texts:
Alexander conquered most parts of the Western World, but there is a great deal of controversy over his invasion of India. In BC 327 Alexander came to India, and tried to cross the Jhelum river for the invasion, but was then confronted by King Purushottama (King Porus, according to the English rendition.) According to Indian history he was stopped by Porus at his entry into the country, but most of the world still believes that Alexander won the battle. Many of Internet links claim that Porus was defeated by Alexander, then he returned to Greece,  giving back the Kingdom to Porus.

This link from wikipedia says that  "After victory, Alexander made an alliance with Porus and appointed him as satrap of his own kingdom". This is difficult to believe: IMO no noble king would accept his kingdom back after being defeated.

Also claimed there: "Exhausted and frightened by the prospect of facing another giant Indian army at the Ganges River, his army mutinied at the Hyphasis (modern Beas), refusing to march further East. Alexander, after the meeting with his officer Coenus, was convinced that it was better to return." Did that mutiny actually occur?

After traveling hundreds of miles from Greece and even winning the battle, why would Alexander return without conquering India?

Specifically, I want to know what actually happened in the battle between Alexander and Porus: Who won? Was it true that King Porus defeated Alexander and made him flee back to Greece ? Whoever won the battle, Alexander or Porus, what historical evidence is there regarding what actually happened in that encounter?


texts: When was the last state militia abandoned?

texts: I've learned that at the beginning of 1812 war most of the U.S army was a bunch of state militias. I think that during the civil war state militias still existed though I have no idea to what extent. My question is when was the last state militia used in combat or when they were fully dismantled?


texts: Is there evidence that working for the Pony Express was dangerous, or not dangerous?

texts:
So I was thinking about what it was like working for the Pony Express and I am wondering was it an extremely dangerous job? I'm thinking that given the success of the Pony Express it must not have been extremely dangerous (otherwise people wouldn't have done it) but I am struggling to find good sources to confirm this suspicion.

Edit

By "Extremely Dangerous" I would say there was a good chance you wouldn't survive a year or something, say 1/5 died. I mean would you have to have been a crazy person to work for them. This is kind of the evidence I am looking for. High attrition rates from injury/death, etc.


texts: How is the Byzantine(Eastern Roman) different from Western Roman?

texts:
At peak time Roman Empire was superpower of the world but It have two Empires at same time.

Eastern Roman Empire (Byzantine)
Western Roman Empire

My Question is who was more powerful then other. and who have the command.

How we can differentiate them.

I know they both are allies but who had control over other.


texts: Why were there so many US military deaths outside of the major battles in WW2?

texts:
Recently I have started to take a huge interest in WW2. I've been researching new information everyday about it. But one of the things I've been interested in is the number of deaths each country suffered during the war. I'm mostly interested in US deaths in WW2.

The number of military deaths for the US was 417,000 during the war. And I recently estimated that around 1/3 deaths were caused by major battles on the islands of Japan and in Europe. But this still leaves 2/3 of the deaths that weren't caused by major conflicts. How did these deaths outside of the major battles occur? These numbers I got are just estimates. Most sources I found said 417,000. I added up all the major battle deaths for us and got the number 140,000, but that probably not the most accurate number. So I think 1/3 Is more accurate. And the battles I'm talking about are like Iwo jima and like the battle of bulge. Battles that had a lot of death involving the us.


texts: When did it become common for optical brighteners to be added to commercial laundry detergent?

texts:
While watching The Theory of Everything, during a scene set in the 1960s, Steven Hawking remarked to his future wife that peoples' clothing were glowing because of the florescent brightener dyes added to Tide detergent.

It immediately struck me as a likely anachronism, as I remember first reading about them in Consumer Reports in the nineties or later.

When were optical brighteners first added to commercial laundry detergent on a large scale?


texts: How can I research multiple raids at the Somnath Temple?

texts:
The Somnath Temple was raided several times during the 11th century. I've reviewed the material in Wikipedia, but I want to dive deeper.  In particular, I'd like to know when Shree Hamirsinh Gohil saved the temple from Muslim Badsha (King/Conquerer)

I've following questions

In which year, did Muslims attack the temple?
What was the name of the Muslim Badshah who battled with Hamirsihn Gohil?


texts: What are the "ancient liberties" of the City of London?

texts:
I recently learned that three clauses of the Magna Carta are still part of UK law — the liberties of the English Church, the privileges of the City of London, and the right to trial by jury.

I think everyone understands the right to trial by jury, and I guess the clause about church liberties is there to prevent the monarch from meddling too much with church affairs.

But what are these special privileges that Londoners been enjoying for the last eight centuries? And why are they still enshrined in law?

Quote:

  The city of London shall enjoy all its ancient liberties and free customs, both by land and by water. We also will and grant that all other cities, boroughs, towns, and ports shall enjoy all their liberties and free customs.


texts: How did 300,000 people survive the 3 1/2 year siege of Sarajevo?

texts:
How did the inhabitants of Sarajevo survive a 3 1/2-year siege from 1992 to 1996? Specifically, how did they deal with water, food, and heating?

Background: In 2018, Sweden sent out a leaflet "If Crises or War Comes" informing the population on how to prepare for such situations, focusing on water, food, heating, and communication. I cannot find the original source, but someone knowledgeable in the matter told me that a government report claimed that the average Swede is self-sufficient for less than one week. My random sampling among friends and neighbors suggests that this number makes sense. I recently saw the BBC documentary "Death of Yugoslavia" and, comparing the self-sufficiency of the average Swede with the duration of Sarajevo's siege, I can't help wonder.

From the BBC documentary, I understood that the city had no electricity, no gas, and had all roads cut off. No electricity likely means that the water pumps were off-line. Did people take water from nearly rivers? What about in winter?

Roads cut off likely means that supermarkets were empty. How did they get food when today's cities are so reliant on transportation? I am tempted to think it is impractical to store enough food for so many people for such a long time.

No gas likely means no heating. How did people survive the winters?

Apology: I'm sorry if this question comes too early. I understand that the events in this question are very recent and many still suffer the consequences. A weird mixture of admiration, respect, sadness, and grief crosses me while typing these lines.


texts: Why does the United States keep using "old" date representations and imperial system, while being in the minority?

texts:
Other than the US (and a few other countries), the vast majority of countries use

International System of Units (SI).
Celsius temperature scale.
DMY or YMD date format¹.
24-hour clock when written².
Monday as the first day of week³.

These differences can cause technical difficulties.

What are the historical reasons for the United States, which is one of the most advanced, powerful, and influential of countries, to keep using units and date representations which were abandoned by most of the countries of the world, especially developed ones?

¹ except the US, Philippines and a few other countries.
² except the US, Canada, Australia and a few other countries.
³ except the US, Canada, Mexico and a few other countries (also usually Saturday in the Middle East).


texts: Did any armies systemically favor axes/hammers over swords?

texts:
In fantasy literature there are plenty of examples of cultures (such as the Dwarves of Lord of the Rings) who favor axes or hammers above swords in combat.  Did any historical army follow that pattern?  Obviously some people in any battle will have unusual weapons, and an angry mob will grab anything that's convenient.  Some armies (like the Greek phalanx) also used pikes or other length-based weapons that reduced the need for hand-to-hand weapons entirely.

But were there ever any armies where they fought up close and face-to-face, but where the standard melee weapon was an axe, a hammer, or something other than a straight blade like a sword or knife?  I have a distant memory that Bronze Age cultures in the Middle East used some kind of sickle-shaped weapon, but I can't think of any after that.


texts: How did Diego Gutiérrez know the boundaries (shape of the Americas) when he drew the 1562 Map of America

texts: The map drawn by Diego Gutiérrez in 1562 shows both North and South American shapes (borders). How did he (or the 15th century Europeans) know the shapes of the American continents and their geography in such detail at that time?


texts: Did the US and Soviet navies really come close to blows in the Indian Ocean in 1971?

texts:
In December 1971, Pakistan and India were at war over what would become Bangladesh.  President Nixon ordered Task Force 74, led by the nuclear-powered aircraft carrier USS Enterprise (CVN 65) and supplemented by a marine contingent on the amphibious assault ship USS Tripoli (LPH 10).  On scene, reportedly, was the British carrier HMS Eagle, the commando ship Albion, and their escorts.

To hear some sources from India and Russia today, it would appear that the United States and Soviet naval task forces came very close to a nuclear confrontation.

Russian sources cite a television interview of former Admiral Vladimir Kruglyakov, who commanded the Soviet task group, who said he had orders to stop the American fleet from interfering with India's operations.  Kruglyakov's task group left Vladivostok on December 3, 1971, and consisted of a variety of platforms for coordinated anti-carrier operations and self-protection. It included a Kynda anti-ship missile cruiser, a conventionally-powered anti-ship missile submarine (possibly of the J-class), an anti-aircraft missile destroyer, and a F-class attack submarine already in the Indian Ocean.

According to U.S. sources, the Enterprise left its station off the coast of Vietnam on December 10, 1971, headed for the Indian Ocean, pausing a day for its supply ship to reload.  U.S. sources state that the task force had two missions:  to assist with the evacuation of non-combatant foreigners and, if necessary, "to insure the protection
of U.S. interests in the area."  Besides the Enterprise and Tripoli, Task Force 74 included three guided missile anti-aircraft escorts, four Gearing class destroyers, and a nuclear-powered attack submarine.

According to Adm. Kruglyakov, he surfaced his submarines to show the US Navy that they were there, and then "we encircled them and aimed the missiles at the ‘Enterprise’. We had blocked their way and didn’t allow them to head anywhere, neither to Karachi, nor to Chittagong or Dhaka.”  Adm. Kruglyakov claimed also that the Soviets had intercepted American communications where "[T]he commander of the Carrier Battle Group was then the counter-admiral Dimon Gordon. He sent the report to the 7th American Fleet Commander: ‘Sir, we are too late. There are Russian nuclear submarines here, and a big collection of battleships’."  Note that the US Navy has no "counter-admirals" and there was no Admiral named "Dimon Gordon."  Moreover, the US Navy might refer to "warships" but not "battleships" because neither navy had any in active duty.

