-
We have updated our Community Code of Conduct. Please read through the new rules for the forum that are an integral part of Paradox Interactive’s User Agreement.
Tell me when the 30 Years War comes around again so I can study it more closely this time.
Originally posted by Murmurandus
................
BTW History is never objective (mostly written by whoever wins)
Not quite true in the case of the Vikings IMHO.
Originally posted by Styrbiorn
No it doesn't, just take a look at the definition of "traitor".
The word traitor is not a completely objective term.
Originally posted by Sonny
Not quite true in the case of the Vikings IMHO.
Well you still have William the Conqueror, who had Vikingblood and made England what it is today.
Originally posted by Sonny
Tell me when the 30 Years War comes around again so I can study it more closely this time.
Maybe start studying the Gulf War, that is a bit more likely
Originally posted by beowulf
It would be more true to say that the ones that write history are the winners.
In the case of ancient times, the ones that wrote on the most durable material are the winners.
Ah, then we can agree on this one. It's just a matter of wording
Originally posted by Dark Knight
Put it in the right subforum next time!
Very difficult in the new layout
No, it's just as easy for moderators as before.Originally posted by Murmurandus
Very difficult in the new layout
Re: Re: rebels..
It was considered the second largets in Europe during much of that time. The surrender to numerical inferior Russian troppas is the darkets point in Swedish military history.Originally posted by beowulf
There is a fortress called Sveaborg ('Soumenlinna' in finish), that was built between 1748 and 1772. I think it was the largest swedish fortress of the time.
