@Setanta,
Quote:You display an appalling ignorance
You display an appalling arrogance.
Quote:people writing syntheses of primary sources.
Without the primary source you can verify the accuracy by...???? Oh, thats right...ESP.
Quote:Your view is also "western-centric,"
That is correct. This is because I do not read Chinese. Do you ?
Quote:History is a great deal more than secondary narratives written in Europe, which began, by the way, a lot earlier than the lifetime of Napoleon.
I thought it was obvious I was talking about primary sources of history...note the word history...google it and see what it means.
Quote:The English were already become as avid a group of readers of history as the Romans were-
But reading history does not make what is read accurate. Look at the bias in the Roman authors; it is enough to make you look like a calm reasonable person.
Quote:I would suggest to you that you don't know as much about history as you seem to think that you do.
I would suggest to you your knowledge of history relies heavily on google. Only a fool would say that history does NOT increasingly become obscure going past the Napoleonic Era. My friend beside me has a doctorate in history..shall I quote from him ? You are a complete dickhead who does not know what he is talking about. For my part, I would have said your age has robbed you of your hormonal balance and turned you into a grouchy old man.
Quote:i'd not have known what to look for at Wikipedia
Look up hormonal imbalances caused by senility.