According to a study by the Center for Naval Analysis, the events the Soviet Admiral described did not happen during the war.  Because of the long-distances, the American task force did not arrive on station in the Indian Ocean until after foreign nationals had left and just one day before the Pakistanis surrendered.  Adm. Kruglyakov's task group, however, arrived three days after Enterprise and was not in position to block the task force from entering the Bay of Bengal if it wanted to.  The British fleet, by that point, had already left the scene.  Some of the Soviet warships did seek out the Enterprise, according to the CNA study.  Otherwise, all American sources I've read say nothing really about any Soviet naval threat.

So is Admiral Kruglyakov speaking the truth?  Was there nearly a major naval confrontation as there almost was when the Soviets deployed four victor class attack submarines in response to the mining of Haiphong Harbor?  Or is this just a legend carried on for propaganda purposes?


texts: To What Extent Were St. Augustine's Just War Principles Used In The First Crusade?

texts:
The question is mostly self-explanatory; however I want to state I have read a few books so I am aware of abuses and also some of the origins of the Crusade.

So what I am really asking for is instances where St. Augustine's Just War theory was actually implemented/followed prior to and during the FIRST Crusade. I imagine there are at least a few, but the Crusade is often painted with an Enlightenment brush.


texts:
Which is the still functioning Oldest Watchmaker company on the world?

Googling gave me three results:

Blancpain
JEANRICHARD
Vacheron Constantin


texts: How did one look for missing people in the 19th century?

texts: I was curious to know how a missing person might have been looked for in the 19th century or early 20th century - 1890s-1930s - as they didn’t have things like news broadcasts and such. Any ideas?


texts: Is Livy to much of a romantic to be considered credible?

texts:
If you compare, for example the writings between Titus Livius and his Greek counterpart from a century earlier, Polybius, does Livy prove himself credible with his fantastical writing styles and trying to add an emotional narrative to the history that is being described?

For example, when Hannible crossed the alps, Livy writes:

  On top of that, the horses caused particular mayhem in the
  Carthaginian column. They went mad with terror at the wild shouts,
  which echoed and re-echoed ever more loudly from the forests and
  mountain sides, while chance blows and wounds so panicked them that
  they wrought havoc among the men and their equipment alike. 33.7. The
  cramped conditions combined with the fact that there were sheer cliffs
  and precipices on either side meant that many (including soldiers in
  full armour) were hurled to their death. Worst of all, even baggage
  animals with full loads on their backs were sent tumbling to
  destruction.

While an excerpt from Polybius writes:

  This time it was all too probable that Hannibal’s whole army would
  have perished if he had not, even now, suspected some such outcome. In
  anticipation of it and as a precaution, he had placed the baggage
  train and the cavalry at the front of the column and kept his hoplites
  as a rearguard. 53.2. Since they were fully alert for an attack,
  casualties were less serious and they were able to beat back the
  tribesmen’s attack

Polybius writes in a much more stoic and objectively than Livy. I cannot recall where I read it, but I also have read that Livy was known to simply copy and embellish what other historians have already written.

Is this true, and if so, can Livy be considered a respectable Roman historian?


texts: Did people shoot from both sides of the bow in medieval times?

texts:
Most modern archers are taught to shoot with Mediterranean style; that is, putting the arrow on the left side of the bow (if they're right handed) and pulling the string with 3 fingers. Some claim that it's how people have been shooting arrows since medieval times, because shooting on the left side of the bow is more accurate and precise than shooting on the right side. The way you pull the bow with 3 fingers also makes the string twist to the right, which pushes the arrow towards the bow and give it stability.

A youtuber named Shadiversity has made several videos claiming that people in medieval times didn't just shoot arrows from the left side, but also on the right side. He referred to several medieval artworks clearly depicting archers shooting their arrows from the right side, and stated that these aren't likely to be mistakes because how prevalent archery was in medieval times. He also demonstrated that it's possible to shoot accurately this way, with minimal adjustments on the technique.

Is there truth to his claim? And if medieval people did shoot from both sides, when and why did the norm change from "shooting both ways is fine" to "the correct way is shooting from the left side"?


texts: Was Jesus depicted as dark skinned during the beginning of Christianity

texts:
I have seen depictions of Jesus classified under "early Christian art" and in the earliest depictions of Jesus he was of a much darker skin tone and I also seen the early "black madonnas" (the dark skin virgin mary and baby jesus) and these are dated back to early Christianity in european dominant lands. It was also said that the depiction of Jesus that we have today is actually based off of a portrait of cesare borgia.

Is there any historical value to these statements in question?

here are a few links

Wikipedia
Real History
Jesus
Good Shepherd

Please view these above links sincerely with a non-bias perspective and tell me if this holds any weight at all historically.


texts: Why are NATO flag officers allowed to pilot aircraft?

texts:
LTG Frank M Andrews and Maj Gen Robert Worley  both died while piloting combat aircraft in a war. Wikipedia has pictures of GEN Fogleman, while a four-star Gen, flying the C-17 and F-16.

I'm assuming that generals and admirals are less skilled or prepared to pilot aircraft, as their primary duty is management and leadership, not flying.

Thus GFOs probably ought not be allowed to pilot, but please see the question in the title.

What other GFOs of NATO Rank OF-6 or higher died, while piloting in a war?


texts: Were covered wagons used on the Federal Road in North GA in the early 1830's?

texts: I'm doing reasearch on the years leading up to the Cherokee removal and need to know if pioneers during the early 1830's used covered wagons to travel long distances on the Federal Road in north Georgia.


texts: Were there many instances when an "overaged" commander was at odds with a much younger second in command?

texts:
I can think of two. The first was at Stirling Bridge, in 1297 when the English outnumbered the Scots some 4 to 1, but the 72-year old English commander, John Warrenne, Earl of Surrey was not keen on giving battle in swampy land where the Scots were "at home." But the 40-year old Hugh de Cressingham led half the army (the part under his control) across Stirling Bridge against orders. When half of this force was across the bridge, the Scots attacked from ambush at the odds of 1- to 1, crushed both halves of Cressingham's force, and even carried the battle successfully to Warrenne's remaining troops.

The second was the Waterloo campaign, after the defeat of the Prussians by Napoleon at Ligny. There, the badly wounded 72-year-old Marshal Blucher insisted on leading the remnants of his defeated army to Waterloo to reinforce Wellington, over the objections of the much-younger Gneisenau. The Prussians made it to Waterloo on time with sufficient reinforcements, and the rest is history.

Are there other instances where military commanders of very different ages were of the opposite opinion? What were the results?


texts: How were war elephants used against cavalry?

texts:
In this question: How do war elephants fight? it was mentioned that horses tend to dislike elephants, so they are effective against cavalry. How does this work in practice? I don't imagine it would be a good idea to charge at cavalry using war elephants, because war elephants are hard to control and the cavalry could just move out of the way.

Were there major battles that saw effective use of elephants against cavalry? How were they used?


texts: Was one of the main reasons Hitler attacked the Soviet Union due to oil?

texts:
Some people say the reason for Hitler's invasion of the Soviet Union was due to the oil fields in the Caucasus. Which, according to many historians, was the fact he prioritized his armies south rather than to capture Moscow.

Weren't the oil fields in Romania enough for Hitler? They were already engaged in Northern Africa, wouldn't it be an easier target to keep the occupation there and possibly capture other Middle Eastern territories, rather than attacking the Soviet Union?

If this was one of the main reasons for attacking the Soviet Union, why did he do it?


texts: The Rosenberg diary and the functionalist-intentionalist debate

texts:
Today it was announced that the diary of Alfred Rosenberg was been found, after it had disappeared in 1946.

Prima facie, this would seem to be a major piece of historical evidence for the Functionalist vs. Intentionalist debate. What puzzles me at this stage is this: the news article says the diary was entered as evidence in the Nuremberg Trials; this means that parts of it might have been available for historians as part of the trials' documentation.

If so - what part has the diary played so far in the debate?


texts: How many people survived the Titanic?  Was it 706, 706 or 705 or can we only say it was between 705 and 713 ?  Where do these various number come from?


texts: Did more Jews live in Poland than any other country, prior to the Holocaust, because of how Polish laws and people regarded Jews?

texts:
Poland in 1900 and just before the Sho'ah ranks 1st in a list of nations by Jewish percentage of the population. [1]
Now of course in such a ranking that country is Israel.
Why did Jews migrate to and live in Poland? Considerations could be historical, geographic, legislative (Statute of Kalisz, Warsaw Confederation?) or other.
A more specific question: did more Jews live in Poland than other nations prior to the Sho'ah because of a preference for how Polish laws and people treated Jews? Or is Poland's historical ranking in Jewish population attributed to other reasons?
Comparisons to other countries like Hungary, Ukraine, and Russia, and their laws, may also be helpful.
Personal and family histories may also be helpful in understanding this historical ranking of Poland by Jewish population.


texts: In a Nazi concentration, labor, or death camp, what was a "'sale' Appel"?

texts:
I have listened to 100+ hours of testimonies by Holocaust survivors. Those who were in concentration, labor, or death camps invariably described the brutal roll calls known in German as Appels.

However, a handful of survivors used a two-word phrase that sounded to me like "'sale Appel," which makes no sense. The witnesses did not define the phrase, and the interviewers did not ask for clarification.

What is the phrase in question?


texts: Is this photo of Gavrilo Princip or Nedeljko Čabrinović?

texts: It seems most websites say this is Gavrilo Princip who shot Franz Ferdinand, but some say it is Nedeljko Čabrinović who threw the bomb at him. I was wondering if anyone knew for sure?


texts:
Standard ancient Roman uniform consisted of a tunic, a cloak and sandal-type boots, resulting in a look like this. Now, this is all very well for Mediterranean climates but I really cannot fathom how they got along with this clothing in Northern Europe (Germania, Britannia, Northern Gaul, etc.). Was there another type of uniform more suitable to cold climates?

I know there is a theory that the temperatures were then higher than today but at least the article I've linked to talks about a difference of 1 degree Celsius - not enough to make one warm and cozy in a tunic on a cold North European winter day.

