What is your favorite part of history

= 318 [ ?? ]

 

Well actually, i like late 19th century - mid 20th European history the most (inter-war, and post-war periods of both world wars)

 

According to a Warhammer Wikia, that same source said that there were still groups of “warring tribesmen” living alongside the cave dwellers, which I’m assuming are still reminiscent of Ancient Britons. Furthermore, the degeneration of the inhabitants was the result of the intrusion by Be’lakor and the rise of the Dark Emissaries - before this the inhabitants of Albion were groups of Celtic-type kingdoms, who were taught by the Truthsayers about the lore of the Old Ones. If we assumed that the Sea Elves helped the people of Albion settle in the new world before anything like this occurred, we can say that even if Be’lakor and his dark forces still corrupted the people of Albion itself even in the new timeline, they did not know of the new world settlers and didn’t corrupt them, meaning that any Albion settlers in the new world still retained their Celtic aspects.

We don’t, but we can use common sense to establish an educated understanding of what they were used for. I am just using the vast amount of information I’ve gathered from various sources to relay the most likely interpretation.

Multi-layered ramparts and networks of ditches and trenches of such scale as can be seen on British hillforts would hardly have had a main purpose of controlling people and livestock - what would the point of having such an intricate pattern of earthworks be if it was used for this relatively small purpose, or indeed any purpose other than defence? Trust me, I think I know what I’m talking about here.

The large majority of Celtic tribal wars consisted of small warbands going on raiding missions to steal livestock and possessions from their enemies, and hillforts were built to repel such attacks. Only by a concerted attack from an especially large opposing army from another tribe could such defences be overwhelmed. What I’m saying is that the Celts had little experience in the overall field of siege warfare, which encompasses assaulting fortresses as well - I wasn’t referring to the individual act of holding a long siege.

Useless? Hardly. It would still be incredibly difficult for any native invaders to first scale the very steep earthworks and then climb over the palisade without some form of ladders, which I don’t recall the Native Americans ever having. Even without defenders on the ramparts it would still provide a strong amount of protection for those inside against enemies with very little grasp of technology.

All right, but I didn’t know that these examples existed.

I’m surprised you show such an active disagreement towards my ideas even after you thought they were initially good.

 

Three rings would allow someone in charge to say: ...cattle to the left, ...pigs to the right, ...sheep to the top.

Market days or tax days or a yearly thing.

There comes a point in the annual calendar of an organized but agrarian society when it is time to gather the herds, decide which animals to butcher, corral the ones that need shearing, gather them all up, make a count, tax accordingly.

And then there is wintering. People, hay barns, and granaries on the top level. Sheep, Cattle, Pigs each in their own Zone/Level. Wolves and Bears on the outside...having a sad. Poor wolves...

But those three-ish ^ paragraphs are me speculating. Just like all the archaeologists[?] you’ve been reading. But different ideas.

What do we really have for evidence? The remaining extant earthworks, one or two digs where numerous arrow tips (that looked like Roman kit) were found, the accounts left by Roman authors. Is there much else?

I can see how you could think that. What I am guilty of is picking and choosing.

You had some excellent ideas mixed in with some (IMNAAHO) dodgy ideas. In this thread I have noted the dodgy ones where I think we’re going to agree to disagree.

I still like the good ideas.

 

Does the part about Solo: A Star Wars story losing money at the box office count as history? Only ask because I liked that!

 

Everything in the past is history!

 

You liked that it lost money or you liked the movie..?

( But answer that in a StarWarsTrek thread! )

 

How come? It happened in the past so it is history... and thus appropriate.

http://www.lustria-online.com/threa...ed-official-trailer.20828/page-11#post-253425

 

I'm sorry, a ruling has already been made:

I do agree that the Solo movie is pretty insignificant though!

 

Obviously the most significant one would be A New Hope as it brought about all the others and changed the movie industry.

 

Agreed - As was the Last Jedi (albeit for generating so much fan hate).

Certainly of all the Disney ones (and perhaps all the films in general) you could argue that Episode VII is the least significant - it’s only real triumph being the first Star Wars film in 10 years.

Look at all the others:
Rogue One recreated the OT very well and fixed a 39-year old plot hole (and the biggest one in the franchise)
The Last Jedi accrued fan hate on a level not seen since Episode I (and even with Episode I people still loved the Maul Lightsaber fight)
Solo was the first Star Wars film to make a loss at the pictures (an ignominious achievement, but still an achievement none the less)

 

I can't agree with that. Episode VII is also significant for making more money than any other Star Wars movie. The new Disney SW movies will have a hard time to dethrone it now that TLJ has created so much hate and negativity.

 

Only because of the hype of it being the first Star Wars film in 10 years. Remember that before Episode VII, Episode I was the highest grossing of them all, I imagine again due to it being the first Star Wars film in a very long time (22 years in Episode I’s case).

 

That's fair, but the fact still remains.

Plus, TFA was still pretty well received by the public. We've definitely seen a shift away from that since TLJ dropped.

 

The Star Force is strong with the @NIGHTBRINGER