.

I love Byzzies, but come one how can anyone honestly claim they're not clearly distinct entity from the classical Rome

>Republic fanboys, Byzantineboos, Natives and Leftists/SJW's, Mongolboos and John Green fans, Protestants and germans, the southern US and /pol/
>people
Memeing aside I think that a lot of that is pretty generally accepted. Those aren't really majorities that you listed there, just vocal fringe groups.

That Islam point isn't too offensive. What bothers people is when shitposters use that one Nietzche quote out of context to say that we should all surrender to ISIS, kiss the feet of refugees and let Mohamed fuck our wives.

Islam back then was strong, held ideals that were more or less in line with Europe and was generally going forward. Now I think it seems regressive and has nothing to offer the first world. Feel free to respond to this point but I'd hate to drag the thread off topic.

It's pretty fascinating to imagine Europe if the Umayaads had kicked Martel and the frank's shit in and conquer it

If it had reached the same kind of sophistication and advancement as the moorish Spain

And also, since central european society and culture were so drastically shaped by the Franks

Does John Green believe the crusades ended the Islamic Golden age?

>Capitalism
>XV century

Here's a more interesting question; does John Green believe any of the shit he says in this stupid videos he makes?

I wouldn't know about his opinion on that specific matter because I only watched one of his videos, on Alexander the Great, and was so disgusted that I now get angry at the site of his name.

>Muh silver/gold
Literally any other country would do the same, colonies weren't made to be economically diverse, but to give simple profit, and gold was literally money.
>Merchants
I guess? Idk desu.

>>The Sack of Constantinople in 1204 on Fourth Crusade is completely justified

If it's justified, justify it.

Christianity was a mistake

How?

>Spain hurt itself by expulsing Jews.
Not exactly an unpopular opinion

Wew Mussolini

Well they did drop it, and you can see what happened

It's very odd
>spends an entire episode dickriding the Arabs and MUH SCIENCE
>literally next episode he dickrides the mongols, talking about now progressive they were and glosses over all the destruxtion

The world would be better if the axis won the 1. WW, moar peace in the world

You're right, considering what was promised and what was then never delivered and the Emperor's attempts to backstab the Crusaders, they completely were. The Empire was terminal at that point anyway and while that sped things up, its death was inevitable.

How did the emperor try to backstab the crusaders?

Yeah to all of that, but the last one.

He just thinks that Charlamagne was within a generation or so of the fall or the Roman Empire, and 1066 appeared shortly afterwards.

Churchill is a filthy anglo rat and the aggressor responsible for WW2 and all the carnage that followed

couldn't agree more with the points on Islam, this is coming from someone born Muslim that realised it's regressive nature at the age of 11

The axis didn't exist in ww 1 it's the central powers. No point of being on this board if you don't know basic history

Not him but he refused to feed them if they didn't pledge allegiance to him and give him all the land they captured. They also stole their first city under cover of darkness which pissed everyone off.
They were a pretty scum ally for such an intense war.

Didn't he talk about the Emperor during the fourth Crusade?
Pretty sure you are talking aobut the one during the first Crusade.

Yeah I was. Sorry mate, wasn't paying attention. Still though. I'd sack those shits after all the crap they slung in the first crusade anyway.

>one of the closest things the French Revolution had to a hero.

he couldn't even kill himself right, the idiot blew his jaw apart with a pistol.

>carbon dating

LOL

It's kind of unclear what happened with his jaw. There was at least one National Guardsman who took credit for what happened to Robespierre himself and then there's also the theory that he resisted arrest and somebody's gun went off in the struggle. What's clear is that the arrest of Robespierre's faction didn't go cleanly.

>justified
Is this along a relativity idea? I mean, everything in history was arguably justified, especially when you get to the ends justifying the means.

Versailles wasn't harsh enough, should have been peace of Westphalia tier

dying kek

>if the Empire weren't created the Republic would've done exactly what the empire ended up doing anyways
FTFY

an age is reflected by superior people killing and otherwise expansively usurping inferiors

America should have sided with Germany in World War 2.

quality post

Dude this

Martin Luther did nothing wrong.

Why would we

Piers Gaveston should have been consort. He'd have made a better king than Hubby. They could have been pretty successful rulers together.

>America sides with Germany instead of Great Britain
>Britain immediately sues for peace with Germany
>Germany crushes the Soviet Union
>No final solution; Jews deported to Palestine or Madagascar
>No oil embargo on Japan
>No Pearl Harbor
>Soviet Union and China divided up between conquering powers (Germany, America, Japan, Italy)
>Continued economic prosperity in the West; Japan dominates in the East, subjugating China; Germany and America rule Europe
>No cold war
>Communism purged without mercy

fucking glorious

meant for

There are understandable regularities in human affairs

In what fantasy land does America betray its British and French allies to side with Nazi Germany?

Also, concentration and death camps were already running by the time America entered the war.

Alternate history, duh

kek

Allies are always relative. France was worthless and Britain was a liability. Fewer brits die if they just capitulate. Concentration camps were not automatically death camps. Learn the difference.

I really want to read Fomenko's books, large investment in time and $ though. One day..

I want to know more about Tartaria, the large Asian land empire thats been left out of history. Do you think the people we now know as Mongols were actually the people of Tartaria?

>Not him but he refused to feed them if they didn't pledge allegiance to him and give him all the land they captured.
That's because Alexios was not expecting the crusaders to be DEUS VULT RELIGION WAR NOW.

>They also stole their first city under cover of darkness which pissed everyone off.
Nicea was an important city to the ERE. Had the crusaders captured it, they would've razed it to the ground.

Islamic history from the beginning to the 18th century is fucking amazing. Probably one of the most interesting periods of time to study and learn about.

>islam since 1800
>ottoman turks acquire gunpowder through trade from far east
>rewalk the steps of the byzantine empire they acquired before them
>get fucking smashed by a pack of inbred habsburgs WHILST they are fighting multiple european fronts against legitament powers
>do fucking nothing in 2 world wars
>decay into smelly goat fuckers
>burden of the world

>The cultural superiority is where it is at

I fucking agree.
As the old saying goes, "its whats on the inside that matters" and culture is on the inside.

You're absolutely right.
The fact that some people don't realize this is such a pity. Behavior and values stems from culture not ethnicity.

>Islam back then was strong, held ideals that were more or less in line with Europe and was generally going forward. Now I think it seems regressive and has nothing to offer the first world.
This is true.

>they think culture and ethnicity can be separated

>Roman empire was bad
>Attila and the other "barbarians" did nothing wrong
>American independence was bad
>The confederacy did nothing wrong
>the 1911 chinese revolution was a misstake

>American revolution was bad, but the confederacy which did all the same shit but even worse was good

That's not even being controversial, it's just being contrarian.

>had they captured it
It was their capture mate. They were robbed of their glory and probably provisions and looting because their allies were snatchy. Pretty big net loss for the away team.