texts: What was Libya's form of direct democracy (Jamahiria) like in practice?

texts:
I've been following the recent events in Libya and I learned about the Green Book, which outlines Gaddafi's vision for a democratic socialism. Published in 1975, it proposed a form of direct democracy supposedly implemented in Libya called Jamahiria.

  "This new theory is based on the authority of the people, without representation or deputation. It achieves direct democracy in an orderly and effective form. It is superior to the older attempts at direct democracy which were impractical because they lacked popular organizations at base levels."

Gaddafi was widely critical of the different forms of dictatorship through history, and he even counted representative democracies among them. "The most tyrannical dictatorships the world has known have existed under the aegis of parliaments."

He claimed western democracy is not democratic enough; that he was not "the leader", and "you don't understand the system here".

How well do we understand the system there? How did Jamahiria actually work in practice, was there actually a process of direct democracy, to any degree?


texts: Why didn't Mao see that the "Great Leap Forward" would be such a disaster?

texts: I've been reading about Mao Zedong and I heard about his Great Leap Forward. I read that it ended up splitting families apart and causing a massive economic crash. Why didn't Mao Zedong see this would happen.


texts: chests for transporting bedding furnishings (and mattresses)

texts:
In Medieval Portugal (13th-14th centuries) chests specific for transporting mattresses and bedding furnishings were called 'almafreixe' (term of Arabic origin).

In English I have found references to:
- chest: storage of clothes and other items
- casket: small portable chest for jewelery
- coffer: portable chest, sometimes large and with domed lids, sometimes small (e.g. money chest)

I would like to know if the Iberian 'almafreixe' has an equivalent in English, or if it would simply be called the 'bedding chest / coffer'.

P.S. The cassone does not fit the bill because it is of Italian origin, it was basically a trousseau and, as far as I know, it is from the Renaissence period.


texts: What was the role of the mountain ranges surrounding India in developing India's civilization?

texts:
I am reading 'The Wonder That Was India' by A.L.Basham. In chapter 1, Introduction the author says,

  India's isolation has never been complete, and the effect of the mountain wall in developing her unique civilization has often been overrated.

I would like to understand the role of the Himalayas in India's civilization and how is it overrated.


texts: Is there any historical evidence of boiling oil being poured on attackers?

texts: A typical modern scenario of the medieval siege was the throwing of oil on the attackers from ramparts.  Oil was really expensive so why waste it on attackers?  Most commonly the items thrown were boiled sewage, rocks, and arrows.  Does anyone know of any primal source of evidence of boiling oil being used as a weapon in sieges?


texts: Why were gravediggers, actors and former gladiators (but not slaves) banned from the Colosseum?

texts:
According the website Colosseum, some people were banned from attending events at the Colosseum. The same information is given on the Wikipedia Colosseum page which cites the book Rome: An Oxford Archaeological Guide. However, none of these sources gives a reason (the website Colosseum may also have got the information from the same source as Wikipedia), while Keith Hopkins, in 'The Colosseum', does not appear to mention any such ban.

As for possible reasons, I can think of the following:

Gravediggers. According to this Wikipedia page, 'In many cultures throughout history, gravediggers have been highly marginalized by their societies'. I'm thinking the same held true in Ancient Rome, that maybe they were considered 'untouchable'.
Former gladiators. Were they considered a potential threat (an assassin) to one of the VIPs? This sounds like a suicide mission so there has to be another reason I think.
Actors. According to this blog, 'Actors, in Roman society, were considered to hold a lower, dangerous status and were often avoided.'

Concerning status in Roman society, weren't prostitutes also low status? And slaves? Of the former, no mention is made of a ban. In fact, the Encyclopedia of Women in the Ancient World states that prostitutes could solicit customers during shows at the Colosseum. Slaves, according to the Colosseum website and also this Smithsonian article, were allowed though.

I'm also wondering how the gate men at the Colosseum would know if someone was an actor or a gravedigger (though presumably ex-gladiators would be easier to spot).

Why not allow actors and other low status people in together with the slaves at least?

Were there other groups who were also banned?


texts: Did Washington like or dislike the monarchical styles of address proposed by John Adams?

texts:
In high school history class a teacher taught us that George Washington desired and sought nobility/monarchy-like titles for his office of President, such as ones involving "Highness", "Majesty", and "Excellency".

In the HBO historical dramatization series John Adams, the story shows Washington chastising Adams for suggesting such titles without his knowledge, saying

Just Mr. President, no more.

Do we know which, if either, of these versions of history is accurate (or more accurate)?

I know that the government had already outlawed hereditary titles of nobility, thus it was overall unpopular and of course the accepted title was and is Mr. President.


texts: A counterpoint/corrections list to "A Peoples' History of the United States"

texts:
I'm very interested in reading Howard Zinn's "A Peoples' History of the United States". I've heard it's a more honest accounting of American history than most textbooks.

The strongest criticisms I've seen against it are that it doesn't cite any sources (and while the author tries to explain that I still believe it's important to know where the author got his information from) and that the author ignores incidents and facts that don't support his theories.

What I'm looking for, is some kind corrections or counterpoint list for theories/ideas in the book that not might be so accurate. I'm aware of Larry Schweikart and Michael Allen's "A Patriots' History of the United States," but from its reviews it seems like that book is even more skewed than Zinn's.

I realize this may be more of an opinion question and I may be out of luck, but if there's something that can help me decipher truth from an author using some historical facts and discarding others just to get his point across, I would appreciate the heads up.


texts: What is this war machine shown on Trajan's column?

texts:
The most comprehensive visual evidence about Roman army of I-II centuries is the Trajan column. It shows in great detail cloths, weapons, ships, military machines and other equipment of the Roman army. Here is an enigmatic depiction from this column:

The image is taken from this web site:

It seems from context that this is some siege equipment. What could this possibly be?


texts: Why does Japan use the same type of AC power outlet as the US?

texts:
Does it have something to do with the US taking part in aiding reconstruction of the country after WWII? I've tried googling around for an answer, but every site I find simply states the outlet style, as well as voltage and frequency, as opposed to explaining why the outlet type is shared.

Just to be clear, I am asking what lead to the Japanese choosing to use Type A/B  plugs & sockets. The spirit of the question is: What is the historical reason why if I buy a device in Japan it can clearly and easily plug into a US socket and vice versa.

I'm not asking about voltages. I'm not asking about AC/DC or current. I'm aware those things are different. I'm simply asking about the physical socket.


texts: How long did it take to bind a book in 13th century England?

texts:
I am looking for information on the time it took for the construction and binding of books in particular, not the writing or copying of them.

So, considering that the material is ready to be bound, and that the book to be made is fairly plain and functional (e.g. as wiki says "bound in plain white vellum over boards, and had a brief title hand-written on the spine"):

How long would this process take for someone who was skilled at it (i.e. it was their job) per book?

How much longer would a luxury book (decorated cover, metal furniture, etc) take compared with this plain book?

If more than one book was needing to be constructed, could time be saved (either in preparation of the materials or the binding process itself) by grouping tasks, or would they need to be bound one by one?


texts: Was it Bismarck who said: "He who is master of Bohemia is master of Europe"?

texts:
Did Otto von Bismarck say the following?:

  He who is master of Bohemia is master of Europe


texts:
Mad Men, season 7, episode 4, describes the computer business in 1969 as follows. IBM would lease computers to businesses, but would do so only for short leases, and would replace them with newer models on the lease renewal. Therefore, a bunch of businesses had started in competition, who bought IBM computers and leased them for longer terms and cheaper.

Of course, Mad Men is fiction, but I wonder: (to what extent) is this true?


texts: Where did the Roman money involved in the spice and luxury trade end up?

texts:
In the book "The Roman Empire and the Indian Ocean" by McLaughlin, which is a very interesting read, he states that annual bullion going to buy luxuries in India was around 50-100 million sesterces per year between around 60 AD and 160 AD.  He mentioned that there have been very large coin hoards found in India, specifically in the Tamil region.  He also mentioned how the Indians would use their own currency to buy trade items from further east as they preferred to keep the Roman money as it was a better quality and higher silver content.

That amount of silver/gold exported was pretty large.  My question is where did this bullion end up?  I realize at the start it went to India, but did it all stay in India?  Or did they use it to buy other things further on down the line.


texts: How many acres per person were needed for the early American settlers vs. the native Americans?

texts: Clearly the lifestyle of the native peoples of North America was less intensive than that of the European settlers and thus required more land per person. However, theirs was not exclusively a hunter-gatherer culture -- some peoples practiced agriculture fairly extensively. I'd like to know estimates for both the native peoples and the European settlers, especially those on the East Coast of the United States -- how big was the disparity?


texts: Did colonists "resign the power of voting" and have no more right to govern themselves than the Cornish people?

texts:
What exactly made the Americans believe they were different than the Cornish people besides the distance which divided them from England? Wasn't it the settlers' own free decision to move from parliament? All Americans were there of their own free will and were still under the the authority of the crown. "Taxation without representation", while seemingly an undeniable belief in the modern age, was only the statement of a poor minister in colonial America and thus had no legitimate grounds "outside our hearts" I would say. If it was legitimate, what is the distinction between the Cornish people and the Americans? Americans willingly moved hundreds of miles from parliament.

I am asking after reading a short entry on the politics of Samuel Johnson, a brief synopsis reads:

  "The last of these pamphlets, Taxation No Tyranny (1775), was a
  defense of the Coercive Acts and a response to the Declaration of
  Rights of the First Continental Congress of America, which protested
  against taxation without representation.Johnson argued that in
  emigrating to America, colonists had "voluntarily resigned the power
  of voting", but they still had "virtual representation" in Parliament.
  In a parody of the Declaration of Rights, Johnson suggested that the
  Americans had no more right to govern themselves than the Cornish
  people. If the Americans wanted to participate in Parliament, said
  Johnson, they could move to England and purchase an estate. Johnson
  denounced English supporters of America as "traitors to this country",
  and hoped that the matter would be settled without bloodshed, but that
  it would end with "English superiority and American obedience".


texts: Napoleon's Dresden Victory Double-Flank attack

texts:
I know that Napoleon used a double flank attack against the armies at Dresden; and wasn't doing well in the center until a cannonball hit a renowned leader which demoralized the Allied army.

