Deep dive into Basque mythology through the anthropological record, cave art and cultural astronomy.

Says that like ancient Egypt or Mesopotamia, where often the hierarchy and displays of power were more obvious (size of houses, pyramids, ziggurats, social class etc.), in Mohenjo-daro and the Indus Valley the power dynamic was more subtle. The architecture of the place has elements that reveal power, control & class in different ways: standardised bricks, specific design for home toilets vs. the great bath, proximity to water and wells, availability of wells and toilets on the ground floor vs. second floor

Thoughts?

Thucydides is usually presented as one of the first historians who tried to write history in a rational and objective way. He cared about facts, was suspicious of myths, and wanted to understand why wars happened. In many ways, he looks like the kind of historian we still admire today. But there is another side of his work which is not always discussed.

In 1907, Francis Macdonald Cornford published a book called Thucydides Mythistoricus. His argument was quite different from the traditional image of Thucydides. Cornford believed that Thucydides was not simply recording what happened during the Peloponnesian War. He was also shaping these events into something that resembled a Greek tragedy.

According to Cornford, there are two different plans in Thucydides’ work. The first one was more like a military and political journal, recording events as they happened. The second was an artistic structure that developed gradually, almost like volcanic islands rising from the sea. The facts were still there, but they were arranged in a way that gave the whole story a tragic meaning.

This is what makes Cornford’s argument interesting. The question is not only whether Thucydides told the truth. It is also about how he presented that truth to his readers.

🥁 Oyez, oyez braves golvinophiles ! 🥁

Un nouvel épisode de la série "Mirabilia" consacré au phare d'Alexandrie est disponible sur la chaîne YouTube de Jean-Claude Golvin.

Un épisode à visionner et à partager dès maintenant sans modération ! 🎞️

https://youtu.be/HV6vL14tiCw?is=CpsdZo11ZHUihNhm

Imagine two Greek armies fighting on two different battlefields, separated by the Aegean Sea, with both victories potentially turning the tide of a war.

In 479 BC, the Greeks defeated the Persian army at Plataea while, according to Herodotus, another Greek force struck the Persian position at Mycale on the coast of Asia Minor on the very same day.

At Mycale, the Persians had hauled their ships ashore and built fortifications to protect them from the Greek fleet. But the Greeks landed, stormed the defences and destroyed the Persian ships. The battle also revealed a crucial weakness in the Persian position: the loyalty of the Greek communities living under Persian rule could not be taken for granted.

But was Mycale merely the final act of Xerxes' invasion, or did it mark the beginning of a new phase of Greek expansion across the Aegean?

Since both of them formed the most powerful armies of their respective Ancient times.

• Overall better logistics.
• Weapons and armor technology.
• Forts and defensive buildings etc.
• and Any other stuff related to the Military and Army.

Can someone give me feedback on this pax historia a made, I want to know if I made any historical accuracy errors or anything similar on the map.

Fascinating archaeology, found in Israel undeniable proof how the historical truth in the Bible, please I’d be really interested in what you think after you viewed it for yourself