If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Slate)   The history of the world in one handy little chart   (slate.com) divider line 34
    More: Interesting, zero-sum games, major depression, renewable resources, history, charts, non-fiction books  
•       •       •

3368 clicks; posted to Geek » on 14 Aug 2013 at 3:17 PM (47 weeks ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



34 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest
 
2013-08-14 02:36:20 PM
It needs to go back further and show when the survivors of the Twelve Colonies landed.
 
2013-08-14 03:05:49 PM
Too bad it ended just before the cold war.


Still, a very interesting chart.
 
2013-08-14 03:20:51 PM

Riche: Too bad it ended just before the cold war.


Still, a very interesting chart.


Well, it was created in 1931.
 
2013-08-14 03:27:11 PM
It's unclear what the width of the colored streams is meant to indicate. In other words, if the Y axis of the chart clearly represents time, what does the X axis represent? Did Sparks see history as a zero-sum game, in which peoples and nations would vie for shares of finite resources? Given the timing of his enterprise-he made this chart between two world wars and at the beginning of a major depression-this might well have been his thinking.

So the author just sort of pulled everything out of his ass?
 
2013-08-14 03:28:35 PM
The history of the world minus pre-Columbian Americas in one handy little chart

FTFS
 
2013-08-14 03:31:56 PM

Riche: Too bad it ended just before the cold war.


Still, a very interesting chart.


So no Hitler on ice?
 
2013-08-14 03:32:03 PM
Of course it's flawed, but I remember seeing this in classrooms when I was a kid.  Nice find, subby.  Thanks for the trip down memory lane.
 
2013-08-14 03:32:08 PM
The Seleucid Dynasty was one of the Hellanistic kingdoms that, along with Ptolemaic Egypt, should be shown as an extension of the Greek green block. If not, then Alexander of Macedon should have his own color.
 
2013-08-14 03:38:07 PM
That's just nuts. N-V-T-S, nuts!
 
2013-08-14 03:40:21 PM

llortcM_yllort: It's unclear what the width of the colored streams is meant to indicate. In other words, if the Y axis of the chart clearly represents time, what does the X axis represent? Did Sparks see history as a zero-sum game, in which peoples and nations would vie for shares of finite resources? Given the timing of his enterprise-he made this chart between two world wars and at the beginning of a major depression-this might well have been his thinking.

So the author just sort of pulled everything out of his ass?


Given that the subtitle of the chart is "Relative Power Of Contemporary Nations, States And Empires", I think the writer just didn't read the chart carefully enough and missed that part.
 
2013-08-14 03:44:48 PM

Arkanaut: The history of the world minus pre-Columbian Americas in one handy little chart

FTFS


Somebody didn't actually look at the chart. Pre-Columbia America is on the left side from 1050-1600 AD.
 
2013-08-14 03:46:40 PM
But what was Erik Northman doing?
 
2013-08-14 03:53:55 PM

To The Escape Zeppelin!: Arkanaut: The history of the world minus pre-Columbian Americas in one handy little chart

FTFS

Somebody didn't actually look at the chart. Pre-Columbia America is on the left side from 1050-1600 AD.


Which as we all know, is the entire duration of Pre-Columbian civilizations existed.

//the text was so tiny I couldn't make it out.
 
2013-08-14 04:22:12 PM
Old fashioned Eurocentric idiots detected.  Look at how tiny China's supposed power is, when they were basically the most technological advanced, well armed and organized state in world all the way up till the 1600s, possibly even as late as the 1800s.
 
2013-08-14 04:30:15 PM

Arkanaut: To The Escape Zeppelin!: Arkanaut: The history of the world minus pre-Columbian Americas in one handy little chart

FTFS

Somebody didn't actually look at the chart. Pre-Columbia America is on the left side from 1050-1600 AD.

Which as we all know, is the entire duration of Pre-Columbian civilizations existed.

//the text was so tiny I couldn't make it out.


To be fair in 1931 very little was known about pre-Columbian history outside of a few Spanish sources. Mayan script wasn't deciphered until about the 1970's and the relevant areas were very remote and poorly explored. It wasn't until fairly recently that we got a better grasp of the region's past thanks to a lot of very extensive and painstaking archaeology.

