What does Veeky Forums think of Dan Carlin's hardcore history podcast?

I think he goes for the "human aspect" many times in favor of a more "accurate" narrative an historian would go for. The claims might be the same, but the narrative would be different.

I'm totally addicted to HCH as well as his Common Sense podcast. There's one episode I liked so much that I listen to it about once per year: Prophets of Doom
It has all the makings of an awesome story viz., sex, violence, religious fanaticism, war, etc. I actually spent $60 some dollars on his website to buy some of his archived podcasts, money well spent!

youtube.com/watch?v=Wg79R5jopj8

I loved the opening sequence of Ghosts of the Ost Front, the "what is a monument" thing, very powerful.

He has no training in historiography unlike historians.

I like how he focuses more on the over-arching ideas and motivations behind the "human element" of history, rather than just the chronological narrative.

Also, my favorites were Death Throes and Logical Insanity

Yep, like user said. Dan focuses on the deeper elements rather than simply a reading off a list of timelines and events like some teachers I had in college.

Thank God.

>Listen to entire Wrath of the Khans series
>Australia isn't mentioned once

0/10

It's a fun podcast.

I recently re-listened to Ghosts of the Ostfront and it is so great. It truly focuses on the real struggle of the eastern front rather that just claiming that "muh stalingrad" was the thing that changed everything.

His newest stuff has not been that great though to be honest.

But that's fine as I now have a billion other podcasts to listen to.

>But that's fine as I now have a billion other podcasts to listen to.
Recommendations?

My favorite would be the "revolutions" podcast. It made the french revolution actually fun to learn about, and has opened my eyes to awesome revolutions like the Haitian and the Gran Colombian.

Another great one is the "history of Byzantium" which continues where the "history of Rome" podcast(also pretty darn good if you can make it through the first episodes) stopped.

Other worthy mentions are "the history of Egypt" podcast and "the history of ancient" Greece.

There are also a bunch of others that I am to lazy to mention but my tips for any of these podcasts is to force yourself through the first episodes even if they are not great because many podcasters don't know what they are doing in the beginning but they get better.

>revolutions
Holy shit this podcast gives me the feels. Spanish America did not deserve Simon Bolivar.

He exaggerates and extrapolates way too much to illustrate the story he's trying to tell

it's armchair history, trying to make it seem super hip and, well, hardcore at the expense of accuracy

into the trash it goes

Wrath of the Khans is my favourite, but that's because I'm a mongolboo. Still, even I think he can sacrifice some accuracy of the events to play up whatever it is he's talking about.
>can you even imagine?

I always felt like his podcasts are a really good amatuer look at history. But, there are alot of podcasts which I think do a better job of going through history and have better analysis. And yes I know the point of a podcast is to be entertaining. And that if you want real history you have to read. But I still feel like I am experiencing an experience more like watching a movie rather than a documentary when listening to his podcasts. So for me that's a bad thing, but I understand why he is the moat popular.

>Another great one is the "history of Byzantium"
Everyone keeps recommending this and neglecting to mention that there are narrative-critical episodes randomly paywalled off.

I don't mind donating or contributing to a Patreon, but I'm wary of signing up to the tvcritic website which doesn't even have HTTPS on it, just to buy random episodes.

Does anybody happen to have a link to episode 28, at least? That happens right in the middle of the story of Justinian, in the aftermath of the Plague of Justinian.

>more like watching a movie rather than a documentary when listening to his podcasts
for me it feels like it has the positive aspects of a movie in that it's engaging dramatic but it has the positive aspects of a documentary because since they're so damn long he manages to squeeze in so many overarching narrative stuff and anecdotes to set the scene. I think he's also fairly good at citing his sources and telling you when there are contentious things

I didnt like the one titled "american peril". I find american history a bit boring though. His latest one on nuclear weapons is pretty interesting though. Faves are the one aboute rome and the one about proddy reformation

He's a decent orator, sadly his own ideas are pretty trite and a lot of the times outright laughable if you have any deeper knowledge of whatever topic he's talking about.

I feel like he falls back too often on the excuse that

>I'm not an historian, I'm a fan of history
>This is just the Dan Carlin version of history

>adly his own ideas are pretty trite and a lot of the times outright laughable if you have any deeper knowledge of whatever topic he's talking about
care to give any examples? He does repeat himself a lot but I don't think the ideas themselves are that terrible

>He exaggerates and extrapolates way too much
>it's armchair history, trying to make it seem super hip and, well, hardcore at the expense of accuracy

you're talking about Dan Carlin or this board ?

this is a copypasta right

Kek

>if my history isn't dry as fuck and told to me by a man with an english accent that puts me to sleep it is trash