• DOI/PMID/ISBN: N/A
• [URL]https://archives.datapages.com/data/hgssp/data/016/016001/107_hgs0160107.htm
• Deltas in Their Geologic Framework, 1966, Pages 107-124

PART 2: THE LONG AND TUMULTUOUS SHARED HISTORY OF ROMANCE AND GERMANIC NATIONS

This is Part 2-D-η, the direct continuation of 2-D-ζ, which you can find here: https://www.reddit.com/r/AttackOnRetards/comments/rjxxzr/continuation_of_my_previous_posts_about_the/

2-D: THE OTHER ROMANCE AND GERMANIC NATIONS IN THE MIDDLE AGES

2-D-η: ROMAN AND MEDIEVAL NETHERLANDS

Roman Era

ROMAN SETTLEMENTS IN THE NETHERLANDS

https://preview.redd.it/b7rang3gvh981.png?width=782&format=png&auto=webp&s=e8f401547411e798278ee6b786835f0d78aeaf6d

During the Gallic Wars, the Belgic area south of the Oude Rijn and west of the Rhine was conquered by Roman forces under Julius Caesar in a series of campaigns from 57 BC to 53 BC. The tribes located in the area of the Netherlands at this time did not leave behind written records, so all the information known about them during this pre-Roman period is based on what the Romans and Greeks wrote about them. One of the most important is Caesar's own Commentarii de Bello Gallico. Two main tribes he described as living in what is now the Netherlands were the Menapii, and the Eburones, both in the south, which is where Caesar was active. He established the principle that the Rhine defined a natural boundary between Gaul and Germania Magna. But the Rhine was not a strong border, and he made it clear that there was a part of Belgic Gaul where many of the local tribes (including the Eburones) were "Germani cisrhenani", or in other cases, of mixed origin.

Starting about 15 BC, the part of the Rhine in the Netherlands came to be defended by the Lower Limes Germanicus. After a series of military actions, the Rhine became fixed around 12 AD as Rome's northern frontier on the European mainland. A number of towns and developments would

Hi all! It is me again, here to bring you another long post about something I found interesting in historical literature. For those of you who do not know, I have a background in medicine and public health. I do not claim to be an expert, but I love to share my knowledge when I can with you all!

The phenomena known as “dancing mania” occurred primarily in mainland Europe between the 14th and 17th centuries. At the time of onset, many theories that surrounded the cause of the dance ranged from religious cults, possession, and the Devil himself. More modern takes speculate that the rash of people dancing was in part to relieve themselves of the stress of poverty and plague that threatened the lives of many.

During manic dancing, groups of people (ranging from tens to thousands) would find themselves dancing erratically until they collapsed from exhaustion and injuries. The mania wasn’t limited to just one demographic; men, women, and children were all equally affected by this pull to dance, eventually affecting thousands of people over the course of several centuries. To this date, there is no consensus among modern-day scholars as to the cause of this dancing plague.

Etiology and Historical Context

“Dancing mania” is derived from the formal term “choreomania,” Greek for choros (dance) and mania (madness). It has several other identifiable names, such as St. John’s Dance, tarantism, and St. Vitus’ Dance. The origins behind the association with St. John the Baptist and St. Vitus originate from the concept that these two saints had sent a curse that caused the dancing mania. This becomes significant upon learning that many victims of the dancing mania often ended their dances at places dedicated to that saint, who then began fervent praying to end the dancing. It also becomes significant when realizing that incidents had been noted to break out around the time of the feast of St. Vitus.

As an interesting side note: St. Vitus was reportedly diagnosed in the 17th century as having an illness referred to as Syndenham chorea. This is a type of autoimmune disease that results from childhood infection with a specific strain of Streptococcus bacteria. However, this disease has been noted to be more common in females and typically affects children aged 5 to 15, with nearly all adult causes being recurrences following childhood chorea.

The dancing mania has also been known as “epidemic chorea,” with chorea being defined as a disease of the nervous s

Happy new year, first of all.

I've posted on here twice in the past year, to show off the latest incarnations of my "leader list", my slightly dumb hobby of identifying and ranking the greatest military commanders in history. My last two posts can be found at the following links, for reference:

https://www.reddit.com/r/history/comments/5ykj3a/the_top_100_commanders_of_history_my_list_a_long/

https://www.reddit.com/r/history/comments/764ned/the_300_greatest_commanders_of_history/

I said last time that I was working on a book. The book is being worked on...slowly. I've started my Master's Degree in Military History, so that takes up a lot of my time. My wife says I might be borderline autistic...which sounds about right. At about 11pm each night, she taps on my computer screen or the spine of my book and goes "Say goodnight to General....I can't pronounce that." Nevertheless, here it is: my best stab at the Top 300 Generals in History (and the Top 50 Admirals, and some flyboys for good measure).