My questions are

Is this "double flank attack" an effective technique? Was it crucial to the victory? Does it have a real name?
Why does it work? In Austerlitz he tricked the enemy into a right flank attack and then won in the center. Why does the reverse work too? Did his idea of also attacking the left flank make the difference between Austerlitz and Dresden?

edit: Also, can you confirm whether this was the main "tactic" of Napoleon's dresden victory?

Thanks in advance!


texts: Why have officers in the U.S. army tended to "top out" at the level of Major?

texts:
In the U.S. army, something like 75%-80% of newly-commissioned Second Lieutenants are promoted to First Lieutenant (around age 25), perhaps 75%-80% of First Lieutenants are promoted to Captain (ages 28-29), and 75%-80% of Captains are promoted to Major (around ages 31-33). About half (or slightly less) of Second Lieutenants make it this far. Call it 48% to make the numbers round.

Only one out of four Majors (12% of the original group) are promoted to Lieutenant Colonel by age 40. Half of the Majors retire around that time at half pay. The remaining one quarter serve out their careers as Majors, and are promoted to Lieutenant Colonel around age 50, shortly before retirement, for purposes of calculating their pensions. This is a form of "social promotion."

Half of the Lieutenant Colonels (6% of the total) are promoted "naturally" to Colonel by age 45; the remainder, at the end of their careers.

Half of the Age-45 Colonels are promoted to General (3% of the Second Lieutenants). The remainder retire as Colonels (and do NOT receive a "final" promotion).

Of course we know that there is a pyramid. But why is it so much less steep up to the level of Major than thereafter?


texts: Looking for source for Jefferson Davis with Bat Wings

texts: Some time ago I came across a large print of Confederate President Jefferson Davis with bat wings, which was ostensibly printed in a northern newspaper during or shortly after the American Civil War. Has anyone else ever come across this print? I've been trying to find it recently without success.


texts: In Battle of Zama, how did Hannibal's use of war elephants lead to a Roman Victory?

texts:
Why did Hannibal attack with elephants from the front? Why not from side?

Also why did the elephants just keep walking through the small gap? Why not wreak havoc in the middle of Roman troops? (like heat seeking missiles)

Why did the elephants just keep charging forward? Why was Hannibal's cavalry routed? Even if they're routed, once the Roman cavalry return, why they don't join in?


texts: How do historians know the details of a seemingly private event?

texts:
Sometimes I read in history that someone said something, but it seems, it's just a daily conversation, or even in private, or a secret event. So how do history writers know these details?

It seems impossible, e.g. when there are only two people, and one of them killed, and then the conversation between them was revealed to history. But similar situations can be met many times. Maybe the history writer imagined or invented those things? That is the only possible scenario, isn't it?


texts: Did Emanuel Lasker write a book declaring that Germany had to win World War I if civilization were to be saved?

texts:
Emanuel Lasker, the second chess world champion, was a very interesting person. I read here that

  During World War I, Lasker […] invested all of his money in
  German war bonds. At the end of the war, he had lost all his money and
  savings. During that period, he wrote a book declaring that Germany
  had to win the war if civilization were to be saved.

However, I was unable to find any other reference to the existence of such a book. For instance, the German Wikipedia article about Lasker mentions no book published by him during the war and the first book he published after the war (Die Philosophie des Unvollendbar, Leipzig 1919) seems to be a book about Philosophy. So, was such book ever written?


texts: What did Ben Franklin mean when he said "The sun of liberty is set; you must light up the candle of industry & economy"?

texts:
The sun of liberty is set; you must light up the candle of industry
  and economy.

I've seen this quote in various places, cited simply as "a correspondence". Looking for more context, I only find:

  In a letter on the Stamp Act, written from London, July 11, 1765, Franklin said, “Idleness and pride tax with a heavier hand than kings and parliaments: if we can get rid of the former, we may easily bear the latter.” He also wrote on the same subject: “The sun of liberty is set: you must light up the candle of industry and economy.”

What did Ben Franklin mean by this? Context or justified interpretation is appreciated. I'm mainly interested in his thoughts on liberty in this regard.


texts: When did the term "mirror" begin to be used in place of "looking glass?"

texts:
As recently as 150 years ago (I'm thinking of Lewis Carrol's "Through the Looking Glass"), the term looking glass was used to denote what we today call a mirror.

I'm wondering, however, when the transition between these two words occurred, and I can't seem to find any historical sources for this. Could someone help me?


texts: Why did Gandhi give the violent "Do or Die" slogan to the Quit India movement?

texts: Mahatma Gandhi was a pacifist and anti-violence leader. Why did he adopt the slogan "Do or Die" for the Quit India movement? It sounds more like a strong, desperate phrase.


texts: What role did the media have in the outcome of the "Arab Spring" revolt in Tunisia?

texts:
What was the role of the media in the outcome of the revolution in Tunisia?
Throughout the revolution we saw the role of the media was extremely important.
What was the role of the media during the revolution?


texts: At what point did mapmaking begin to accurately reflect what we now know about the earth?

texts:
Looking at maps through the ages, it is apparent that maps have become closer and closer to representing the locations and shapes of the Earth's features with increasing accuracy over the centuries. What significant events affected this, and when did maps become significantly close to what we now know?

Specifically, it seems to me that aerial photography and satellite imagery probably contributed significantly to mapmaking. What other developments were significant?


texts: What is the latest case of employment of Cretan archers in Antiquity?

texts:
It is known that Cretan archers were widely used (presumably as mercenaries) across Mediterranean by Greek armies and were occasionally included in Roman armies of Republic and of Imperial period. I do not remember if there is a secure evidence for that so cannot provide reference, but somewhere I have seen the Cretan archers mentioned in Dacian wars of emperor Trajan.

But what is the latest known case of employment of Cretan archers, supported by reliable evidence? Is there any evidence for the use of Cretan archers in Roman Empire in III-V centuries AD?


texts: Are steam engines still in regular use anywhere in the world?

texts:
Are there any countries in which steam engines have a regular purpose, or are still dominant on the railway? When did they officially fade out of use in the western world?
In Australia at least, they are being privately looked into again to make a comeback. Is this the case anywhere else?
It's several questions, I know, but mainly anything related to the title.


texts: In modern terms (for example the 2017 US dollar), how much purchasing power is 50,000 (French) Francs in 1829?

texts: Not simply a conversion of money, as even independent of inflation, the value of basics like bread and such change over time. I am reading "The Count of Monte Cristo" and a character has just remarked that 50,000 Francs is "a large sum, but not a fortune". Would this be, for example, enough to purchase a upper-middle class home in Paris at the time?


texts: What deaths were caused by weapons deployed during a war long after the war has ended?

texts:
Inspired by Last death caused by World War I.

Even as recently as 2013, we still have had casualties from abandoned munition stockpiles and the likes from WW1. I'm wondering if there are any wars from before WW1 which caused recent casualties. As a ridiculous example or 2: a collector who was killed while cleaning their Civil War era rifle which was still loaded; or someone who falls into a trap pit dug during the American Revolution. I'm specifically talking about remnants of past wars which are still out there in the world, like boobytraps or unexploded munitions.

Is the longest period between the start of a war and their most recent casualties really 99 years? or have there been even longer periods?


texts: What was the legal status of an East German once he had reached West Germany?

texts:
Cold War histories usually state something like "any German able to reach West Germany was automatically granted West German citizenship" to explain how easy it was to go from East to West, if only you could get round/across/through the wall.

So it's plain that once you defected, if you succeeded, you could establish yourself easily in West Germany. You were a West German. You could presumably apply immediately for a West German passport and travel, say, to France or Denmark.

As the comments below point out there was no legal distinction between citizens of the East and citizens of the West in West German law, and this was constitutionally guaranteed in the 1949 Basic Law.

But what was your legal status as far as East Germany and her allies were concerned? Could you travel to the Eastern bloc countries immediately on your freshly minted West German passport? If not immediately, then after how long? Did you face immediate arrest or did the DDR, too, suddenly see you as a West German? Did the DDR formally revoke your citizenship and, if so, how quickly?


texts: How much did it cost to maintain Gustavus Adolphus' army? How much of it was paid by Richelieu?

texts:
I know that Cardinal Richelieu subsidized a large portion of Gustavus Adolphus' Protestant forces during the 30 Year War - despite France, ironically, being a Catholic power (citation obviously googleable).

However I was at a loss to find just how much was it costing (per year or total) to pay for Gustavus Adolphus' army in Germanies and how much of that was subsidized by Richelieu?


texts: Had there been a significant physiological difference between the Vikings and the Europeans (around the 11th century)?

texts:
Everyone who has seen the show The Vikings surely noticed that the Nordic men are far more muscular and much bigger. Is there a genetic difference  that was making them better fighters or had they been better fighters rather thanks to their rough nurture and violent culture?

Is there any evidence that supports this hypothesis? If so, has the physiological difference between the Vikings and the Europeans played a significant role in the wars of Vikings?


texts: Was *Green Eggs and Ham* really banned in China from 1965–1991?

texts:
The Wikipedia article on Green Eggs and Ham states that the children's book was banned in China in 1965 for its "portrayal of early Marxism", and that the ban was lifted in 1991.  The citations for this are a clickbait article and a New York Public Library blog post.

Is there documentary evidence that this ban actually existed?  If so, what was the rationale?  I don't understand what the book has to do with early Marxism.


texts: I am reading a book (Kathryn Kerby-Fulton, Books Under Suspicion, (University of Notre Dame Press) 2006.) called Books Under Suspicion. In it, there is an ongoing struggle between the mendicant orders and the antimendicant heretics. There is no good definition for what an antimendicant is in this context. Can anyone help me sort out this debate?


texts: Why is the Qing Dynasty in China considered Feudalistic?

texts:
From my understanding of the Qing Dynasty (and a few more dyansties before it as well), the Empire (under the Emperor) owned all land. Power and responsibilities were delegated to state elected bureaucrats who control either a geographic region or an aspect of government. (pretty much like modern day governors and secretaries).

From my knowledge, there were no fiefdoms, nobles, warrior-lords (knights), nor exchange of land for protection deals between the multiple layers of government.

The Qing Dynasty seems more like a monarchical federalist bureaucracy than feudalism. Why is it still considered the feudalistic era of Chinese history?

