Summing up world history

Basically the only relevant Western countries are:

- Greece
- Italy
- Germany
- Britain
- USA

Rest might as well never have existed.

Christcuck please, go whine about history not being revisionist enough somewhere else.

>Thinking an ever expanding empire would somehow be stable

They had enough problems with their borders when it was Dacia plus the Rhine and Danube. You couldn't have a country that large in an era without mass communication. There's a reason Diocletian is relevant

>what is China

If you want a good basic introduction to history, buy yourself a decent atlas from either a second hand bookstore or get a pdf copy from online.

not western and americas some stopgap plug for the pacific-atlantic

France? I mean... Napoleon and shit.

>England invents modern democracy, modern science, starts the Industrial Revolution, and builds the greatest empire in history

How bout nope?
The British Empire wasnt that great, and half these things werent invented by England

>when u illiterate

France was more relevant than Germany for most of history indeed
But overall, I'd say that France and Germany were more relevant than Britain
Britain's only contribution was creating the USA

Please stop

Spain?
Poland?
Russia?

...

>Nº of significant figures

ebin

>and continue to jointly lead the world to this day
Wow, the British delusion. They already are a non-factor and still losing influence day by day.

Some midget who got rekt by Britain? How is that in any way relevant?

France's only notable achievement is surrendering.

I bet you listen to British music and watch British TV shows every day you cuck.

>France

>poland
lmao
Is getting wiped off the map for a good hundred years an accomplishment nowadays?

wow you have such a good understanding of history wow

There are some minor issues.

>Catholicism appears, makes science illegal and burns all books and scientists as witches, causing the fall of Rome

Rome fell because it was easier for a military commander to become rich and powerful by sacking Rome than the other way around. After the Marian reforms and Augustus's consolidation of power, the only way to prevent military coups was to tax the rest of the population heavily and give said taxes to the military.

This led to overtaxation, which eventually became such a heavy burden on the peasants that farmers would be the first people to die in a famine. The end result was depopulation, and most of the survivors trying their best to avoid any representative of the Roman state.

The Catholics just kind of wandered into this mess and did their best to hold the pieces together.

>meanwhile the Chinese make invent gunpowder and the printing press

The Germans are the ones who made the version of the printing press that was actually useful.

And the scientific revolution was the work of most of Europe and America pitching in to varying degrees. England did much more than their fair share, but French, German, American, and even Italian and Russian scientists did a huge amount.

>than the other civilization's capitals

derp

>the Chinese invent the printing press
Hol'up, they were using wooden letter thingies and shit didn't work that well, because they got wet and bloated very quickly.
They might have tried it first, but Güttenberg actually made it work.

I never read bigger bullshit in my entire life.
1. "Dark ages" is a myth made up my protestants to shit on Catholics.
2. Catholics did not "ban science"...without catholic monasteries, most of our knowledge would be lost.
3. Rome fell because of their overextenstion, inflation, and constant Barbarian invasions. Their internal struggle was huge. Catholicism just became popular in the middle of the mess...aka not a cause.
4. fall of Rome left a huge power vacuum in Europe, which caused lots of disputes for territory.
5. there were invention during the Medieval period so fuck off with your pure Anti- Catholic propaganda.
6. Gun powder was used a lot better by Europeans, because, they modified technology to make it as powerful as they could. Aka innovation.

>"Dark ages" is a myth made up my protestants to shit on Catholics

It isn't.

Try finding first hand historical sources from Britain in 200 AD.

Now try finding them for 600 AD.

Christcuck please.

From Hypatia to Galileo, the Church killed and persecuted anyone who wanted to do science. All books except the Bible were banned and burned, and nobody except some priests was allowed to learn to read. There's a reason all progress stopped as soon as your death cult appeared and Europe stayed an irrelevant backward shithole for the entire time of Catholic domination.

If all progress stopped than how do you explain plate armour, cathedrals, and the discovery of the new world?

Stop being a massive faggot.

Armor existed long before, cathedrals are complete shit compared to ancient Roman buildings and Muslims and Chinese were building things 100 times more impressive, and America was discovered during the Renaissance (medievals didn't even have proper ships and would have been afraid of falling off the edge of the flat Earth).

>he's crediting the early middle ages for things that happened in the high middle ages

If you wanted to look at things the church was actually involved with, look at the sudden decline in slavery, human sacrifice, and consanguineous marriage.

All of these are things that actually happened in the early middle ages and were directly attributable to the church.

Also, the Hagia Sofia.

Looks kind of ugly to me compared to later gothic structures, but it was in the period traditionally associated with the Dark Ages, albeit in the wrong part of the world to qualify.

Please stop b8ing

>Triggered by truth
It happens christkek

>tries to defend christfaggotry
>posts a fucking mosque

Lel christcucks just keeps getting more desperate and retarded.

I asked really nicely.

I get that you enjoy this, but there are a bunch of other threads on the board, and most of them are shit.

There's like a 1% chance that we get a history newfag and teach them something they didn't know.

Then maybe a 50% chance the entire thread was a well disguised dark ages troll thread and a 49% chance OP was genuine but shitposters smother the discussion.

Catholics didn't build the Hagia Sophia
The Byzantines/Romans did
The Catholic church spoke of the primacy of the bishop of Rome, but the ERE never agreed with that idea.

Well, it's kind of a pointless discussion as far as the Dark Ages, since that term only applies to Western Europe.

As I understand it, before the schism, the east and west didn't agree on hierarchy, but agreed that they were part of the same church.

True, but the church cannot be said to be the Roman Catholic Church since the Pope was not the primate. I don't mean that the pre-1054 popes were illegitimate or not-Catholic, but rather that the Roman Catholic church and the Orthodox churches split from the same original body, rather than the Western perspective that the Orthodox split away from being part of Catholicism.

You did not say a single correct thing.