Need Help with History Homework?

Need Help with History Homework?

The whole "Aryan race" ideology was based on a number of dubious scientific and historical "proofs" that the Aryan race were superior to all other races...well, somebody else who knows more about the ideology of Nazism can elaborate further for you. Of course Hitler regarded himself as a member of this "race", where his conception of the Aryan race extended to all Germanic and Nordic peoples. So as an Austrian he obviously regarded himself as belonging to that group.
 
The whole "Aryan race" ideology was based on a number of dubious scientific and historical "proofs" that the Aryan race were superior to all other races...well, somebody else who knows more about the ideology of Nazism can elaborate further for you. Of course Hitler regarded himself as a member of this "race", where his conception of the Aryan race extended to all Germanic and Nordic peoples. So as an Austrian he obviously regarded himself as belonging to that group.

A very good explanation. it is also important to remember that Hitler warped what constituted an "Aryan" depending on his needs.

For example before America entered the war, Hitler called them suitable Aryan allies that should aid Germany in the fight against the subhumans, but as soon as it was clear that America was against him, his speeches shift to slight the Americans as the "pathetic Zionist and Bolsheviks who are dogs barking at their Jewish masters".
 
Hence : Indo-European Languages
The First Aryans came from India and Mesopotamia and settled in Europe
Incorrect, The Aryans (Indo-Europeans actually) came from Central Asia originally and migrated into India, the Middle East and Europe. The original inhabitants of India (The Dravidians) are Darker and live mostly in south India.

The Dravisians did not originally speak Indo-European languages, but when the Indo-Europeans came to Indioa, they imposed their languages upon them. (Although a few pre Aryan languages still exist in India, with a few million speakers, in the South.)

In reality, the Iranian languages, the Indo-European Indian languages and all of the Indo-European languages of Europe are all related and connected to each other, they all had a common ancestor.
 
So during my next term at Uni I get to write a 30+ page paper in a seminar course on Pop Culture. I've come up with a few ideas for topics, but I'm hoping you all are willing to help me decide (or add to the list). Anyway, the two ideas I've come up with so far are "American History is Pop Culture" (think the HBO special 'Assume the Position', cause that's where I got the idea) and "Soviet Propaganda/Media of World War Two' (specifically how it changed from before the war, and then during the war as it progressed).
 
This essay is due in three in two days, essentially it is a summary of a book on art history that I read over the summer. Tell me what you think. I'm in high school and this is for AP Art History.​

The Annotated Mona Lisa Book Report
Art has evolved continuously since its inception in the settlements of humans during the Stone Age. What originally started as a method by primitive man to control nature and its destructive forces , has become a way to express one’s emotions, to critique society, and to make a living doing nothing except taking photos of rocks stacked on top of each other. Art has progressed as fast as civilization. It took roughly ten millennia for human society to transition from the old stone age and the making of cave paintings to the new stone age and the construction of massive standing stone monuments. Compare this to the decade it took for Abstract Expressionism to become cliché and be replaced by Hard Edge.

Art in its original state was quite spiritual in nature, its purpose being to understand and control the natural world. The Venus of Willendorf, one of the oldest of man-made sculpture, exemplifies this as it is believed to be a symbol of fertility. In the more primitive areas of the world this tradition that art contained magical properties continued, as can be seen in traditional Native American and African art. Religions also inspired great architecture, from the Ziggurats of the Sumerians to the Egyptian pyramids. The Parthenon, the greatest symbol of the classical world, was built to be the temple of the patron goddess of Athens, Athena.

As civilization progressed and wealth allowed for luxuries, secular art grew in demand. The Mesopotamians kings were the first great patrons of secular art, employing many artists to depict military exploits and hunting expeditions. The Greeks adorned their pottery and art with everyday scenes, such as a boy singing while playing an instrument. The Romans in particular made many secular pieces, usually depicting famous emperors or military leaders. Mural painting was also another form of secular art, with the rich Roman elite having their villas adorned with scenes of parties and landscapes.

