For the purposes of claroty on my comment below:
The reason for a modern program of non-European immigration into the UK is to bring in non-Christians. i know this for a fact. I know those behind it. And I mention them constantly.
Skin colour is irrelevant. Don't bring it up. Once again, the target is Christianity.
Anti-white sentiment is just a cover. Those ultimately behind it have no real interest in the colour of your skin. They just want you to think they do. They shall happily encourage white nationalism in the shadows because it serves their purpose of division for conquest and can cause a useful backlash.
What they are really targeting is European Christianity. Articles like this one can come from those who know full well what they are doing and those who don't. The latter are like white nationalists, in being unwitting spreaders of half-truth.
I know that whenever I see the name of this author we're generally in for another, less-than-subtle, anti-white, anti-western, anti-men bashing session. She can't help herself.
And I'm female btw so I'm not just repelled by her obvious disdain for the people, cultures and processes that have brought her into this world.
It's absolutely par for the course that academia is now shoehorning such pieces into everything. As Brits, we know we're a diverse bunch but longstanding, native Brits contributions TO Britain is always, always underplayed and there are now so many agendas in academic writing, particularly assaults from afar and from many people who, even if based in Britain, rarely seem to see life across this island from anything other than a Leftwing, elite-presenting, finger-wagging academic culture.
It's a No, Cecilia. Not a no to how you choose to write or how you conduct your thoughts. It's simply a personal No to your endless underlying wokery and how you drain any fun out of this website.
As a Brit in Britain, I live here and always will, and you don't.
This type of leftwing propaganda narrative has no place on this site. The perspective here presented by the author is manipulative postmodern nonsense. Very disappointing.
“It was always the women, and above all the young ones, who were the most bigoted adherents of the Party, the swallowers of slogans, the amateur spies and nosers-out of unorthodoxy.” —George Orwell, 1984
Yikes the anti-white bias on this site has become absurd. It's like reading the BBC. Immigration isn't essential to British identity. Britain is being conquered. I just canceled my membership.
Too little voltage for any practical use, even if more “batteries” were put in series, because of the voltage drop of those primitve (would be) connections. Most probably mainstrean archaeology is right, just a jar for storing documents.
I really like Paul Harper's YouTube account. It's full of 'off the beaten track' and underreported history. He just gets out there and goes sleuthing. This story is particularly interesting if you're keen to learn more about England and ultimately Britain's buried and rather undersung-by-the-mainstream history.
His book about Cerdic comes out on the 30th April too. Should put even more meat on the bones.
Yes, I believe there were some fascinating “fats” during the Hellenistic Age: animal fats, olive oil, etc. But, primarily, there were some fascinating “facts” during the Hellenistic Age.
There are many examples of Roman lead coffins, this is just the first one found in Yorkshire that's all. As for Ice Ages during the Iron Ages, I note it's P Wagner, read a book yet?
What always intrigues me more is how anything found in Britain is always lumped into the 'Roman' category, which is so catch all. These were staggering periods of change, trade, crossover and numerous tribes. We are always left to assume that by 'Roman' these finds must be 'of Rome' yet there's no idea whether they were, or were just OF that Roman era of British history. And which would therefore throw the door wide open to other explanations.
Of course we can never fully know, but the moniker is handed out very liberally to items, practices or peoples that may ultimately turn out not to be a direct product of Rome or a Roman/fully Roman tradition.
I'm not a purist of any group, and ultimately actual products of Rome are what they are. I'd just like to see more accuracy reflected within academia, rather than us left to assume because of gaps.
Dear Wu, thank you for the nice strory! I have a question. Can you help me with some information about an inscription in the Edfu Temple containing the very large number 1.333.330? I saw its photo (https://www.reddit.com/media?url=https%3A%2F%2Fpreview.redd.it%2Fthe-num...) but with no indication. I would be grateful to obtain your answer on my mail [email protected].
Alternatively, how about a place for fledgling historical fiction writers to get feedback for accuracy sake?
I have a work in progress setting Moses’s fleeing Egypt near the end of Amenhotep III’s reign and would love to share the link (writing it on Google Docs so it can be shared) to get historical critiques
"Despite his young age, Lorenzo proved to be a skilled politician and diplomat, adept at navigating the complex web of alliances and rivalries that characterized Italian city-states at the time. He skillfully maintained the Medici's grip on power..."
It is said that power corrupts but, in reality, it attracts the already corrupted. The Medicis were very attracted to power. Should we be praising Lorenzo's skill, or condemning his family's corruption?
Historians too often glorify that which has little inherent glory. Being a patron of the arts, for example, does not paint over one's corruption in the eyes of God. But then the Medicis only pretended to look to God. It is telling that the education Lorenzo received is described as "humanist" rather than 'Godly'.
Here you can navigate quickly through all comments made in any article sorted by date/time.
The UK refugee program could bring in persecuted Indian Christians, who can even be killed by Hindu nationalists. Does it?
No. They're Christians.
For the purposes of claroty on my comment below:
The reason for a modern program of non-European immigration into the UK is to bring in non-Christians. i know this for a fact. I know those behind it. And I mention them constantly.
Skin colour is irrelevant. Don't bring it up. Once again, the target is Christianity.
