Rockin' in the free world since 2005.

[Total: 29    Average: 3/5]
24 Comments - View/Add
Hits: 4681
Rating: 3
Category:
Date: 01/09/05 12:58 PM

24 Responses to Eyewitness to History

  1. Profile photo of buddy
    buddy Male 30-39
    10116 posts
    January 9, 2005 at 12:57 pm
    Link: Eyewitness to History - History through the eyes of those who witnessed it.

    :-)

  2. Profile photo of niccole
    niccole Female 18-29
    519 posts
    January 9, 2005 at 1:46 pm
    This is very interesting!
  3. Profile photo of HOBYandy
    HOBYandy Male 18-29
    3060 posts
    January 9, 2005 at 3:38 pm
    this was a really cool site. there need to be more posted like this.
  4. Profile photo of Homer1234
    Homer1234 Male 18-29
    597 posts
    January 9, 2005 at 3:59 pm
    Extremly interesting!
  5. Profile photo of Bloing
    Bloing Male 18-29
    67 posts
    January 9, 2005 at 4:54 pm
    Yes, history, of course, everyone knows that there is no history beyond the West, all there is are the Ancient World, Middle Ages, Renaissance, 17th Century, 18th Century, Civil War, Old West, 20th Century, WWI and WWII. Forget about Prehistory, Mesopotamia, Egypt, Assyria, Persia, India, Arabia, South-America, China, Russia, Africa, Japan, Australia, those parts have no history! (much less a written culture, right?) All hail the West (and especially the USA), the only Empire With History!

    The thick-headed imbecile(s) who made this `history` website should change the subtitle to "Pre-American Western and American History, by which we mean the United States of America". Any other one is too arrogant. But then again, why do I even bother, just another piece of excrement on the internet.

  6. Profile photo of nondescript0
    nondescript0 Male 18-29
    117 posts
    January 9, 2005 at 6:55 pm
    I really liked this site. Okay, so it`s not completely comprehensive and focuses on every single culture that ever existed, but that would be unrealistic. I hate how so many people look at history and wonder - Where are the women? Every single minority group? The non-Western cultures? The West, which was dominant for so many years, and the politicians/monarchs were the ones who made history, and we have easier access to the documents they wrote.
  7. Profile photo of PirateMeghan
    PirateMeghan Female 18-29
    151 posts
    January 9, 2005 at 7:03 pm
    Well, since the definition of `prehistory` is `the time before written historical records,` prehistoric cultures probably didn`t have much in the way of a written culture. And it`s also possible that the curator of this site is having a tough time finding eyewitness accounts of the earlier civilizations that you mention.

    "History" is a pretty damn broad topic, so just because not every culture is listed on the site (yet) doesn`t mean that the webmaster is a "thick-headed imbecile" or arrogant. Hell, he might just be short on bandwidth.

    And let`s not forget that most American schools only recently expanded the curriculum to include people who were not white and male. About damn time, but late is better than never.

    In short, lay off.

