We're moving Forums to the Community pages. Click here for more information and updates.

Avatar: The Last Airbender Forums

Nickelodeon (ended 2008)

Official Avatar Historical Comparisons Thread

  • Avatar of Axrendale

    Axrendale

    [1]Jul 31, 2008
    • member since: 06/30/08
    • level: 10
    • rank: Holy Level 10!
    • posts: 2,640

    I'm back; the guy who made the thread about how the war in Avatar may have been based off the Hundred Years War, and I've decided that what this forum really needs to perk it up a bit (or perhaps destroy it completely) is some more historical comparisons. Basically, the purpose of this thread is for anything from history (or perhaps the present) that you think is somehow bizarrely similar to something in Avatar (or Avatar related), or could be used as a device for understanding better something of Avatar, or vice versa, and the discussion of said material. I have a sneaking suspicion that I am the only person here who is enough of a history freak to post regularly with new stuff, but that is certainly not going to stop me!

    Before you say it, I do not believe that any part of Avatar was actually based off real history. Rather, real history is so immense that it is almost impossible not to be able to find something in it that can match with almost anything.

    Since I know that some of you are tiring of my insanely long posts, I will do my best to summarize (but I can't promise that some of them still won't be fairly long).

    have fun (I hope).

    EDIT:

    This is the second time I have made this thread. The original thread was reported for being off topic shortly after it was made, and was deleted. I would like to say that this is not off topic. It says quite specifically in the rules that posting trivia about the show is perfectly permissible. Correct me if I'm wrong, but I think that areas of history being bizarrely similar to events in ATLA (or this forum, for that matter), can certainly be counted as trivia. Personally, my suspicion is that it had more to do with the fact that the historical coincidence that I put in the first post could possibly have been taken as subtle criticism of the mods, so I got rid of that, and advise anyone posting on this thread to avoid anything that could also be taken as criticising the way they run things here.

    EDIT:

    I would prefer it if we could stay clear of fairly recent subjects such as world war two. The fact is that a lot of people can be quite sensitive about delicate subjects like that, and that was what got a similar thread to this one locked. So lets avoid flaming, and try to restrict ourselves to stuff that isn't going to upset anyone.

    Edited on 08/01/2008 9:16am
    Edited 2 total times.
    You must be registered and logged in to post a message.
  • Avatar of LondonParisNYC

    LondonParisNYC

    [2]Jul 31, 2008
    • member since: 07/21/08
    • level: 7
    • rank: Talk Show Host
    • posts: 1,343
    Axrendale wrote:

    I'm back; the guy who made the thread about how the war in Avatar may have been based off the Hundred Years War, and I've decided that what this forum really needs to perk it up a bit (or perhaps destroy it completely) is some more historical comparisons. Basically, the purpose of this thread is for anything from history (or perhaps the present) that you think is somehow bizarrely similar to something in Avatar (or Avatar related), or could be used as a device for understanding better something of Avatar, or vice versa, and the discussion of said material. I have a sneaking suspicion that I am the only person here who is enough of a history freak to post regularly with new stuff, but that is certainly not going to stop me!

    Before you say it, I do not believe that any part of Avatar was actually based off real history. Rather, real history is so immense that it is almost impossible not to be able to find something in it that can match with almost anything.

    Since I know that some of you are tiring of my insanely long posts, I will do my best to summarize (but I can't promise that some of them still won't be fairly long).

    have fun (I hope).

    EDIT:

    This is the second time I have made this thread. The original thread was reported for being off topic shortly after it was made, and was deleted. May i say that this is not off topic. It says quite specifically in the rules that posting trivia about the show is perfectly permissible. Correct me if I'm wrong, but I think that areas of history being bizarrely similar to events in ATLA (or this forum, for that matter), can certainly be counted as trivia. Personally, my suspicion is that it had more to do with the fact that the historical coincidence that I put in the first post could possibly have been taken as subtle criticism of the mods, so I got rid of that, and advise anyone posting on this thread to avoid anything that could also be taken as criticising the way they run things here.

    interesante. i'd be curious to see what historical evemts show simlarites to avatar. i hope this doesn't get deleted =[ there's no reason it should be.