In fact I feel like Qing Dynasty's system of government management is almost as far from feudalism as you can get.


texts: During the American Civil War, could you send mail to someone across the border?

texts: Before the Civil War, there was mail service between all the different states.  During the war, could you still send a letter from, say New York to Georgia, or did the post office shut down services to states on the other side?


texts: Did a Japanese medieval castle withstand US battleship fire during the Pacific War?

texts:
I have overheard the story from an US soldier that during the Pacific War the Japanese mounted a defense in an old medieval castle. The Americans asked for support from a battleship. The battleship successfully shelled the fortress only to find out that the castle was able to withstand battleship fire!

Now if you know how big battleship guns are...you, me and the other people are thinking "he is pulling our leg". But he insisted that this is true and they finally called a special ship with 15" guns and extreme high-explosive grenades shells which was able to tear the castle down.

Does anyone know if there is a grain truth in this story ? Google Fu failed.


texts: What was the number of native casualties in the Muslim invasion of Hispania?

texts:
Where can I find information about the number of casualties amongst native peoples produced by the Muslim invasion of Visigothic Hispania?

Strangely, it's very easy to get an estimate of the number of casualties in most other wars and genocides, including some much older ones that happened in America or Greece, but no information about the invasion of Hispania, just some sparse data on some battles and sieges.


texts: In Studying the peoples of pre-Roman Britain, what are our primary reference sources?

texts: Where do we get our information on the people's of pre-Roman Britain?


texts:
This photo was found in the same envelope as a photo of the Prince Imperial, Louis Napoleon, (recently identified on this site by Evargalo). The photos (seven in all) were recently handed down on the English side of my family.

What I've established so far:

The card measures approximately 4 inches (10.16cm) by 2.5 inches
(6.35cm) The design on the back (boxes in the corners, the use
of a simple crown) means it was printed no earlier than 1873.
When this card was printed, the photographers A & G. Taylor only had
branches in London, Liverpool and Leeds, so the printing is
definitely before 1878.
This comment says the Leeds branch opened c.1875; this date
seems most likely for the printing of this card given that the font
for ‘Leeds’ is different (as if it was added to an existing
template). At least three of the other cards in the collection also
date from around 1875.

Other than the above, the best clue would seem to be the costume which (I’ve been told by an elderly relative) is probably either North European or Orthodox and was possibly take for a confirmation or some similar event.

As requested/suggested by AlllnOne in his comment, this close up might help:

As before, I'm looking for any information or additional clues which might lead to an identification of the teenager. A definite answer to the main question would be great, but I don't know if there is enough information here for that to be possible.

Failing an ID, I am prepared to accept an answer which gives information on the costume / other details in the photo. Can anyone provide evidence that it is North European or Orthodox (or indeed from somewhere else)?

EDIT

As suggested by Evargalo in his comment, this may be Grand Duke Paul Alexandrovich of Russia. The dates seem to match quite well (date of photo, date of his birth + possible age in the photo). Can anyone offer any further evidence which might confirm (or refute) this?

Not sure if this will be of any use but (for context), of the seven cards in the envelope, the following five have been positively identified:

Prince Alfred (1844 – 1900), 2nd son of Queen Victoria, Duke of
Saxe-Coburg and Gotha
Grand Duchess Maria Alexandrovna of Russia (1853 – 1920), wife of
Prince Alfred
Princess Dagmar of Denmark, later Maria Feodorovna (1847 -
1928), wife of Czar Alexander III
Maria Sophie of Bavaria (1841 – 1925), Queen Consort of the
Kingdom of the Two Sicilies
Prince Imperial Louis-Napoléon Bonaparte (1856 – 79)
(identified by Evargalo in a previous question)

The remaining picture is possibly Princess Louise, Duchess of Argyll. Although there are no clues at all on dress (damaged photo, only the head is clear), and the date is very approximate (1860-80, no text on front or back), I found a photo which bears a striking resemblance (facial features).


texts: Has anyone ever created or supported a political party they profoundly disagree with in order to split the opposition vote?

texts:
In a First Past The Post electoral system, has anyone ever created or significantly supported a political party they profoundly disagree with in order to split the opposition vote?

Additional background: this question about history was born out of some musings about current politics in the United Kingdom. Suppose hypothetically that the outcome of Brexit all came down to anti-Brexit MPs winning a general election. Suppose also that someone extremely rich wanted to swing the outcome against Brexit as much as they possibly could. One hypothetical possibility is that instead of supporting an anti-Brexit party, they could actually found a new, pro-Brexit party standing in all 650 seats. Let us call this party the "Moderate Right". Suppose it supports a moderately soft Brexit but otherwise has policies very similar to the incumbent Conservative party, and policies as different as it can from all parties in the Remain Alliance. Then, possibly, it may split the pro-right wing and pro-Brexit vote between the Conservatives, Brexit Party, and Moderate Right, paving the way for a Remain Alliance victory in a First Past the Post electoral system.

Has something of this nature ever been attempted at some point in history anywhere in the world?


texts: When did Japan and the Three Kingdoms of Korea first meet?

texts:
Wikipedia claims that Japan and the Three Kingdoms of Korea started having close relationships at the end of the 4th century, during the Kofun period. However the article doesn't provide any sources to back up the claim.

When did the two civilizations first met? When did they start having regular relationships?

I'd appreciate answers that point to literary and/or archaeological evidence.


texts: Who was (reputed to be) Alexander The Great's real father?

texts:
Macedonian rumor had it that Alexander was not the son of Philip II. This rumor was based on the main ground that Philip II had several official wives a fact which infuriated Olympias, Alexander's mother. Another cause is that Philip II's many sons wanted to inherit the title of King of Macedonia. He was also rumored not to look like his father.

In a classical way forward, Alexander or his admirers later spread the rumor that indeed with such victories, his real father had to be someone with a magic or divine profile. The real father identity was then rumored to be an exiled Pharaoh of Egypt who had indeed found refuge and protection by Philip II in Macedonia. This pharaoh is represented in middle-ages paintings as a half dragon. What was his name and how did he come to be believed to have magical powers?

Sources: Plutarch / Alexander. E.g., describing the feud at Philip's wedding:

  At the wedding of Cleopatra, whom Philip fell in love with and married, she being much too young for him, her uncle Attalus in his drink desired the Macedonians would implore the gods to give them a lawful successor to the kingdom by his niece. This so irritated Alexander, that throwing one of the cups at his head, "You villain," said he, "what, am I then a bastard?"

Note: I am not considering the question of whether such a Pharaoh existed. Of interest is the story itself. Interesting enough that it inspired artists and philosophers. (Source: Peter Sloterdijk in 'Die schrecklichen Kinder der Neuzeit' — not translated in english yet.)


texts: When did people start saying about the US that "it's a free country"?

texts:
Confronted with lack of permission, Americans sometimes reflexively claim that "it's a free country". Obviously, the truth is more nuanced, with degrees of freedom, competing definitions of freedom, and so on.

Where did this meme come from, and what was it first used to justify?


texts: When was the festival of the See of Peter in the 6th Century?

texts:
I've been researching the decrees of the second Council of Tours (AD 567), specifically Canon XXII:

  Some still hold fast the old error, that they should honor the 1st of January. Others, on the festival of the See of Peter, present meat offerings to the dead, and partake of meats which have been offered to demons. Others reverence certain rocks, or trees, or fountains, etc. The priests should root out these heathenish superstitions. (1)

I understand the 1st of January to have been when Consuls entered office and citizens would renew vows, make offerings to chief deities such as Jupiter and Juno, and take auspice.

But when was the festival of the See of Peter in the 6th Century?

Does it correspond to the Feast of Saints Peter and Paul?

Personally, I'm not familiar with the calendrical history and the changes the calendar went through.

(1) A History Of The Councils Of The Church Volumes 1 to 5 by Charles Joseph Hefele D.D. Chapter I, The synods until the end of the sixth century.


texts:
As far as I understand serfdom is very closely related to slavery. For example, Wikipedia mentions serfs could be traded, bought and sold and were more or less at the mercy of their owner/lord and even the word serf is derived from the word slave. I understand that one big distinction between serfdom and slavery, as mentioned on the Wikipedia page, is that serfs were tied to land. But it does not mention where this institution came, which is what I would like to know.

The reason why I am wondering about the above is that from my own reading on slavery I understand that it was quite heterogeneous. As explained here, slavery in ancient Rome was not the same institution as for example slavery in the US. This shows that there are already varieties of slavery, so why is serfdom considered distinct and different?

Is it just that the term serfdom is itself historic so it stuck even though there is no fundamental difference, or do historians consider these two institutions different on some fundamental level?

I also understand that slavery and serfdom were different in different countries, as mentioned in the comments, but this is what just adds to my confusion. As mentioned in the Wikipedia article, slavery is very similar to serfdom and even the word serfdom derives from the Latin word for slave, but then there are different forms of slavery and different forms of serfdom which to me implies there is some fundamental difference which is not explained in the article (or at least I did not understood it if it was).

To clarify even more, I see that the article says that there was difference in rights under feudalism between slavery and serfdom, but there was difference between rights of slaves in Rome and the US. In fact, based on the blog article, it seems to me there was bigger difference between rights of Slaves in Rome and US than between slaves and serfs under feudalism. That is what confuses me.


texts: Where were Guadalupe Victoria's headquarters in Veracruz?

texts:
Mexico had a Provisional Government in 1823-1824, after the end of the First Mexican Empire. Guadalupe Victoria, a member of the governing triumvirate and the subsequent president, received an especial political mandate to run Veracruz, and during this period:

in the port of Veracruz, he besieged the fort of San Juan de Ulúa
at the fort of Puente Nacional, Veracruz, he held a junta de guerra, "in favor of the legitimately constituted authorities"
in Xalapa, later state capital of Veracruz, he motivated a schism in a Masonic lodge

Where was Victoria's principal office as chief of Veracruz?


texts: In ancient Rome, could free-born Romans become slaves?

texts:
In the article Roman Slavery, Kenneth Tuite, formerly of the Classics Department at the University of Maryland, states quite categorically that Romans could not be slaves:

Although a class system existed, there was no such thing as a native
Roman slave. No matter how impoverished a Roman became, he did not
become a slave.

Leaving aside Nexum contracts (whereby a free man could use his person as collateral on a loan, abolished in 326 BC), the Wikipedia page Slavery in Ancient Rome seems to contradict Tuite:

There were … many cases of poor people selling their children to
richer neighbors as slaves in times of hardship.

