Notice: This is the official website of the All Empires History Community (Reg. 10 Feb 2002)

  FAQ FAQ  Forum Search   Register Register  Login Login

Is History Eurocentric?

 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <1234>
Author
cavalry4ever View Drop Down
AE Moderator
AE Moderator
Avatar
Retired AE Moderator Emeritus

Joined: 17-Nov-2004
Location: Virginia
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 589
  Quote cavalry4ever Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Topic: Is History Eurocentric?
    Posted: 21-Oct-2009 at 17:16
I agree that it takes pretty self-centered vision of universe to upgrade a peninsula to a rank of a continent.

It is interesting fact that within European History we have US European History, British European History and Continental European History. The large parts of these  three could have been written on three different planets. 

Yet all these three version unite on a a single item, which is to stress the greatness of Western (European) Civilization.

There should be a EU committee to reconcile all of them.


Edited by cavalry4ever - 22-Oct-2009 at 05:56
Back to Top
Sander View Drop Down
AE Moderator
AE Moderator


Joined: 20-Mar-2007
Location: Netherlands
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 597
  Quote Sander Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 25-Oct-2009 at 00:57

cavalry4ever made several posts here. He claimed  that Europe was some pool of  backwardness till the 18th century. 

 
Originally posted by cavalry4ever

What is funny about Eurocentric view, is that most of European civilization is based on Asian contribution and Asian societies were more advanced until eighteen century, when Europe emerged from its backwardness. Only exception maybe the Antiquity, but influence from..

 
Cavalry4e claims are immaterial to historical facts. 
 
Note that the 16th  and 17th centuries  prior to the 18th  are known as the Age of Discovery and  the Scientific Revolution.  The events between 1500-1700  are well known : Great  artists  ( Michelangelo, Rembrandt, El Greco , Botticelli etc. ) and architecture.  Groundbreaking scientific  research  of Galileo, Descartes, Isaac Newton , Boyle and others.  Global exploration and global trade networks. Colonization of both  Americas, establishment of many colonies and trading posts in Africa and Asia, and much more.

  

Originally posted by cavalry4ever

The problem is that Westerners often forget that they stand on the shoulders of civilizational giants. We tend to look down at societies that are not on the same development level as we are, forgetting that not long ago we were at exactly same level or worse. We tend to ignore the contribution of many cultures to our civilization.

 

The "we" indicates that his confessions are personal. It' s unknown who else he means ; maybe some Isolationist scholars in the Americas. In Europe virtually all scholars and educated people  know for a very long time about outside influences and ancient interconnections between civilizations  (1) 

 
 
 
Originally posted by cavalry4ever

Another one is about human sacrifice. I remember mention of it in diverse books characterizing Incas or Aztec cultures as primitive because of it. But burning people alive on stakes, cooking in oil and disemboweling for entertainment, was always characterized as less evil and presented as whitewashed "mistakes".
 

 

The sacrificing of  10.000s was surely not entertainment. According to articles from professional journals, the Aztecs also ate the victims. Some scholars argue that the cannibalism was about protein, others that it was their idea of being closer to the gods. (2 )

 
 
 
Aztec Cannibalism: An Ecological Necessity?
Bernard R. Ortiz de Montellano, Science 12 May 1978

 
 
It has been proposed that Aztec human sacrifice and cannibalism can best be explained as a response to population pressure and famine. The greatest amount of cannibalism, however, coincided with times of harvest, not with periods of scarcity, and is better explained as a thanksgiving.

 

Tenochtitlan recevied large quantities of food tribute and engaged in intensive (chinampa) agriculture. These two sources alone would have provided enough to feed practically the entire population of the city. The Aztecs also consumed various animals and insects that were good protein sources. The amount of protein available from human sacrifice would not have made a significant contribution to the diet. Cannibalism was not motivated by starvation but by a belief that this was a way to commune with the gods.

 

 

(2) www.sciencemag.org/cgi/content/abstract/200/4342/611

 

 

Star
 
 
Notes/References 

 

(1) E.g. Robert Brown, Jun. “On the Origin of the Ancient Northern Constellation-Figures” The Journal of the Royal Asiatic Society of Great Britain and Ireland, (Apr., 1897), pp. 205-226  relates the transmission of the Zodiac, Mesopotamia>Greece>India.  

