I have always wondered...

[Red October1984]

My big question for you Europeans/Asians out there is this...

How do Germany and Japan teach World War 2 in their schools? How does Germany handle the Holocaust? Do they tell the whole truth? Do they leave some details out because of what happened?

I started thinking one day how this was done. Germany doesn't allow Swastikas or SS Runes....Japan...well...they were so stubborn, I'd like to just know how they handle that part of their history.

If you are European/Asian, I'd like to know how they teach the kids/young people of your country about the war.

I am sorry if this offends you in any way at all. I'm just curious.

[Cybermat47]

That's a good question :hmm2:

[Karle94]

Don`t mentzion zhe war!

[Herr-Berbunch]

Lumping the whole of Asia in with Japan seems a bit much. Almost racist, one might say. :-?

[TarJak]

Lumping the whole of Asia in with Japan seems a bit much. Almost racist, one might say. :-?

Wun might:
http://i2.kym-cdn.com/photos/images/newsfeed/000/157/122/f.gif

[Jimbuna]

I'm from neither country but my belief or understanding is that Germany doesn't go into a great deal of detail and Japan believes it was everyones duty to fight for and protect the Emperor.

I'd be really interested in a detailed response from said nationals myself.

[Dowly]

Looking at the movies Germany makes about WWII, they seem to be quite honest about it. :hmmm:

[Oberon]

I'm from neither country but my belief or understanding is that Germany doesn't go into a great deal of detail and Japan believes it was everyones duty to fight for and protect the Emperor.

I'd be really interested in a detailed response from said nationals myself.

That's the understanding I have as well. Germany is a lot more up front about it though than Japan which seems to periodically attempt a spot of historical revisionism, particularly in regards to its actions in China.

[Stealhead]

I know there are some Germans on here so they can answer it better.As I recall when I was stationed in Germany they did learn about the Holocaust in great detail in fact I am fairly sure that it in their laws that they must learn about it and the general effect of Hitler and all.

It is also illegal to display a swastika or anything specifically related to the Nazi party.You can get arrested for it.I never even saw neo Nazis display any but they would use emblems in the old style writing used during that time and hide SS in some other name so the shirt they wear has lots of letters on it but the important part says something like "Deutschland SS".

In Japan they don't really learn much factual I know this because a friends wife is Japanese she said that they basically have this stylized view of what Japan did during the war kind of middle groundish and idealized and pro Japanese.So it is up to the Japanese person themselves to learn the truth or follow a different line.There are a lot of Japanese that are very much aware of what happened including the atrocities at the same time there are many that have an idealized view.

The rest of Asia was either victims of Japan or a colony of Great Britain or the US or the Neatherlands in which case they generally have the Allied view of the war.China most certainly learns a lot they being most victimized by the Japanese.In Chinese schools all children learn about the American Volunteer Group better known as the Flying Tigers because their actions saved China from being cut off.If you ask an American kid what the AVG or the Flying Tigers where they will have no idea in most cases ask a Chinese kid and they will know what you are talking about.

Also a little known fact about China is that the Communists where much more determined to fight the Japanese than the Kuomintang where and they would go far out of their way to help American aircrews get back to their base even if it was 1,000 miles out of their way most American pilots felt that the general populace was better treated in Communist controlled areas of China.

[Sailor Steve]

Traditionally Japan's official policy has always been to deny wrongdoing of any kind, and to assert that Japan was the victim, being attacked for no apparent reason. Several historians and teachers have tried to change this over the years, with varying success, but sooner or later the government textbook policy seems to come back to that theme.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Japanese_history_textbook_controversies
http://spice.stanford.edu/docs/134

An article from 1988:
http://www.nytimes.com/1988/04/27/world/a-japanese-view-of-world-war-ii-is-attacked.html

The Wiki and Stanford articles indicate that things have gotten better since 1988, but that in the 21st century it's happening all over again.

[Red October1984]

Thank you for the interesting answers. I did not mean to be racist in any way. I do not wish to offend anybody.

But this is interesting. :salute:

[nikimcbee]

Don`t mentzion zhe war!

Maybe the third time a charm....?:hmm2:

[Red October1984]

Maybe the third time a charm....?:hmm2:

Hey...USA 2 Time World War Champs....

It could go either way with a new world war.... We're so messed up right now...

[em2nought]

I don't think I even want to know what "we" teach our kids about our history. I think they probably paint us as racist evildoers. I really hate applying our "PC" current attitudes to history or even to old people for that matter. :arrgh!:

[Red October1984]

I don't think I even want to know what "we" teach our kids about our history. I think they probably paint us as racist evildoers. I really hate applying our "PC" current attitudes to history or even to old people for that matter. :arrgh!:

Where are you from?

[em2nought]

Where are you from?
USA, and once upon a time PA thus that last bit I guess.