  8. Profile photo of JLiu
    JLiu Female 30-39
    863 posts
    January 9, 2005 at 7:19 pm
    Bloing makes some good points. I believe this site is aimed at American school kids. But that`s just an easy excuse. I did find the site interesting, but lacking. It is deviant in it`s attempt to show a different point of view, or rather, take on a situation in herstory.
  9. Profile photo of pandapo0h
    pandapo0h Female 18-29
    242 posts
    January 9, 2005 at 11:31 pm
    i REALLY ENJOYED THAT. i L0VE HiST0RY AND SEEiNG THiNGS AB0UT/FR0M HiST0RY. i L0VE G0iNG T0 MUSEUMS AS WELL. THE 0NLY THiNG THAT KiLLS HiST0RY F0R ME, iS A B0RiNG HiST0RY TEACHER HAHA.
  10. Profile photo of whatup09
    whatup09 Male 18-29
    169 posts
    January 10, 2005 at 8:18 am
    that was very interesting. thanks for the history lesson
  11. Profile photo of Rich_in_VA
    Rich_in_VA Male 40-49
    110 posts
    January 10, 2005 at 11:04 am
    Excellent site. If you want a site that focuses on non-Western history, why don`t you start one?
  12. Profile photo of Rich_in_VA
    Rich_in_VA Male 40-49
    110 posts
    January 10, 2005 at 11:05 am
    Also, how can you have a history site about prehistory???
  13. Profile photo of Bloing
    Bloing Male 18-29
    67 posts
    January 10, 2005 at 12:20 pm
    Because, you bunch of retarded monkeys, history can be recorded even if there is no written culture. For example, oral tradition, it`s quite reliable because of the social structures which perpetuate the general outline of a story. In Africa for example, historians were able to guess the meaning of bald puppets found in a grave, hundreds of years old, because stories from the current tribes speak of messengers who were shaved bald so they would be recognised and not attacked. In medieval Europe, there was not a very large written culture, so people relied on given words and promises of truth instead. Sometimes it took centuries before a story was written down , it worked because of the social repercussions if one would lie (perjury was very severely punished). So that is why oral history can complement (or replace) written history.
  14. Profile photo of Bloing
    Bloing Male 18-29
    67 posts
    January 10, 2005 at 12:21 pm
    Archaeology, Sociology, Anthropology, Biology, Chemistry, etc. All these can tell us how those people (most likely) lived or what happened in history (Troy was dug up and apparently, it did not happen as it is described in the Iliad of Homer, so here we have an example of non-written history`s superiority to written history). And it`s not as though the Inuit or Hottentots changed much in their behavioural pattern in over 2000 years, they`ve probably always been as they were (before Western culture came along), cultural evolution is a (very) slow process, especially when you never go beyond primitive technology.
    Also, written sources (sorry to shock some of you naive persons) are not always correct, hell, they`re never completely correct because mostly only one author`s point of view, years of copying, contradictions (in text or in other texts), misreading, changing or wrongly recording (sometimes deliberately), etc.
  15. Profile photo of Bloing
    Bloing Male 18-29
    67 posts
    January 10, 2005 at 12:21 pm
    If you are only going to rely on written sources to write history, you`ll not be able to make much of it.
    The point is, there is no "prehistory" as such, there are always traces to be found by which we can deduce the most likely habitus of those people. And not all times had written testimonies of what happened in that particular year.
    So my point is: You can speak of prehistory and what happened (it does not require an archaeology degree to see that if there are ashes somewhere, there has been a fire, now does it?)
  16. Profile photo of Bloing
    Bloing Male 18-29
    67 posts
    January 10, 2005 at 12:21 pm
    Why am I even bothering, all of you are thick-skulled anyway:

    "he might just be short on bandwidth" If you would be so kind as to read the page for few moments, perhaps it would dawn to you that the owner is Ibis Communications, that`s right, a company, so I doubt they can`t buy enough bandwidth.

    "If you want a site that focuses on non-Western history, why don`t you start one?" Yes, and when I want a world-class literary work, I`ll write one myself, If I want a brilliant opera, I`ll compose one myself. I see your point: if you want to find something, put it there yourself. Perhaps you get your kicks by hiding your toys and finding them again, but I don`t.

    "how can you have a history site about prehistory?" Listen you barely evolved simian, go climb a tree and suck on a banana. Prehistory is still history! Search the crapweb for 5 seconds (I`ll give you a hint: Google: "Prehistory")

  17. Profile photo of Bloing
    Bloing Male 18-29
    67 posts
    January 10, 2005 at 12:22 pm
    I`ve had it with commenting on this site, it`s fine for children age 10, but children suck and shouldn`t get a website designed for them, so this site should be token down (along with the rest of the internet).
  18. Profile photo of PirateMeghan
    PirateMeghan Female 18-29
    151 posts
    January 10, 2005 at 7:45 pm
    Christ, I was going for sarcasm with the "prehistory" comment.