 

 

 

 

 

                                          

 



Edited by Sander - 25-Oct-2009 at 07:30
Back to Top
cavalry4ever View Drop Down
AE Moderator
AE Moderator
Avatar
Retired AE Moderator Emeritus

Joined: 17-Nov-2004
Location: Virginia
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 589
  Quote cavalry4ever Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 25-Oct-2009 at 09:03
Originally posted by Sander

cavalry4ever made several posts here. He claimed  that Europe was some pool of  backwardness till the 18th century. 

 
Cavalry4e claims are immaterial to historical facts. 
 
Note that the 16th  and 17th centuries  prior to the 18th  are known as the Age of Discovery and  the Scientific Revolution.  The events between 1500-1700  are well known : Great  artists  ( Michelangelo, Rembrandt, El Greco , Botticelli etc. ) and architecture.  Groundbreaking scientific  research  of Galileo, Descartes, Isaac Newton , Boyle and others.  Global exploration and global trade networks. Colonization of both  Americas, establishment of many colonies and trading posts in Africa and Asia, and much more.

 

Precisely my point. Except it was not age of Discovery and Scientific Revolution. It was "Age of Regaining What Was Lost" and adding some stuff on top of it. I make the point in another thread about the fact that another Pantheon could not be build until 1840.  

This recovery was uneven and some sciences started progressing forward, past what Antiquity accomplished, but some were still behind. Europeans were very impressed with themselves for rediscovering empirical methods,  and so we get "Age of Discovery". To judge how important these were, you should ask: Would Greeks or Romans be impressed with them?

I mentioned in some other posts Western Caliphate. They had regular trade routes to India and China (VIII - X cent.) so did Romans and Greeks. 

Sculpture ... Phidias

Architecture... see Pantheon

Astronomy... When Europeans were able to calculate the size of Earth?

Medicine...

Boiling in oil alive... Pomponio Algerio (1559)

Seems that being theologian, astronomer or philosopher was a life shortening occupation and many became subjects of sadistic entertainment for masses.


Your point above is a typical Eurocentric view of Universe. You provided me with good example. Everything you give as an example was possible by the fact that Roman and Greek achievements were rediscovered in Europe, with Arab addition from the first millenium CE.


Originally posted by cavalry4ever

The problem is that Westerners often forget that they stand on the shoulders of civilizational giants. We tend to look down at societies that are not on the same development level as we are, forgetting that not long ago we were at exactly same level or worse. We tend to ignore the contribution of many cultures to our civilization.

 

The "we" indicates that his confessions are personal. It' s unknown who else he means ; maybe some Isolationist scholars in the Americas. In Europe virtually all scholars and educated people  know for a very long time about outside influences and ancient interconnections between civilizations  (1) 

 
 
 
Originally posted by cavalry4ever

Another one is about human sacrifice. I remember mention of it in diverse books characterizing Incas or Aztec cultures as primitive because of it. But burning people alive on stakes, cooking in oil and disemboweling for entertainment, was always characterized as less evil and presented as whitewashed "mistakes".
 

The second sentence about disemboweling etc.. refers to Europe. It should say 

"But burning people alive on stakes, cooking in oil and disemboweling for entertainment, by Europeans, was always characterized as less evil and presented as whitewashed "mistakes".


The fact that it was assumed I was still talking about Incas and Aztecs proves my point.


Sorry for confusion, but being European I use "we" as meaning Europeans and our ancestors. As in: We had ways of making executions sadistic and entertaining, yet considered ourselves "civilized".

It was not until eighteen century that Europe crawled out of the abyss.