My mom asked me if I ever watch porn because it's illegal after watching some Bush comment about underage porn a few years back. I had to explain that not all porn is illegal. She's 87, old folks shouldn't have modern standards applied to them, as they're from a different time.

Luckily she didn't ask if I've ever been "in" porn. :D

[Catfish]

Obviously, regarding the OP i can only speak of Germany :hmm2:

I went to school in the 70ies and 80ies, and we learned of the 'Nazi' atrocities in a lot of courses and lectures, including visiting some of the concentration camps, and seeing original footage of the time, and of the liberating armies.

Which certainly led to some questions regarding our elders .. it is certainly convenient to be born long after this time, and to think of oneself as an all-knowing superior being, and of surely having been a would-be hero against dictators, if only born in those times. You usually do NOT have the hindsight of the time you are living in.

There are also a lot of memory sites, museums and graveyards, along with the holocaust memory sites, and also 'monuments of shame', if you like to call it that.

I do not know though, how and if that much is being told today in Germany, about this time. And after all there is even more german history, than the 12 years of Hitler's dictatorship.

The problem is also the allied re-education project in Germany, there was also a lot of propaganda in it, e.g. WW1 was just explained as the typical german way to declare war to the world and be generally the bad guy. If you look a bit closer it's a lot of smoke and mirrors though. Niall Ferguson's 'The pity of war' is a real eye-opener in that respect. WW1, mind you.


When i look at what is done today in the name of 'freedom', 'helping' other nations or 'defense', and how the media report about atrocities internationally (atrocities and breaking of international law depending on who did it, otherwise it's the road to freedom), and how willingly people wage wars and join them for the 'right cause', i really do not think that people have learned much.

IMHO the problem is that people die too soon - when they have learned enough about how things and propaganda really work they die, and the new kids are as dumb as those in generations before, and they make the same errors again. And again.
How can you know as a kid, that your education is 'right' ?


That said, i think there is still more thinking about the bad old times in Germany, than in most other countries of the world. I do not want to attack our english or american friends, but i seldomly see a national monument of shame about anything, in their special imperial histories.

Thanks and greetings,
Catfish

[Schroeder]

Over here each state has it's own regulations about what is tought in school. The Nazi time was quiet a big part of our history lessons where I went to school.
Even without that everybody knows about the Holocaust and war atrocities committed by German forces here, the topic is pretty omni present. TV shows, memorials etc.

[Red October1984]

Thank you for your posts Catfish and Schroeder. I appreciate it. It answers my question.

One of these days, I hope to go to Germany....I want to go to all the memorials and museums and stuff. I really want to see the U-995.

[Cybermat47]

I really want to see the U-995.

:yep: Don't we all? :O:

[Oberon]

The problem is also the allied re-education project in Germany, there was also a lot of propaganda in it, e.g. WW1 was just explained as the typical german way to declare war to the world and be generally the bad guy. If you look a bit closer it's a lot of smoke and mirrors though. Niall Ferguson's 'The pity of war' is a real eye-opener in that respect. WW1, mind you.

Thanks and greetings,
Catfish

I often wonder if that is part of what has created that sort of subculture of shame that is mentioned, I once read somewhere that the Eastern half of Germany has a bigger problem with Neo-Nazis because the GDR didn't go through the same re-education process that the FDR did. Is there any truth in that?

[Catfish]

Hello Oberon,
I often wonder if that is part of what has created that sort of subculture of shame that is mentioned, I once read somewhere that the Eastern half of Germany has a bigger problem with Neo-Nazis because the GDR didn't go through the same re-education process that the FDR did. Is there any truth in that?
Difficult to say, if it was easy to explain one might be able to do something about it .. i can only try to speak about this from the western part, and point of view.

As long as the GDR existed (or East Germany, until 1989), the official socialist theory 'over there' was that the surviving Nazis had all fled and were all living in the capitalistic western part, while in the socialistic GDR they were all pure as snowflakes and would help the Soviet Union and comrade Stalin and his successors to make the world a better place.
They also had students from abroad like from countries of the eastern soviet block, or Cuba; but indeed inofficially those foreigners were not really liked. You could say that they went on on with their way of control, dislike and dictatorship like under Hitler, but indeed now it was of course for the other side, which made it all good. The system was certainly different (at least theoretically ahem), but in the minds ..

Certainly officially hate against foreigners and the like was all suppressed and censored, but when the old GDR seized to exist in 1989, and the capitalist bright promises of wealth and occupation for everyone failed to come true, a lot of especially younger people were disappointed with both systems, and found their resort in violence and Neonazi groups.
(I will never understand though how so much people in the US and Russia can become Neonazis - they must seriously lack some perception on what it really is about lol).