    Edited on 07/31/2008 6:43pm
    You must be registered and logged in to post a message.
  • Avatar of Axrendale

    Axrendale

    [3]Jul 31, 2008
    • member since: 06/30/08
    • level: 10
    • rank: Holy Level 10!
    • posts: 2,640

    With luck, this should convince any remaining skeptics that this is on topic. This was the original historical comparison that gave me the idea for this thread.

    Avatar and the Hundred Years War:

    Several months ago, a thread was created for the purpose of debating as to whether Avatar could have been based off a real war. personally, I highly doubt it, but if it was, the best candidate would be the Hundred Years War, fought between England and France from 1337 to 1453 (116 years total). Below is a basic outlline of the history. There are some things in there that should be quite familiar to people who have seen Avatar.

    There were 4 main participants in the war: England (the agressor), France (the largest country defending itself), Burgundy (much smaller than France, it was initially allied to the french, but later switched sides), and the small, but important area of Flanders, which was taken over by the english in the very early stages of the war.

    The war began in 1337, when England invaded France. England was enjoying a time of relative prosperity, and since the King of England was related to the royal family of the less prosperous France, he felt that he was entitled to the french lands. A small english army landed in south-western france and occupied it. The french immediatly sent in an army to crush it that was five times as big as the english one, and were shocked when it was soundly defeated at the battle of Cr??cy. It was at this point that the Pope, who as head of the church was supposed to deal with that sort of thing interfered, and told the english that they were to withdraw at once. The Pope was used to people doing as he told them, and was shocked when the english king replied that he had no intention of leaving france, and that the Pope should mind his own business. France was on its own.

    Over the next 100 years, the english fought a long series of battles against the french. At every single battle the french outnumbered the english, and yet the english won virtually all of the battles through a combination of tactical planning and vastly superior war technology. Despite their victories on the battlefield though, the english had a lot more trouble capturing the heavily fortified french cities. After several failed sieges the english came up with a new tactic, and instead of attacking the cities attacked the small farming villages that supplied those cities. Villages and farms were burned, forests were cut down and/or burned, and the country in general was messed up badly. It took a while, but after a while the tactic worked, and the cities began to surrender. Only Paris, the capital of France and the largest and best defended city resisted all attempts at capture by the english. Eventually however, it fell when the Burgundians, long considered to be France's strongest ally, betrayed the french and opened the gates of Paris to an english army.

    With their capital city taken and most of the country occupied by the english, the surviving french forces realised their only option now was to try and take the fight to the english. An army was assembled and prepared to invade england. The plan was to attack the english capital city of London, and attempt to capture the King of England and force him to withdraw from France. Unfortunatly, english spies were able to find out about the plan, and when the french army crossed over into england, a massive english army was waiting for them.

    The few pieces of France (mostly in the south and west of the country) soon united under a new king. The only problem was that the new king was completely mad. When an english army appeared to finish off the french, the crazy king ignored his nobles, who insisted they were willing to fight to the death, and surrendered to the english, a surrender that was largely ignored by most of his subjects. Nevertheless, the french looked done for.

    At this point however, about 100 years after the war had begun, somthing happened that turned things around for the french. Two french knights, returning from the new border with the english, came across a girl named Joan of Arc. 17 - 18 years old, she claimed that God had spoken to her and told her to take command of the french army and defeat the english. One of the knights liked Joan, and believed that there was somthing special about her, but the other knight was suspicious, and believed that she might be in the employ of the English, or worse, she was a witch. Eventually however, the second knight was convinced, and they took her to see the crown prince of France (who by all accounts was somthing of an emo after a lifetime of being mistreated, ignored, and generally passed over by his insane father). Most of the french nobles were suspicious of Joan, and said that if she had really been sent by God, she would have been sent 100 years before to stop the war from ever happening. The emo-prince however, decided he liked her, and gave her command of his army. Suprisingly, the 17 year old peasant girl turned out to be a brilliant general, and started her career by decisively defeating a large english army that had been sent to capture Orleans, the greatest remaining french city. Joan spent the next three years winning battle after battle against the english. Her two chief lieutenants were Gilles de Rais, a ridiculously moral man whom Joan was suspected of falling in love with, and La Hire, a short, angry man who people always underestimated in battle because of a deformed foot.