In response to criticism and suggestions from all of you, I have also separated out the naval and air commanders into their own lists. It doesn't make much sense to compare Nelson with Caesar.

Thanks to Reddit character limits, I can only include so much in this post. I think you'll find the format much improved over my last two posts, but that squeezes out my criteria from my last two posts. I will be re-posting the criteria, and another list there wasn't room for, in the comments.

For your ease, I've also included some keys so you know who's been promoted, demoted, or added since the last list two months ago (the second link.)

This leader has been significantly promoted

This leader has been VERY significantly promoted

This leader is a new addition

This leader has been significantly demoted

The 300 Greatest Generals in History

Howdy everyone, as I mentioned in my previous dev diary, due to the upcoming release of the mod, we are streamlining the dev diarys production! This time the topic of our dev diary is the Republic of France, undoubtedly an interesting nation placed in a not exactly comfortable position in Europe as both Germany and the United Kingdom have poor opinion of them and the proximity of their forces is making things rather heated.

Before we indulge further in the dev diary, I would like to thank all members of the dev team that made this dev diary possible, as well as mention that recruitment for new members of our dev team is still on!

Here comes the French music playlist, so let's begin!
https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PL9v6BYTD2SqKbVaQInxWVgVRAlLp5pcUB

Bienvenue en France!

When the war broke out in 1914 in the face of a wave of protests and provocations in Alsace and Lorraine, no one in Paris expected that it would end with a quick German victory. And frankly, there are many reasons for this failure, one can start with the obsolescence of the French army in relation to its German counterpart, both in terms of equipment and military strategy. One should also mention a total defeat at sea due to the lack of preparation to repel the German-led submarine war. Finally, the failure of French industry to wage total war should be mentioned. The war therefore soon ended in failure due to a general collapse of the front and the signing of the Treaty of Versailles, which humiliated the republic. France was then forced to pay Germany significant war reparations, to give up part of the disputed colonial territories and protectorates, and also had to accept the transfer of the border with Germany to the Moselle-Meuse line. Moreover, in order to save the French budget and in the face of the collapse of a large part of the French colonial system, part of the colonies were sold to Germany and Italy. The humiliation that the French suffered at that time in the struggle for their place in the sun made the republic full of retaliatory and chauvinistic slogans of demagogues from virtually every side of the political spectrum. Moreover, France's stability is not favored by the fact that, under the peace treaty, they were forced to withdraw their right to exile, which allowed for the resumption of t

The Talleyrand Plan was a proposal developed at the London Conference of 1830 by the French ambassador to Britain Charles Maurice de Talleyrand, to partition Belgium. This Plan was a response to the Belgian Revolution in which the the Belgians won their independence from the Dutch and declared their own kingdom. The Great Powers eyed the situation with intrigue and hoped to grab chunks of Belgium for themselves.

The French put forward several proposals in the Talleyrand Plan

-The province of Antwerp — except the city of Antwerp itself — and Limburg, west of the Meuse river — except Maastricht — would remain in the Netherlands, as would a small part of the province of Brabant, the former Oranje Lordship of Diest;

-The parts of the provinces of Liège, of Limburg and of Namur east of the Meuse river as well as the cities of Maastricht, Namur and Liège and the Grand Duchy of Luxembourg would go to Prussia;

-Part of the province of East Flanders, nearly all of the province of Brabant, the province of Hainaut and the province of Namur west of the Meuse would be assigned to France;

-West Flanders, most of East Flanders, including Zeelandic Flanders, and the city of Antwerp were to form the Free State of Antwerp, under British protection. It would have been more or less a restored County of Flanders at the river Scheldt.

The Plan never went into effect because “France have can’t have nice things” had been British Foreign policy for over 400 years at that point. Also, to Britain, Belgium was seen as an important Buffer State that would limit the scale of any future Franco-Prussian War...in theory

What would happen if the British agreed and the Plan to partition Belgium between its Neighbors went into effect?

Talleyrand Plan Map

Weekend Off-Topic Discussion 21 May 21: F-104 Starfighter

One of the things I appreciate about stupidpol is that historical analysis allows posters to not only observe current events, but also to look to the past and identify the underlying material conditions at work. I thought I it would be nice to use one specific example to explore this connectivity. Starting with a current headline about the Military Industrial Complex and looking to a past example I would guess is less familiar, we can see how the Military Industrial Complex functions beyond individual programs but as a system.