So what was the Romans' trick? Were they supermen or something?


texts: What do we know about Archimedes text "On Sphere-Making"?

texts:
I originally put this question on Mythology SE, but was suggested I move it here.

I was doing some mindless research and came across a Wikipedia page on lost works and went down to the classical period. Nothing grabbed my attention until I saw On Sphere-Making by Archimedes. The title was in red, so I clicked on it and got a blank page.

This tells me that we know nothing that was in the sphere making manuscript. Do we really know nothing? Has nothing survived? If something did survive, what do we know about what Archimedes wrote?


texts: Is this a Qing costume and did it have a purpose?

texts:
According to this article, clothing during was very codified during the Qing dynasty.

Is it reasonable to think this suit may be of Qing dynasty, and if so, what would have been its wearer status and the occasions to wear this robe ?

Update :

Just found this similar looking costume.  According to the description it may be a woman's domestic semi-formal coat from the late Qing dynasty.


texts: Who decided to bury Napoleon in the Dome of Invalides?

texts: Who decided to make Napoleon the center of the Dome of Invalides in Paris? What was the church like before Napoleon? It would be interesting if you could clarify the history of the decision.


texts:
Nimet Eloui Bey was a famous Egyptian model in the 1920s and 1930s, whom I'm researching at the moment. Although now largely forgotten, she is still mentioned from time to time due to being the first wife of Aziz Eloui Bey, who divorced her in order to marry Lee Miller, after which she drank herself to death in a few weeks.

Ralph Freedman stated in his biography of Rainer Maria Rilke (this is a link to the passage in question) that she was the daughter of a 'First Chamberlain to Sultan Hussein of Egypt'. I presume that 'Sultan Hussein' refers to Hussein Kamel; in that case, it shouldn't be too much labour to identify one of his chief ministers, since he reigned for less than three years (1914-1917). However, Googling "Hussein Kamel", "Sultanate of Egypt" and "First Chamberlain", and various permutations thereof, is not giving me anything useful.

An ambitious tangent: if anyone could give me a date of birth, even an approximate one, for Madame Eloui Bey, that would be marvellous. According to this article, she was born in Cairo, but it doesn't say when.


texts: How have changes in taxation affected philanthropy in the US?

texts:
Every so often, I see a newspaper article which states that the wealthiest people in my country make less substantial contributions to philanthropy (relative to their wealth) than do their American counterparts. Invariably, our higher taxes are cited as a reason why this is so, supposedly leading some to form the opinion that they are already giving their fair share to the less fortunate. If this is a significant consideration, it would be reasonable to also expect a change in the rate of philanthropic contributions when a country alters the amount of tax it collects from its wealthy.

I'm interested in whether this is so in the US, given that it's long had a culture of philanthropy by the wealthy. Has such a relationship with taxes been observed there?

I have no particular definition of "wealthy" in mind and am open to any that allows for comparison of data from different periods.


texts: How much influence did the Zimmerman Telegram have?

texts:
The Zimmerman telegram provoked USA to join WW1 against Germany. If the telegram hadn't been sent, would USA have entered war against Germany?

The reason I ask is because it seems very strange.

Working from the assumption that Germany would have won the war if the US hadn't gotten involved, it's kind of strange that Germany provoked US to fight them.


texts: What was the response of the general Iranian public to the modernization policies of Reza Shah?

texts:
I have been reading the fascinating study on Iran by Nikki R. Keddie, "Modern Iran: Roots and Results of Revolution", Yale University Press, 2006.  In it she outlines the dramatic modernizing policy of Iranian ruler Reza Shah (r. 1914-1941).  In her chapter on Reza Shah, she describes a fairly autocratic leader who made great strides in improving certain aspects of Iran (notably in military capacity, public education, and transportation infrastructure) by adopting Western style reforms.  While there seem to be obvious winners and losers in this process, with the former being landlords, industrialists, the class of civil servants and military officers, and to a lesser degree women in general; with the latter being the ulama (Muslim legal/religious scholars), peasants, trade unionists, socialists, and  proletariat.

While Keddie provides a very thorough explanation of Reza Shah reforms on a macro level, her focus on the larger history of Iran leaves more in-depth questions unanswered.  I am interested as to what the general population of Iran thought of the reforms.  One particularly interesting clue comes from a lengthy quotation in Keddie's work from a professor in International Relations and History, Houchang Chehabi:

  The forced unveiling of women...was, among all of Reza Shah's modernization policies, the one that contributed to most of his unpopularity among ordinary Iranians...while meant to unify the nation by eliminating visible class, status, and regional distinctions, in fact deepened another cleavage in Iranian society, i.e., that between westernizers...and the rest of society, which resented an intrusion in their private lives.

In many ways this sounds similar to a common compliant in the modern middle east, in which the justifiable outrage many feel over their exploitation at the hands of Western powers is most vocally expressed through real & perceived incursions into day-to-day life and customs.  This seems to fit with this example as Iran had a long history of being exploited by the west, particularly by Great Britain and Russia.  I'd be interested in knowing if this was indeed the most common complaint of the Iranian people at the time and if the aforementioned analysis is valid.  Also, what were other reactions Iranians had at the time to the policies of Reza Shah?


texts: What is the last historical mention of people worshipping the Roman gods?

texts:
Today, there are many polytheists and neopagans who worship the ancient Roman gods.  They are, however, a very new development, and not the descendants of an unbroken line stretching back to the Roman Republic.  There was a long period (unless I'm wildly mistaken) when the gods of ancient Rome were fully dead.

As Christianity was rising, though, there was a significant amount of time, both before and after Christianity became the official religion on the Roman Empire, when Christians and pagans lived side-by-side.  Some of this was peaceful, some of it was less so.  But at a certain point, there were simply none of the latter group left, and Christianity had (aside from other religious minorities like the Jews) completed the conversion of the Empire, and of Europe.

When did that happen?  What is the last reference we have to people worshiping Jupiter, Mars, Venus, etc?  Preferably, what is the last reference that is generally accepted as valid, and not simply an accusation of scandalous pagan practices as a way to slander a Christian's name?


texts: Why wasn't there more resistance to the French revolution by the army?

texts:
Reading about the French revolution in 1789, none of the readily available Sources (Wikipedia history.com encyclopedia.com) mentions much resistance to the revolution by the army, even though "The kings had ruled by ... their command of the army"

One would assume that a king who rules his country like a modern dictator would, if neccesary, call the army to subdue all efforts to strip him from power.

Where does this discrepancy come from? Some explanations I could think of are:

There were actual attempts to subdue the revolution, but as they didn't affect the outcome, they generally aren't mentioned
Louis XVI was already desperate when he called for the national assembly; he knew he needed them to solve France's financial trouble and didn't dare to antagonize them
After the 7 Years' War and the American Revolutionary War, with France's severe financial troubles, most of the army had already been disbanded and just wasn't in a position to put up much resistance
The army (especially the leaders) knew about the desolate state of the country, so they wanted something to happen no matter the outcome to the king
Many members of the army, having fought in the American Revolutionary War, had been exposed to the ideals of the Americans, secretly supported them, and because of this welcomed the revolution in France as well

Is there any research about which of these possibilities are true, and to which extend, especially the last one?


texts:
Tullia was the daughter of the great Roman politician Cicero. She had a few marriages and according to English Wikipedia she had two sons, the first one of which died the same year it was born. Tullia gave birth to the second son in 45 BC, who survived. The English Wikipedia doesn't say anything more about that.
Do we know anything more about her second son (name, what happened etc)? Since Cicero lived two years longer than Tullia, one would assume that Cicero would have said something about the grandson in his letters, but that's maybe a longshot.


texts: Did Russia and Lenin benefit from the Treaty of Versailles?

texts:
Russia suffered a substantial land loss and severe economic problems due to the Treaty of Brest-Litovsk. However, the land Germany gained from Russia was to be independent according to Treaty of Versailles. Would this help Russia to get the lost land back?

And would this have any positive effect on the Russian economy?


texts: Why were women excluded from the succession line in the Meiji constitution?

texts:
Article 2  of the Meiji consitution (full text here) says:

  The Imperial Throne shall be succeeded to by Imperial male
  descendants, according to the provisions of the Imperial House Law.

A history book I was perusing indicated that this was a break with previous Japanese tradition and explains this by Prussian-German influence. This explanation makes a lot of sens, since two Prussian experts (Rudolf von Gneist and Lorenz von Stein) were helping with the drafts.

However, the Japanese did reject some European notions they didn't want in their constitution: (wiki article, "drafting" section):

  [Ito Hirobuni, chair of the drafting commission] also rejected some
  notions as unfit for Japan, as they stemmed from European
  constitutional practice and Christianity.

So, I'd like to know if there was some internal debate on this point, in which some Japanese upheld the traditional approach which allowed for a ruling empress - and why did the German (Salic?) approach prevail?


texts: Why did the Japanese expect the United States navy would attack the Home Islands?

texts:
Kantai Kessen, the Japanese naval strategy for a Pacific war, amounted to (simplified) "The American fleet will cross the Pacific to attack Japan.  At that time, we will engage and defeat them."

Creating a battle plan that depends on the enemy's cooperation is a beginner's mistake, not something you'd expect from a senior naval strategist.  The Japanese must have had some reason to believe that an attack was the only viable option for the Americans.  What was that reason?


texts: Is Howard Roark's potted history of architecture accurate?

texts:
Howard Roark explains why the Parthenon is not great architecture and in passing explains that the whole of architectural history has been nothing but a series of copycatting:

  "Look," said Roark. "The famous flutings on the famous columns — what
  are they there for? To hide the joints in wood — when columns were
  made of wood, only these aren't, they're marble. The triglyphs, what
  are they? Wood. Wooden beams, the way they had to be laid when people
  began to build wooden shacks. Your Greeks took marble and they made
  copies of their wooden structures out of it, because others had done
  it that way. Then your masters of the Renaissance came along and made
  copies in plaster of copies in marble of copies in wood. Now here we
  are, making copies in steel and concrete of copies in plaster of
  copies in marble of copies in wood. Why?"

