Least favourite time period in history... - Historum

**jeroenrottgering** · February 25th, 2012, 02:11 PM

Since we always talk about favourites I thought let's do the alternative. Which period of time in history interests you the least and why?

Mine would be

1945-present: The days of glory are gone and the world becomes a bit more boring to my taste.

RusEvo · February 25th, 2012, 02:24 PM

I personally don't like time periods that we don't know a lot about yet. Sometimes we only know scant details about a period or a battle or a person, I like to know for sure what happened.

But I totally understand the fascination with all things Roman, Greek, Ancient, Carthage etc....... I just appreciate more certainty than we have..... thats just me.

**tjadams** · February 25th, 2012, 02:30 PM

Ancient Rome or Greece just gives me dead head.

Major Wilson · February 25th, 2012, 02:45 PM

Ancient Greece never got my attention. Same can be said about everything Belgium (what can't they be friends?) as well as Chinese and Korean history. There's nothing fascinating about neither of them.

**M.E.T.H.O.D.** · February 25th, 2012, 02:54 PM

My least favourite time period in history is anything pre-battle of Kadesh(1274BC)

parallel · February 25th, 2012, 03:09 PM

Ancient China. I try and yet....yawn.

**Louise C** · February 25th, 2012, 03:16 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jeroenrottgering

Since we always talk about favourites I thought let's do the alternative. Which period of time in history interests you the least and why?

Mine would be

1945-present: The days of glory are gone and the world becomes a bit more boring to my taste.

I agree with you. Recent history is mostly very dull.

HammockHank · February 25th, 2012, 03:16 PM

Sub-Saharan African history prior to mid 19th century is not well documented and relies too much on oral traditions.

Middle Eastern history from the Middle Age to the present and Oriental history from all ages except for Chinese and Japanese in the early twentieth century. ME'tern and Oriental cultures are just too alien for me to appreciate.

**Kirialax** · February 25th, 2012, 05:53 PM

I have a particular dislike for the later middle ages, although I can't really say why. Things just become so well sourced after 1200 that it takes the fun away, I suppose.

**Guaporense** · February 25th, 2012, 06:25 PM

Least interesting? Well, in the History of Western Eurasia:

1 - Late Roman period, from 200 AD to 400 AD, things got a bit boring: Rome stopped to expand, starts to vegetate while Ancient civilization stops developing and also begins to vegetate and decline. Numerous inconclusive wars with the Sassanians and with the tribes to the North.

2 - Early medieval period: too few sources and also lack of very interesting social processes of change: society is rather vegetative.

3 - The Medieval Period as whole lacks novelty. There were big Eurasian Empires: the Ancients also had that. They had some proto science: The ancients also had that. For instance, while in the middle ages there were the Arab Caliphate and the Byzantines the Ancients got the Achaemenid Persians and the Roman Empire at it's full glory. On the whole medieval warfare was less advanced than earlier warfare: the clearest example is military force projection and Rome could project power more easily than any medieval state.

It was with the Modern Period that things started to get more dynamic and interesting: the unification of all civilizations into a single global civilization, the creation of massive colonial empires and massive processes of social and political change. The power projection capabilites of Rome were surpassed and continued to progress at exponential rates.