right?!

I know!!

As long as he never forgets the infamous bath plug story that's all we really need.

sipsWikis

Man of many knowledge

Yea but in terms of the chinese wars they were talking about, these were fairly recent and well documented in comparison to "Ancient wars" which took place 1-2 thousand years before and generally were told through stories and word of mouth through generations.

Wars in China's history did often actually result in the atronomical casualties reported when compared to Western civilisation purely because China has always had an enormously disposable population.

Ancient scholars definitely exagerate, but modern scholars also have a tendency to undersell this stuff too. I recently heard one of them saying a couple of hundred men would have been seen as a large army in ancient times, which is clearly bullshit.

​@@kurukblackflame Maybe, but it'd really depend on the context whether that's underselling or not. As an ancient historian myself, it's important to note that the monicker 'ancient history' is a gross oversimlification in its own right. It can, depending on where arbitrary lines are drawn, span some 5000 years. Over an insane timespan like that, and given the immense differences between regions, it's virtually impossible to generalize about. For instance, while 1000 men wouldn't have been a lot for a massive empire like Rome's, Greek Poleis, which depending on the period were very autonomous, were far from as able to field armies of massive size. Athens had for much of its history only about 100-300.000 or so inhabitants. They'd logically have been able to field an army of some few tens of thousands. And this was one of the largest of all the Poleis. A smaller Polis had maybe 10.000 inhabitants. Take from that 5.000 men, drop all the elderly, infirm and those too young, and suddenly a few hundred men doesn't seem as crazy. The same goes for, say, Germanic warbands, which would likely have consisted of some 500-2000 men. Armies of tens of thousands were the exception and not the rule for much of ancient history. In short, context is absolutely key.

​@@Tofuey 😊

best minecraft block, best war... next one has got to be best 90s grunge / gangster rap artist

To be fair, we've had a lot of bullshit wars in Denmark, in particular between Denmark and Sweden.

‘I wasn’t told about Chinese wars in school because historians are racist’. No Lewis, you’re English and your history comes from Europe you ignorant Lebanese child

@@pokinacha actually he was cookin with that one

@@jacksonross5941I think my fav things is all the European conquerors are super bad but Suliman and other non European conquerors aren’t that bad. I mean the mayans and Incans are well known for slavery, human sacrifice and other nasty shit. But that’s what we come to expect and enjoy about Lewis and his cute ignorance

@@pokinacha what are you talking about

@@pokinacha the Ottoman Empire is European, and honestly the fact that you don’t know that is the racist equivalent of pantsing yourself

We know that Troy existed and had wars with Greek people and was destroyed before the Hellenistic period so the greek thought it as a mythic time as it was before they wrote things down. We dont know for sure if the pre greek people actually killed troy or if another people or event did it. Its very unlikely that events went down like the story even without the mythical elements

Also want to add, I love how pyrian framed the American Civil War, he has a better understanding than some Americans I've met

And key element in the cause of WW1. Though WW1 had many a cause 👀😅

How does that work

@@jamesgazeley he listens to them, the old ones and the new ones, at the same time

January last year

No it's not. There were wars going on before the one in Ukraine and there will be ones that happen after it's over. Ukraine is not the center of the universe.

Why?

@@butt3428 where have you been last year

@@ctulhuone Buddy theres always a war happening somewhere. There's literally never been a period in recorded history where someone wasn't at war with someone else. To not release an episode discussing wars just because 2 countries are currently at war with each other is just silly

@@butt3428 i'm from russia

No it was 100% about slavery. The southern states succeeded because Lincoln was against the western territories becoming slaves states. Whether it was from a purely humanitarian standpoint or not is definitely debatable, but there is no way to spin it that doesn't lead back to slavery in some way.

@@ohy3ah97 Sorry but you are wrong. That might be what history teachers tell you but take a look at ukposts.info/have/v-deo/g5ykmYejpaFks2w.html timestamp 1:10:20h if you can even see the link