Edited by cavalry4ever - 25-Oct-2009 at 11:02
Back to Top
DayI View Drop Down
Sultan
Sultan
Avatar

Joined: 30-May-2005
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 2408
  Quote DayI Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 01-Nov-2009 at 03:48
Originally posted by red clay

Originally posted by cavalry4ever

 The domed structures are inherently more difficult to build  than gothic structures. The first built domed church, which could match on some level, engineering of the Pantheon, was Basilica di Santa Maria del Fiore. it had to be built using bricks because Europeans "forgot" how to make concrete. The Pantheon was built using light weight concrete. Any engineer building domed structure would have no problem understanding gothic structure, but opposite is not true. If you Google that church you can find its history and the fact that there were few people understanding concepts behind its dome at the time ( I am refering here here about Santa Maria del Fiore). The similar to Pantheon structure could not be built in Europe until 1756 when concrete was reinvented, but that concrete would be inadequate to do it. The  Roman concrete had very similar mechanical properties to Portland Cement. Portland Cement was first used in 1840. So another Pantheon could not be built in Europe until 1840. It is interesting that this corresponds also to the time when Europe snapped back from it religion induced stupor.
 
 
 
Hagia Sophia ? remember that one? 537 AD, brick and mortar, no concrete.  And it definitely is part of Europe.
 
 
 
If hagia sophia was a part of "europe" that days, there would be at least 100 hagia sophias around europe today. Why couldnt they manage to make at least one in europe besides Greece???? why?


And about that eurocentric view, i mostly agree with cavalry4ever. Still today Europe "discovers" or "invents" some stuff that are in use, that are invented many century`s ago by other society`s but the credit go`s to those who actually re-invented them.

The best example of a Eurocentric view is the Turkish bath. Building a Palace in Versailles with thousands of rooms without a single bathroom is another good example.
Back to Top
DayI View Drop Down
Sultan
Sultan
Avatar

Joined: 30-May-2005
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 2408
  Quote DayI Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 01-Nov-2009 at 04:02
Originally posted by Sander


 
Cavalry4e claims are immaterial to historical facts. 
 
Note that the 16th  and 17th centuries  prior to the 18th  are known as the Age of Discovery and  the Scientific RevolutionThe events between 1500-1700  are well known : Great  artists  ( Michelangelo, Rembrandt, El Greco , Botticelli etc. ) and architecture.  Groundbreaking scientific  research  of Galileo, Descartes, Isaac Newton , Boyle and others.  Global exploration and global trade networks. Colonization of both  Americas, establishment of many colonies and trading posts in Africa and Asia, and much more.
the bolded text only counts for people who do live in Europe. Thats something for sure. 

Those groundbreaking researches of galileo and his company where allready found, discovered and somethimes even better calculated some century`s prior them. But nobody giving credit to those people, why you think? 
You`ll probably dont believe me, look up to "arab" or moslim scientist and see their works.

You should objectively re-read history of spain, especially during the arab rule and after reconquista or something. Many authors and books where actually stolen by the western "scholars" by simply translating them and renaming the authors of it. 
Back to Top
opuslola View Drop Down
Tsar
Tsar
Avatar
suspended

Joined: 23-Sep-2009
Location: Long Beach, MS,
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 4620
  Quote opuslola Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 28-Nov-2009 at 19:41
Posted: Oct-12-2009 at 19:32
If I may presume to interject an outsiders viewpoint, I would suggest that "certainly" history is Eurocentric! A very obvious fact, since for the last 300 years or so, most all historical writing has been done by people who called Euro-Asia as their homes. Thus most all history has been written in English, German, French, Italian, Russian,or take your pick of about a dozen other languages.

You see, I take a very different view of the so called "Indo-European" language history as is now accepted by 99.9% of modern historians and linguists! Thus, I would suggest that Persian, or Proto-Persian or Indo-European is not an East to West Phenomena, but a West to East one!