Unfortunately, this statement is unsourced, but there is also this page on Roman Slaves which says:

…abandoned children could … be brought up as slaves. The law also
stated that fathers could sell their older children if they were in
need of money.

Further, the article Slavery in the Roman Empire states:

The government would ... take people into slavery if they could not
pay their taxes. There were also many cases of poor people selling
their children as slaves to richer neighbours.

One problem with all these sources is that they do not indicate any time periods or dates. At least some laws must have changed over the hundreds of years of ancient Rome, from the early Roman Republic to the latter days of the western Roman Empire.
Has Tuite over-generalized? Are the other sources possibly referring to non-Romans, or to laws that only existed (for example) during the early republic (as with Nexum) or for a very limited period of time?
Were there any circumstances (other than Nexum, non-payment of taxes, abandoned children or children sold by fathers) under which a native Roman could become a slave?


texts: Have American gangsters ever helped their government in war time out of patriotism?

texts:
In the movie Rocketeers the gangsters who were working unknowingly for the Nazis switched immediately sides after the hero revealed the identify of their employers. I think there are also many other movies where gangsters are depicted as patriotic.

Given their influence in the underworld the Mafia and other criminal groups could have gathered important information and support which is not available to the legal or military system. Is there any indication that American gangsters in general were willing to help by e.g.

giving tips to authorities if they observed suspicious activities (e.g. spying) in their district
watched channels for smuggling
accept disadvantages and losses by not working together with war-time
enemies.
etc.

The important thing is that the gangsters did not have any advantage
by working with the authorities (for e.g. money) so that the decision was triggered by patriotism.

Essentially, is the movie depiction of patriotic gangsters unadulterated kitsch or has it a real background?


texts: What was the typical peasant's diet like in Europe during the High Middle Ages?

texts: I know that wheat, barley, rye, onions, lettuce-like plants and turnips were common but how common were other things like meat or cheese? I've heard the "plowman's lunch" was a concoction of the dairy council so that's out as an approximation. I'd assume that a fair amount of poor quality beer or wine figured into the diet as well.


texts: Why does the amount of days in an year on average of the Gregorian calendar only have 4 decimal places (365.2425)?

texts:
Alfonsine tables available at the time of the Gregorian reform provided enough information (however inaccurate) for the calendar to have been designed such that it expressed more precision regarding the amount of days in a year on average (e.g., 365.2425463 instead of 365.2425).
Why isn't the Gregorian calendar as precise as it could have been, with regards to its designation of leap years? Did Pope Gregory XIII just get lazy and think that three rules (every 400 inclusive-or (every 4, but not every 100) years are leap years) were already far too complicated of an algorithm for the average person to handle? Was there some sort of a Christian taboo on writing numbers with more than 4 decimal places? Or perhaps did he think, "We're not really sure if 365.2425463 days in a year is accurate anyway, so we may as well truncate it to 365.2425. Just to be safe."?


texts: How much leisure time was enjoyed by English peasants in the 16th century?

texts:
It seems like technological advances like seed drills, the cotton gin, reapers (grain harvesters), John Deere tractors, nitrogen fixation, steam engines, the internal combustion engine, cars, aircraft, industrial farming, GMOs, and many other useful inventions coming after 1500 would have drastically reduced the amount of time the average person labored in the 1500's, but I found this article that argued the opposite: http://groups.csail.mit.edu/mac/users/rauch/worktime/hours_workweek.html

The biggest problem I have with this article is that it implies that any time not spent in service to the lord was leisure time. This article seems to only be talking about the number of hours and days the typical laborer spent in service for their lord. It doesn't mention the amount of labor the average person spent trying to obtain sustenance for themselves and their families. For example, it claims that laborers only spent 120 days in service to their Lord. Were they really able to take 245 days off every year and still have food for themselves and their family?

To make the point about leisure time, I only work 8 hours a day, 5 days a week. But I don't get the rest of that time for leisure. I have a habit of sleeping about 8 hours a day. Also, I brush my teeth several times a day; I also shower, shave, wash my hair, brush my hair, etc. daily. So, I spend about an hour conducting personal hygiene. I also spend about  20 minutes in transit to and from work. I don't have to spend any time hunting my meat, picking my veggies, or even really preparing my food. Since I'm a single guy, most of my food is microwaveable. I spend about 15 minutes each day preparing my food. I also buy clothes via Amazon every other month for about an hour. So, that averages to about 1 minute a day. I pay someone to clean and rent, so I spend no time on maintenance. So, for those 5 days a week, I have about 6 hours and 24 minutes of free time to read, play video games, or do anything else, at my leisure.

Now, back in the 16th century, I doubt as much time was spent on hygiene, but I tend to believe more time would be spent on obtaining meat and veggies (wouldn't they have to constantly have fresh due to limitations in preservative methods), food preparation, housing maintenance, clothing maintenance, etc. Also, wouldn't mandatory religious ceremonies limit the amount of leisure time? I think of England as a very religious during this time.


texts: Barbara, Celarent, Darii, et Ferio. Whom devised the vowel-consonant designations?

texts:
In the history of philosophy & logic there is a taxonomy of syllogisms designated by name. William of Sherwood and Peter of Spain write of a mnemonic to help medieval students of logic memorize the syllogisms:

  Barbara celarent darii ferio baralipton
  Celantes dabitis fapesmo frisesomorum;
  Cesare campestres festino baroco; darapti
  Felapton disamis datisi bocardo ferison.

Vowels & particular consonants have particular meaning.

a – universalis affirmativa (i.e. affirmo)
e – universalis negativa (i.e. nego)
i – particularis affirmativa (i.e. affirmo)
o – particularis negativa (i.e. nego)
s – conversio simplex.
p – conversio per accidens.
c – reductio ad contradictionem
m – metathesis (in Petrus Hispanus, conversio per contrapositionem?).
B – reductio ad Modus Barbara.
C – reductio ad Modus Celarent.
D – reductio ad Modus Darii.
F – reductio ad Modus Ferio.

Whom first devised the vowel-consonant designations in the taxonomy of syllogisms?

(A link to an article describing the context of logicians naming syllogisms mnemonically: https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/medieval-syllogism/)


texts: What was the basis for the Nazis to support various ethnic minorities in the Soviet Union and elsewhere over the majority populations?

texts:
What was the reason for the Nazis to support certain ethnic minorities over the majority populations in the conquered territories?

For example, they supported Crimean Tatars against the majority of Russians in Crimea, Ukrainians and "mountainers" in Poland against Poles as well as Ruthenians in Carpathian Ukraine against Ukrainians. They also consistently supported various Turkic and Mongolic minorities against the Slavs.

Sometimes they supported totally scanty or improvised ethnic groups against numbered and established peoples.

What was the reason for such policy? Did not it harm the attitude towards the Nazis among the conquered population?

On some instances some ethic groups such as Karaites cited the laws of Russian Empire to receive privileges. Indeed, in late Russian Empire only Jews had deminished rights compared to Russians while most of Turkic, Mongolic native North peoples as well as Cossacks enjoyed privileges over Russians.

Was not the Imperial Russian law in essence the source of the Nazi ethic policies? Is there a connection? Or was it more a case of "the enemy of my enemy is my friend?"


texts: Why did the first Safavid Shia become Shia?

texts:
I'm currently reading the history of Safavid Iran (by Roger Savory) which was a Shia ruling. The eponym of Safavid is Safi-ad-din Ardabili that was a Sunni. We can be sure that his grandson Khvajeh Ali Safavi was Shia.

I want to ask the reason for his convert to Shiism and the age at which he converted.


texts: Were there any Senate hearings involved in ending WW I trench warfare?

texts: I know that tanks becoming more reliable was a part of why trench warfare started to dissipate at the end of World War I. I want to know if there was much in the way of political commentary or public opinion concerning trench warfare.


texts: What were the Lines of Ne Plus Ultra in the War of the Spanish Succession?

texts:
After reading another biography of Marlborough, I am annoyed by the fact the authors mention but do not describe the Lines of Ne Plus Ultra. They make it sound (I have read Chandler and Konstam) as if it was the ultimate system to defend France, and yet Marlborough 'defeated'/crossed it in a matter of weeks.
Admittedly, Marlborough was skilled but... it doesn't make sense based on the 'ultimate' level of defense these lines are described to be in these biographies (without providing detail). English Wikipedia has nothing at all on this. So, what do we actually know about the Lines of Ne Plus Ultra—what were they and what was their intended function?
Note: I imagine I am held back by not searching in French, but I am not 100% convinced.


texts: Which ships arrived at Novo-Arkhangelsk between 1810 and 1815?

texts:
The Russian-American Company's colonial headquarters were at Novo-Arkhangelsk, today's Sitka. Occasionally, supply ships from Russian ports to the west (Okhotsk, Petropavlovsk, Kodiak) would arrive.

The Sv. Mariia Magdalina, under Nikolai Kuritsyn, left Okhotsk in 1810 and reached Sitka in 1811. Did any other ships arrive there during the 1810-1815 period?


texts: When were the first mosques established in Constantinople?

texts: In his book The Man of Numbers about Leonardo Pisano (Fibonacci), Keith Devlin quotes a problem from the Liber Abbaci (Devlin's spelling, I know most others spell it Liber Abici) which is titled "A Problem Proposed to Us by a Most Learned Master of a Constantinople Mosque". As Liber Abbaci dates to the early thirteenth century (first edition predates the sack of Constantinople by the Fourth Crusade by about 2 years), I want to ask about the date/s of establishment of Mosques in Constantinople?


texts: Did the Carthaginians have the option of sending Hannibal to Sicily?

texts:
Sicily was a major focus of the First and Second Punic Wars. The first Punic war ended with Carthage handing over major grain-growing areas on the island, and the port of Lilybaem to Rome as spoils of war.

The second Punic War started as an uprising by Hannibal, a descendant of one of Carthage's native born generals, in Spain against "creeping" Roman domination. With little Carthagian support (but the implicit approval of the government), he raised a "mixed" army, crossed the Alps, and invaded Italy. Because Rome's defenses were too strong for him, he ended in the southern part of the peninsula, fighting a seesaw war.