There is certainly some truth with the Nazis in the west, lots of 'former' Nazis sat in leading positions in the FDR or West Germany, backed by the US, England and France; thousands of 'Nazi' physicians, technicians etc., were now working for the West, from Wernher von Braun to Walter but also lots of less known but not less brilliant scientists. French Mirage jets were flying with the further developed HE 176 Heinkel turbines and helped Israel win their war in the Levante .. lots also worked for the Soviet union though as well. Then there were those US experiments on citizens that did not seem to be far-fetched from what the Nazis did, then the OSS (which later became the CIA), working with the Nazi 'Odessa' and 'Kameradenwerk' networks to help and cover up former Nazis, collecting the remnants of the organisation Gehlen, SD etc. to work with them yaddayadda ... but i digress.

A lot of judges and well-known leaders from the 3rd Reich were again sitting in high positions in West Germany soon after the war, and when the new youth at the universities found that out, there almost was a revolution, in West Germany in 1968.
This constellation of power backed by US and other western Allies led to some sympathy in the west-german students, for the socialist GDR. And for demonstrations against the war in Vietnam, of course.


After all i think this re-education was not such a bright idea for the USA and its satellites, because frankly, now those pesky western germans would now even criticize their western liberators for shortcomings, wars and atrocities, because they were now educated and keen to criticise everyone, from their elevated and self-righteous point of view ..
:O:

Greetings,
Catfish

[Platapus]

I asked The Frau this very question a while ago. She finished her schooling in the 1970's so her answer is dated.

She told me that during the 1960's and early 1970's that History class stopped after WWI with the forming of the Wiemar Republic.

She is sure this has changed since she finished school. But WWII was never mentioned.

[Penguin]

First of all, I don't see RO's question as offending. The way I see it, is that he asked for a European/Asian POV due to the geographic proximity to Germany and Japan rather than lumping them all together.

So here's my personal, limited experience about WW2 history in school:
I attended history classes in West Germany in the 80s until the early 90s, first the "normal" history courses, then I had an focus on history, something the British call A-levels; comparable to the AP program in the US school system.
The timeframe is important to understand for two reasons. First, most parents of us were still born during WW2 and our grandparents participated directly, in a civilian and/or military role. So any old timer you met, was a witness of this time and could share some experiences if they wanted to talk about. It was also not uncommon to share these stories with kids, especiallly when we played war with our plastic soldiers. So by the time we attended our first history lessons, we could say that we already knew much oral history.

The second point is that I attended a learning facility at the time of an important historical debate, the Historikerstreit (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Historikerstreit). I was lucky that I had able teachers who gave us reading material from both positions.

Same as in the US, history was/is taught progressive in schools, so we didn't reach the 1930s untill the late 9th/early10th grade. We also learned some stuff about Weimar and the 3rd Reich in politics and social science, as those are basic fundamentals, important in understanding the foundation of the Federal Republic and its political system.

Before reaching WW2 in history class, we had a focus on WW1 and its aftermatch. Contrary, to Catfish's experience, we learned it more nuanced. So we read Fritz Fischer's (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fritz_Fischer) position on the question of the German responsibility for WW1, but also others like Mommsen. Btw: Fischer developed his thesis the way historians do: through historic research, not through some reeducation program or allied pressure. However this is a point I can write some stuff about tomorrow, when I'm less tired. :03:

Back to the OP's question: Yes, we learned a lot about WW2 in school and also about the Holocaust. Just check the focus you guys in America put on the foundation of the USA and the Civil War, to compare it with the focus we put on 1914-1945, as it is an important part of the German history. Did we learn the whole truth? Well, we learned what was the contemporary historical state of history. Of course many things were left out if you ask me as a historical interested person (avoiding the word "history buff" to keep Hottentott calm :O:)
A big part was about internal German politics, to understand how Hitler rose to power, to understand how life in the Reich was for its citizens and to try to understand how the big slaughter began.
We didn't learn this much about the Pacific Theater, also not too much about military operations in general, other than some key battles, like Stalingrad or the Normandy landing. An interesting aspect that was also quite absent is the economic side, for example about the role of the German industry, as well as about international economic relations, e.g. Sweden, Switzerland, the USA, etc.
Another point that I missed, was the whole aftermatch of WW2. 10th grade ended virtually in WW2. In the 11th grade we put an emphasis on different time eras and countries. So I never learned in my history class when WW2 ended. :dead:

A little about today's teaching of history in schools:
School politics are a business of the German states, so here is a link to the current school curriculum of my state: http://www.standardsicherung.schulministerium.nrw.de/lehrplaene/upload/lehrplaene_download/gymnasium_g8/gym8_geschichte.pdf (in German only)

On page 31, we see the curriculum for WW2, I'll put up a crappy translation:

topic: National Socialism and World War 2
emphasis:
- the destruction of th Weimar Republic
- the nationalsocialistic government system; individuals and groups between comformity and resistance
- deprivation of rights, prosecution and murder of European jews, gypsies and dissidents (literally "people who think different") between 1933 and 1945
- war of extermination
- flight and resettlement in the European context

In general you can say that it is more common to discuss politics here than in the US, e.g. at dinner, in bars or at parties. So it is also ok to talk with Germans about history. When people are interested in a historic conversation, they speak openly about this time period.

last words: we are the last generation who has the ability to talk to people who lived during WW2 - use your chance folks! In 20 years, we won't have it anymore.