    With the sudden reversal in French fortunes, the emo prince was able to summon up enogh courage to get himself crowned King. Things seemed to be going very well, but Joan's luck ran out when she attempted to attack Paris and win back the capital city from the english. The french lost the battle, and Joan was soon captured by the english, and burned at the stake. If the english thought that they could now win the war though, they were wrong. The New french king gathered an army in Joan's memory, and used it to drive the remaining english forces out of France, ending the Hundred Years war after 116 years.

    England had been bankrupted by the now lost war, and civil war soon errupted, leaving the french free to rebuild.

    It's not exact, but parts of Avatar's storyline are definitely reminescent of the Hundred Years War. The ending might be different, but the begining and middle were quite frankly scarily similar at times.

    Cookies and internetz for the people who can pick out the most similarites.

    Edited on 08/03/2008 7:05am
    Edited 4 total times.
    You must be registered and logged in to post a message.
  • Avatar of isabelwhatx

    isabelwhatx

    [4]Jul 31, 2008
    • member since: 11/30/07
    • level: 14
    • rank: Autobot
    • posts: 6,106

    The Fire Lord's idea for burning the Earth Kingdom is very similar to the Civil War when the South burned numerous towns to the ground. HA!

    Edit: I'm not a history freak. As you can see, there aren't many details. But I thought it was interesting

    Edited on 07/31/2008 7:39pm
    You must be registered and logged in to post a message.
  • Avatar of Axrendale

    Axrendale

    [5]Jul 31, 2008
    • member since: 06/30/08
    • level: 10
    • rank: Holy Level 10!
    • posts: 2,640
    isabelwhatx wrote:

    The Fire Lord's idea for burning the Earth Kingdom is very similar to the Civil War when the South burned numerous towns to the ground. HA!

    Edit: I'm not a history freak. As you can see, there aren't many details. But I thought it was interesting

    YES!!!!!!

    Someone else has posted information; this thread is a success!

    And very good point. Many a ruthless tyrant/other in history has shown no hesitation to remove whatever obstacles stand in their way.

    You must be registered and logged in to post a message.
  • Avatar of isabelwhatx

    isabelwhatx

    [7]Jul 31, 2008
    • member since: 11/30/07
    • level: 14
    • rank: Autobot
    • posts: 6,106
    Axrendale wrote:
    isabelwhatx wrote:

    The Fire Lord's idea for burning the Earth Kingdom is very similar to the Civil War when the South burned numerous towns to the ground. HA!

    Edit: I'm not a history freak. As you can see, there aren't many details. But I thought it was interesting

    YES!!!!!!

    Someone else has posted information; this thread is a success!

    And very good point. Many a ruthless tyrant/other in history has shown no hesitation to remove whatever obstacles stand in their way.


    Lol. I want to keep thinking. This is actually really fun. LET'S KEEP THIS FROM BEING A FAIL! *gets excited*
    You must be registered and logged in to post a message.
  • Avatar of rgc19

    rgc19

    [8]Jul 31, 2008
    • member since: 05/20/07
    • level: 5
    • rank: Caveman Lawyer
    • posts: 244
    Is bumping legal? I don't ask to be a dick, it's just that I got warned for it (only did it once too)
    You must be registered and logged in to post a message.
  • Avatar of Axrendale

    Axrendale

    [9]Jul 31, 2008
    • member since: 06/30/08
    • level: 10
    • rank: Holy Level 10!
    • posts: 2,640
    EmoHaruno wrote:

    Since I can't think of historical comparisons right now....

    BUMPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPP!

    You don't have to put in any of your own, the other thing that I hope people will do on this thread is look through what other people have written and try and figure out which parts they believe are similar to Avatar.