Is there any historical truth in his account?

EDIT: Specifically, I wonder if it's true that marble buildings were copies of wooden ones, with structurally irrelevant features included as atavisms from wooden constructions?


texts: Employment statistics in Germany since mid-19th century

texts: What is the most reliable source of employment statistics in Germany? I am interested in the time period starting from mid-19th century all the way to present days.


texts: Did all writing civilizations eventually produce cryptography?

texts: I know some of the ancient civilizations did encrypt their messages. Did it happen everywhere where writing was known? If it didn't happen somewhere, what were the reasons?


texts: How did western saloons lock up for the night?

texts: Old western saloon doors have spaces under them, which means people can still crawl under them and get in even if the doors are locked. How did the saloon owners lock up at night to keep people from breaking in?


texts: How frequent were murders by Mormon Danites in the 1850s?

texts:
During early Mormon history, there was a band of clandestine assassins known as the "Danites" or the "Sons of Dan". They committed a form ritualized murder known as Blood Atonement.

The group and their murder/revenge tactics are surrounded in some historical mystery. Much of the literature about the Danites is sensationalist fiction, such as Sir Arthur Conan Doyle's "A Study in Scarlet."

My question is: How common were the Danites? Were there Danite divisions in every ward and stake in Zion? Were Danite murders rare events committed by vigilantes or was Brigham Young's Utah basically a Fascist state, with the Danites playing the role of the institutionalized secret police?

Please include sources for any answers that you submit.


texts: Are former British colonies better off now compared to other colonies and why

texts:
After looking up some statistics it appears that former British colonies ( Canada, Australia, India, New Zealand, South Africa, India, Singapore,...) seem to be better of than colonies of let's say France (Morocco, Algeria,...), Germany (Cameroon, Togo,...), the Netherlands (Indonesia, New Guinea) and Belgium (Zaire/Congo). Of course compared to colonies in the neighborhood.

Is there some consensus on this topic? What are significant differences in how the British governed their colonies compared to other countries? What made this approach more successful?

This question is not about the life conditions of the native people in these colonies, which was in many cases dramatic.

A bold rephrase of the question would could thus be: based on historical evidence, what conditions should one look for (to pick a good place) and how should one manage that colony to be successful. as a thought experiment. Please don't take this question as a provocation, it's more scientific research in what caused colonies to succeed or fail.


texts: After the American Civil War, which states had the most problems with rejoining the Union?

texts: Once the American Civil war ended, did some states encounter more difficulty than others when it came to rejoining the Union? What circumstances or conditions might have contributed to their issues?


texts: How common was it for people to live 80+ years in the 17th century?

texts: I was studying music and saw in a music score sheet that Tomaso Albinoni lived 80 years. I know that long before that people had lived to that age. I would like to know just how common that was. Did people back then see those people as we see people with 100+ years today?


texts: Use of lead sheets in reconstruction of late medieval tower?

texts:
I guess it's more of an archaeology question, but this is the closest forum I could find.
So, we stopped at Gardiki Castle, Corfu, Greece, built in the late Byzantine era in the 13th century, and walked along it's perimeter since it was all locked up. Some parts were reconstructed, and between them a tower was restored. Within that tower, and some other reconstructed wall parts, there were what seemed to be lead sheets, or, at any rate, there were sheets of a soft metal (deformable by hand with little effort) embedded between the stones. Why is that there? Why haven't I seen it before?


texts: What was the impact of race in the French Foreign Legion in the 20th century?

texts:
Lately I've been interested in the French Foreign Legion and found that it's somewhat difficult to find information about racial topics on the subject. Were for example blacks allowed to serve, and if so, what was their treatment and position in the ranks? Did different ethnicity participate in combat? Was the social status of the individual somehow affected and maybe changed by the service?

I'm especially interested in the 20th century and 1930's. Every info, even small details, is greatly appreciated.


texts: Were any of Queen Victoria’s portraits widely publicised?

texts:
Background

The Article „Lingering between Tradition and Innovation: Photographic Portraits of Empress Dowager Cixi“ (link) describes how Empress Dowager Cixi of the Qing Dynasty was advised to have her portrait painted as a means of counteracting negative publicity in the West. It assumes, that

  European royal portraiture was highly publicized and worked as the connecting knot between the ruler/sitter and subject/viewer.

Being accustomed to Byzantine portraiture, I saw no reason to question this notion, but my colleagues are highly sceptical thereof.

Main

So I am interested in Queen Victoria as an oft painted Western monarch who is roughly contemporary to Cixi.

Were Queen Victoria’s portraits widely publicised, except on stamps and coins?“

Obviously the royal portrait adorned stamps:

As well as coinage:

But this article  showing many portraits maintains:

  Queen Victoria was the most photographed and painted monarch to have ever lived (at that time). A fiercely intelligent woman who acknowledged that her image was instrumental to her relationship with the public, some argued that she was the first royal to grasp the camera's potential power as a 'political weapon'.
  It is likely that she regarded painting in the same way.

So, were any of her (non-stamp, non-money) portraits widely publicised?

For example at great exhibitions like the one of 1850? I am yet to find concrete information.


texts: What were the relations between Romania and Bulgaria before WWI?

texts:
I am researching the Balkan's involvement in World War 1. Specifically, Bulgaria, Serbia, and Romania.
My question is:
What were Romanian - and Bulgarian relations in, and around the lead-up to the First World War, and the War itself. And, what were the relations of the Great European Powers, and the Balkans within 1900 - 1920 (why did they consider the Balkans valuable, and what did they do about it).


texts: When did England make a statute that barred foreigners from inheriting the throne?

texts:
According to Iain Moncreiffe in his book The Highland Clans, he says this.

  “By the fourteenth century it had become common law (in both England and Scotland) that a person who was not born in the liegeance of the Sovereign, nor naturalised, could not have the capacity to succeed as an heir”

However Wikipedia says this

“It was not common law but a 15th-century statute that restricted the English crown to those in the liegeance of the Sovereign”

So which is correct? Was it done in the 14th or 15th century?


texts: Could the Soviet Union have continued fighting World War II without Caucasus oil?

texts:
In 1942, Germany's Fall Blau was initially aimed at capturing or interdicting shipments of oil from the Caucasus to the rest of the Soviet Union. Even though armies were diverted to Stalingrad and even Leningrad, the Germans managed to capture Maikop, and came within 50 miles of Grozny.

Where would the Soviet Union have gotten its oil from, if Germany instead had pursued and succeeded in an all-out attempt on the "Caucasus?" Perhaps Army Groups A and B would have moved in parallel to the lower Volga, bypassed Stalingrad, captured Astrakhan on the Caspian, and move far enough beyond to interdict oil shipments. Or Germany could have sent Manstein's 11th Army and Hoth's 4th Army along with Army Group A to the Caucasus, (leaving Paulus between the Don and the Volga for flank protection), thereby capturing Grozny and isolating Baku.

Early in the war, the Soviet Union had moved hundreds of factories to the Urals from soon-to-occupied territory to Sverdlovsk and Magnitogorsk. My sense is that they would have had adequate, though not ample supplies of oil to fight a war from around the Urals, and east of Moscow, without the Caucasus. After all, Germany managed to continue fighting with "only" Romanian oil supplies (and beyond 1944 without them).

But one of my history teachers taught that without Caucasus oil, the Soviet Union would have had to make a "Carthaginian" peace. Could someone with a knowledge of Soviet geography tell whether I or my teacher was right about the Soviet Union's ability to continue fighting World War II without Caucasus oil?


texts:
This question has been confusing me for a while. Was Alexander the Great Greek or Macedonian?

He was born in Pella, Macedonia, but is he considered Greek? Did nationality and ethnicity mean different things at the time of the Greeks as they do now or were they regarded the same?

This link says Macedonians were ethnic Greek, while this one contradicts the former.


texts: How many Spartan boys survived army training?

texts: Spartan combat training was very rough and dangerous. What percentage of boys survived their training?


texts: What ships did pirates use in ancient Greece and Rome?

texts:
I imagine they did not have the funds to buy or build heavy military ships, so I wonder what did they use.

Did they re-purpose civilian ships?


texts: When did the English and Americans realize that vegetables were healthy?

texts:
I've recently come across two quotes in very unrelated sources implying that for centuries, the English and their colonial offspring did not appreciate the role of vegetables in a healthy diet.

From "Religion and the Decline of Magic: Studies in Popular Beliefs in Sixteenth and Seventeenth-Century England":

  The well-known ‘green sickness’ in young women, to which
  contemporaries gave a sexual meaning, was chlorosis, anaemia produced
  by a lack of iron in the diet, stemming from upper-class disdain for
  fresh vegetables. The well-to-do ate too much meat and were frequently
  constipated . . . In the seventeenth century [the poor] may have escaped the
  gout and stone which plagued their betters, and may even have had
  better teeth from eating more vegetables.

From Jacksonian America: Society, Personality, and Politics:

  During [the cholera epidemic of 1832], among the quaint notions that
  flourished was a belief in the the therapeutic qualities of beef and
  mutton and the evil effects of vegetables. Before and after the
  epidemic many people considered tomatoes taboo.

I was already aware of anti-potato prejudice, but now it seems to me like disdain for vegetables was even more widespread. Even some vegetarians did not think much of the health benefits of vegetables, according to an editorial in The Index to Good Health (Michigan, 1899):

  Nothing short of confusion is produced when a vegetarian declares to
  his friends that he does not eat vegetables . . . Generally he does
  [eat vegetables] when he first becomes a vegetarian, but very often as
  he progresses in the knowledge of the value of foods, he comes to a
  point where he thinks it economy of labor to live on fruits and grains
  and nuts, discarding vegetables as not worth the trouble of
  consumption and digestion.

When did members of the English-speaking world begin eating vegetables by choice instead of out of poverty? When did it become conventional wisdom that vegetables were, in fact, healthy? Was this change attributable to any kind of research?


texts: How did Romans do division in their numeral system? Was it by repeated subtraction or did they know anything faster?


texts: What was Income Disparity like in the Middle Ages of Europe?

texts:
I was looking up the income disparity today. What I got for America, was Food service could get as little as $18,000 annual income, while Lawyers got paid $140,000, surgeons $320,000, and Bill Gates made something between 2,600,000,000 and $11,500,000,000 annually. So Bill Gates earns over 600,000 times the income of the poorest job I could find.