[mapuc]

:yep: Don't we all? :O:

I have seen her, she's a beauti.

Markus

[Red October1984]

Thank you all for your posts. I never would've thought that's the way they teach it. I guess i'm just used to American History classes where we have to learn about the Civil War for the 3rd time...

Ugh. It gets old. Yes. I realize what happened was important but I'm sick of hearing about it. I love the post 1900 history but before that...eh...

American History I can do. World History before 1900? Kill me now.

[Platapus]

It is also important to remember that there is a significant part of American history that is not taught in American schools.

I am sure that pretty much any country cherry-picks the history they like to teach. The advent of the Internets Tubes will make it harder to guide history education in the future.

[Cybermat47]

Thank you all for your posts. I never would've thought that's the way they teach it. I guess i'm just used to American History classes where we have to learn about the Civil War for the 3rd time...

Ugh. It gets old. Yes. I realize what happened was important but I'm sick of hearing about it. I love the post 1900 history but before that...eh...

American History I can do. World History before 1900? Kill me now.


:haha: Americans are disinterested in their pre-1900 history.

I'm sick of hearing about the British invading Australia: pre-1900.

We have a lot in common :haha:

Except perhaps a love of Gettysburg and Gods & Generals :rotfl2:

[Sailor Steve]

It is also important to remember that there is a significant part of American history that is not taught in American schools.

I am sure that pretty much any country cherry-picks the history they like to teach. The advent of the Internets Tubes will make it harder to guide history education in the future.
That's true, but not only because of cherry-picking. It's impossible to teach all of any one country's history in a year. I admit they could try harder, though.

[Platapus]

That's true, but not only because of cherry-picking. It's impossible to teach all of any one country's history in a year. I admit they could try harder, though.


I just wished it were a bit more balanced. History IS the good, the bad, and the ugly.

I understand that a government wants children to grow up feeling proud of their country and frankly most younglings lack the maturity/wisdom to understand that good people sometimes to bad things and that applies to governments too.

A while ago I was talking with some of The Frau's daughter's friends (all in their early 20s) about American history. Some of them were self-identified history buffs. When I brought up Indian "Removals" of the mid 1800s and the alternating government position on Mexican labour in the early 20th century, they were astonished. None of this had been even mentioned in their history classes. They never learned about Cuba and the Philippines around the start of the 20th century.

And forget anything worthwhile about the Cold War. :nope:

But they sure learned a lot about the Civil War..Oh boy that got that covered... well almost.

No one can ever learn all the history of the US, and I don't expect a school to spend all that much time trying to cover 200+ years. But I would like to see some balance to reflect the good, the bad, and the ugly that makes up US history.

I think understanding the transgressions of the US will make it easier to understand the transgressions of other nations.

We all wear grey hats. Some a little lighter, some a little darker, but all grey. :yep:

[Red October1984]

:haha: Americans are disinterested in their pre-1900 history.

I'm sick of hearing about the British invading Australia: pre-1900.

We have a lot in common :haha:

Except perhaps a love of Gettysburg and Gods & Generals :rotfl2:

It's world history pre-1900 in general that bores me. I do like American History before 1900 but has to be after 1700...That 1608 Jamestown Colony crap gets old quick.

American History and Military History Post-1900 keep my attention. I don't want to hear about the Lost Roanoke Colony again. I don't want to hear about the exploration of El Salvador....again!

I want to hear about the major wars of the 20th Century. American schools don't teach enough of that IMO. For those of you who don't know, I am in High School. I'm between Cybermat and Dowly on the age scale. My American History book right now pretty much says that the Germans got ticked and invaded Poland. We, then, kicked some butt in Northern France...Then it goes on for 3 or 4 sections about the Japanese American Internment, the Holocaust, Women working in factories....you know....all the stuff that nobody wants to learn about. My current history teacher is a joke. I could teach the class better than her. She won't allow any movies to be shown and she won't go into detail about any of the battles. She doesn't like learning about the equipment of the different countries and the deciding factors in the war. (I'm gonna march right in there tomorrow morning and tell her about Hearts of Iron. If that fails...then maybe my Business teacher. :arrgh!: ) Even the WW1 Chapter covered more of the battles of the war than the WW2 Chapter does. It's rather disappointing really. The Cold War chapter looks just as bad. If the book took less time focusing on Women's Rights, Japanese American Internment, Mexican-American Riots, the Holocaust (Should be a seperate chapter), and the poor German citizens of the time...we could actually learn about the actual war.