The fact that they were on the list at all shows that the author probably really was going for an unbiased history. I collect old history books and had the book been from even thirty years earlier it's unlikely the Aztecs or Incas would have been mentioned at all except in their interactions with the Spanish. Some of the bias in turn-of-the-century history texts it hilarious and bizarre.
 
2013-08-14 04:30:41 PM

Riche: Too bad it ended just before the cold war.


Still, a very interesting chart.


Yeah, it should have ended with the building of the creationist museum.

/got nothing
 
2013-08-14 04:32:55 PM

Arkanaut: The history of the world minus pre-Columbian Americas in one handy little chart

FTFS


The History of the world MInus ANYWHERE South of roughly the Tropic of Cancer......actually
 
2013-08-14 04:33:19 PM
Missing: Idiocracy.
 
2013-08-14 04:36:49 PM
Maybe this is just Part One?
 
2013-08-14 05:24:35 PM

Cybernetic: Riche: Too bad it ended just before the cold war.


Still, a very interesting chart.

Well, it was created in 1931.


Yeah, i'd love to see 2013, where 60% of the chart is ther USA, 35% is china, and 5% is "everyone else"
 
2013-08-14 06:10:10 PM
First the earth cooled. And then the dinosaurs came, but they got too big and fat, so they all died and they turned into oil. And then the Arabs came and they bought Mercedes Benzes. And Prince Charles started wearing all of Lady Di's clothes. I couldn't believe it.
 
2013-08-14 06:17:50 PM

Zafler: Maybe this is just Part One?


I'm a stand-up philosopher....

Great, a bullsh@t artist...
 
2013-08-14 06:21:02 PM

xenomorpheus: Zafler: Maybe this is just Part One?

I'm a stand-up philosopher....

Great, a bullsh@t artist...


Was expecting more references to that film, to be honest.

/It's good to be the king.
 
2013-08-14 06:42:59 PM
It's nice that they included Egypt, given that Africa isn't there at all otherwise.

/yeah, it's 1931, what did I expect.
//Mongols and Huns lumped together because...
 
2013-08-14 07:07:07 PM

Zafler: xenomorpheus: Zafler: Maybe this is just Part One?

I'm a stand-up philosopher....

Great, a bullsh@t artist...

Was expecting more references to that film, to be honest.

/It's good to be the king.


Piss boy!  Don't forget the shake!
 
2013-08-14 07:44:18 PM
Technically the Byzantines called themselves Romans, were called Romans by others at the time, and were an extension/continuation of the Roman Empire.
 
2013-08-14 08:07:15 PM

LemSkroob: Cybernetic: Riche: Too bad it ended just before the cold war.


Still, a very interesting chart.

Well, it was created in 1931.

Yeah, i'd love to see 2013, where 60% of the chart is ther USA, 35% is china, and 5% is "everyone else"


The 1980s would have been interesting: 50% USA, 45% USSR, 5% everyone else.
 
2013-08-14 09:45:14 PM

Zafler: xenomorpheus: Zafler: Maybe this is just Part One?

I'm a stand-up philosopher....

Great, a bullsh@t artist...

Was expecting more references to that film, to be honest.

/It's good to be the king.


Remember, we art mortal!
 
2013-08-14 10:28:48 PM
Looks like the Histograph you'd get when you finished a game of Civilization III
 
2013-08-15 12:38:53 AM
Does it say " White people win!!!" at the end?

Otherwise it is flawed...
 
2013-08-15 07:49:54 AM
why I no see america take over map? map bad.  bad map, bad.
 
2013-08-15 08:45:49 AM

Dafatone: It's nice that they included Egypt, given that Africa isn't there at all otherwise.

/yeah, it's 1931, what did I expect.
//Mongols and Huns lumped together because...


Because it's painfully Eurocentric and from that perspective one mob of hairy barbarians on horseback riding in from Central Asia is the same as any other.
 
2013-08-15 08:57:40 AM

RicosRoughnecks: Technically the Byzantines called themselves Romans, were called Romans by others at the time, and were an extension/continuation of the Roman Empire.


People called Romanes, they go the house?
 
2013-08-15 10:53:34 AM
The history of evolution one is better and also incorporates the other.

http://www.m4a3.com/pictures/arfcom/Histomap%20of%20Evolution.jpg
 
Displayed 34 of 34 comments

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report