There is much more to history

Often the people criticize those who do not follow a certain creed for the same reason all of them. These people do this in most cases because they want an argument no to be made.

I may believe or understand things that some might say it is wrong, or "hateful", but everything I believe is based on things I can know by myself, and I refrain from believing things which have no basis but "that is what someone said", unless it is based on the inconsistency of someone saying something they themselves said otherwise when it mattered.

I introduced this concept, because I want to talk about something. I have studied history for many reasons. Writing, my liking of Conan the Cimmerian, which is heavily inspired by real history. I have been researching history even for my own profession, Accounting and Economics. The roots of those trace back thousands of years, and through cross fact checking, you find unrelated facts that prove other facts.

Trading, in history, proves more things than one might think. For example, there were a city in the Indus Valley that prospered thousands of years ago, bearing advanced politics, infrastructure and government, and the trade in the region at the time proves it did not made wars or conquest. They have survived among the most violent societies of their time by trade and neutrality alone.

Another thing that history of accounting and economics show is the data relating to practices and goods that pertain to a culture, moving around with that culture, defying the narratives of roots and politics of ancient times.

Lots of translations fail to grasp the meaning of documents because they do not relate what they think was written with the realities on the ground. I know for researching facts that many cuneiform and Greek translations are wrong because they often traded with Asian and Middle Eastern peoples, who left readable documents.

You see, Chinese is, undoubtedly, the longest used language you can easily read through thousand of years.

 

Through my knowledge of Chinese I have sought around and learned how the Romans actually spoke Latin, as Chinese dictionaries from the time they existed still around. The meaning is harder to correlate and certain words must be assumed to mean certain things they dont anymore, but it is much easier to relate ancient Chinese to modern Chinese than it is to relate ancient Greek to modern Greek. Reason being the Chinese documents and culture was never completely rewritten like the Greek was.

On that note, several cultures that exist today were also changed in ways they cant trace back their culture to the one of their ancestors. It would be like me saying my being born in Southern Brazil means I am culturally descendant of the Tupi or the Guarani. My ancestry would be closely associated with Middle Eastern and African before it reaches any resemblance of Tupi or Guarani.

Unfortunately, most of our Eurocentric history does that, by ignorance or malice, sometimes both, and distorts the history of many peoples, even themselves. You would be hard pressed to find a Irish person who can really tell the history of their people back a certain time, and some of them, if they know who were their ancestors in reality. And from the Europeans, the Irish still one of the most knowledgeable people about their ancestry. The British in general might tell you a completely verifiably wrong story about their ancestry, because many of them were fed a lie they are unable to research.

Which brings me to the point of this post. Arguing historical reasons for conflict, rights and wars is a dangerous game, and turns dicier the further back you try to justify it. Vladmir Putin was in a certain way smart to keep his history research to a certain level, and not drag the argument to far in the past. The Russian history is very complex, and at a certain point very nebulous, allowing no certainty for what is fact, what is myth. His use of history was kept to the verifiable minimum, which is verifiable and I might go on that sometime.

However, this post I made for my research of another topic bringing me the following video:

This video have caught my attention, even if not really related to the research that brought me it, because it does another type of verification. It searches the claims made throughout the time being inconsistent in themselves, by the same people.

The video also touches on many things I have said in comments and responses to people, so it serves to show that backed research does exist on what I said.

Much of what is said here can also be found in another channel I often watch, and brings this research in other point of view, you might be surprised by:

Do not get offended or ridicule the occult nature of the channel. The EXOTERICA channel has very serious studies on the faith of the people, done by an actual Jewish Scholar, which talks about many things that match the history affirmed by virtually every people who really study the subject.

As I said before, your opinion on the subject might change, but the facts are the facts. If something depends on your opinion to constitute a fact, it is not a fact.

One example I make to my students is the "fact" that gravity is not a fact, but an explanation of the fact that "things fall to the ground". While you may be illiterate and ignorant of physics, you will know soon enough in life that something wont be floating around and soon you understand how birds and planes fly, even if you are not equipped with an explanation for that.

The same way, there are economic, accounting and administrative facts, and they are independent of knowing economics, accounting or bureaucracy. You can simply know something you use gets "consumed" and you might not have it anymore, even if you are completely ignorant of the concept of scarcity.

And that is the real meaning of this post. It is to talk about the fact that you can understand facts without having to understand explanations, and explanations are worth nothing if the facts contradict them.

Prefer the facts.