During the Second Punic War, Carthage sent some 77,000 men to try to recapture Sicily, more than Hannibal had at any one time. They might have done better to reinforce Hannibal with them instead.

But maybe the Carthaginians could have done even better by directing Hannibal to Sicily to receive these reinforcements, re-capture Lilybaem and the grain lands, and prevent Syracuse from falling into Roman hands. Or did naval, or other considerations, rule this out?


texts: Which is the earliest surviving inscription of "SPQR"?

texts:
I have looked around a bit, and was wondering if there was any information about what could be the earliest surviving and accessible (for public) inscriptions which included the Latin initialism SPQR (Senatus Populusque Romanus)? By inscription I mean something carved/engraved on a permanent stationary object, such as on all kinds of architectural objects and elements, versus, eg. writings/engravings on coins, equipment, weapons, armour and other items.
As I understand, inscriptions were commonplace throughout the history of Rome, and a score of them still survive. Wikipedia says that "The title's date of establishment is unknown, but it first appears in inscriptions of the Late Republic, from c. 80 BCE onwards. Previously, the official name of the Roman state, as evidenced on coins, was simply ROMA."
As SPQR has been used since then throughout history and is still used, it is a bit hard to discern which of them are "very old", which "merely old" and which new from the looks of the items inscribed (except for the very obviously modern ones).


texts: Have any historical pandemics actually originated in the United States?

texts:
I've heard of a few pandemics, such as the Spanish Flu, the Cholera Outbreaks in the 19th century, and, of course, our current pandemic ;).
Something that struck me as odd was that none of these pandemics actually originated in the United States. Can somebody point out examples of pandemics or provide a link that answers my question?


texts: What was the capacity of Vemork power station?

texts:
The Vemork power station was once the largest power station in history and target of the famous Norwegian heavy water sabotage in WW2. Yet there seems to have very different data on its capacity.
Some say it's 108MW when finished by 1911, see Wikipedia:Vemork and NVE.NO:Vemork
Yet at the same time, there have been reports saying the station consists 10 units, each with 6MW, which should sum up to 60MW.
Can anyone give some comment on the actual capacity?


texts: were the ancient Hebrews basically a African tribe?

texts:
Hebrew is one of the earliest Afroasiatic languages. It has been argued that the Hebrews were a offshoot of the Canaanites, even akin to them. It is nearly undesputable that the Canaanites were Africanoid people  in both language and appearance. The geographical location of the time determines the Canaanites and Hamitic peoples to be Africanoid. With the early Hebrews originating from such a group and being so closely intertwined with these Africanoid peoples would it be too far fetched to say that the early Hebrews were presumably a African tribe and or Africanoid in language and appearance?

Taking in mind the geographic location, the peoples in that area at that time and that Hebrew is one of the early Afroasiatic languages.


texts:
Did Japan perceive their hypergrowth as stable and unstoppable as the United States did?

Or was it commonly known to the man on the street that it would fail?


texts: Can you identify this (possibly Bulgarian) uniform?

texts:
can someone identify the country the uniform is from?

Context:
Must have been born before 1880. First served in the Austro-Hungarian army, perhaps as an officer servant, possibly to a man who later became Ferdinand I. of Bulgaria. And he likely followed him to Bulgaria, where he seems to have made a career.
Decorations I think I identified: German Iron Cross, Bulgarian Order of Military Merit.
My working assumption it's a Bulgarian uniform from a later stage of WW1. Perhaps even after the war.
Thank you.


texts: Are there any ancient sources clearly testifying a frozen Tiber river in the year 398, 396, 271, and 177 BCE?

texts:
Multiple sources, ranging from Wikipedia to journal articles over the years (such as this one), record a series of severe winters which caused the Tiber river to be frozen in the above-listed years. All of these sources direct to a book titled Climate: Present, Past and Future (Routledge Revivals): Volume 2: Climatic History and the Future by the late English climatologist Hubert Horace Lamb, who apparently provided the quotation without supplying any clear references, as shown in the page screenshot below:

I would really appreciate it if someone can locate actual references from ancient sources (textual or archaeological) that might testify Lamb's quotation. Much thanks in advance.


texts: Were the 1940-42 RAF bombing raids over Germany unescorted?

texts: Considering the Spitfire's chronic lack of range, was the RAF doing unescorted bombing runs over Nazi Germany in 1940-42 or did they have another fighter that escorted their bombers?


texts: Was the Missouri Compromise too arbitrary to stop spreading of slavery to the west and the north?

texts:
The Missouri Compromise determined that in states south of the 36°30' parallel slavery was allowed (and also in the new state of Missouri, which lay north of it). This seems rather arbitrary to me, and arbitrary laws lack strength.
Was it therefore that both in the Mexican Cession and the Kansas-Nebraska territories (Kansas-Nebraska Act) they resorted to the principle of popular sovereignty to allow slavery beyond the 36°30' parallel? Wasn't this further spreading of slavery also the alarm bell for the Whigs (and later the Republicans) that with so widespread lack of natural rights (for the slaves) also the natural rights in the free states came under fire?


texts: At the time of Sputnik, what kind of radios were common in the Soviet Union?

texts:
Sputnik was launched 1957 Oct 4. At that time, what kind of radios were common in the Soviet Union?

I'm interested in what kind of radios were privately owned and kept in people's apartments. What frequency ranges did they have? Were they AM or FM or both, or something different?

Or perhaps was there a radio shortage instead? Could the people afford them?


texts: Under what legal theory was Mary Surratt hanged as an assassin of President Lincoln in 1865?

texts:
According to every source that I found so far, the only reason Mary Surratt was convicted of taking part in the assassination of Abraham Lincoln was that the murder conspiracy was plotted in her boarding house.

What other reasons were given for the conviction and execution of Mary Surratt—the first woman ever executed by the United States? It would seem that owning the boardinghouse in which John Wilkes Booth lived was not enough reason to convict Mrs. Surratt to death (see images), especially since she insisted on her to innocence to the end.


texts: Why did Ivan the Terrible put a Khan to rule Astrakhan in 1554?

texts:
I just discovered that*, in 1554, when the Russians finally conquered the city, they put a weak Khan on the throne, in order to control the place.
Two years later Ivan The Terrible annexed it after a rebellion, a Crimean invasion and stuff like that.
The thing is, why would they put a "fake" Khan there instead of giving Astrakhan to a neighbouring noble? Vassalising Astrakhan was a smart move, but I really don't get why they thought a Khan would do a better job than say, a duke.

Was there a will to annex slowly? I can't find no proof anywhere of Ivan the Terrible beeing compassionate enough to accept another culture in his land, with another kind of leadership...

The source beeing : https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dervish_Ali_Astrakhani and the french Page of Astrakhan https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Astrakhan (Weirdly they talk differently of the event between English and French)


texts: Did Boulez admit that his Structures didn't succeed?

texts:
Can anyone please source or substantiate the emboldened phrase from Reddit?

  As others have already said, the worst piece is probably something obscure that is not performed or recorded. But if we are going by relatively well known pieces by relatively well known composers, I might go with Boulez' Structures.  I am a big Boulez fan, and love almost all of his pieces, including some of the more aggressive early serial works like the 2nd piano sonata and the Flute Sonatina.  But Structures just doesn't do anything for me, there doesn't seem to be anything to grab on to (which may well be the point of the work).  I think even Boulez himself had stated that he didn't feel the piece was successful. [I bolded.]


texts: Was the option of setting up a Jewish state in defeated Nazi Germany ever considered?

texts:
Since there were a lot of Jews pre WW2 in Germany, and Germany was responsible for the many deaths of Jews during the Holocaust, it seems logical to suggest, that a new Jewish state should maybe be created in Germany. Arab leaders, like the house of Saud at the time seem to have suggested this specific solution (citation: The documentary The House of Saud).

Was something like that ever discussed? Did it gain any traction? Why / Why not?


texts: Was there a plan to use nuclear weapons for terrain modification in North America?

texts:
I remember reading a story once about a plan to build a seaport and modify a significant amount of the coastline at once by using a nuclear explosion. I can't find anything about it now when I try Googling.  Does anybody know what I am referring to and how I can find more information about it?

What I do remember: it was an Arctic Community in Canada (either in the Yukon or the N.W.T.). It was early on in the development of nuclear technology, so maybe around the 1960s, and it was ultimately cancelled when they realized that radiation would be a significant and long-lasting consequence. I did read the article online originally.


texts: Which religion was the first monotheistic one? Was it Judaism or a religion which disappeared from practice?


texts: What effect did awareness of devastating bombing at home have on the fighting spirit of German troops on the Eastern front?

texts:
German troops fighting in Russia must have been aware of the destruction of their cities back home by American and British bombing.

Knowing that their loved ones were in danger and that their beautiful towns and cities were being destroyed, how did German soldiers react on the Eastern Front?

Did it help fuel their fighting spirit, spurring on their efforts against the enemy they could reach (Russian ground troops) in lieu of the distant enemy (British and American air crew)? Or did it sap morale, with troops in Rostov and Riga questioning their purpose fighting so far from home when Germany itself was under such heavy attack?

Is there evidence of either effect in letters and journals?


texts: Did Popes publicly call for any assassinations other than that of Elizabeth I?

texts:
According to encyclopedia.com, following on the Protestant Reformation,

  In 1580, outraged at the deaths of Catholic missionaries, Pope Gregory XIII made a pronouncement that encouraged Elizabeth's murder, saying, as quoted in translation by Alison Weir in The Life of Elizabeth I, it would be justified to kill: "that guilty woman who is the cause of so much intriguing to the Catholic faith and loss of so many million souls. There is no doubt that whoever sends her out of the world with the pious intention of doing God service, not only does not sin but gains merit."

In the event, Elizabeth I was not assassinated; but were there other occasions when a Pope sanctioned the faithful to kill someone? If so, did it happen?


texts: Did Freemasons hold Enlightenment ideals?

texts:
I was doing research on early US presidents and read that men like George Washington probably were attracted to the Masonic Lodge due to the Lodge aligning well with popular Enlightenment ideas around the time of the French and American Revolution.

However I was curious if the Masonic Lodge had always held similar Enlightenment ideals or if the society had adopted many of them to "stay current with the times"? And if they adopted them, would American Freemasons have ideals closer to their revolution and the French theirs?