My question was how much of an income gap there was in medieval Europe, to compare? Were the Kings and merchant guild leaders earning 600,000 times what the day labourer was earning, in the middle ages?

If you need the time narrowed down further, I was thinking from the years 1200 to 1400.


texts: WW2: Did US marines and soldiers really go into action with unbuckled helmet chin straps?

texts:
(Note: links go to realistically portrayed scenes of WW2 combat.)

I am watching Youtube clips of WW2 miniseries, like The Pacific and Band of Brothers.

Based on a non-scientific survey of these miniseries, it looks like US marines and soldiers buckle their chin straps in landing craft or aircraft - and unbuckle them once they hit the landing zone. Like here or here or here or here. The chin strap will either dangle photogenically, or the helmet will appear to have had its strap completely removed.

What happens when you are in a war zone with your chin strap unbuckled? You lose your helmet. Losing your helmet in a war zone is a Bad Thing. (Unless you are a lead actor and will survive for dramaturgical reasons.)

Now, the advantages of having your chin strap buckled appear obvious to me. So I'd assume they would be as obvious to US marines or soldiers - and to actors playing them. (They certainly did to my drill instructor twenty years ago, who did not want to see us with dangling straps.) So I have to assume that someone told the actors to unbuckle the chin straps.

Did WW2 marines and soldiers actually go into action with their chin straps unbuckled? If so, what was the reason? If not, were actors in these miniseries actively told to unbuckle their straps? If so, what was the reason for that?

(Incidentally, History.SE suggests that this question may already have my answer: Did the Celts really go into battle naked? Umm... not quite.)


texts: Was the American Civil War the “bloodiest civil war in history”?

texts:
I heard something like that once on some TV documentary, but I'm second guessing that there must have been a caveat for just the Americas, or otherwise qualified it as, "in modern history", or as a percentage of population or something.

I know that the newly industrialized machinery was a key factor (e.g. lever-action repeating rifle, developed by the Union late in the war.)

What are other known civil wars across history that had more casualties?

Edit:

After many hours of Civil War documentary review trying to find the source (much of the Ken Burns series and others), I found it.  Death and the Civil War (2012) (PBS: “The American Experience”: 9/12/2012).

“Never before and never since, have so many Americans died in any war, by any measure or reckoning.”

That's not inline with the original question header – but I tried to acknowledge it to be a false memory – but having now just watched the show again, you'll have to forgive me.  The entire show is hyper-maudlin, and about the ugly details of mass deaths, how it was realized and processed, and the theretofore unimaginable scale of it.

If only all wars were as well-served in documentary format; vs. various forms of thinly-veiled heroic glorification.


texts:
Has Morocco ever claimed ownership of the Canary and Madeira islands? If no, then why not?

How about the island countries Cabo Verde and São Tomé and their African continental neighbours?


texts: Who swore fealty to his overlord and immediately knocked him down?

texts: I remember a story about a physically strong medieval figure, I believe maybe in Normandy, who swore fealty to some relatively weak overlord, but during the ceremony kicked or knocked the overlord off his throne. The story may be apocryphal but was widespread. What incident am I thinking of? I have not been able to search for it via other means.


texts: Why is New Jersey (the US state) so associated with a kind of "low-brow worker guy" stereotype?

texts:
I don't live in NJ myself, nor have I ever been there.

I've heard numerous times, oftentimes from "New Jerseyians" themselves, jokes and sarcastic remarks relating to people (or males specifically, usually) from New Jersey being very "low-brow" or "uncultured", for example, they allegedly speak in a way which sounds "stupid" or "comical", and they allegedly don't care much about anything or anyone outside New Jersey. Of course, this doesn't apply to every single individual, but apparently to "a large percentage".

In this stereotype, it seems like the guy is oftentimes Italian-American. However, I have also heard a different stereotype about New Jersey where apparently an unusual amount of Jews live there, and in which this is the distinguishing "feature" of New Jersey. But I've also heard that about Long Island (which isn't a state but part of New York) and New York (the state, in general), so I don't know what to make of that.

I guess it's possible for both to be true.

What I'm wondering is why specifically New Jersey was "picked" for this (first) stereotype. That is, among the "Northern" states. I never hear anyone make fun of any other Northern US state in this way. There must be something I'm missing about the history of New Jersey.

I hope that my question is clear enough and doesn't offend anyone. Again, I'm trying to understand why this stereotype exists; I don't have any particular dislike/hate toward New Jersey or the people who live there.


texts: What lands have been called by names chosen to disassociate those lands from its inhabitants

texts:
Historically, the name "Persia" has been applied to southern Asia to disassociate that land from the people who inhabit it, who called themselves Aran. Similarly, the name "Palestine" has been applied to the Levant, to disassociate the area from Judea. To be clear, I understand that the names existed in a sense before the broad, official application to the land, however they were officially decreed as names for the land (by foreigners) to repress the people living in the land. I am not referring to recent political events so please no flamewars! I am listing those two as examples for the sake of explanation so no need for pedantry.

Of notable development in the past century have been the return to the ancient names to both these places: Iran and Israel. What other areas were named to disassociate the lands from their inhabitants? Are there any movements to restore other such lands to their former names?


texts: How did messages in art, entertainment, etc. influence perception of Canada?

texts:
How did messages in art, entertainment, and official publications shape the English Canadian view of Canada's the world at the time of the Victorian era?

So far how I understand it, is that the covers of much art (especially the painting of Britannia in the middle, surrounded by various races across the world, showing White Englishmen's superiority in the world in status, entertainment, taste in culture, art, economy, technology, etc.) helped solidify this message that Canada, being a British colony, was the pinnacle of technology, power, status, etc.

Are there any more sources, or information that prove this statement? I'm researching information for an essay, and would really appreciate some more info. I'm slightly lacking a bit.


texts: Did anyone ever try to beat the Great Wall of China by digging secret tunnels under it?

texts: I know the Great Wall was useful to defend against enemies on land, but is there any record that people ever tried to beat the Great Wall by digging tunnels under it? If not, why didn't it happen?


texts:
When was the first full length book sent over telegraph?
or
What was the longest message sent over telecommunications before 1900?


texts:
Since young, I am informed that Taiwan is always a part of China and should not seek independence, and that the Chinese Communist Party will not hesitate to use force to stop the Taiwanese from seeking independence.

The newspapers I read were mostly CCP party organ, so you can imagine my skepticism.

My question is, what is the historical basis for the claim that Taiwan is always a part of China because from what I know, national territory expands and shrinks all the time? And is such a claim valid (in whatever sense), and therefore the CCP can send tanks and airplanes into Taiwan to prevent independence?


texts: How did the United States treat POWs in Vietnam?

texts: Did the USA take prisoners of war in Vietnam? Did they administrate POW camps? Or were the South Vietnamese in charge. I know there is a famous photo of a South Vietnamese police officer summarily executing a prisoner.


texts: Did Hannibal join Antiochus in order to get back at Rome, or was he merely escaping his political enemies in Carthage?

texts:
According to Livy's history of early Rome (Book 33), Hannibal was forced to flee Carthage in 195 BC after his disgruntled political enemies among the Punic aristocracy sent word to Rome accusing him of conspiring with King Antiochus III of the Seleucid Empire to wage war against the Roman Republic. Hannibal ended up seeking refuge with Antiochus and commanded the king's naval forces during the subsequent Roman-Seleucid War.

Did Hannibal intentionally join Antiochus in order to get back at Rome for his country's defeat in the Second Punic War (in line with his childhood oath to be an eternal enemy of Rome), or was he merely seeking personal security against his Carthaginian political enemies and the Roman envoys who wanted to take him into custody?


texts: Which factors led to the different casualty ratio betwen British and German forces during the Battle of Normandy?

texts:
I take for example the VIIIth corps of the British Army, which was part of multiple operations in Normandy in 1944. If you go through the different operations listed in the article, there are very different outcomes:

Operation Epsom: 4 000 British (mostly Scottish) casualties and 3 000 German, and fairly even tank scores
Operation Jupiter: 2 000 British casualties and more than 6 000 German, quite a difference
Operation Goodwood: 5 000 British and 2 000 German (maybe more since 2 000 is only the number of prisonners), a very good German score: up to 500 tanks destroyed for 100 German
Operation Bluecoat: British: 5 000 casualties and 246 tanks, German: more than 100 tanks and probably

Overall, all those operations are considered are partial successes for Allies, since they all contributed in the end to pin down German units, exert attrition on them and leave time and space for American units to break through the forest and at Falaise. This was Montgomery strategy and it succeded from a high point of view.

Looking into the details, however, I am very surprised than the number of casualties had been so varying during the different operations. Especially for Operation Jupiter and Epsom, that went own over similar grounds and with similar units on both sides: the ending result is 3:1 to 1:1.5.

So which factors, for every British operations during the battle of Normandy (6th June to mid-August), led to the different casualty ratio ? Why didn't the British manage to keep a good attrition ratio after, for example Epsom or Jupiter?


texts: Were there prominent secular philosophers in the European middle ages? If so, who?

texts:
I've only done a small amount of reading on the middle ages, and on the history of Western philosophy, but from what I can glean education and religion were tightly coupled during the period, so most thought coming from that time came from religious thinkers.

It seems to me that secular thought started to come to the fore-front again during the late early-modern period, toward the enlightenment, but, if it ever existed during the middle ages it was mostly hidden away, or thinly veiled.

So, were there prominent secularists during the middle ages in which is now modern day Europe? Who were they?


texts: How do we know that prostitutes were very common/popular in Corinth around Jesus' time?

texts:
I just started reading 1 Corinthians today, and one of the footnotes in my Bible (NLT, Life Application Study Bible) has this:

  ...there were more than a dozen pagan temples employing at least a thousand prostitutes. Corinth's reputation was such that prostitutes in other cities began to be called "Corinthian girls."