With arrival of Christianity, religious art took precedence over secular art. The Byzantines made incredibly beautiful mosaics for their churches, often depicting Jesus and the disciples. These mosaics paid little attention to the ideas of perspective and volume. As Europe stabilized with the end of the Dark Ages and the Roman Catholic Church established its grip over society, churches were built all over the continent. Originally Roman in style, these buildings used barrel and groin vaults with rounded arches. Gradually, more experienced architects came onto the scene and developed Gothic architecture., with its distinctive pointed arches, flying wall supports, and well-lit interiors.
In the commercial and manufacturing cities of Northern Italy, rich patrons and the rediscovery of roman classics led to a reawakening by the art world in what has since been called the Renaissance. Vital to this movement was the discovery of new ways to depict reality, namely the use of oil and canvas instead of wood and tempera, the use of perspective and pyramid configuration to create depth, and the use of chiaroscuro to depict rounded surfaces. The creative spark was also very bright during these times, with masters such as Donatello and Botticelli using these techniques to sculpt and paint with realism that had not been seen since the Classical Era. The man which most represents the Renaissance is the genius Leonardo Da Vinci. His interests were vast, covering such subjects as astronomy, physics, and art. It is for his art that he is most remembered for, as he was the one who painted The Mona Lisa, considered one of the greatest paintings ever made. Through his use of all the great breakthroughs in Renaissance, along with his own improvements such as the “sfumato” technique and making his model smile, has rendered it a masterpiece of the Renaissance. The Northern countries of Europe, Germany and the Netherlands, all had their own renaissance. However, the lack of Roman ruins to rediscover led to a greater focus on nature and daily life in art. The lack of Classical sculptures to teach idealism in art also led to greater realism in Northern art.

After the death of Raphael, artists seeking to differentiate themselves from the masters of the High Renaissance began to pioneer a new style called Mannerism or Late Renaissance. While High Renaissance had sought to bring realism, harmony, and reason into art, Mannerists tried to bring emotion and imagination. Typical Mannerist paintings included elongation of bodies, harsh lighting, and intense emotionalism brought on by lurid colors.

The combination of mannerist and renaissance styles would lead to a new art movement called Baroque. The Baroque era began in 1600 in the city of Rome, where the Catholic Church was financing the construction of cathedrals and grand works to inspire religious faith. Artists from all over Europe came to Rome to study the masters and to find employment, then would return to their homes and add their own touches. The Reformation had a dramatic effect on northern Europe, from where on no artists would continue to paint religious subjects.

The nineteenth century would be different than the previous ones. Art styles which would have lasted for a century or longer might last 4 decades or even just 2 as artists developed new styles to compete with the old. This reflects the changes in society at the time, with democracies being established, religion losing its sway, and industrialization making the cities full of poor working masses and industry.

The next great art style would be that of Neoclassicism. The revival of classical painting can be traced to the revulsion many artists felt toward the Rococo style, a minor art style which grew up in France and was the definition of over-decoration. Whereas Rococo was frivolous and highly colored, Neoclassicism was solemn and relied on line. The subjects of Neoclassicism were of course Roman and Greek mythology.

In response to the solemnity and reason of Neoclassicism, new artists developed Romanticism. Like the Mannerists to the Renaissance artists, Romanticism gave far more weight to emotions, passion, and imagination. The German writer Goethe summed up Romanticism perfectly when he stated “Feeling is all!”

While Neoclassical and Romantic schools argued in Paris, a new style called Realism was emerging. While realism had been a part of the art world ever since Renaissance artists overcame the technical limitations of representing it, usually such forms were either idealized or sensationalist. Realists painted exactly what they saw, with no alterations or enhancements.

The style which would come to influence modern art the most would be
Impressionism. Impressionism was a radical style at the time, abandoning time honored principles of perspective, balance, and chiaroscuro. Instead, the Impressionists used color and light to capture an “impression” of a scene, or the initial perception an artist gains. In order to capture the fleeting nature of light, these artists pioneered the use of short, choppy brush strokes which used pure color.