I do know the beginning of the Free Masons (about 1646) and start of the Age of Enlightenment (1685) were pretty close together but am sure they each evolved their own philosophies by the time French and American revolution occurred.


texts: What was the voting mechanism in early elections to the Commons?

texts:
From the 1200s in England, counties and towns sent two representatives to Parliament. Sheriffs ran the local elections, in which voters were enfranchised by being freeholders or potwallopers. Presumably the candidates receiving the greatest number of votes won, but were the two seats elected on the same or different slates? How many votes did each voter get?

These elections were means of patronage and bribery; the outcome was often predetermined by local power structures. However, I want to know about the origins or antecedents of the plurality voting rule.


texts: The Abbasid ransom for the Black Stone (Hajar Aswad)

texts:
The Black Stone (Al Hajaru Al Aswad, popularly called Hajar Aswad) of the Kaaba in Mecca was stolen in 930 AD by the Qarmatians, and was returned 23 years later in 952 AD for "a huge" ransom paid by the Abbasids.

Does anyone know what that ransom amount was?


texts: The National Defence Education Act (NDEA) was passed shortly after the Soviet launch of the satellite Sputnik I with the goal of remedying what the American government believed to be a gap in technology between the two nations by promoting science and engineering education at a high-school and post-secondary level. My question is, how successful was it? The most obvious answer would be "Well, they were the first to the moon!" But I am wondering more from a statistical standpoint. I have found a couple of sources detailing employment in science and engineering after the passing of the NDEA as well as a CIA report (The Technological Gap: The USSR vs the US and Western Europe) on a comparison between the technological trends of the two nations a number of years after, but I am wondering if there was every any official follow up report by the American government on the issue. Employment statistics and large engineering projects tell one story, but it doesn't necessarily mean that the NDEA was a success, especially during a time when America was pouring millions upon millions of dollars into massive RnD projects.


texts: Was non-interventionism before WWII a principled stand, or was it motivated by pro-Nazi sentiment?

texts:
I'm reading a book on Charles Lindbergh, thinking about his support for non-interventionism leading up to World War II. The America First Committee has a number of prominent names associated with it, so I was led to wonder what their motivations were.

It's possible that these people were taking a principled stand against intervention in foreign conflicts (such as might be expressed these days about the conflicts in Syria, Iraq, Yemen, or Libya), or it might be that they were hoping that Nazi Germany would prevail in its wars.

Clearly the answer could be different for different people. I don't know if the movement has been studied in any depth. (Reflections on whether a question such as this can be answered from historical evidence would also be welcome.)


texts: How were knee injuries treated in Ancient Greece?

texts:
Today knee injuries, for example ACL tears*, are a pretty common injury, especially with fighters (Judo, Wrestling, BJJ, MMA, …). Since the Greeks practiced a lot of wrestling and pankration, knee injuries must have been a common thing, right? Besides the athletic stuff, soldiers on the battlefield surely had to deal with a similar amount of knee injuries (while training or on the battlefield itself).

To what extend could they treat knee injuries (of any kind) back then?
What were their methods? Did they try some sort of knee surgery?
Are there any scripts or depictions of how common such injuries would occur with athletes/soldiers?

*There are four primary ligaments in your knee, two of them form an X in the center of the knee. If those tear, e.g. through a wrong twist or a sudden stop motion, that woud be called an ACL tear. There are various degrees of tear I think and also similar injuries when other ligaments get torn. (disclaimer: I am not a medic)
See:
Anterior Cruciate Ligament (ACL) Injuries (American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons)
Wikipedia: Anterior cruciate ligament injury


texts: Why did the British think a 99-year lease on Hong Kong's New Territories was "as good as forever"?

texts:
I still don't get why Claude MacDonald wrote down 99 years. Why not play it safe and add more 9's? Why not write down 999? I know hindsight's 20/20, but it feels stupid for the British not to pick a bigger number!
Or why not just write down "forever" or "unlimited"?

Did the British worry the Chinese government would resist if the treaty said "forever"?

Convention for the Extension of Hong Kong Territory - Wikipedia

  Under the convention the territories north of what is now Boundary Street and south of the Sham Chun River, and the surrounding islands, later known as the "New Territories" were leased to the United Kingdom for 99 years rent-free,[1] expiring on 30 June 1997, and became part of the crown colony of Hong Kong.[6] The Kowloon Walled City was excepted and remained under the control of Qing China. The territories which were leased to the United Kingdom were originally governed by Xin'an County, Guangdong province. Claude MacDonald, the British representative during the convention, picked a 99-year lease because he thought it was "as good as forever".[7] Britain did not think they would ever have to give the territories back. The 99-year lease was a convenient agreement.


texts: Why is there a gap of information in Russia for human migration?

texts: I've noticed that in a lot of maps for human migration, there's usually a really unspecific arrow pointing from the Iran area that goes through Kazakhstan, Mongolia, and Russia to North America. These maps all seem to have this dark area with little info, why's that?


texts: Why was there a "workers' militia" in Eastern Europe but not in the USSR?

texts:
After WWII, especially after 1956 in several Eastern European countries the ruling Communist Parties formed "workers' and peasants' militias", see for example, Worker's Militia or Combat Groups of the Working Class
As far as I know these paramilitary organizations did not exist in the Soviet Union. This is surprising to me because the countries were forced to emulate perhaps all (?) Stalinist institutions. My question is why this one was a "colonial" invention?


texts: Why was the morale of El Cid's troops always so high?

texts:
It seems like in every battle El Cid fought his troops had very high morale and fought above and beyond their abilities. Why did El Cid's troops have such high morale? I would understand the high morale if he were always leading coreligionists but he led armies from Muslim and Christian kingdoms throughout his life and they all fought with bravery bordering on fanaticism.
I got the impression his troops had such high morale from this KingsAndGeneral video.


texts: How quickly did the term "nuclear fission" spread?

texts: In The Nuclear Express by Thomas C. Reed and Danny B. Stillman, they explain that the term "nuclear fission" was first used in Physics by Lisa Meitner in a letter to Otto Hahn on December 19, 1938. How quickly did the term spread? How did this term spread?


texts: How did the Belgians issue ID cards with ethnicity to women in Ruanda-Urundi?

texts:
I've read about how the Belgians issued ID cards to the inhabitants of their colony Ruanda-Urundi (later independent under the names of Rwanda and Burundi):

Indeed, the Belgian colonists classified a person as Tutsi if they had a long nose (or ten cows).

Caselli/Coleman: On the theory of ethnic conflict, 2012, page 28

However, I was not able to find any information on whether these were applied to men and women alike or whether different means of distinction were used for women.
Were phenotypical features and wealth also distinctive for women, or were women categorized along other means, e.g. their husband's / father's categorization?


texts: In what language was the first Zionist congress in basel in 1897 held?

texts:
In what language was the first Zionist congress in Basel held?

Was it Yiddish, Hebrew, German, English? Where there translators?


texts: How did the Dutch East India Company (VOC) have so much revenue when they only control small part of Indonesia?

texts: According to this, the VOC only controlled some ports, cities (like Batavia/Jakarta) and its surrounding. Yet, it seems to be a very successful corporation, mostly benefiting from the natural resources of what is now Indonesia. How did they become so rich without controlling most of the territories? Why couldn't the locals make that much themselves?


texts: Did any European monarch execute their sister or other direct female relative?

texts: In my search, I found examples of kings/queens having their wives and brothers executed, but I cannot seem to locate any example for sisters, mothers, and fathers.


texts: By when was the Manila galleon well known?

texts:
Spain managed to start up the Manila galleon system in the 1560s, linking the Philippines with Mexico. The Spanish crown used its control of non-free labor in New Spain to extract precious metals. On the other side of the arduous journey, Chinese middlemen took these precious metals in exchange for luxury Chinese goods such as porcelain and silks.

While certainly Spanish elites and the Casa de Contratación benefited, the general effects of this trade breakthrough might not have been so obvious to outsiders. Why would those involved in uninsured imports of luxury Chinese goods publicize their valuable shipments? After all, several galleons were indeed raided. But doubtless the other imperial powers of Europe had great interest in Spain's success at breaking up the Portuguese monopoly on China goods.

Did the Spanish Crown initially seek to keep the galleon system hush-hush? How much time elapsed before the other European states learned about it?


texts: What collar badge did the 36th Battery of the Canadian Field Artillery in WW1 wear?

texts:
My Great-Grandfather fought with the 36th Battery CFA of the 9th Brigade during at least a portion of WW1. He was in three other units as well, I'm trying to collect the collar badges for each unit he was part of, but I'm having a heck of a time trying to find a collar badge for the 36th Battery. Did they have a collar badge? If so does anyone know where I can at least find a picture so I can see what it looks like?

(note: Not to be confused with the 36th Battalion CEF of WW1)


texts: Is there any resource to learn interiors of a house for particular classes in 17th Century in Bohemia?

texts:
I would like to learn details of the living places for particular classes and professions in Bohemia in 17th Century. (For example a burgher, or carpenter guild master etc.)

I try some novels written in those times.

What are the canonical resources in this field?


texts: What is the history of organizing militaries primarily through semi-permanent units as opposed to individual positions?

texts:
In modern, professionalized armies, command structures tend to be composed of units and subunits, and the chain of command goes from commanding officer of a  superior unit to the commanding officer of subordinate unit.

Please note, that I am not asking about whether military forces were always composed of separate units, but the history of a chain of command built around units instead of officers (or other type of leader). In the current U.S. Army, for example, it's not quite the case that a First Lieutenant reports to a Captain. The commanding officer of a specialty platoon reports to the commanding officer of a company. The commanding officers of a specialty platoon and a company are typically a First Lieutenant and a Captain, but if these officers are incapacitated in battle, the next highest ranking officer takes the role of commanding officer.

What is the history of this form of organization? This seems quite different, than say, feudalism, where knights were personal followers of their generals. If a knight fell, his vassals would not necessarily keep operating as a unit.

Book suggestions on this topic are very welcome. Huntington's Soldier and the State and Preston's Men in Arms look very relevant.


texts: What is the earliest evidence for the use of hearing aids?

texts:
D. N. Brooks, in Hearing aids – a historical survey states that Emperor Hadrian

  reportedly used to cup his hand behind his ear, the better to hear the
  affairs of state...Historically, the cupped hand was probably first
  replaced by a rolled up leaf or hollowed out animal horn.