There are two claims here that I was surprised by:

There were at least 12 pagan temples employing at least 1,000 prostitues
Prostitutes in other cities began to be called "Corinthian girls"

How did the author of this footnote know these (reputed) facts? What's the historical evidence for these claims?


texts: How to track down a Spanish/Latin American soldier that fought in wars internationally (18th/19th century)?

texts:
The details are scant, but I hope it's enough to get the community interested and a clear answer emerge (there can't be that many people who fit the bill?).
I read a long time ago about a famous Spanish/Latin American soldier who fought in several major conflicts in the 18th or 19th century: he fought in Latin America (maybe with Jose de San Martin?), in the US, and in Europe. I'm not clear if he was a mercenary of sorts, or just chased after battle, but I remember being amazed at the fact that this one man managed to be a part of the major military conflicts at the time.
I'm hoping to find a good biography--I know it exists because I read about this person in a major media company: something like 'the not-so-famous soldier/general that shaped world history' (very loose paraphrase). At the time I found some books on Amazon but life happened and I lost track of them.


texts: When was federal sovereign immunity in the U.S. established?

texts:
Lawsuits against the federal government can be dismissed under the doctrine of sovereign immunity. For example, Al Haramain Islamic Foundation v. Obama was recently dismissed (Appeals court dismisses warrantless wiretapping suit). The constitution refers to the "immunities of citizens" but not to "sovereign immunity".

Was federal sovereign immunity in place from the beginning? Was it established by a particular court ruling, or was it understood to be in effect (e.g., due to common law precedent)? Has there ever been a significant controversy over federal sovereign immunity?


texts: Did Persian Qanat water system influence Turpan Karez water system?

texts:
Based on Wikipedia, the Persian Qanat water system was started in cr. 1000 BC. The Turpan water system, located in modern north-west China, has a similar idea and later it was used on the Silk path that linked China and Persia (among others).
So we can hypothesise that Turpan water system was somewhat inspired by Qanat.
Is there any evidence to support this hypothesis?


texts: Can anyone identify these (possibly WW1 Polish) uniforms?

texts: The only hint I have is that the gentlemen in the picture were Polish and it was reputed to have been taken in 1917. So far I suspect that they may be cavalry?


texts: Can you help me identify the rank and patch on this Royal Italian Army uniform?

texts: Can you help me identify the rank and patch on this uniform on the far right?  It's from around 1910.  Thank you very much.


texts:
The number representing a year or a century gets smaller as we approach AD / CE.

I was wondering what happens if we have an exact BC / BCE date. Do months and days also get smaller as we approach AD / CE?

So, for example, between 500/01/25 BC and 500/12/25 BC, their order from old to new is 500/12/25 BC - 500/01/25 BC or the opposite?

Thaknks


texts: How did the stigmatisation of nationalism begin?

texts:
It is undoubtable that in the modern world the idea of nationalism is frowned upon by many, especially on the left wing, and I'm curious about how this has developed historically.

Can anyone help it proposing ideas as to how nationalism has come to be perceived negatively, is it as a result of Nazism?


texts: When and where did just war theory originate?

texts:
I was reading an entry from Victor Reppert's blog (Reppert being a noted apologist), where he mentioned that just war theory, specifically prohibitions on what you could do during a war and afterwards, was a Christian invention.

I thought that was interesting, albeit a little implausible, so I looked up just war theory on Wikipedia, and sure enough, it says that while the concept of justification dated as early as Cicero (so, c. 75-50 BCE), the idea as it stands now (and to which Reppert refers) does come from Augustine of Hippo and Thomas Acquinas.

My knowledge of history is limited to the Roman Republic/Empire, and to Greece via Thucydides and the classical philosophers, so I couldn't think of a specific instance where the losing side was afforded any inalienable rights: any concessions given were at the pleasure of the winning side. But I could have just as easily missed some event or philosopher at the time proposing such a thing.

The general definition of a "just war" from the Roman Catholic Church is mentioned in paragraph 2309 of the Catechism of the Catholic Church:

  The strict conditions for legitimate defense by military force require rigorous consideration. the gravity of such a decision makes it subject to rigorous conditions of moral legitimacy. At one and the same time:

  the damage inflicted by the aggressor on the nation or community of nations must be lasting, grave, and certain;
  all other means of putting an end to it must have been shown to be impractical or ineffective;
  there must be serious prospects of success;
  the use of arms must not produce evils and disorders graver than the evil to be eliminated. the power of modem means of destruction weighs very heavily in evaluating this condition.

Is this definition a novel formulation of what constitutes a just war? Were there similar definitions held before Augustine?


texts:
I think that a few men, but many more women were convicted of using magic in Europe mostly during the years in between 1400 and 1800 and I think it became much more prevalent after the Protestant Reformation.

Was the majority of people killed women?

If so, Why?


texts: How many civilians died in Sabra and Shatila massacre?

texts:
Wikipedia gives a wide range of between 460 and 3,500 civilians. Is this range still accepted by modern historians? maybe this is a better phrasing: What parts of the disagreement still remains after all new evidence is accounted for?
There is an abundance of sources but I don't have the skills needed to determine which are trustworthy, which are outdated (or use outdated evidence). in other words: for modern historians, that have had acess to and the ability/training to examine all new evidence, is there a non-fringe fraction that still believes that  460 (or 800, or 1390, 2000, 3500..) is plausible?


texts: Where did the “vikings wear helmets with horn” stereotype come from and why?

texts: Vikings wearing helmets with horns has been stereotyped by cartoon shows and animated depictions of vikings. Vikings are also portrayed as beasts and savages who looted and raided innocent shrines and institutions. But archeological evidences prove that vikings wore plain helmets and traded a fair bit as well. So where did this pre-conceived notion come from?


texts: In the British empire, what was the difference between a Governor General and a Viceroy?

texts:
In the many colonies of the British empire, it seems that the rulers of some were known as Governors General and others were officially titled as Viceroys. Was there a practical distinction between the two titles, or are these really two names for the same position?

I'm focusing on the period from AD 1700-1900, or so.


texts: Is it true that Spartan soldiers fought naked?

texts:
I was watching a trailer for a movie called 300: Rise of an Empire. I noticed in this movie the Spartan soldiers from the chest and legs are naked.

But recently I read in several posts here in the Stack Exchange, that Celts fought a war naked, and being naked is extremely dangerous and deadly for an army. Why then were the Spartans naked?

Is it correct that the Spartans were almost naked? If yes, wasn't that a weak point for an army?


texts: Was the title "Democratic-Republican" really used?

texts:
I've read about Democratic-Republicans, and I've never seen it mentioned that they actually didn't use the term, but I read that (from http://elections.lib.tufts.edu/election-faq.html)

  One term that was not used by either party during this time was the infamous label Democratic-Republican. Neither the followers of Thomas Jefferson nor the Federalists used this term. It was invented by historians because they could not decide which term should be used to describe the party of Thomas Jefferson.

Is that true?


texts: Why did the Roman military start to favour swords over the spear phalanx?

texts:
Up until the rise of the Roman Republic, the Greek phalanx was considered the dominant form of military tactics. Evolution had simply favoured longer and longer spears: by the time of Alexander, phalanxes often carried polearms that rivalled a pike in length.

The Kings of Rome appeared to have gone with this prevailing trend. By the time of the early Republic, however, things had changed. Although not the well-organised Legionnaires of popular imagination, the Hastatii, Principes and Triarii of this era tended to favour stabbings swords over spears.

This was the army that was able to secure the basis of the Roman Empire, including a defeat of Macedonia and other states belonging to Alexander's successors which, presumably, were still putting pike phalanxes in the field.

One thing that has never been clear to me is how and why this new military model developed, and whether it was instrumental in defeating Rome's enemies. So:

Why did Roman soldiers start to favour swords and maniples over the traditional spear phalanx?
Was this new method of waging war a significant factor in their success, or was it more a case of other factors such as good discipline and organisation compared with the relatively chaotic and fragmented post-Alexander world?
If so, why did the sword-armed Roman armies enjoy such an advantage over the phalanx?


texts:
As far as I know, the church at the time strictly forbade all heretical manifestations and was very strong. So I could not think sects existed at that time. But reading the book by Victor Hugo, "The Man Who Laughs", I found mention of at least three sects with its own buildings (not just secret meeting in someone's home).
How was this possible?


texts: Why did Nebuchadnezzar keep King Jeconiah alive?

texts:
When Nebuchadnezzar conquered Jerusalem he appointed Zedekiah as his puppet-king and took King Jeconiah and his sons home with him.

For what reasons would the king of a large empire of antiquity, such as Nebuchadnezzar, keep the captive king and his sons alive? Was this common practice in that era?

Would it not make more sense strategically to execute them to prevent any legitimate successors from claiming the throne and seeking vengeance?


texts: Taoism is not generally known as a proselytizing religion these days, but was there ever a time when Taoist missionaries were found?


texts: How did England react to the arrival of the Black Death?

texts:
For an assignment, I need to be studying the Black Plague, and different people's reactions to it. I know about England when the Black Plague hit it. However, were people in England aware of the fact that a plague was coming their way, and if they were, what did they do to prepare?
I'm assuming that leaders of countries and cities would communicate with each other to inform them that a disease was heading their way, but considering the plague hit hard in the beginning, were people aware, or did they even care that a disease was coming their way? What did different types of people (e.g. town leaders, peasants, freemen) do to try to stop the plague affecting their regions?


texts: Did Thomas Paine really give up book royalties?

texts:
I heard on a podcast the claim that Thomas Paine apparently gave up on his book rights so that his writings would circulate more widely. However, I tried to find sources for this claim but was unable to do so. The closest I could find was that a sentence on Wikipedia that Rights of Man had been "radically reduced in price to ensure unprecedented circulation".

Did he really explicitly give up the book rights, or was it the result of some disputes with his publishers/printers?
If so, did he do so with the explicit aim of increasing the circulation of his writings?

