Over at one  of my favorite blogs, “According to Hoyt”,  there was a guest post by Christopher Nuttall about encouraging a writer.

I’ve dabbled at writing fiction, but after several attempts, I’ve discovered that I prefer straight non-fiction. Since I don’t know that I have an audience, I write what pleases me, and what pleases me is the unity of knowledge: the weaving together of isolated fields of knowledge into a more complete vision.  I’m not a voluntary talker: I don’t say much unless I think I have something worth saying, unless you happen to push one of my buttons.

So, if you’re seeing this blog for the first time, drop a comment. Say hi. Let me know you are human and how you wound up here on this lonely, dusty, back road of the information highway of all places you could possibly be.

A grand review of antiquity has produced the following results.  For history in general I have finished the review of applications of institutions, and will be doing a review of applications of culture. The periods of classical and medieval history are better connected to subdivision of the 16th century.  Modern history has done a review of North and South Korea. The 16th century now has a reference to Somalia; the 17th to Nagoya, Japan; the 18th  and 19th century to more cities. The mid 19th century now has a brief summary of the United Kingdom, which is a particular area of interest. I made some progress in getting the 20th century and its various subdivisions better developed.

The disentanglement of nations has been less fruitful, largely because worldwide patterns of population and influence have shifted greatly since antiquity, but there was some progress.   I have in mind applications of social mechanics, so I took some time to do a little more development.

Institutions in general are going through a review of history. I am still taking religion through a review of Western Civilization: For the particular institutions government, economics, education, and family studies, I have begun to emphasize the connections to cities.

What all this has to do with antiquity is not instantly clear, except that in order to investigate antiquity, all these other subjects need to be sufficiently developed, too.

I have just finished an upload of what I have been working on, so that all the stuff I’ve been talking about is now visible. I have been seriously negligent in updating the site, but I hope to do better.

For history in general, I’m nearly done reviewing the connections of institutions. For prehistory, I’m working on adding institutions. For antiquity, I’m working on adding details of culture. For classical and medieval history in general, I’ve been working on adding more of the nations that history in general and modern history are connected to. I’ve been connecting the 18th century back to periods of antiquity, so this will be getting more attention. For the 19th century in general, I have finished a review of the peoples of the world, and I am now looking at social mechanics. There has been a little improvement of the particular periods, and I have been adding connections to a few cities. For the 20th century in general, I have also finished a review of peoples of the world and social mechanics, and I am now doing a review of religion. There has also been some connection of the periods of the 20th century to cities. For the early 21st century, I have also finished a review of peoples and I am now working on reviewing social mechanics.

For sociology in general, I have finished the review of history and I am now reviewing the connections of religion. For peoples of the world, I am still reviewing history.  I don’t have much progress on particular peoples. Communities are almost fully connected to details of culture as far as I have them developed. For social mechanics, I have almost finished a review of peoples of the world (finally!) and will be working on reviewing religion.

Culture in general is also finishing a review of peoples of the world. For Anthropology in general, I am still making connections to particular cities.  Personal studies are being connected to centuries of antiquity.

The most visible result I have today us a paragraph with an overview of China from 1501 to the present. I wouldn’t say that is enough to make me an expert on China, but it is a piece of the puzzle for modern history.

I have been using middle prehistory as some incentive to add more cities to periods of the 19th century and 20th century. These aren’t showing up in the summaries yet, but they will in the future.  I also have more interconnections of nations and cities. African peoples are now connected to specific nations as far as I can go for now. The next target is Latin peoples.

Since world history depends so heavily on sociology, I have been aggressively reviewing the history of sociology. This pass is nearly done, but is still disappointingly superficial. Likewise, the review of the history of peoples of the world has been rather superficial.  The list of nations is being connected to more details of religion and government.  The list of cities is being connected to details of material culture.  Social mechanics in general has been going through an extensive review of peoples, and I am going through a review of the application of institutions to history.

Prehistory has been most successful in prompting development of later divisions of history, chiefly the 19th century, 20th century, and early 21st century.   For Antiquity, I have finished a review of peoples, cities, and social mechanics and I am currently going through a review of institutions.  For classical and medieval history, I have finished a review of how other history applies, and I am connecting more nations and distributing them to their respective peoples. For modern history, I have been doing a review of the influence and importance of nations and peoples. This has been  This has been most successful for the larger nations of India and Pakistan.  The 19th century in particular has been going through a similar review, which has been beneficial in giving a background look at the Ottoman empire, the Persian empire, India, and Pakistan. The 20th century has some similar developments.

I have begun working on the review of social mechanics for Asiatic peoples, Western Civilization, and American Indian peoples. I am still working on getting African peoples fully connected to all the nations on the list of nations, but I am getting close to having this finished.   The list of communities is still being connected to details of culture, but this is making progress. I have been developing the largest few cities in more detail, with connections to various nations, cities, and elements of social mechanics.  For social mechanics in general, I am going through a review of the application of nations.  I have had some success in developing this subject and making connections to nations and cities,  with prompting from history in general.

I have been reviewing the history of institutions, although this also has more references than content.  Religion in particular is getting most of the attention.   For culture, I have been going through a review of the application of different nations and peoples.  Anthropology is being developed by connecting cities.

In the review of aids to history on general, I have finished reviewing peoples of the world, and also finished a review of social mechanics. I am now ready to begin the application of social institutions. This should help my technique of historical research some.  Prehistory is being connected to centuries of classical and medieval history, antiquity is going through a review of peoples, and classical and medieval history is going through a review of how modern history has developed it.

Modern history is going through a review of peoples. This is currently approximately in Hispanic peoples. The 16th century still has a number of nations to connect to. I am adding cities to the 17th and 18th centuries. For the 19th century, I have decided that the Ottoman Empire and the Persia were the two large regional powers in the middle East, and I am aware that these were being squeezed between the British empire from the south and the Russian empire from the North. Lesser nations still need to be reviewed.

For the 20th century, I have been reviewing African nations. The review has been revealing mostly that I have inadequate information on the early half of the 20th century, but I am in the process of correcting and extending it.   The mid 20th century, the era of World War II and the early Cold War, is beginning a process of adding more nations. The late mid 20th century, the mid Cold War era, is also being connected to more nations. I have been seeing that one of the chief social movements, revolutionary Marxism, has an ugly face and bloody hands, and in few places worse than post-colonial Africa. I am likely to expound on this idea in future posts. For the late 20th century, I find that events have been difficult to summarize. The early 21st century is going through a review of nations, which also reveals that I don’t have good summaries.

Sociology in general is going through a review of its history, by now well into the 19th century. As I recall, the review of the 20th century is likely to slow-moving.  Peoples of the world are also going through a review of classical and medieval history and picking up developments of the past couple of months.  I am connecting nations in general to subdivisions of government, which will be a great help in the study of government.  I am connecting Western Civilization to more cities, a project I have been wanting to finish for some time. Asiatic peoples are going through a review of how American Indian peoples can be applied.  Communities are being connected to details of culture. I have been looking specifically at Tokyo and making connections between it and other cities, while I connect Seoul to earlier periods of the 18th and 17th century.  Social mechanics is going through a review of peoples.

Institutions at the general level are going through a review of modern history. I am taking religion through a review of peoples, and adding nations to government, economics, education, and family studies.

Culture in general is going through a review of peoples. Material culture is expanding connections to nations, and I am beginning to connect conceptual culture to more nations also.

Anthropology in general is being connected to more cities, and I am also connecting particular groups to earlier periods of history. Personal studies and science are both being connected to more nations.