There are references to medieval hearing aids in a number of articles online. For example, The (Big) Timeline of Hearing Aids states (under the heading 13th to 15th century):

  Really early on, people would use animal horns and hallow bones as
  sort of an ear trumpet. While it helped a small amount, it was nothing
  close to an ear trumpet made of metal. It was the first sign of an
  attempt to aid the hard of hearing.

Also, the Textbook of Hearing Amplification, with reference to K. Berger’s The Hearing Aid, says that animal horns were used to aid hearing as early as the thirteenth century.

A little outside the medieval period, in 1588, the Italian scholar Giovanni Batista Porta described

  wood carvings that resemble animal ears used to help people hear

Despite these references, the only images I have found from before the 17th century appear to be false leads: this picture taken in the Musee d'histoire de la medecine in Paris appears to have been mislabelled as medieval, likewise this picture. This Wikipedia article is of little help; it dates hearing aids as late as the 17th century (see example below).

Early Modern period (1673) "Ear trumpets, as illustrated in: Athanasius Kircher's Phonurgia nova sive conjugium mechanico-physicum artis & naturae paranymta phonosophia concinnatum. Kempten : Rudolph Dreherr, 1673. (p. 160)."

Even in Ancient times, it is possible that some kind of hearing aid may have been used. Given that the Ancient Greeks had an in-depth understanding of voice amplification and acoustics (see this pdf), it is not inconceivable (but I’m not assuming) that they had an aid for hearing loss, just as they did for poor eyesight (see this Hist SE link). However, the only references I’ve found relate to people born deaf  (and they aren’t very complimentary): there appears to be nothing online relating to hearing loss in the ancient world.

In short, the references I've found are at best vague and do not give any details or show any evidence or cite any contemporary sources. At worst, the information appears to be wrong. However, there is enough here to suggest that there may be evidence from the medieval period, if not earlier.

Aside from the use of the hand to cup the ear, what is the earliest evidence for the use of some kind hearing aid? Evidence (which can be dated at least approximately) could be:

an archaeological find
a reference to some kind of hearing aid in a contemporary source
a contemporary image of some kind (painting, engraving etc)


texts: How did Hitler get off so lightly after the Beer Hall Putsch?

texts:
The main square in Munich during the Beer Hall Putsch
On November 8–9 1923 the Beer Hall Putsch or Munich Putsch was an attempted coup by the Nazi Party against the German Weimar Republic which resulted in the death of 16 Nazis and 4 police officers.
The Putsch would have been successful except for the quick thinking of a handful of men and 3,000 students rioting from the University of Munich until the Putsch was put down, and Hitler was arrested.
Hitler escaped into the countryside where he was apprehended after two days and charged with high treason.
Hitler was not tried by a jury of his peers. The Weimar Republic's court system had implemented the Emminger Reform (Jan 1924) in the build up to Hitler's trial which began Feb 1924. Rather than a trial of his peers, Hitler would be tried in front of mixed system of judges and lay judges.
Hitler's popularity at this time is reflected in the election results showing in May 1924 just after the Putsch, the Nazi's received about 6.5% of the popular vote. One year after the Putsch in December 1924 the Nazi's support dropped to 3% of the popular vote.

Hitler's Rise to Power
After the putsch the party was banned in Bavaria, but it participated in 1924's two elections by proxy as the National Socialist Freedom Movement. In the German election, May 1924 the party gained seats in the Reichstag, with 6.55% (1,918,329) voting for the Movement. In the German election, December 1924 the National Socialist Freedom Movement (NSFB) (Combination of the Deutschvölkische Freiheitspartei (DVFP) and the Nazi Party (NSDAP)) lost 18 seats, only holding on to 14 seats, with 3% (907,242) of the electorate voting for Hitler's party.

During the trial, Hitler took full and sole responsibility for the coup, inspiring his title "Führer" or "leader" in later years. The lay judges were supporters of Hitler and needed persuading to not dismiss the case altogether.
Hitler received a sentence of 5 years in prison for his part in the putsch. His part being the confessed leader and responsibility for the deaths of 20 people, 4 of whom were police officers.
Hitler would serve a little more than 8 months of this sentence in comfortable accommodations in a room with the view of the river. He could both receive visitors for hours every day and could socialize with his co-conspirators. He even was permitted the use of a private secretary.
Hitler would make good use of his 8 months, dictating the book Mein Kampf (My Struggle) which would become a best seller and provide significant percentage of his income until his rise to power was complete  in March of 1933 with the passage of the Enabling Act of 1933.

Beer Hall Putsch

Defendants in the Beer Hall Putsch trial. From left to right: Pernet, Weber, Frick, Kriebel, Ludendorff, Hitler, Bruckner, Röhm, and Wagner. Note that only two of the defendants (Hitler and Frick) were wearing civilian clothes. All those in uniform are carrying swords, indicating officer and/or aristocratic status.

My question:
How did Hitler get off so lightly after admitting in court complete responsibility for the death of 20 people including 4 police officers?   Who were these lay judges who supported him, and how were they selected for the trial? Who bears responsibility for this result?

Sources:

Beer Hall Putsch
Emminger Reform
Hitler's Rise to Power
Enabling Act of 1933
Mein Kampf


texts: Is there any Historical Evidence for a Co-Regency of Tiberius and Augustus?

texts:
Is there any historical evidence for Caesar Tiberius (commonly referred to Tiberius Caesar) having a co-regency with his predecessor Caesar Augustus? I have read (in a book that I don't remember the title nor author) that some believe there was a co-regency. In an article from Answers In Genesis (see Conclusion), the author writes

[S]ome have postulated a co-regency (joint rule) of Tiberius and Augustus during the last few years of Augustus’s reign. However, there is no reliable ancient historical evidence for such co-regency.
[emphasis mine]

Is there "no reliable ancient historical evidence" for a co-regency of Tiberius and Augustus? Is there any evidence at all?
For a little background, Caesar Augustus was the first Emperor of the Roman Empire. He succeeded the dictator Caesar Julius (commonly referred to as Julius Caesar) and was succeeded by Caesar Tiberius. Some claim Tiberius was co-regent with Augustus for a couple years prior to Augustus' death. A co-regency is the situation where a monarchical position (such as king, queen, emperor or empress), normally held by only a single person, is held by two or more.
The article mentioned is about when Jesus Christ died. I shall explain why a co-regency of Tiberius and Augustus is important to Christian apologetics. Had there been a co-regency, Jesus could have started His ministry as early as AD 26 or 27, allowing for AD 30 to be the date of Jesus' death. Had there been no co-regency, His ministry would have started at about AD 29, putting His death around AD 33.


texts: Did Wilson's 'He kept us out of war' really win the 1916 Presidential Election?

texts:
In the 1916 United States presidential election, President Woodrow Wilson defeated Charles Evans Hughes, the Republican candidate.
Wilson ran on the slogan 'He kept us out of war'. From what I have been able to find, this did assist his popularity some. (Hughes accused him of failing to make adequate preparations for war, which cemented his image as the antiwar candidate.) Most of his popularity (or, in certain quarters, unpopularity) revolved around questions of domestic reform, but being antiwar surely helped.
But the election result was astonishingly close. According to Wikipedia,

The key state proved to be California, which Wilson won by only 3,800 votes out of nearly a million cast. Although New Hampshire may not have been a deciding state in the election, the margin of victory for Wilson there was the second smallest ever recorded in an American presidential election at just 56 votes, behind Franklin Pierce's 25 vote victory in Delaware in 1852.[18][a] If Hughes had carried California and its thirteen electoral votes, he would have won the election.

On the face of it, that means the slogan was indeed needed; without it, Wilson wouldn't have had enough popularity to make the numbers by such a tiny margin.
However, it has been argued that things are not as they seem; that the Californians who were antiwar, primarily labor, were Wilson supporters anyway, and would have voted for him regardless of that slogan; that it made no difference in the end. And there does seem to be some evidence that labor was the group most strongly opposed to joining the war, e.g. Preparedness Day Bombing

Isolationism remained strong in San Francisco, not only among radicals such as the Industrial Workers of the World ("the Wobblies"), but also among mainstream labor leaders. At the same time, with the rise of Bolshevism and labor unrest, San Francisco's business community was nervous. The Chamber of Commerce organized a Law and Order Committee, despite the diminishing influence and political clout of local labor organizations.[citation needed] The Preparedness Day Parade was organized by the Chamber of Commerce and the anti-union conservative business establishment.

Was there strong antiwar sentiment among other sections of California society?
Were there any states other than California and New Hampshire in which the result was close enough that prevailing antiwar sentiment might have made the difference?


texts:
I always thought it put things into perspective if, instead of the Gregorian Calendar, we had a kind of "absolute" timeline, going all the way back to the big bang, as well as we can define it as of today, in 2012.

Of course, this would be ridiculously impractical (today's date would be something like year 13,749,999,999.) I only mean this as a learning tool, and to point out just how relatively few years written history has been around.

My question is, do you agree that this would be a helpful learning tool for students to comprehend a kind of birds-eye-view of the timeline?

Here's an example of what I'm talking about.  The column on the left would be the year the event on the right-hand column occured:

 1  The Big Bang
 9,150,000,000  Earth forms
 10,150,000,000     simple cells
 10,350,000,000     photosynthesis
 11,750,000,000     complex cells
 12,750,000,000     multicellular life
 13,150,000,000     animals
 13,250,000,000     fish
 13,275,000,000     land plants
 13,350,000,000     insects and seeds
 13,390,000,000     amphibians
 13,450,000,000     reptiles
 13,550,000,000     mammals
 13,600,000,000     birds
 13,620,000,000     flowers
 13,685,000,000     dinosaurs die out
 13,747,500,000     genus Homo appears
 13,749,800,000     modern humans appear
 13,749,975,000     Neanderthals disappear
 13,749,994,488     writing begins
 13,749,995,000     civilization begins along the Euphrates River in Mesopotamia, along the Nile, along the Indus River
 13,749,995,988     recorded history (writing down history) HISTORY begins
 13,749,997,988     christ is born
 13,749,999,999     today

Really puts things into perspective, doesn't it? Do you agree or do you think this would just be confusing to kids? Thanks for the feedback.


texts: Why do Strabo, Pliny and Diodorus cite Pytheas in disbelief?

texts:
According to the wikipedia page on Germanic tribes, (direct quotation)

  The first news about the Germanic world are contained in the lost Pytheas work. It is believed that Pytheas travelled to Northern Europe, and his observations about the geographical environment, traditions and culture of the Northern European populations were a central source of information to later historians, possibly the only source.[38] Authors such as Strabo, Pliny and Diodorus cite Pytheas in disbelief, although Pytheas' observations are substantially correct. Though Pytheas was not the first explorer of those lands (for example Himilco, Phoenicians, Tartessians), he was the first to describe these populations, and it is fair to say that much of the Germanic peoples' history enters into view through Pytheas.