    You must be registered and logged in to post a message.
  • Avatar of isabelwhatx

    isabelwhatx

    [10]Jul 31, 2008
    • member since: 11/30/07
    • level: 14
    • rank: Autobot
    • posts: 6,106
    rgc19 wrote:
    Is bumping legal? I don't ask to be a dick, it's just that I got warned for it (only did it once too)

    It's not. That guy will probably got warned. Ah, well...
    You must be registered and logged in to post a message.
  • Avatar of rgc19

    rgc19

    [11]Jul 31, 2008
    • member since: 05/20/07
    • level: 5
    • rank: Caveman Lawyer
    • posts: 244
    Can't agree with you there isabelwhatx. The fire nation burned earth kingdom villages to demoralize their denizens and prevent uprisings. It was more of a control type thing. The South burned villages while retreating to prevent the advancing Union forces from utilizing them for their resources/as strategic bases. But I like your line of thinking.
    You must be registered and logged in to post a message.
  • Avatar of Axrendale

    Axrendale

    [12]Jul 31, 2008
    • member since: 06/30/08
    • level: 10
    • rank: Holy Level 10!
    • posts: 2,640

    rgc19 wrote:
    Is bumping legal? I don't ask to be a dick, it's just that I got warned for it (only did it once too)

    On the subject of legality, I once again post the history of how the Western Roman Empire fell to the barbarians. Perhaps this forum could learn a message from it.

    The Fall of Rome to the Barbarians, and the rise of Constantinople:

    Most of you are probably familiar with the Ancient Roman Empire. Lasting from appox. 750 bc to 476 ad, It is considered by many as one of the greatest empires in history. Many of its major achievements such as Christianity, Republican Government, and the Calendar are still with us today. Ancient Rome was ancient western civilization at its peak. But it fell, in the end fell to the endless hordes of barbarians that streamed out of Germany. But why? How did the military superpower of the Mediterranean succumb to those that it had successfully held back for centuries?

    The answer begins with the city of Constantinople, today known as Istanbul. In the late 4th century, the Roman Emperors and the Senate, fed up with the increasing difficulties imposed on them by relentless barbarian invasions, made the decision to abandon Rome, and indeed the entire Western half of the empire. The empire was split into two halfs, the Western Empire, with Rome as its capital, and the Eastern Empire, with Constantinople as its capital. Although the provinces of the Western Empire had been in steady decline for some time at that point, the provinces of the Eastern Empire were flourishing and wealthy, and far more importantly were safe from the barbarians. So tempting was this "new Rome", that the entire leadership of Rome effectively upped and left. All of Rome's most talented leaders, generals, artists, writers, most wealthy citizens, etc, all chose to leave for the new empire, and took most of the empire's wealth (and most of the military) with them. The Western Empire was left dangerously vulnerable.

    Over the next century the invading barbarians made steady advances into Western Rome. And yet they continued to be driven back. Although most of Rome's talent had departed for Constantinople, a number of great generals who professed loyalty to their home country remained, determined to hold back the tide of invaders and preserve the empire. For years, they succeeded. In the end however, they were betrayed by their own leaders. One after another, the brilliant generals who were the only people preventing the Western Empire from falling were assasinated by their Emperors who feared that if their generals were too successful and given too much freedom they would seek power for themselves. It was a huge mistake. Seeing their fellows struck down by their own leaders, the surviving generals upped and moved to Constantinople, abandoning the treacherous emperors and the rapidly shrinking western empire they ruled to their fate. The emperors were of course incapable of doing anything themselves, and before long the barbarians had swept right across the western empire, eventually sacking the city of Rome itself. For centuries the lands of the former Western Empire were plunged into a time of darkness. The Eastern Empire remained however, a beacon of civilization in a dark time. And while the Romans who had taken refuge in the east knew they had to wait for a while before they could strike back, they knew their time would come. And it did.

    After waiting two hundred years, Rome (technically now Constantinople) reaserted itself, sending out armies in all directions to reconquer most of the former empire. Eventually, they were even able to retake the city of Rome. The Eastern Roman Empire (now eastern and western again) would continue for another 800 years.

    You must be registered and logged in to post a message.
  • Avatar of isabelwhatx

    isabelwhatx

    [13]Jul 31, 2008
    • member since: 11/30/07
    • level: 14
    • rank: Autobot
    • posts: 6,106
    rgc19 wrote:
    Can't agree with you there isabelwhatx. The fire nation burned earth kingdom villages to demoralize their denizens and prevent uprisings. It was more of a control type thing. The South burned villages while retreating to prevent the advancing Union forces from utilizing them for their resources/as strategic bases. But I like your line of thinking.