It is mostly a result of misdating of documents, coins, and the desire of etymologists to attempt the regression of language rather thas recognize that language can also "digress!" Therefore, one persons desire to show how language has "progressed" from the basic form, to a more advanced form, can also show how a "progressed form" can "regress" to a less developed one!
Early Latin is not either "early" nor is it Latin, except in the sense of a language to be used only by the "learned", and those in power, as a "common language" designed not to be either read nor understood by the masses! But, printing and religious wars caused its undoing! Greek can but be considered not as evolutionary but created!
Ron Hughes


My words from the above post, still asks questions which were not answered by any later respondands!
http://www.quotationspage.com/subjects/history/
Back to Top
cavalry4ever View Drop Down
AE Moderator
AE Moderator
Avatar
Retired AE Moderator Emeritus

Joined: 17-Nov-2004
Location: Virginia
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 589
  Quote cavalry4ever Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 29-Nov-2009 at 09:15
Originally posted by opuslola

Posted: Oct-12-2009 at 19:32
If I may presume to interject an outsiders viewpoint, I would suggest that "certainly" history is Eurocentric! A very obvious fact, since for the last 300 years or so, most all historical writing has been done by people who called Euro-Asia as their homes. Thus most all history has been written in English, German, French, Italian, Russian,or take your pick of about a dozen other languages.

You see, I take a very different view of the so called "Indo-European" language history as is now accepted by 99.9% of modern historians and linguists! Thus, I would suggest that Persian, or Proto-Persian or Indo-European is not an East to West Phenomena, but a West to East one!

It is mostly a result of misdating of documents, coins, and the desire of etymologists to attempt the regression of language rather thas recognize that language can also "digress!" Therefore, one persons desire to show how language has "progressed" from the basic form, to a more advanced form, can also show how a "progressed form" can "regress" to a less developed one!
Early Latin is not either "early" nor is it Latin, except in the sense of a language to be used only by the "learned", and those in power, as a "common language" designed not to be either read nor understood by the masses! But, printing and religious wars caused its undoing! Greek can but be considered not as evolutionary but created!
Ron Hughes


My words from the above post, still asks questions which were not answered by any later respondands!

One can trace progression of many ethnic groups by studying geographic names. This all points to east to west phenomenon. Interesting fact is that science never got in the way of History.

This is a quote from an Indian Chief speaking about celebration of Columbus day in US.
"I don't understand this fuss about a white guy that got lost.
We always knew where we were."
Back to Top
TheGreatSimba View Drop Down
Chieftain
Chieftain


Joined: 22-Nov-2009
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1152
  Quote TheGreatSimba Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 29-Nov-2009 at 12:43
So this is a discussion that has been going on for three page, and rather than attempting to involve myself in such a long discussion without knowing what the arguments are (I do not want to read through all the pages!) I will just give my two cents:

I do not believe history is Eurocentric. History may appear Eurocentric to many of us on this website because we live in the West. And living in the West means one thing, Rome and Greece, as the Western world did not have many other advanced European civilizations in Ancient times. This is why all European nations, and even North American ones, tend to glorify Rome and Greece because thats all they have, their histories were founded on the backs of Roman and Greek civilization.

So history is only Eurocentric in Europe, North America, and Australia, and this is natural, as in China I'm sure history is centered around their own civilization, and in Iran around Iranian civilization, and so on...

So it depends on where you live and where you were raised. To even suggest that history is Eurocentric or even raise the question is very Eurocentric itself.

Originally posted by cavalry4ever

This is a quote from an Indian Chief speaking about celebration of Columbus day in US.
"I don't understand this fuss about a white guy that got lost.
We always knew where we were."


I doubt the Native American's knew where they were because they did not even know about the rest of the world. How could you know where you were if you do not know what else exists?

I understand what the chief is trying to say, but its still funny.
Back to Top
cavalry4ever View Drop Down
AE Moderator
AE Moderator
Avatar
Retired AE Moderator Emeritus

Joined: 17-Nov-2004
Location: Virginia
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 589
  Quote cavalry4ever Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 29-Nov-2009 at 17:52
So did Europeans.
Back to Top
von zip View Drop Down
Immortal Guard
Immortal Guard


Joined: 26-Jan-2010
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 3
  Quote von zip Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 26-Jan-2010 at 16:17
History is Euro-centric due to the fact the modern world as in a vast quantity of everything we use today comes from European minds or American ones. A huge amount of thought came out of Britian, thats a fact not some Eurocentric point of view. Alot of modern culture has arisen out of Europe. The worlds largest sports  Rugby, Tennis, Golf, Soccer, Cricket originated in Britian.

