Talk:Macrohistory

message: I think a good article could be written on this topic, talking about the controversy in macro-historical content, and some major events that could be included, such as the Battle of Tours or the Siege of Constantinople in 717.— Preceding unsigned comment added by Baiter (talk • contribs) 04:37, 9 January 2006‎ (UTC)
Ok, no one's commented on it, so I've added a bit of a list myself.  I welcome anyone's thoughts or comments on it, and especially additions. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Baiter (talk • contribs) 05:19, 11 January 2006‎ (UTC)
Not being especially familiar with Islam, I put the Hijra as being the macrohistorical event in Mohammed's life.  If there is a more significant event related to the foundation of Islam, please change it to reflect that event instead.  -Baiter — Preceding unsigned comment added by Baiter (talk • contribs) 07:43, 19 January 2006‎ (UTC)
I added the death of Ogedei Khan, since this event stopped the Mongols from conquering more of Europe-Pieter — Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.241.220.107 (talk • contribs) 23:41, 23 January 2006‎ (UTC)
:Is this the correct definition of macro-historical?  A google search for macro-historical event reveals that this article is the only reference.  Macro-history appears to be a theory to explain the repition of similar effects across different time periods (Athens vs Sparta compared to Allies vs Axis for instance).  If a definition of macro-historical that fitted this article could be found, it might be appropriate to discuss what it is and the academic work involved.  The events themselves might then be best arranged in category as the current list is highly arbitrary. MLA 14:20, 26 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: It would be good if someone could cite what a macro-historical event is and source that.  I'm tempted to remove everything that is there and replace it with a stub about the sociological theory of macrohistory.  The current page here appears to be stuff that someone made up in school one day. MLA 17:13, 7 February 2006 (UTC)

text: When I next get the time, I'm going to follow up on this and completely redraft this page so that it reflects macrohistorical sociological theory rather than being a random list of events.  I've written here in the talk page to give due warning to those who keep adding to what is an unencyclopedic list so that it shouldn't be a surprise when it happens.  There hasn't been any attempt to show why the definition shown here that neither I nor Baiter have found elsewhere should be retained.  MLA 08:36, 5 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: The reference to the battle between Aetius and the Huns should be taken out.  The outcome of the battle did not change history significantly.  The Roman Empire was already dead (and had been so since Septemus Severus 200 years earlier) and a barbarian kingdom such as the Huns is only as fragile as the health of its leader (in this case Attila).  And to make another suggestion I would probably add a reference to the English victory over the Spanish Armada in 1588.  The effects this event brought (if we follow the rules of a truly ground shaking historical event) was in no way destined to happen.  But, thanks to the utter destruction of Spain's fleet, English dominance over the world went unquestioned until the 20th century (to include the campaigns of Napolean who I believe could never have defeated England anyway).  It also played an important role in the creation of America (it is not a coincidence that the first major english colonies appeared less than 20 years after the battle and at the same time as the peace treaty between Spain and England which was precipitated by this event).
Finally the definition of macro-historical should be further refined.  A truly historic event is one in which the effect brought on is completely opposite to the prevailing winds of the day.  For example, while we may consider the American Revolution to be of great historical importance, in actuality it is not as "earth-shattering" because sooner or later the country would have gained its independence (as have other colonies such as Canada and Australia).  Conversely the rise of Alexander, and Macedonia was wholly unexpected and did much to completely obliterate the status quo (i.e. Persian influence) and bring about the Hellinization of the ancient world. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 204.111.156.196 (talk • contribs) 03:09, 11 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Further Suggestions 

message: I think you should drop this list of examples and focuse on finding sources to fill out the actual definition. A list like this invites nit-picking (where's WW1? and the Seven Years War?) and will always be POV. Marskell 09:11, 14 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: OK, I've done this myself. The definition as it previously stood seemed to be "if it's really, really important it's macro-historical." Some limited looking around shows this is inaccurate. Macro-history appears, basically, to be a kind of trend analysis with long time-frames as a sample. Marskell 09:39, 14 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Remove them all