Thank you!


texts: When did chairs with arms and backs develop in Europe?

texts:
There are numerous depictions of early / high medieval Popes, Kings and Bishops sat on thrones, with arms and a back, and the saddles of the high medieval period had a padded back, but every depiction I've come across of a seated mortal, before the 15th Century, is shown sat on a stool or bench.

I'm curious when chairs emerged in Europe, if there were any rules prohibiting comfy chairs from all but the highest, or whether the depiction rules are purely an artistic thing / convention?


texts: What happened with North African oil during the Second World War?

texts: From everything I have seen, the war in North Africa was solely about getting oil from the Middle East. Had oil simply not been discovered in North Africa during the time of the war?


texts: Where can I find the calls made between Kita Ikki and the rebels in the Japanese February 26 incident?

texts:
While reading about the February 26 Incident I learnt that Kita Ikki knew of it and provided some support to the coup by phone. A documentary about Asian 20th century history contains a small portion of one of these calls made by the rebels to Kita to inform him of their coup attempt, however it's barely intelligible. Where can I find this recording and possibly those of other calls made?  Are there transcripts of any of them?
For reference, the documentary is by PBS and it's called "The Pacific Century". The call I'm referring to can be found in this video starting at 42:18


texts: Were boycotts, divestment, and sanctions effective against apartheid?

texts:
In the 1980s there was a movement to use boycotts, divestment, and sanctions (BDS) to apply pressure on the apartheid regime in South Africa. These efforts included sports boycotts, refusal of some countries to allow direct airplane flights to and from South Africa, and divestment of universities' pension portfolios from corporations doing business in South Africa.

Does the historical evidence allow us to say anything objective about how effective a contribution BDS made to the end of apartheid? Can it be quantified in economic terms, or was it more a question of psychological pressure? Can we tell from historical records whether, for example, the masters of the apartheid system saw BDS as a source of concern?


texts: Which air minister said (before or during WW2) that parachute troops are just a circus?

texts:
In Chapter 32, Airborne Forces of Liddell Hart (ed), The Soviet Army, Kurt Student says, after noting the abscence of paratroop involvment in the invasion of Poland (p. 378), that

  `Parachute troops are just a circus,' one of the Western air ministers
  remarked.

Who was this minister? A quick google search does not turn up anything.

Edit: moving this here so that people get to see it.

Clarification: the minister was Pierre Cot. Ganze Männer, p. 41:

  Nach Angabe des ehemaligen französischen Luftfahrtministers P. Cot
  wurden sie auf Veranlassung des Generalstabes als eine
  ,,Zirkusangelegenheit'' abgelehnt und aufgelöst.

(Google)

  According to the former French Air Ministry Minister P. Cot, they were
  rejected and dissolved as a "circus matter" at the instigation of the
  General Staff.

So perhaps not completely clear who said it was a circus.


texts: Were armed merchantmen effective against submarines?

texts:
The armed merchantman Jervis Bay was no match for the German pocket battleship Admiral Scheer in a ship to ship duel. Nevertheless, the merchantman put up a brave fight lasting over an hour, allowing the convoy it was protecting to scatter, so that the German ship could sink only 4 out of 37 ships.

Let's assume the antagonist had been one or more submarines. First of all, were there actually any notable "duels" between merchantmen and submarines that I have overlooked? What was the result?

If there was no such fight historically, one might instead answer on "capabilities: What could the Jervis Bay have done against submarines? My understanding is that the merchantman would have at least been a match for submarines on the surface, thereby limiting their options. To what extent did they also have depth charges or other subsurface anti-submarine capabilities?


texts: Did Wernher von Braun ever have a position of authority over astronaut program or Moon landings?

texts: I'm aware that Wernher von Braun was director of the Marshall Space Flight Center and as such focused on the development of launch vehicles, but the recent alternate history of the space race, For All Mankind, seems to depict him as having much wider, almost total authority over the entire space program. I'm aware the show is not fact, but it made me wonder what the limits and extent of von Braun's authority in fact were historically. Would he ever have been able to influence the selection of astronauts, or in a position to directly influence real time decisions at Mission Control (as depicted in the show)?


texts: What is the earliest mention of space travel?

texts:
What was the earliest mention in recorded history of travel through space? Admittedly, I am not really a history buff, but I am writing a scientific paper related to space travel, so I wanted to give a brief (1-2 paragraphs) historical account of it. I searched the web and couldn't find any prior to the 20th century.
Did ancient Greeks ever talk about actually traveling to the stars? Did Galileo ever talk about it?
I appreciate any insight!
edit:
Wow, I'm blown away at the response. Thanks so much to everyone who gave me some historical insight! I'm writing my thesis in the field of propulsion in general relativity and wanted to give a short historical account. I think I'm well-suited to do that now!


texts: Were there any pilots that declined to carry out the atomic bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki?

texts: Were there any pilots that refused (or politely declined) to take part in the operations of "Fat Man" and "Little Boy," knowing the destruction these would cause? Similarly, were there any scientists or officials who resigned from or opted not to take part in the Manhattan Project, or any subsequent projects to create ever more destructive variants of the atom and hydrogen bombs?


texts: How democratic was Imperial Germany?  How much power did the Reichstag actually have?  How did the Imperial German government compare to other contemporary democracies?


texts: What was the official reason for not invading France until the middle of 1944?

texts:
As I understand it, Stalin was urging the western powers to open a second front in France ever since Barbarossa begin in 1941 June.

What was the official reason for waiting until 1944 June? They needed time to prepare? The U-Boat threat was too great? They felt it wiser to deal with Africa and Italy first?

Edit: I read everything in the other question, but it does not answer what is the official response. I want to know what Churchill and/or Roosevelt said in response to Stalin's request.


texts: What is the origin of this Hitler quote regarding lying?

texts:
Adolf Hitler allegedly said,

  If you tell a big enough lie and tell it frequently enough, it will be
  believed.

This quote can be found on here and here, for example.

Can anyone add any details regarding the origin of that statement? If it occurred in print, what publication did it appear in? If it was simply related verbally, who was he talking to?


texts:
The Black Hills Lands Claim is an ongoing land dispute between the US Government and The Sioux Nation. The treaty of Fort Laramie protected the hills from white settlement, but the discovery of gold on the land led to its defacto seizure in 1874, and officially by a congressional Act in 1877. The legal struggle for the return of the lands started in

  the  early 1920s under tribal lawyer Richard Case where he argued that the 1877 Act of February was illegal and that the United States never made a legitimate purchase of the land. Tribal Lawyers Marvin Sonosky and Arthur Lazarus took over the case in 1956 until they won in 1980 when the case reached the supreme court (United States vs The Sioux Nation of Indians) which upheld an earlier ruling that the 1877 Act was in violation of the 5th amendment.

However in a unanimous decision the Sioux Tribal Council refused to accept the awarded Compensation with the intention of forcing the US Government to return the land.

Thus the legal struggle is roughly 90 years; is this the longest legal case in the US or elsewhere, or are there others go beyond this one?


texts: Do we know any Roman debtor being cut to pieces in line with the 12 Tables?

texts:
The Twelve Tables state:

... Meanwhile they shall have the right to compromise, and unless they make a compromise the debtors shall be held in bonds for sixty days. During these days they shall be brought to the praetor" into the meeting place on three successive market days, and the amount for which they have been judged liable shall be declared publicly. Moreover, on the third market day they shall suffer capital punishment or shall be delivered for sale abroad across the Tiber River.

On the third market day the creditors shall cut shares. If they have cut more or less than their shares it shall be without prejudice.

Do we know of anybody how was cut pieces by his creditors, or did they always prefer the delivered for sale abroad across the Tiber River?


texts: How to identify this probably French Military uniform?

texts: I'm trying to identify the uniform in this picture of my great-great-great uncle Leon.  The picture was taken some time between 1860 to 1890 we think.  I've done image searches for uniforms from that time, but google generally ends up just showing pages of American Civil War uniforms.  Things do show up from the Franco-Prussian war, but nothing seems to match the uniform Leon is wearing here.


texts: How were the invasions of Korea by the Mongols and the Manchus similar?

texts:
The first Mongol invasions of 1231 forced the Koreans to capitulate and reconsider their defensive posture.

In an attempt to overthrow the newly imposed tributes of the Mongols, the Koreans (at the command of Choe U) relocated their royal court and the population of Gaesong on the mainland to a more defensible location on Ganghwa Island in the Bay of Gyeonggi in 1232. Over time, this island became a fortress stronghold capital. The royal family and commanders weathered many campaigns by the Mongols. They commanded from Ganghwa Island until they were forced by the Mongols to move the capital back to the mainland in 1258.

The Koreans similarly evacuated to Ganghwa Island during the first Manchu invasion in 1627. During the second invasion, the Manchu forces ensured this would not happen by blocking off the island to prevent resistance, leading to their quick victory.

It is obvious that the invasions share similarities in that they were stymied by the strategic bastion that was Ganghwa Island.

Are there additional tactical or strategic similarities that both Mongol and Manchu invasions shared during their conquest of the Korean Peninsula?


texts: This is one question that perplexes me: Was Catalonia ever a sovereign state? I understand that Catalonia was developed out of the Frankish counties of the Marca Hispania, but it still seems disputed whether Catalonia ever had sovereignty.


texts: Did Gavrilo Princip ever express regret for his actions during imprisonment?

texts:
After assassinating the Archduke Franz Ferdinand and his wife in June 1914; Gavrilo Princip spent just short of 4 years in Prison in Austria-Hungary before dying in April 1918 of tuberculosis. I was wondering since he lived to see the results of his actions did he ever express regret for his actions?

I have tried to find information regarding his time in prison, interrogations, possible letters to/from him, etc, but have not come up with much. I have read that he may have attempted suicide in 1916 while in prison.

Any insight regarding his time time in prison would be of interest to me.


texts:
Historians have titled Alexander III of Macedon "the Great".  In a very short period of time he conquered one of the largest empires in ancient history and was undefeated in battle.

What I'd like to know is, what factor more than any other made it possible for Alexander to achieve this?