The Vietnam War is one of the shortest chapters in the book...(Gee, I wonder why) and the Korean War is almost non-existant. I think there's a few pages on the Korean War and that's it. I really wish that they seperated the World War 2 chapter from the Human Rights stuff. They need to organize the book to have a Unit on World War 1 with a few chapters and a Unit for World War 2 with a few chapters. I've learned more on the internet than in History class. I love history. I can't get enough of World War 2 history. I think the public school system is failing in that department. They want us to grow up to hate war and hate our leaders because "We rounded up all the Japanese Americans and penned them up in cruel camps for 2 years." The book contains nothing about the horrible things the Japanese did to POW's and the Chinese. Just on the Internment and Holocaust. You're gonna love this next part....

The book contains nothing at all of the major Air battles or Naval battles. The Battle of Britain is mentioned in a paragraph or two and the Battle of the Atlantic apparently wasn't important enough to even be included. There's a picture and a caption telling about German U-boats.... :nope:

I offered to bring in The Enemy Below and some other movies to get a general idea of what happened but no...because we watched The Grapes of Wrath, we don't get to watch World War 2 movies.


My former teacher was much better but he retired. I would almost give my left arm to have that guy back teaching at school.


There's my rant about the teaching of the 20th Century Wars in American Schools.... :)

[Stealhead]

I just wished it were a bit more balanced. History IS the good, the bad, and the ugly.

I understand that a government wants children to grow up feeling proud of their country and frankly most younglings lack the maturity/wisdom to understand that good people sometimes to bad things and that applies to governments too.

A while ago I was talking with some of The Frau's daughter's friends (all in their early 20s) about American history. Some of them were self-identified history buffs. When I brought up Indian "Removals" of the mid 1800s and the alternating government position on Mexican labour in the early 20th century, they were astonished. None of this had been even mentioned in their history classes. They never learned about Cuba and the Philippines around the start of the 20th century.

And forget anything worthwhile about the Cold War. :nope:

But they sure learned a lot about the Civil War..Oh boy that got that covered... well almost.

No one can ever learn all the history of the US, and I don't expect a school to spend all that much time trying to cover 200+ years. But I would like to see some balance to reflect the good, the bad, and the ugly that makes up US history.

I think understanding the transgressions of the US will make it easier to understand the transgressions of other nations.

We all wear grey hats. Some a little lighter, some a little darker, but all grey. :yep:


I agree with you here(and the others that posted similar sentiments) history is always "stylized" when you learn it in school.Then if you learn it post secondary it usually is still not 100% objective but from one slant or another.No one side is "perfect" or righteous in the end world wars are (generally speaking) several hundred thousand young men being told to kill several hundred thousand other young men for "freedom" in some shape or form.

[Red October1984]

I just wished it were a bit more balanced. History IS the good, the bad, and the ugly.

I understand that a government wants children to grow up feeling proud of their country and frankly most younglings lack the maturity/wisdom to understand that good people sometimes to bad things and that applies to governments too.

A while ago I was talking with some of The Frau's daughter's friends (all in their early 20s) about American history. Some of them were self-identified history buffs. When I brought up Indian "Removals" of the mid 1800s and the alternating government position on Mexican labour in the early 20th century, they were astonished. None of this had been even mentioned in their history classes. They never learned about Cuba and the Philippines around the start of the 20th century.

And forget anything worthwhile about the Cold War. :nope:

But they sure learned a lot about the Civil War..Oh boy that got that covered... well almost.

No one can ever learn all the history of the US, and I don't expect a school to spend all that much time trying to cover 200+ years. But I would like to see some balance to reflect the good, the bad, and the ugly that makes up US history.

I think understanding the transgressions of the US will make it easier to understand the transgressions of other nations.

We all wear grey hats. Some a little lighter, some a little darker, but all grey. :yep:



I agree with that.

Most teachers I've had will skip chapters like that. The chapters are in the book but certain teachers will skip those to do other things. This year we learned about the Philippines and the Spanish American War and stuff I already knew....We learned about the Indian Removals and all the cruel laws other years...

[Sailor Steve]

It's world history pre-1900 in general that bores me. I do like American History before 1900 but has to be after 1700...That 1608 Jamestown Colony crap gets old quick.
You're doing yourself a great disservice, and I hope that someday you'll find out just how rich history - all history - can be.

It looks like you missed this thread:
http://www.subsim.com/radioroom/showthread.php?t=199110

Read the entries from February 15-23 to find out about Columbus the badass.

There are many cool things you probably don't know about Columbus and his contemproraries, about Washington and his friends. If all you care about is 20th-century warfare, then you might as well admit you don't care about history at all. I recently read a three-volume set on the economic causes and effects of naval warfare in the period from the Spanish Armada through the end of the British-French wars of the 1700s. Fascinating stuff. I'm also currently collecting music from the Baroque era, and concurrently reading about the composers and how they interacted with kings and princes.