    But anyway, I`m thrilled that you have so much spare time on your hands that you can come here and write six posts for the purposes of proving your superiority, awakening us to such vital topics our own pig-headed ignorance and the patheticness of children, and pointing out so deftly that you have absolutely no understanding of sarcasm.

    It`s a shame that you feel this site should be "token" down, but we `barely evolved simians` enjoy it, almost as much as we enjoy bananas and tabby kittens. You might like it too, if you took the time to bend over and pull that stick out of your ass.

  19. Profile photo of Queen_Kissy
    Queen_Kissy Female 18-29
    63 posts
    January 10, 2005 at 9:45 pm
    My U.S. History classes all required "Eyewitness to America: A look at American history through the eyes...blah blah blah." Anyway, the whole concept is much more interesting when interactive.
  20. Profile photo of Bloing
    Bloing Male 18-29
    67 posts
    January 11, 2005 at 10:44 am
    Yes, I have spare time on my hands, what gave you the hunch? The fact that this site is called i-am-bored perhaps? Dolt. Besides, it took me five minutes to write that post (yes, one post, I had to split it up because this site limits a comment to a thousand characters, which is approximately when idiots start losing their line of thoughts; now why would that be?), but I suppose that seems quite implausible for someone who hasn`t reached the stage of opposable thumbs yet.
    The fact that you like that site is completely your own problem, I merely annotated it and demonstrated (with sarcasm) the fact that it`s title is incorrect and arrogant; but hey, why even bother when dunces like you never listen anyway?
    I would never like this site because, quite contrary to you, I am intelligent. You like it? Fine, stay at the history level of the average person (by which I mean: no knowledge or comprehension whatsoever).
  21. Profile photo of PirateMeghan
    PirateMeghan Female 18-29
    151 posts
    January 11, 2005 at 10:12 pm
    I never actually said I liked the site, I`m pretty ambivilent about it, actually. I just don`t think it`s bad enough that it should evoke the kind of petulance you`re displaying.

    And might I point out that for someone who recently said, quote, "I`ve had it with commenting on this site," you seem to be commenting a great deal.

  22. Profile photo of Bloing
    Bloing Male 18-29
    67 posts
    January 12, 2005 at 7:40 am
    Yes, I see there has been a problem with the pronouns `this`, `that` and the verb `to commentate`.
    My quote "I`ve had it with commentating on this site" meant that I was tired of commentating on that site (eyewitness to history), not that I`d had it with commentating on this site (i-am-bored). Seeing as the verb "to commentate" as a transitive verb uses the preposition `on`, it was an accusative rather than a locative ("on what am I making comments?" rather than "where am I making comments?"). To be completely clear I should`ve used the pronoun `that` rather than `this`, however it should`ve been clear enough from the context, seeing as the topic of my comments here have always been that site (eyewitness...) and not this site (i-am-bored).
  23. Profile photo of PirateMeghan
    PirateMeghan Female 18-29
    151 posts
    January 12, 2005 at 6:17 pm
    Wrong! Scroll up. "I`ve had it with COMMENTING on this site."

    And the accusative case is used with direct objects. You`re thinking of the ablative case. Toodles.

  24. Profile photo of Bloing
    Bloing Male 18-29
    67 posts
    January 13, 2005 at 10:51 am
    It doesn`t matter because the verb `to commentate` came from `commentary`, which is related to the verb `to comment` (which in turn is related to the Latin noun `commentum`). The gerund forms are `commentating` and `commenting`, so basically, there is not much difference whether you use `commentating` or `commenting`. Though `commentating` as an intransitive verb is "making a running commentary on", and is more for sporting matches.

    I referred to the locative and accusative to make the difference in meaning clearer, not as an actual grammar usage, if English would have more/clearer grammatical cases, it would have been clear that I was `making a comment on that site` (accusative) and not `making a comment on this site (locative ablative), cf. velicabam locum / velicabam (in) loco.

    And where was I "thinking of the ablative case."?

Leave a Reply