Military historians typically focus on his battle tactics and strategies.  Certainly those were remarkable and proven effective, but was that it?  The Macedonian army he inherited was quite skilled; would Alexander have achieved the same given any other army in the ancient world?  Would he have been equally effective against another ancient army, or were the particular opponents he faced particularly vulnerable to defeat?

I know there's probably no single answer, and it may well be a combination of factors, but I'd like to hear different theories.


texts: Were there corridors inside the curtain wall of medieval castles?

texts:
I've seen this in movies or cartoons sometimes, that they are waling around inside the curtain wall, but hollowing out the curtain wall with a hallway seems like it would lover the structural integrity of the stone structure, that is supposed to withstand poundings from catapults and trebuchets.
I noticed this in the excellent book Stephen Biesty's Cross-Sections Castle, where you can see it illustrated by the author, this is where I first relized the potential structural problem with this. You can see one example from this image below.

I've looked around on the internet but haven't been able to find any other image sources, like photographs of real castles, that confirms that corridors in the curtain wall was used. Does anyone have any insight into this? Perhaps someone who has actually been to some real castles, unlike me(!)


texts: What were the origins of Etruscan Civilisation?

texts: Given the differences between Etruscan civilisation and other Italian peoples of the same period, is the conclusion that Etruscan civilisation was autochthonous sensible?


texts: how could japan recover very fast their economy eventhough the two bombs were dropped?

texts: I tried to search for this question alot but I didn"t find anything so I said to ask my question here maybe someone knows how to answer it!!


texts: Where did the French revolutionists get their weapons?

texts: I have learned in class that the main purpose of raiding the Bastille in 14 July 1789 was to acquire the weapons in the Bastille. There was only a few political prisoners held there. There were, on the other hand, a significantly large amount of weapons. However, at about 29:00 in this video, it shows pictures of armed citizens attacking the Bastille. If that were the case then where did the revolutionists got such a mass of weaponry from? They would have to acquire it before attacking the Bastille, logically speaking.


texts: A question about an inscription inside the Jefferson memorial

texts:
This is a follow up to my question here.  There, I asked about an inscription inside the Jefferon memorial that says:

  God who gave us life gave us Liberty. Can the liberties of a nation be
  secure when we have removed a conviction that these liberties are the
  gift of God? Indeed I tremble for my country when I reflect that God
  is just, that his justice cannot sleep forever. Commerce between
  master and slave is despotism. Nothing is more certainly written in the
  book of fate than that these people are to be free establish the law
  for educating the common people. This is the business of the state to
  effect and on a general plan.

I am puzzled about

  Commerce between master and slave is despotism.

Where was  there commerce between master and slave back then, and if there were such commerce, was it despotism? Why would that be of great concern to Jefferson, and why would the designers of the memorial have selected that as part of a inscription inside the memorial?


texts: When was this photo of Mission Dolores *actually* taken?

texts:
While researching another question concerning the cemetery at Mission Dolores, I came across an image which gives a date of 1856, in Wikipedia.

The image shows the mission in a state of disrepair, with plaster coming off the sides. I thought this might help me build a timeline of events at this mission.

But then I came across another image at The Portal to Texas History:

This images caption states Mission Dolores about 1833
A few discrepancies make me believe this is an artist's rendering for a post card, and the date is just wrong.

Then I find a site with numerous images of the Dolores Mission, OpenSFHistory.org ,  and see this image:

Note the handwritten caption on the photo saying Mission Dolores 1870. So much for simplifying a timeline of this structure.

Eventually, focusing on the year 1856, which seems most plausible to me, I come across another image (cited as OpenSFHistory / wnp71.0172.jpg) which seems to give the same 1856 date (in a printed caption this time)

Besides apparently confirming the 1856 date, this page is providing source information:

  Carleton Watkins (Martin Behrman Negative Collection / Courtesy of the
  Golden Gate NRA, Park Archives)

Thinking my troubles done, I include the photographers name (Carelton Watkins) in my searches, and find a site dedicated to photographs by the photographer The Photographs of Carleton Watkins, and it contains what must be the original, which shows much more sky and background than any of the others:

But when I think the desired date will be apparent here, I find the following in the information below the image (emphasis mine):

Date Photographed: 1878-1883
Catalog: Carleton Watkins: The Complete Mammoth Photographs, cat. no.
749
Notes:   CMP notes: Likely a wet-plate copy of an earlier image
(daguerreotype, ambrotype, or salt print). If so, this image was
taken well before 1860 (see Palmquist, From Babies to Landscapes,
1856-1858 in Daguerreian Annual (1991): pp. 227-246)

Lastly, the photography site shows a connection to J Paul Getty Museum.(This seems to be the exact image as the above, so I won't repeat it here), The information below the image, is as follows (emphasis mine):

  Date:  negative before 1861; print possibly 1880s

So, that is my research, finding dates for (mostly) the same image claiming 1833, 1856, 1870, 1856 again, 1878-1883 or 'well before 1860', and finally 'before 1861'.

The Wikipedia page for the photographer indicates he was in San Francisco after 1851, but may not have started his photography business until 1858.  Other research on this topic indicate that clapboard siding appeared on this church 'in the 1850s', so dates later then that are probably incorrect (verifying the exact date when this was installed may help narrow the date of the photo down). The 1833 post card has obvious differences, and the lack of photographic equipment in the 1830s means we can probably discount that date as well.

So what is the correct, exact date (year is adequate)? What year was the above image of the Mission San Francisco de Asís from?


texts: What was China's claim line in the Aksai Chin before the 1962 war?

texts:
The original mutually agreeable boundary seems to have been the McCartney-MacDonald line since the late 1890s. In the 1910s and 1920s China seems to have accepted even the Johnson line, by publishing maps that showed the Johnson line as its boundary. However, even after they changed that position after 1950, they still seemingly accepted the McCartney-MacDonald line till 1959. However, just before 1962 war, the line separating the two armies had further moved inward into India.

I understand how sensitive this issue is, and would like an unemotional answer on why there was a shift in the border to the detriment of India, when China ostensibly accepted the McCartney-MacDonald line. Is it because India started sending patrols all the way till Haji Langar, and declined to redraw the line on anything less than the Johnson line? Or was there a need felt to make up for the loss of Chinese territory after the Shimla agreement, which the Chinese felt took away their territory in the East? And this is not even getting into the Tibetan issue.

I searched far and wide and was unable to find a single article, even official historiography, that addressed this point. There are a lot of maps published in the 1950s by China, but there is a big disconnect between what the maps show, and what the Chinese leaders were saying publicly, and also in what the Chinese leaders were saying about the published maps themselves. Also what is the basis of the Chinese claim line of 1960, which they reached in 1962? Is it geographical continuity?


texts: How old is the practice of a woman accompanying another woman to the ladies restroom?

texts:
I am curious to know how old is the practice of a woman accompanying another woman to the ladies restroom.

I assume that this practice began in America and Europe when indoor plumbing and indoor restrooms became a standard accommodation within restaurants, bars, and social clubs, which would be about the mid-19th century.

Yet, I wonder if this particular practice predates this time period not only in America and Europe but in all other parts of the world? For example, were women accompanying other women to outhouses/public restrooms going all the way back to Roman times?


texts: What are some settlements in Greece circa 2000 BCE - 1900 BCE?

texts:
While looking at some data for a game I was working on set in 2000 BCE, I had the big problem: what are some ancient Greek settlements from between 2000 BCE and 1900 BCE?

The Minoans at the time had just integrated with the Cyclades and most historic records had to be found via archaeological evidence.


texts: Rose tattoo used to mark convicts condemned to death?

texts:
I recall from my university history courses a factoid about rose tattoos being used to mark convicts condemned to death in Europe during the Renaissance period (in case of escape), and was wondering if anyone has any credible sources for this factoid, or more information about the history of the rose tattoo in the context of being used to mark a condemned man.

You know that whole "raise your right hand and swear to tell the truth" thing we practice in court in the US to this day? That dates back to the middle ages when convicted criminals would be branded or tattooed on their right hand with a record of their crimes, so the next judge they stood in front of would be able to get a look at their criminal history by having them raise their right hand. Doubt it all you want, but it was a common practice in days of yore, and I'm really looking for informed opinions/citations on this particular mark as practiced historically, not personal doubts.


texts: Did any Western consulates remain open or re-open after WWII in the same buildings in which they had resided in Wuhan, Hebei, China?

texts:
The recent CNN article From one-time Chinese capital to coronavirus epicenter, Wuhan has a long history that the West had forgotten

Two generations ago, this city of 11 million people, on the junction of the Yangtze and Han Rivers, 600 miles upstream, in central China, was known through the West as a major industrial city.
It was somewhere many European powers had a consulate, a place where major Western and Japanese trading firms, and international textile and engineering companies, had factories and sales offices.
It was a regular overseas posting for customs officers, steamboat captains, traders and consuls. Wuhan was also a cradle of China's revolution in 1911. A quarter of a century later, it stood defiantly as the beleaguered wartime capital of nationalist China.

and later

The new arrivals clustered in Hankou creating a tree-lined, two-mile long Bund, which largely remains today, building their warehouses, docks and offices as well as a race track, clubs and public gardens all adjacent to the Hankou waterfront.
The British Concession was adjacent to concessions run by the Germans, the French, the Japanese, a rather disputed Belgian concession, and the Russians, who had been active in Wuhan trading tea from Siberia since the 12th century. All these nations, including the Americans, had consulates.

and later

While Wuhan became a cosmopolitan place, it was always essentially a business town -- it never developed the nightlife or the movie industry, publishing houses, and art galleries that clustered in Shanghai's more Bohemian quarters; it wasn't quite the scholarly center that was Beijing. The foreigners were present, and their soldiers guarded the consulates, but the city retained a more dominant Chinese feel.

I'm assuming that at least some of these consulates were closed as a result of World War II:

After the chaos and destruction of the Second World War, the Communist Revolution brought the Bamboo Curtain firmly down. International trade stopped, the foreign business community left, and the Western world largely forgot about Wuhan.

Question: Did any Western consulates remain open during or re-open within the decade after WWII in the same buildings in which they had resided in Wuhan city, Hebei province, China?