Source #38 in Wikipedia is (direct quotation)

  The only ancient authors we know by name who saw Pytheas' text were Dicaearchus, Timaeus, Eratosthenes, Crates of Mallus, Hipparchus, Polybius, Artemidorus and Posidonius, as Lionel Pearson remarked in reviewing Hans Joachim Mette, Pytheas von Massalia (Berlin: Gruyter) 1952, in Classical Philology 49.3 (July 1954), pp. 212–214.

Despite this however, no citation is given for where Strabo, Pliny and Diodorus cite Pytheas in disbelief. But more importantly, there is no explanation as to why these scholars disbelieved in Pytheas. Hence, my question is simple: why did Strabo, Pliny and Diodorus disbelieve in Pytheas? What reason is there for this? Also, what evidence is there that Pytheas was largely correct, as Wikipedia claims without proof or citation? In addition, a citation, reference or link on where these scholars cite Pytheas in disbelief and what the context of the citation was would be appreciated.


texts: To what degree is Simone Weil correct in arguing that the third Reich under Hitler was merely a revival of imperial Rome?

texts:
Simone Weil wrote in her book, The Need for Roots:

  The Romans were really an atheistic and I idolatrous people, not idolatrous with regards to images made of stone and bronze, but idolatrous with regards to themselves. It is this idolatry of self which they have bequeathed to us in the form of patriotism ...

John Hellman, in his commentary on her work suggests that she sees Hitler and his regime as a revival of imperial Rome and in fact, the term Third Reich (Drittes Reich) was first used by Arthur Moeller van de Bruck in a book he first published in 1923, where he counted the first Reich as the Holy Roman Empire; and the second Reich as the German Empire.

Q. Did Hitler himself make a conscious attempt to think of Germany in the Roman mold, say in his book, Mein Kampf?


texts: Did the Torch operation help doom the Germans at Stalingrad?

texts:
Amid calls for a "second front," the Anglo-Americans landed in North Africa Operation Torch, in early November, 1942. Some say that it was a "sideshow," others say that it was a "cross-ruffing" operation, Eisenhower style, because of the upcoming battle at Stalingrad.

During the month of November, the Germans sent over 100,000 men to North Africa (what we call the Torch force).

A few days after the Torch landings, the Soviets encircled the German Sixth Army at Stalingrad. A few weeks later, a rescue column under General Erich von Manstein attempted to break open a lifeline to Stalingrad, an attempt that failed after initially coming close to succeeding.

I'm not going to ask what would have happened if the "Torch" reinforcements had been sent to Manstein (a counterfactual), but I did want to explore the factual bases of this idea through the following:

How did the Torch force compare to the Manstein relief column in size and composition (armor vs. infantry divisions, German vs. non German troops)?
If you add the Torch force to the actual Manstein relief force, how would the combined force compared to the Soviet forces facing Manstein?
Were there any major obstacles to using the Torch Force in reinforcing Manstein, given that one armored division actually joined Manstein from France? (I'm going to assume that the air force would airlift these troops, taking note of the fact that the transport fleet had been "decimated" or almost halved, in North Africa.)


texts: What is the etymological origin of the Marsi, the ancient Italic people?

texts:
The English Wikipedia article does not provide any etymological explanations on the demonym. The Italian article, which is marked as "recommended", points the name's origin to the Italic deity Mamerte, from which the Romans derived the name "Mars" (see the etymology of "Mars"). Brill's New Pauly's article on the Marsi too hinted at a potential etymological connection to Mars.

Upon further research, however, I find this interpretation contradictory with several ancient accounts, many of which considered Marsyas to be the eponymous founder of the Marsi without any mentioning of Mars. Silius Italicus, for instance, wrote in his Punica (viii, 502-4):

  sed populis nomen posuit metuentior hospes, cum fugeret Phrygias trans aequora Marsya Crenas Mygdoniam Phoebi superatus pectine loton.

  Translation:

  But this people got their name from Marsyas, the settler who fled in fright across the sea from Phrygian Crenai, when the Mygdonian pipe was defeated by Apollo's lyre.

Solinus similarly left the following account in Polyhistor (2.6):

  Archippen a Marsya rege Lydorum, quod hiatu terrae haustum dissolutum est in lacum Fucinum;

  Translation:

  Or that Archippe was founded by Marsyas, king of the Lydians, and was destroyed by being swallowed up into an opening in the ground, into Lake Fucinus?

This Archippe was otherwise unknown, but it was cited by Pliny the Elder in his Naturalis Historia (3.43) as a town of the Marsi:

  Gellianus auctor est lacu Fucino haustum marsorum oppidum Archippe, conditum a Marsya duce Lydorum;

  Translation:

  From Gellianus we learn that Archippe, a town of the Marsi, built by
  Marsyas, a chieftain of the Lydians, has been swallowed up by Lake
  Fucinus;

I therefore find the Wikipedia statement that the demonym Marsi was of the same origin as "Mars" problematic. I am yet to acquire a copy of the book listed as reference to that statement, Giacomo Devoto's Gli antichi Italici, and I will update this description accordingly once I read Devoto's account. Nonetheless, I believe the problem posed by these two different interpretations is clear, so which is the correct etymology?


texts: Why did Anwar Sadat establish diplomatic relationship with Israel and did that decision pay off?

texts:
Why did Egypt establish diplomatic relationship with Israel and did that decision pay off?

As far as I recall, Anwar Sadat was able to convince his people and his followers that establishing diplomatic relationship with Israel will open the door of rapid economic development of Egypt.

My first question is, how did he deduce that ?

My second question is, did we really see that to happen (I guess a big NO)?

And, my third question is, if NOT, why?


texts: Who was the first to accuse enemy troops of impaling babies, cutting fetuses from women's bellies, etc.?

texts:
In a surprising number of conflicts, propagandists have accused enemy troops of very similar (and appalling) atrocities.  Among the most common allegations are claims that babies had been impaled on swords, spears, pikes, or bayonets, and that fetuses had been sliced from the bellies of pregnant women.

Some examples of groups being accused of these activities throughout history:

Irish Catholic forces in the Rebellion of 1641:

The Irish rebels were also accused of cutting fetuses from women's bodies, as a modern historian says here:

  One of the iconic narratives that comes up in hearsay evidence is reports of atrocities against pregnant women who were said to have been ripped open, had their babies pulled out and beaten against rocks.
  -  Source

Ottoman Turk troops in Bulgaria in 1876:

  The number of children killed in these massacres is something enormous. They were often spitted on bayonets, and we have several stories from eye—witnesses who saw little babes carried about the streets, both here and at Otluk—kui, on the point of bayonets...  Here in Batak the Bashi—Bazouks... ripped open pregnant women, and killed the unborn infants.
  -  Source

German troops in Belgium at the beginning of World War I:

Again, the allegations of bayoneted babies was accompanied by claims of pregnant women being cut open and their fetuses removed:

  The Bavarians came into the village of Nomery, after chasing the French and the inhabitants away, they abducted a young pregnant woman, opened her belly and threw the child on the dung heap; since the mother was still living, they finished her off.
  -  Source

I've found many other instances of atrocity propaganda making these claims, but the examples above are sufficient to illustrate what I'm talking about.

As far as I've been able to determine, none of the accusations above are considered to be accurate by modern scholars.

What is our earliest record of propaganda mentioning enemy forces impaling infants and cutting fetuses from women's wombs?


texts: What's the correct term for a waitress in the Middle Ages?

texts: How was a waitress called in the Middle Ages? Handmaid, waitress, maid, ...? And is there a different name for the ones who did this kind of job inside a castle, in contrast to the women doing this kind of job in, for example, a tavern?


texts: Why did science flourish in Germany after the First World War?

texts: It occurred to me that Germany was extremely productive in (at least) physics in the first thirty years of the twentieth century, and especially in the period between the end of the First World War and the start of Nazi Germany when Hitler came to power. Are there any reasons to point at for this productiveness? One might expect that a country is far less productive in the sciences when it has just lost a war..


texts: What was going to be Hitler's next plan after taking Russia?

texts: During WW2 Hitler was defeated in Russia, because of the cold weather there. What country did he plan to attack after Russia, if his attack on Russia had succeeded?


texts: Why was Bulgaria at war with both the Allied and the Axis at the end of WWII?

texts:
Bulgaria entered the WWII after signing the The Tripartite Pact (1 March 1941) which subsequently resulted in a long list1 of war declarations, unilaterally or mutually initiated, against Western Allies countries. However, there is a very interesting period of about two months: September 8th - October 28th 1944 through which Bulgaria de jure was at war with all the countries from both the Allies and the Axis.

What events led to that strange foreign policy situation?

Is there any other known example of a country at war with the "whole world"?

1. List of WWII declarations involving Bulgaria: 1941-04-06 Bulgaria declares war on Yugoslavia.1941-12-12 Bulgaria declares war on    United States, United Kingdom. 1941-12-13 New Zealand, South Africa declare war on Bulgaria. 1941-12-19 Nicaragua declares war on Bulgaria. 1942-01-06 Australia declares war on Bulgaria. 1943-04-02 Bolivia declares war on Bulgaria. 1944-09-05 Soviet Union declares war on Bulgaria.1944-09-08 Bulgaria declares war on Germany.


texts: Were prisons in Maine mixed race in 1947?

texts:
In the movie The Shawshank Redemption, white Andy Dufresne (played by Tim Robbins) and black Ellis "Red" Redding (played by Morgan Freeman) are in the same prison.

I don't remember if it was said anytime in the movie, but Andy lived in Maine before his imprisonment, so it is very likely that Shawshank is located in Maine (state prison).

My question is, were prisons in Maine mixed race in 1947 (his year of imprisonment)?