After Impressionism triumphed over academic art, it began to experience changes and evolved into what is called Post-Impressionism. Many artists were unsatisfied with rather short nature of impressionist, feeling that it made their work look unplanned and unprofessional. This problem split the group into two groups: one which followed scientific design, the other expressing emotions and sensations through color and light. It is from these two trends that twentieth century would be descended from.
The twentieth century was incredibly convulsive. Two world wars, genocide, the destruction of many European cities contributed to a chaotic environment in the traditional art world of Europe. This environment may have contributed to the increasing importance of the interior vision at the expense of reality. The twentieth century would produce the greatest departure from the past of any century before. The philosophy behind this abrupt shift was Modernism, which wanted to reject the past and relentlessly pursue freedom of expression. No longer needing wealthy patrons to support them, artists were free use imagination and experiences in their art. Perhaps the biggest upset of this modern world would be the move of the avant garde in art from Paris to the United States.

The Annotated Mona Lisa is a good book which goes through art history in a fast, not tedious, yet still manages to answer a reader’s questions with great precision.
 
I would have added some more transitions from paragraph to paragraph just to make it longer and smoother to read. For exmple when switching from Greek/Roman to Early Christian Art you could have said at the end of the Greek/Roman paragraph "The classical Greek and Roman style of art would soon change with the introduction of a new religions' concept on art and the world around humanity as a whole". It serves no purpose and is all :wub:, but it lengthens the paper and makes you sound smarter.

Other than that it was good, I couldn't find any grammatical errors or anything.
 
Got it back today. My first A for AP Art History!

I would have added some more transitions from paragraph to paragraph just to make it longer and smoother to read. For exmple when switching from Greek/Roman to Early Christian Art you could have said at the end of the Greek/Roman paragraph "The classical Greek and Roman style of art would soon change with the introduction of a new religions' concept on art and the world around humanity as a whole". It serves no purpose and is all :wub:, but it lengthens the paper and makes you sound smarter.

Other than that it was good, I couldn't find any grammatical errors or anything.

The teacher asked for it to be double spaced so it actually takes up four pages.
 
What is art AP?

Advanced Placement. It's something we do on the other side of the pond where you take a harder class (AP) and at the end of the year you take a test, and depending on what you get on that test you can get college credit for it.

When I took my AP US History test they told us (the test is scaled 1-5) a 3 will make most average state universities accept the credit, a 4 will make most colleges in general, and a 5 will get any college that accepts AP tests to give you credit on it (almost all state colleges are required to accept AP, and most private do anyways too). For example I got a 5 on mine, so that will save me a lot of time and money when I go to college not having to take the test.
I'm not positive but I think you get the letter grade that you got in the class as a college class, or maybe they just give you an exempt.
 
I'm writing an essay about modern Chinese investment in Africa and I'm trying to create a parallel to European imperialism there. Can anyone think of one or more corrupt/oppressive African rulers who were who were aided by European imperialists/colonists through financial support? Or otherwise an instance where European imperialists/colonists fueled civil war/violence in an African nation by supplying weapons?

I need to have this essay written by tomorrow and I'm getting pretty desperate. I've done some research but haven't found anything except for Tewfik Pasha of Egypt who was influenced by the British, but he was only spineless not corrupt or oppressive. Anyway, my eternal gratitude and +rep for anyone who can help me out!
 
Last edited:
Or otherwise an instance where European imperialists/colonists fueled civil war/violence in an African nation by supplying weapons?
The Germans fueled civil strife in Rwanda by dividing the people into Hutu and Tutsi groups based on wealth and length of noses. They classified any wealthy Rwandan with more then 10 cows, or Rwandans with longer noses and lighter skin as Tutsi, and poorer Rwandans with "pushed in noses" as Hutu. The Tutsi were put in charge, sowing the seeds of the future Rwandan Genocide in 1994.
 
The Germans fueled civil strife in Rwanda by dividing the people into Hutu and Tutsi groups based on wealth and length of noses. They classified any wealthy Rwandan with more then 10 cows, or Rwandans with longer noses and lighter skin as Tutsi, and poorer Rwandans with "pushed in noses" as Hutu. The Tutsi were put in charge, sowing the seeds of the future Rwandan Genocide in 1994.

But in that instance the Germans had no financial or political incentive, only racial bias. Thanks anyway though! I might have to just choose a different approach with my essay.
 
But in that instance the Germans had no financial or political incentive, only racial bias. Thanks anyway though! I might have to just choose a different approach with my essay.
Yes they did, a divided Rwanda was much easier to exploit and control. Hatred was directed toward the Tutsi minority by the Hutu majority instead of the Colonialist power.
 