Anti-white sentiment is just a cover. Those ultimately behind it have no real interest in the colour of your skin. They just want you to think they do. They shall happily encourage white nationalism in the shadows because it serves their purpose of division for conquest and can cause a useful backlash.
What they are really targeting is European Christianity. Articles like this one can come from those who know full well what they are doing and those who don't. The latter are like white nationalists, in being unwitting spreaders of half-truth.
I know that whenever I see the name of this author we're generally in for another, less-than-subtle, anti-white, anti-western, anti-men bashing session. She can't help herself.
And I'm female btw so I'm not just repelled by her obvious disdain for the people, cultures and processes that have brought her into this world.
It's absolutely par for the course that academia is now shoehorning such pieces into everything. As Brits, we know we're a diverse bunch but longstanding, native Brits contributions TO Britain is always, always underplayed and there are now so many agendas in academic writing, particularly assaults from afar and from many people who, even if based in Britain, rarely seem to see life across this island from anything other than a Leftwing, elite-presenting, finger-wagging academic culture.
It's a No, Cecilia. Not a no to how you choose to write or how you conduct your thoughts. It's simply a personal No to your endless underlying wokery and how you drain any fun out of this website.
As a Brit in Britain, I live here and always will, and you don't.
This type of leftwing propaganda narrative has no place on this site. The perspective here presented by the author is manipulative postmodern nonsense. Very disappointing.
“It was always the women, and above all the young ones, who were the most bigoted adherents of the Party, the swallowers of slogans, the amateur spies and nosers-out of unorthodoxy.” —George Orwell, 1984
Yikes the anti-white bias on this site has become absurd. It's like reading the BBC. Immigration isn't essential to British identity. Britain is being conquered. I just canceled my membership.
Too little voltage for any practical use, even if more “batteries” were put in series, because of the voltage drop of those primitve (would be) connections. Most probably mainstrean archaeology is right, just a jar for storing documents.
How cleopatra says that no man can will see her tomb.
A good write up. Thanks for this.
I really like Paul Harper's YouTube account. It's full of 'off the beaten track' and underreported history. He just gets out there and goes sleuthing. This story is particularly interesting if you're keen to learn more about England and ultimately Britain's buried and rather undersung-by-the-mainstream history.
His book about Cerdic comes out on the 30th April too. Should put even more meat on the bones.
I was ready to make to same comment, but you put it nicely.
Yes, I believe there were some fascinating “fats” during the Hellenistic Age: animal fats, olive oil, etc. But, primarily, there were some fascinating “facts” during the Hellenistic Age.
It’s a typo, I know. But it’s a fun one.
Occam’s razor method suggests that that story is just an urban myth.
A Pharoah could believe that a name could have power over him, but that nine plagues weren't enough to show power over him...
Nor ten for that matter. Hence the pursuit in the Exodus.
This is what happens when people think themselves to be gods. They ignore God.
I stopped reading at "Y. Harari’s excellent book Jewish Magic before the Rise of Kabbalah."
I have no doubt God would describe it as something other than excellent. The Devil, on the other hand...
There are many examples of Roman lead coffins, this is just the first one found in Yorkshire that's all. As for Ice Ages during the Iron Ages, I note it's P Wagner, read a book yet?
What always intrigues me more is how anything found in Britain is always lumped into the 'Roman' category, which is so catch all. These were staggering periods of change, trade, crossover and numerous tribes. We are always left to assume that by 'Roman' these finds must be 'of Rome' yet there's no idea whether they were, or were just OF that Roman era of British history. And which would therefore throw the door wide open to other explanations.
Of course we can never fully know, but the moniker is handed out very liberally to items, practices or peoples that may ultimately turn out not to be a direct product of Rome or a Roman/fully Roman tradition.
I'm not a purist of any group, and ultimately actual products of Rome are what they are. I'd just like to see more accuracy reflected within academia, rather than us left to assume because of gaps.
Dear Wu, thank you for the nice strory! I have a question. Can you help me with some information about an inscription in the Edfu Temple containing the very large number 1.333.330? I saw its photo (https://www.reddit.com/media?url=https%3A%2F%2Fpreview.redd.it%2Fthe-num...) but with no indication. I would be grateful to obtain your answer on my mail [email protected].
With best wishes,
Hear,Hear!
Alternatively, how about a place for fledgling historical fiction writers to get feedback for accuracy sake?
I have a work in progress setting Moses’s fleeing Egypt near the end of Amenhotep III’s reign and would love to share the link (writing it on Google Docs so it can be shared) to get historical critiques
"Despite his young age, Lorenzo proved to be a skilled politician and diplomat, adept at navigating the complex web of alliances and rivalries that characterized Italian city-states at the time. He skillfully maintained the Medici's grip on power..."
It is said that power corrupts but, in reality, it attracts the already corrupted. The Medicis were very attracted to power. Should we be praising Lorenzo's skill, or condemning his family's corruption?
Historians too often glorify that which has little inherent glory. Being a patron of the arts, for example, does not paint over one's corruption in the eyes of God. But then the Medicis only pretended to look to God. It is telling that the education Lorenzo received is described as "humanist" rather than 'Godly'.
Pages