    Ha. I don't know that far into history. I had a horrible teacher then and it was years ago. But the idea of total destruction is still there.
    You must be registered and logged in to post a message.
  • Avatar of isabelwhatx

    isabelwhatx

    [14]Jul 31, 2008
    • member since: 11/30/07
    • level: 14
    • rank: Autobot
    • posts: 6,106
    Axrendale, you ARE a history freak. AHahhahahaa.
    You must be registered and logged in to post a message.
  • Avatar of Axrendale

    Axrendale

    [15]Jul 31, 2008
    • member since: 06/30/08
    • level: 10
    • rank: Holy Level 10!
    • posts: 2,640

    isabelwhatx wrote:
    Axrendale, you ARE a history freak. AHahhahahaa.

    Why thank you, thank you very much.

    I model myself in this regard after Azula. Just watch "Zuko Alone", and "The Avatar and the Fire Lord". It's obvious that that girl has memorized the textbook.

    You must be registered and logged in to post a message.
  • Avatar of isabelwhatx

    isabelwhatx

    [16]Jul 31, 2008
    • member since: 11/30/07
    • level: 14
    • rank: Autobot
    • posts: 6,106
    I'm having a brain freeze with the history right now. Something is telling me Ghengis Kahn.
    You must be registered and logged in to post a message.
  • Avatar of Axrendale

    Axrendale

    [17]Jul 31, 2008
    • member since: 06/30/08
    • level: 10
    • rank: Holy Level 10!
    • posts: 2,640

    isabelwhatx wrote:
    I'm having a brain freeze with the history right now. Something is telling me Ghengis Kahn.

    It wouldn't be Ozai would it?

    Genghis had a mustache, but other than that pretty similar.

    You must be registered and logged in to post a message.
  • Avatar of isabelwhatx

    isabelwhatx

    [18]Jul 31, 2008
    • member since: 11/30/07
    • level: 14
    • rank: Autobot
    • posts: 6,106
    Lol. Nah, it wouldn't have been. Genghis was a remarkably good ruler who might've forcefully dominated but brought upon a golden age. His grandson I believe killed the empire that his grandfather fought so hard to construct. I guess Ozai is the evil version of Genghis Kahn.
    You must be registered and logged in to post a message.
  • Avatar of Axrendale

    Axrendale

    [19]Jul 31, 2008
    • member since: 06/30/08
    • level: 10
    • rank: Holy Level 10!
    • posts: 2,640

    isabelwhatx wrote:
    Lol. Nah, it wouldn't have been. Genghis was a remarkably good ruler who might've forcefully dominated but brought upon a golden age. His grandson I believe killed the empire that his grandfather fought so hard to construct. I guess Ozai is the evil version of Genghis Kahn.

    Again, you make a good point. Despite being one of the most brutal conquerors of all time, Genghis was an incredibly good ruler. So we need a brutal conqueror who nevertheless ultimately turns out to be a (fairly) good guy once they give up that war stuff and settle down a bit, who still looks like Genghis.

    Got it!

    Edited on 07/31/2008 8:27pm
    You must be registered and logged in to post a message.
  • Avatar of rgc19

    rgc19

    [20]Jul 31, 2008
    • member since: 05/20/07
    • level: 5
    • rank: Caveman Lawyer
    • posts: 244
    I won't pinpoint specifics, but in a small way, Avatar serves as a cautionary tale against rampant imperialism. Now you might look at me like I'm crazy. "Ozai was crazy. He only conquered because he sought absolute power and believed the fire nation superior in nature to the other provinces", you'll say. But this was an evolved mindset. Take a look at the episode in which Roku shows Aang his past. Sozin proposes to Roku that the fire nation, in all of its glory, should spread its wealth amongst the other nations. Roku wisely declined, foreseeing the inherent problems with Sozin's reasoning. While the initial proposition (spread the wealth) is seemingly a noble one, it will often lead to imperialist agressions. Fast forward one hundred years and what do we have? An evil empire that has lost its once admirable ideals. The problem, you could argue, is not with the rulers of the fire nation (though they are/were flawed) but with the mere notion of imperialism, in any form, however small. Ya dig?
    You must be registered and logged in to post a message.