Just some humble inventions that were no doubt stolen or perhaps thought up by an Arab guy.

Computers
Television
Combustible engines
Industrialisation
Steam power
Electricity
Aeroplanes. Flight,
Mining
Warfare

etc etc

I have a feeling that if India created the modern world history would be Indian-centric. But then again if they did would not that Indian-centric view be correct.

I do agree in some way history can be perhaps too Eurocentric in certain areas, yet lending appreciation to another culture also has the affect of putting that culture or perhaps individual on a pedestal when in reality that culture or individual may have had only a minor influence.

You guys speak of all this lost knowledge yet give no creadance to the men in the1500's onwards who revolutionised Europe and then the world. Instead everthing was already achieved or perhaps stolen.


Back to Top
von zip View Drop Down
Immortal Guard
Immortal Guard


Joined: 26-Jan-2010
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 3
  Quote von zip Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 26-Jan-2010 at 16:31
I wonder who Einstein "stole"his ideas from.
Back to Top
opuslola View Drop Down
Tsar
Tsar
Avatar
suspended

Joined: 23-Sep-2009
Location: Long Beach, MS,
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 4620
  Quote opuslola Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 26-Jan-2010 at 20:34
Herr Zip!

You made a few good points above and a few bad ones! Will you admit to your bad ones or should one of us?

Actually, re-reading your above, I might say; Talley HO!

Regards,

Edited by opuslola - 26-Jan-2010 at 20:36
http://www.quotationspage.com/subjects/history/
Back to Top
cavalry4ever View Drop Down
AE Moderator
AE Moderator
Avatar
Retired AE Moderator Emeritus

Joined: 17-Nov-2004
Location: Virginia
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 589
  Quote cavalry4ever Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 27-Jan-2010 at 08:49
The Eurocentricity comes from the fact that European history before 19 century is vastly exaggerated and self aggrandising for a continent that was backward most of time. Modern Western Civilisation stands on the shoulders of civilisations that preceded it and sometime this part is forgotten. It is a technological civilisation that  created and still is creating more problems than it is able to solve. It certainly lacks moral dimension. 
If we were more critical of our modern history, we would perceive ourselves more as a technologically advanced barbarians than true civilisation.

Also British positive contribution to Western Civilisation is not as strong as von zip suggests but is probably responsible for many of its problems.
Back to Top
von zip View Drop Down
Immortal Guard
Immortal Guard


Joined: 26-Jan-2010
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 3
  Quote von zip Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 28-Jan-2010 at 00:23
I dont agree with your Europe being backwards comment, if they were does that not mean that other civilizations were just as equally backward ?
You cant deny there were powerful Kingdoms, the crusades could hardly have been raised by bog men. Its not like Europeans just appeared in the 19th century, there were many advanced states, some not quite as advanced yet its not like the other outside empires/civilizations dwarfed the Europeans, perhaps they did, give some examples.
I think the problem is that with regards to Euro-centrism is that people who come from areas where there may have been flourishing empires feel contempt to modern history because their achievements arent put in the limelight like for example the Greeks. Eurocentrism could be percieved as "Eurocentric" among people who arent European (or descended)


**************I havent finished my post, dont reply I will get back to it*************






Edited by von zip - 28-Jan-2010 at 00:24
Back to Top
Gun Powder Ma View Drop Down
Shogun
Shogun
Avatar

Joined: 02-Sep-2006
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 200
  Quote Gun Powder Ma Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 08-Jun-2010 at 17:52
There are actually two types of "eurocentrism": one which places too much emphasis on European history to the detriment of other world regions and one which places just as much emphasis on Europe as its actual importance for world history justifies.

The problem only begins when people who oppose the former eurocentrism slip into denial of the latter.