Also, if you're not interested in the pre-1700s then you've probably missed out on one of the best series of novels ever written - The Three Musketeers and its four sequels. Poor you.

[Red October1984]

You're doing yourself a great disservice, and I hope that someday you'll find out just how rich history - all history - can be.

It looks like you missed this thread:
http://www.subsim.com/radioroom/showthread.php?t=199110

Read the entries from February 15-23 to find out about Columbus the badass.

There are many cool things you probably don't know about Columbus and his contemproraries, about Washington and his friends. If all you care about is 20th-century warfare, then you might as well admit you don't care about history at all. I recently read a three-volume set on the economic causes and effects of naval warfare in the period from the Spanish Armada through the end of the British-French wars of the 1700s. Fascinating stuff. I'm also currently collecting music from the Baroque era, and concurrently reading about the composers and how they interacted with kings and princes.

Also, if you're not interested in the pre-1700s then you've probably missed out on one of the best series of novels ever written - The Three Musketeers and its four sequels. Poor you.

Poor me I guess. I just haven't found anything out of that time period that has caught my interest. I do care about history...just not the kind of history you enjoy. I'll eventually find something cool about it and want to study it. But atm, I'm big into the 20th Century Wars.

[Stealhead]

You also miss out on the Egyptians the Greeks Alexander the Great(still the greatest general in all history) Roman Empire,Hannibal,Julius Caesar,Augustus Caesar, Attila the Hun,The Dark Ages,the Vikings,The Crusades, Genghis Khan,and only over 1,000 years of other very interesting things that shaped the world in which we currently reside and that is only counting recorded history.

[Sailor Steve]

I'll eventually find something cool about it and want to study it.
I'm sure you will. The big jolt for me was, believe it or not, watching Grand Prix racing films from the 1930s through the '50s, and playing a board game that covers those periods. Adolph Hitler attended the 1932 Italian Grand Prix and insisted that German start entering and winning races. This lead to Mercedes Benz becoming a major contender and to Ferdinand Porsche forming the Auto Union from four different companies. Their four-ring symbol can still be seen on the front of Audi cars today.

But atm, I'm big into the 20th Century Wars.
I was born in 1950. For a great many years history started and ended with World War Two. There was no ground war. Winston Churchill led the Americans to sink the Bismarck (Johnny Horton said so!) and the B-17 Flying Fortress and P-51 Mustang won the war all by themselves.

So there! :D

[Sailor Steve]

Alexander the Great(still the greatest general in all history)
Not according to Robert E. Lee. :sunny:

and only over 1,000 years of other very interesting things that shaped the world in which we currently reside and that is only counting recorded history.
I live in constant regret that I'll never get to study everything, that I've forgotten most of what I have read and my heart sinks every time I walk into the Main Salt Lake City Library and see 100,000 books I'll never get to read. And yet it's taking me forever to get through one little book on Medieval Europe from 300-1000. At least I finally finished the chapter on Charlemagne.

[Red October1984]

I'm sure you will. The big jolt for me was, believe it or not, watching Grand Prix racing films from the 1930s through the '50s, and playing a board game that covers those periods. Adolph Hitler attended the 1932 Italian Grand Prix and insisted that German start entering and winning races. This lead to Mercedes Benz becoming a major contender and to Ferdinand Porsche forming the Auto Union from four different companies. Their four-ring symbol can still be seen on the front of Audi cars today.


I was born in 1950. For a great many years history started and ended with World War Two. There was no ground war. Winston Churchill led the Americans to sink the Bismarck (Johnny Horton said so!) and the B-17 Flying Fortress and P-51 Mustang won the war all by themselves.

So there! :D

What does Early-20th Century Racing have to do with pre-1900 history?

And We're gonna find that German Battleship that's making such a fuss. We've got to sink the Bismarck cause the world depends on us! Hit the decks a'runnin boys and spin those guns around! When we find the Bismarck, we're gonna cut her down!

[Sailor Steve]

What does Early-20th Century Racing have to do with pre-1900 history?
Well, actually, mentioning Hitler leads directly back to WW2, and WW2 was a direct result of WW1, which was a direct result of all the different land-grabs and wars of the 1800s, which were due to a reshuffling of the power bases formed when city-states finally developed into full-fledged nation-states in the 1400s, which came from the small city-state concept that finally developed out of the feudal system of the middle-ages, which formed after the fall of the Western Roman Empire, which started developing when the original Roman city-state developed into the Republic and Carthage decide Rome had gotten too big for their britches.

So you see, World War 2 can be indirectly traced all the way back to Rome.

And that's just Europe.

[Stealhead]

Not according to Robert E. Lee. :sunny:


I live in constant regret that I'll never get to study everything, that I've forgotten most of what I have read and my heart sinks every time I walk into the Main Salt Lake City Library and see 100,000 books I'll never get to read. And yet it's taking me forever to get through one little book on Medieval Europe from 300-1000. At least I finally finished the chapter on Charlemagne.