Past is Prologue: The F-35

It was no surprise to me yesterday to see the following headline in one of the trade papers: The F-35’s Painful Lessons Must Inform Future Programs. It would be fair to say that even on reddit’s front page it is accepted that the F-35 has been a costly failure, if not as an aircraft, then as a program. Despite that, even as the enormity of the mismanagement and cost of the program comes to light, 130 lawmakers just voted to purchase more. This seems to be counterintuitive. Why reward a failed program with purchases when the USAF admits outright the F-35 has not met expectations, and has opted to keep existing types in service longer rather than accept deliveries of the F-35 at the predicted rate? The Navy and Marine variants have even more problems - the Marine Vertical Take-off and Landing F-35 melts the flight decks of Amphibious Assault Ships. Mistakes are learning opportunities, and so we would expect disastrous mistakes to result in significant lessons learnt. What "painful lessons" have been learnt by the Defence Industry from the myriad difficulties and failures of the F-35 program?

A closer look reveals that they may not have actually learnt very much at all. One headline in a defence publication reads ["F-35 in the crosshairs: Despite criticism America needs the fighter jet"](https://www.defensenews.com/

At the end of the 18th century, the great powers of Europe were Britain, France, Russia, Spain, the Ottoman Empire, and a revitalized and centralized Holy Roman Empire dominated by the Habsburg-Hohenzollern monarchy. During the century, the HRE experienced a major rebirth under enlightened H-H leadership. It grew back to span Germany, Italy, the Low Countries, and Burgundy. Although still keeping considerable power, Spain and more so the Ottoman Empire were in decline, while Sweden had lost the status of great power. Under Imperial influence, Hungary and Poland experienced a similar, if less impressive, rebirth into respectable middle powers.

The Habsburg-Hohenzollern monarchy was born out of the dynastic union of Prussia and Austria in the early 18th century, through the marriage of Frederick of Hohenzollern and Maria Theresa of Habsburg. The original divergence occurred in 1687 when the elder daughters of future Queen Anne of Great Britain and Ireland avoided catching smallpox, survived into adulthood, and had issue. Therefore, Britain never formed a personal union with the Electorate of Hanover. The Glorious Revolution and the Acts of Union took place much as usual. Events stayed broadly the same across Europe until Frederick and Marie Therese were born in 1712 and 1717 respectively with slightly different personalities.

He became heterosexual and fond of female companionship, and she grew to become just as appreciative of Enlightenment ideas as her future husband was and more tolerant in religious matters. Finally, in the 1720s-1730s, their fathers Frederick William I and Charles VI shared a bold leap of insight. A dynastic marriage between their heirs would combine the talents and resources of their Houses and help them pursue compatible ambitions in and out of the HRE. It would also help Austria weather the coming trouble of a female succession.

The plan went successful beyond anyone’s expectations. Much as the Catholic Kings had done in Spain, Frederick and Maria Theresa built a solid political and personal partnership based on similar talents and interests. They had a happy marriage with a large number of children. A compromise solution similar to the one Saxony had adopted neatly settled the thorny issue of religion. The new dynasty was nominally Catholic, but in practice kept its religion a private issue. It ensured religious tolerance for its subjects as a cornerstone of domestic policy.

The merger of the talents and resources of Austria and

Thanks go to this post for changing my views on fantasy maps. https://www.reddit.com/r/worldbuilding/comments/pcj4w9/you_know_what_im_tired_of_100_accurate_fantasy/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=web2x&context=3

The idea is that fantasy maps are diegetic: they represent how people within the world view where they live; these maps don't necessarily show the physical reality of the world.

With that in mind I went in search of medival maps and came across the Hereford Mappa Mundi, which shows how the world was understood and mapped in the Medieval ages.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hereford_Mappa_Mundi

It has splitting rivers.

I believe this are actually rivers joined at their headwaters, and that they aren't rivers in the modern sense of the word as watersheds. They are waterways. The medieval mappers were interested in where you can travel by boat, not at all in the flow of water.

It makes sense for diegetic maps to show waterways (where you can take a boat) and so have splitting rivers. Even though worldbuilders may have to keep water flow in mind when designing a world.

Waterflow determines both biomes and the shape of the land itself. Even in artificial environments such as space habitats, water movement is key, and of highest importance to life support. For a real life example: you may not know how the plumbing or the roof of your house works, but they better d-- well work. If you are designing and building a house, you've got to think about how water moves.

But it all comes down to if the map is non-diegetic or diagetic. Is it a tool used by the worldbuilder or is it what the people of the world see.

I don't want to step on anybody's toes here, but the amount of non-dad jokes here in this subreddit really annoys me. First of all, dad jokes CAN be NSFW, it clearly says so in the sub rules. Secondly, it doesn't automatically make it a dad joke if it's from a conversation between you and your child. Most importantly, the jokes that your CHILDREN tell YOU are not dad jokes. The point of a dad joke is that it's so cheesy only a dad who's trying to be funny would make such a joke. That's it. They are stupid plays on words, lame puns and so on. There has to be a clever pun or wordplay for it to be considered a dad joke.

Again, to all the fellow dads, I apologise if I'm sounding too harsh. But I just needed to get it off my chest.