For example, any concise book on world history between 1492 and 1918/1945 which does not dedicate at least 400 of its 500 pages to European history would be inherently unbalanced as it would prefer to discuss less important events and developments elsewhere over more important, European, ones. In this period, history can only be objectively written from a Eurocentric perspective because it was centered on Europe.
Back to Top
DreamWeaver View Drop Down
Colonel
Colonel

Suspended

Joined: 02-May-2010
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 555
  Quote DreamWeaver Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 09-Jun-2010 at 04:36
Originally posted by Gun Powder Ma



For example, any concise book on world history between 1492 and 1918/1945 which does not dedicate at least 400 of its 500 pages to European history would be inherently unbalanced as it would prefer to discuss less important events and developments elsewhere over more important, European, ones. In this period, history can only be objectively written from a Eurocentric perspective because it was centered on Europe.



I disagree. History is only Eurocentric, if it is written Eurocentric. It is not inherently Eurocentric, that is the choice of the author. What events are and are not important is purely subjective. History can not be objectively written.


Its just a bothersome fact that Europeans have a habit of getting everywhere and thus a role in the history of everything. Simply couldnt stay in Europe and mind our own business.LOL
Back to Top
Gun Powder Ma View Drop Down
Shogun
Shogun
Avatar

Joined: 02-Sep-2006
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 200
  Quote Gun Powder Ma Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 09-Jun-2010 at 10:17
Originally posted by DreamWeaver

History is only Eurocentric, if it is written Eurocentric. It is not inherently Eurocentric, that is the choice of the author. What events are and are not important is purely subjective. History can not be objectively written.


I wouldn't stretch the subjective line too far. If history were indeed only subjective, terms such as Eurocentrism would lose any meaning, since the author had only the choice between any of a large number of -centrisms with equal claim to historical truth, so why not take an eurocentric view? The claim or blame of Eurocentrism makes only sense if its narrative can be measured up against some more or less objective yardstick; otherwise it would be a priori as good or as bad as any other approach making any discussion of its inherent value superfluous.
Back to Top
Gun Powder Ma View Drop Down
Shogun
Shogun
Avatar

Joined: 02-Sep-2006
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 200
  Quote Gun Powder Ma Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 09-Jun-2010 at 10:22
Originally posted by cavalry4ever

I agree that it takes pretty self-centered vision of universe to upgrade a peninsula to a rank of a continent.


That's an unhistorical view. In fact, Europeans, or more precisely the Greeks, were the first to show awareness of their continentality, long before anyone else was realising they were living in the continent they did. Peoples on all the other continents, particularly Asia, became only aware of their continent when shown a world map by an European explorer, that is after 1500, but in case of Africa and Asia rather as late as the 20th century.
Back to Top
DreamWeaver View Drop Down
Colonel
Colonel

Suspended

Joined: 02-May-2010
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 555
  Quote DreamWeaver Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 09-Jun-2010 at 17:27
Originally posted by Gun Powder Ma

Originally posted by DreamWeaver

History is only Eurocentric, if it is written Eurocentric. It is not inherently Eurocentric, that is the choice of the author. What events are and are not important is purely subjective. History can not be objectively written.


I wouldn't stretch the subjective line too far. If history were indeed only subjective, terms such as Eurocentrism would lose any meaning, since the author had only the choice between any of a large number of -centrisms with equal claim to historical truth, so why not take an eurocentric view? The claim or blame of Eurocentrism makes only sense if its narrative can be measured up against some more or less objective yardstick; otherwise it would be a priori as good or as bad as any other approach making any discussion of its inherent value superfluous.


Im sure the post structualists would argue that Eurocentrism has very little meaning. But History does still remain subjective, the author conciously or sub conciously will choose some -ism that their work wall fall into. Any attempts to find some objective markers to define it by is in itself a subjective act. Different historical approaches are as good or as bad as one another, its merely a question of choice and personal preference.


Oh well we can all become post modernists and be happy.  
Back to Top
opuslola View Drop Down
Tsar
Tsar
Avatar
suspended

Joined: 23-Sep-2009
Location: Long Beach, MS,
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 4620
  Quote opuslola Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 09-Jun-2010 at 18:02
DW! Dittos!
http://www.quotationspage.com/subjects/history/
Back to Top
 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <1234>

Forum Jump Forum Permissions View Drop Down

Bulletin Board Software by Web Wiz Forums® version 9.56a [Free Express Edition]
Copyright ©2001-2009 Web Wiz

This page was generated in 0.094 seconds.