That is true you do have to narrow down your interests some what the brain can only handle so much.

Robert E. Lee must have said that before the Civil War not after.He may have lost Gettysburg based on one order that he gave that was not clearly understood or rather the urgency of the order.For that reason I say that Alexander was the best general and in a certain way you could really argue that Hannibal was the best general even though he failed at his primary goal he almost made it and that was an achievement in its own right.

[Red October1984]

That is true you do have to narrow down your interests some what the brain can only handle so much.

That's why I stick to 20th Century Warfare and General History.

I am open minded though...Raptor1 convinced me to try out that Europa Universalis 3 game...I'm gonna get the demo in a few days when HSFX6 is done. That might be the push off the cliff that I need. :hmm2:

It all depends...

@Steve. You're in a band! You should do "Sink the Bismarck" or "The Sinking Of The Reuben James" or even "PT-109" by Jimmy Dean and get it on video to upload on Subsim Day here in like a week.

[Oberon]

My God Catfish, we created a monster! :haha: Thanks for putting a further point on it, the great disillusionment of the 1990s in Eastern Germany is something that I think is still being felt, but then we did just push both Germanies together and hoped for the best. Generally speaking it's come out alright, but it could have gone a lot smoother.


In regards to historical interests, funnily enough the Pacific war has been something of a gray area for me, it's not taught much beyond the events of Pearl Harbour and the atomic bombings, not even the fall of Singapore or the sinking of the Repulse and Prince of Wales...perhaps, that is a part of history that we're keen not to remember.
It's only been through playing A World At War as Japan on here (which I must PM joe about) and reading several books that has educated me more on the subject, but there's still lots of gray areas, one of them being the submarine war...I must get around to installing SHIV some time and changing that.
In regards to our educational system, the standard GCSE history covered the history of Britain as being the Romans, the Battle of Hastings, a VERY brief touch on the War of the Roses (I mean, like one lesson), the Tudors, a brief mention of the Civil war, the Victorians, and the two world wars. All of them touched on in brief details, in fact, I think my primary school in Kent covered things in more detail than the Middle and High Schools in Suffolk did, but that could just be my jaded imagination. We also covered in GCSE history the American drive west, basically the traditional Cowboys and Indians with some settlers thrown in, and we also covered 'The Irish Question' which was quite in topic at the time since it was when the Northern Ireland Peace Process was happening.
In A levels we went on to study World War Two in a bit more detail (but still not enough detail for me, I used to study the battles and draw maps to help illustrate the point) and again, seriously neglecting the Pacific theatre but it did include the Russian front in quite a bit of detail, Kursk and so forth.
We also studied Weimar Germany and both Hitler and Stalins rises to power, comparing the two and studied the English Civil War in much greater detail, including the fun and games of the Quakers and Levellers and other such radical religious groups of the time.

Honestly though, a great deal of my historical knowledge has come from playing games based in the era, watching films based in the era and reading up about the era. I knew very little about the Byzantine Empire until I played it as a recommendation by Medieval: Total War (Hey, want an easy game, try the Byzantines it said, or something like that) and I had such a great time that it's endeared the Byzantines to me ever since.
I played Rowansofts Battle of Britain when it first came out, and I watched the film, and then I read, and I read, and now I'd like to think that I have a pretty good understanding of it.

Your tastes will vary, you may rule out America pre-1900, but one day you will watch a film or play a game and you'll think "Hey, that's a pretty awesome thing" and you'll research it, and maybe you'll watch another film based around the era, and so on and so forth until a great interest is built around it. That's how these things grow.

Certainly though, there is a rich tapestry in both the US civil war (which is another area I know very little about) and the politics in Europe where Germany, Britain, France and Russia tiptoed around each other until the whole thing came to a head in 1914. The 'Great Game' for example is a fascinating example of war by proxy and the book by Peter Hopkirk of the same name should be required reading for any nation looking to go into Afghanistan, the graveyard of empires.
Of course, I'm bias to that era since it's the last time that Britain exerted any great political and military influence on the world before the decline following WWI where America rose to take Britains place as the worlds dominant superpower. Also my favourite novel is set in 1898, so I have a bit of a fondness for the era.

However, there is no harm in focusing on one particular area, certainly the twentieth century has a live tapestry of interest, and the advantage is that artifacts from it are more readily accessible than from much earlier eras, particularly if you are in America...not many Roman villas to tour or castles to explore, and it's better documented than some eras.

But never lose sight of the fact that each era has been influenced directly and indirectly by the era before it, and the era before that. As Steve points out, World War Two can be traced back to the Romans, which might explain Italys reluctance in fighting it (j/k). :O:

[Stealhead]

Actually all wars can be traced back to two cavemen.One caveman created the first version of Rock,Paper,Scissors of course paper and scissors not having been invited yet the game was first called Rock,Leaf and the rock always one because it could be honed into a blade cutting the leaf.