Yes they did, a divided Rwanda was much easier to exploit and control. Hatred was directed toward the Tutsi minority by the Hutu majority instead of the Colonialist power.

I wonder if there are any modern Chinese parallels to that... I'll have to do some more research. It may still be a problem because the Chinese are in Africa primarily for economic reasons.

Thanks again for your help.
 
Last edited:
okay i forgot my ap euro book so i need some help :)

who is Baldassare Castiglione-

what is "The book of the courtier"

what is Neo Platonism

what is Nominalism

who is Massccio

who is Botticelli

What is Northern Humanism

what is Mannerism

What is High Renaissance

and...

why was Florence at the heart of the Italian Renaissance

and

What Role did the medici family play in Renaissance Florence


please help me guys :DD

REP to all Answers :)

edit:
some more

who is Lorenzo Valla

who is Brunelleschi

what is Humanism
 
good to know u guys help out fellow twc members :)
 
Can anyone help me with links to primary sources on Alessandro Farnese, Duke of Parma? I've been searching for ages and can't find anything that can count as a primary source.
Thanks in advance
 
It looks like i need to pay for those or be part of an academic institiution so no. I'm just looking for them because my history homework is to analyse an individuals impact on Spanish history between 1470 and 1600 and include 3 primary sources about them.
 
Primary sources should be out of copyright. Try Google Books, Google Shcolar and Project Gutenburg. I did briefly search through Ebscohost but found nothing. Maybe you will have better luck. I'm sure a local library will have access to Ebscohost or Jstor...

I found some references to that name in this book:
http://books.google.com/books?id=u5kOAAAAQAAJ&pg=PA62&dq=Alessandro+Farnese,+Duke+of+Parma#v=onepage&q=Alessandro%20Farnese%2C%20Duke%20of%20Parma&f=false
But it isn't a primary source.

OK, this one is. I think this has some stuff about him in it.
"The Rise of the Dutch Republic"
http://www.gutenberg.org/files/4836/4836.txt

I found some other stuff that might be primary sources but they were in Italian and Spanish.
 
Last edited:
Living Statue Essay​
For the living statue project, I had to choose four statues, with each one belonging to one of the four different periods in Classical Greek history, Archaic, Early Classical, Late classical, and Hellenistic. My Archaic work was Kouros. Kouros is a 6’1/2” marble statue sculpted roughly around 600 BCE. Like other early Archaic pieces, Kouros was heavily influenced by the Egyptians to the south, as can be seen by the advanced left foot and rigid frontal profile of the statue. The Egyptian influence can also be seen in the in these statues principal purpose being to serve as grave markers. Kouros did differ in several ways from its Egyptian counterparts. The Greeks abandoned the stone block, wishing to portray motion instead of stability. The other difference is that the statue is nude.

Early Classical times were a period of prosperity for the Greeks. The Persian threat had been defeated and Greeks were therefore superior to other cultures, so they thought. An artistic revolution, with an emphasis on realism, rationalism, and idealized subjects, was one result. The statue of Zeus (or possibly Poseidon) found off the coast at Cape Artemision exemplifies this. Standing at 6’10” high and sculpted around 460-450 BCE, the statue is an example of the Greek hollow-cast bronze statue technique. The focus on realism is shown by how the statue seems to have motion. It also shows the idealized way subjects are portrayed by the perfect body of the man.

Late Classical times are quite different than Early Classical times. The Peloponnesian War between Athens and Sparta lasted from 431 BCE to 404 BCE, sapping the strength of both and destroying the power of plague weakened Athens. For the next century the Greeks fought against each other and only united when the Macedonians from the north invaded. The century of warfare had weakened the Greeks, however, and as a result they were crushed at the battle of Chaeronea in 338 BCE by Philip II. This political turmoil was reflected in art. The idealism of Early Classical times was abandoned for greater realism and a focus on individual emotions and drama. The Late Classical piece I choose was Apoxymenos (Scraper) by Lysippus. Sculpted around 330 BCE and 6’ 9” high, it is a marble Roman copy of a Greek bronze original. The sculptor Lysippus was one of the masters of his age, the only one deemed talented enough by Alexander the Great to make his statue. He also differed from the ideas of Praxiteles in his 1:8 ratio between the head and body. Apoxymenos is far different than the Doryphros of the last century. Unlike the balanced and serene latter, Apoxymenos has a sort of nervous energy running through him. You expect the statue to at any moment begin scraping the other arm and to start leaning on the other leg. The statue is also unique in how it breaches the imaginary rectangular box surrounding earlier works with its outstretched arm.