Anyway long story short one caveman kept beating the other and the losing cave man smashed the winners head in with a rock in turn the winning caveman's tribe killed the losing caveman this upset the losing caveman's tribe and a series of battles in sued they where all stale mates so a treaty was agreed to sadly this treaty was settled with another game of Rock,Leaf.

[Red October1984]

Your tastes will vary, you may rule out America pre-1900, but one day you will watch a film or play a game and you'll think "Hey, that's a pretty awesome thing" and you'll research it, and maybe you'll watch another film based around the era, and so on and so forth until a great interest is built around it. That's how these things grow.

That statement right there sums up how I found Subsim.com and how i discovered the naval world. :up:

[Sailor Steve]

Robert E. Lee must have said that before the Civil War not after.
No, not Robert E. Lee himself. I was referring to the quote attributed to Lee: "I have carefully searched the military records of both ancient and modern history, and have never found Grant's superior as a general. I doubt if his superior can be found in all history."

[Sailor Steve]

@Steve. You're in a band! You should do "Sink the Bismarck" or "The Sinking Of The Reuben James" or even "PT-109" by Jimmy Dean and get it on video to upload on Subsim Day here in like a week.
'Was' in a band. Still looking for another. And the last band only did stuff we wrote ourselves. That's the way I like it.

[Sailor Steve]

...a VERY brief touch on the War of the Roses (I mean, like one lesson), the Tudors, a brief mention of the Civil war, the Victorians, and the two world wars.
Does that mean I know more about the Tudors than you? I like all the connections there, from Columbus (again) through Philip of Spain and back to Richard III (who may have been a much better man than we remember, since we remember Shakespeare, who worked for Henry VII's granddaughter). Of course I got started on that part of history back in 1971 when I watched Six Wives of Henry VIII.

My late friend Rocky once characterized the era from the Crimea through World War Two as the third 'Hundred Years War'. He also called World War One a family squabble between Victoria's grandchildren, since George V, Wilhelm II and Nicholas II were all cousins.

[Oberon]

Does that mean I know more about the Tudors than you? I like all the connections there, from Columbus (again) through Philip of Spain and back to Richard III (who may have been a much better man than we remember, since we remember Shakespeare, who worked for Henry VII's granddaughter). Of course I got started on that part of history back in 1971 when I watched Six Wives of Henry VIII.

My late friend Rocky once characterized the era from the Crimea through World War Two as the third 'Hundred Years War'. He also called World War One a family squabble between Victoria's grandchildren, since George V, Wilhelm II and Nicholas II were all cousins.

Wilhelm was also a member of our armed forces IIRC! :haha:

Yes, it is quite likely that you know more about the Tudors than me, to be honest I'm not a big fan of them, I fall more to the York than Lancaster side of the war, I know a little bit about Henry VIII, about the usual GCSE fair, the falling out with the pope, the Mary Rose, his desperation for a male heir and the numerous wives that followed, but that's about the short and the long of it.
My knowledge of Britain doesn't really come back into focus until the later years of Charles I.

[Schroeder]

No one can ever learn all the history of the US, and I don't expect a school to spend all that much time trying to cover 200+ years.


And know imagine you're in Europe with 2000+ years of history.:O:

[Gargamel]

Hey...USA 2 Time World War Champs....



That's sad. To think one country alone won either of those wars.

[Stealhead]

That's sad. To think one country alone won either of those wars.


The US only got involved in April 1917 and it took us a long time to get fully mobilized so we where not a real threat until 1918.What "won" WWI was the fact that the other powers had been fighting for four years and their nations where on the verge of collapse.

All I can say for WWII is it is a good thing that Hitler was stupid enough to attack the Soviet Union and then turn around a few months later and declare war on the US two nations that had nearly unlimited manpower(and woman). Logistics the real war winner or loser if you lack it.

Also as you say no one nation alone "wins" a war of such scale.In fact no war is truly "won" one side usually achieves its goals or both sides tire and sue for peace.

[Oberon]

The US only got involved in April 1917 and it took us a long time to get fully mobilized so we where not a real threat until 1918.What "won" WWI was the fact that the other powers had been fighting for four years and their nations where on the verge of collapse.

All I can say for WWII is it is a good thing that Hitler was stupid enough to attack the Soviet Union and then turn around a few months later and declare war on the US two nations that had nearly unlimited manpower(and woman). Logistics the real war winner or loser if you lack it.

Also as you say no one nation alone "wins" a war of such scale.In fact no war is truly "won" one side usually achieves its goals or both sides tire and sue for peace.

x2. Although the extra manpower of the US in 1918 helped to retake the ground lost in the Spring Offensive faster than it could have been done without. It was all about manpower in those final days.