The Hellenistic period is the last period in Classical Greek art, stretching from the death of Alexander the Great to the conquest of Egypt and the death of Cleopatra several centuries later. Like earlier periods, the political climate had an effect on art. Alexander’s conquests in the East had introduced many different cultures to the Greeks, making the Hellenistic world very cosmopolitan. Hellenistic art was as a result even more dramatic and emotional than Late Classical art. An emphasis on the unconscious at the expense of the rational and alert was also common. The Hellenistic work I choose was Sleeping Satyr. At 7’11” high and sculpted around 230 BCE, the work exemplifies many of the characteristics of the Hellenistic age. It is blatantly sexual and erotic, as can be seen by his spread legs revealing his genitals. The Hellenistic interest in the unconscious and sleep can be seen in the drunken stupor the satyr is in.

This is an essay for my AP Art History regarding some art pieces I enacted in class. I am supposed to explain each statue in detail and explain the circumstances for why they are like that.​

Its a lot larger than it looks as the teacher asked for it to be double-spaced.​
 
Caesar invaded in late 54BC, and again sometime later.
Actually, he first invaded in 55 BC. with a small force. Then in 54 BC he invaded again with a much larger force. The second time he was too strong for the tribes to defeat but he wasn't able to force them into a battle, as well as a rebellion under Vercengetorix sprung up in Gual. Due to these he simply made an agreement with the tribes having them give token submission and returned back to Gual.
 
Even though I am a bit late to the party, I'd like to give some feedback.

Kouros was a general term for male nude statues done in a late Deadalic style. There was not one statue that was called 'Kouros', though it is a class of statues that exhibit similar features. They share the same pose, the shoulder rigid and symmetircal, while the left foot is planted firmly in front of the body. The arms show no momentum or movement and hang lifelessly by the figure's side. The hair is very stylised, again featuring eastern influences, tied with a bow at the back. Later on during the Archaic period some limited facial expression was introduced, this was, like the hair, stylised and has come to be known as the Archaic smile. The anatomy of the figure is another stylised feature, there is a limited attempt to show naturalistic musculature, but this is not follow through in the entirety of the sculpture. There was a gradual evolution from stylised features to more naturalistic and a 'severe' style. This can be seen in the differences between the two most famous Kouroi, the early New York Kouros, and the later, nearly Classical, Kritios Boy.

NYKouros.jpg
--->
sgreboy.jpg


Specifically note the difference in pose. While the New York Kouros is rigid, and shows no naturalistic movement or weight, the Kritios Boy leans slightly on his right leg, and that is shown in the anatomy of his abdomen, and the asymmetry of his shoulders.
 
Last edited:
Hello everyone. I don't need any help as my paper is already done and turned in. I just need some opinions on it since it seems like there are some experts around here. Now, my paper is about the fall of Rome and that internal and external forces both contributed to its demise. The reason for saying it was both was that in class we have a book where you take a side stating yes such n so did that or no they didn't. So, I said it was both :doh: . Anyways, this is my first serious research paper with notes, sources, all that jazz. Granted it's obviously nothing perfect (most likely grammar was/is a bit befuddled). I just want opinions on my argument, use of the sources, structure of the paper, etc. I don't need grammar check unless it jumps out and slaps your face. It's my first time covering Rome as well. The paper is 8 pages double-spaced (was supposed to be 3-5 but I couldn't help myself :P), this basically means it's well... short. If someone is willing to read it I'd greatly appreciate it :)
 

Recent posts

Members Online Now

Site News

Thread Statistics

Created
Nikos,
Last reply from
The Wandering Storyteller,
Replies
661
Views
136,628

Site Polls

  • Axis & Allies

  • Battleship

  • Checkers

  • Chess

  • Clue

  • Go

  • Monopoly

  • Risk

  • Stratego

  • Other


Results are only viewable after voting.
Back
Top Bottom