texts: Are the following 5 tenets of historical record examination considered complete today?

texts:
In his lectures recorded in the book Historical Evidences of the Truth of the Scripture Records, p. 39, (https://archive.org/details/historicaleviden1862rawl), George Rawlinson outlines 4 laws or degrees of credibility when examining a historical record. I have quoted them below.

Would these assertions be considered accurate today? Is there anything credible historians today would add or remove from these four statements?

  When the record which we possess of an event is the writing of a contemporary, supposing that he is a credible witness, and had means
  of observing the fact to which he testifies, the fact is to be
  accepted, as possessing the first or highest degree of historical
  credibility. Such evidence is on a par with that of witnesses in a
  court of justice, with the drawback, on the one hand, that the man who
  gives it is not sworn to speak the truth, and with the advantage, on
  the other, that he is less likely than the legal witness to have a
  personal interest in the matter concerning which he testifies.
  When the event recorded is one which the writer may be reasonably supposed to have obtained directly from those who witnessed it, we
  should accept it as probably true, unless it be in itself very
  improbable. Such evidence possesses the second degree of historical
  credibility.
  When the event recorded is removed considerably from the age of the recorder of it, and there is no reason to believe that he obtained it
  from a contemporary writing, but the probable source of his
  information was oral tradition; still, if the event be one of great
  importance, and of public notoriety, if it affected the national life,
  or prosperity, —especially if it be of a nature to have been at once
  commemorated by the establishment of any rite or practice, —then it
  has a claim to belief as probably true, at least in its general
  outline.  This, however, is the third, and a comparatively low, degree
  of historical credibility.
  When the traditions of one race, which, if unsupported, would have had but small claim to attention, and none to belief, are corroborated
  by the traditions of another, especially if a distant or hostile race,
  the event which has this double testimony obtains thereby a high
  amount of probability, and, if not very unlikely in itself, thoroughly
  deserves acceptance. The degree of historical credibility in this case
  is not exactly commensurable with that in the others, since a new and
  distinct ground of likelihood comes into play. It may be as strong as
  the highest, and it may be almost as weak as the lowest, though this
  is not often the case in fact. In a general way we may say that the
  weight of this kind of evidence exceeds that which has been called the
  third degree of historical probability, and nearly approaches to the
  second.

Edit:

Upon further reading I see that he adds a 5th rule, on page 42, that historians go by (but that he disagrees with):

  5. No just perception of the true nature of history is possible, without a perception of the inviolability of the chain of finite
  causes, and of the impossibility of miracles.


texts:
Paul Craig Roberts writes:

  The US military/security complex did not want Reagan to end the Cold War, as the Cold War was the foundation of profit and power for the complex. The CIA told Reagan that if he renewed the arms race, the Soviets would win, because the Soviets controlled investment and could allocate a larger share of the economy to the military than Reagan could.

  Reagan did not believe the CIA’s claim that the Soviet Union could prevail in an arms race. He formed a secret committee and gave the committee the power to investigate the CIA’s claim that the US would lose an arms race with the Soviet Union. The committee concluded that the CIA was protecting its prerogatives. I know this because I was a member of the committee.

Bruce D. Burkowitz writes:

  The challenge of anticipating the Soviet collapse was even
  greater for U.S. intelligence because the very notion of collapse
  was inconsistent with the thinking of most Western
  analysts and scholars. The prevailing view up to the late
  1970s was that the Soviet Union would evolve, not collapse.
  True, some Sovietologists had long believed that a
  multi-ethnic, non-democratic state dependent on a centrally
  planned economy was inherently unstable. Indeed, that
  was the assumption upon which containment was based.
  But hardly any of these scholars were willing to hazard a
  time frame for a Soviet implosion. So their views were more
  of a theory than an intelligence estimate.

My question is: Is there evidence to suggest the CIA didn't want Reagan to end the Cold War?


texts: How did archers judge distance before range finders?

texts:
Before electronics, was there a method for judging distance in archery?

What methods were used historically?
How were combat archers trained to judge distances?


texts: What was the lowest available population to the Soviet Union in WW2?

texts:
According to official census data, Soviet Union had around 168 million people in 1939, and around 196 million in 1941 (annexation of Baltic states and part of Poland). Germany (Third Reich) had around 80 million. But, after operation Barbarossa started, Soviet Union lost huge part of its territory, including major cities like Kiev, Minks, Smolensk etc ...

Therefore, population available for conscription and any kind of mobilization(work in industry, agriculture etc) was reduced. What was effective available population in various stages of war? I'm especially interested in December 1941 and October 1942, because Germans held biggest swaths of Soviet territory at that time.

Demographics of the Soviet Union

Census in Germany


texts: How did the Allies communicate during World War II?

texts: I was wondering how the allied (America and England, since France was occupied by the Nazis) communicated securely with each other in 1943. I know that the SIGSALY existed, but I am most interested in how Roosevelt's and Churchill's telegrams were encrypted. Did they use the British Typex or the American SIGABA?


texts: What was unreasonable about Austria's ultimatum to Serbia?

texts:
There are actually three questions.

First Question:

It is often stated, especially in English-speaking media, that the terms of the Austrian ultimatum to Serbia 1914 were unreasonable. Sometimes the demands are also summarized, but emphasis is often placed on the minutes of the meeting between Austrian ministers and Winston Churchill's note, that more or less state that the demands were unacceptable, or even drafted to be rejected.

  Europe is trembling on the verge of a general war. The Austrian ultimatum to Serbia being the most insolent document of its kind ever devised

I've long since wondered what these unreasonable demands that a sovereign state cannot possibly comply with were, so i went through the trouble to actually read them and i can't really understand which demand specifically was meant with those words. Could anybody help out?

Second Question: The prosecution of those involved with the murder of the crown prince shouldn't be even a demand: that should be done anyway in any country with the rule of law. Murders just get punished.

Ceasing propaganda against Austria and shutting down terrorist organizations seams reasonable; it's not unlike the demand that US and NATO countries actually demanded from Iraq and Afghanistan. The Austrians were even polite enough to issue the demands before mobilizing troops and offering to make an investigation and to issue a formal declaration of war afterwards.

Did the ultimatum have any reasons for being unreasonable that were specific to that time and its customs, like prestige or some geopolitical implications, that might not be culturally or politically relevant today (and make it thus more difficult to understand why it was unreasonable)?

Third Question: Also, I've read on several occasions that Serbia was willing to meet Austria halfway, but i did not find any sources for this. Do you know of any sources that might state if Serbia was willing to comply with certain points or to compromise on some issues, or otherwise?


texts: Do we know anything in detail about the effect of the black death on Sub-Saharan Africa?

texts:
When I was in school 20-odd years ago, historians were still unsure about whether or not the black death traveled through Sub-Saharan Africa to any large degree, in large part because the vector (merchant ships) didn't visit many Sub-Saharan African ports and historical records of the area during the Middle Ages were few and far between.

Now that we have a few more histories of individual Sub-Saharan African fiefdoms through the Middle Ages, has anything more been unearthed on whether the bubonic plague affected Sub-Saharan Africa to any significant degree?


texts: What was the basis for valuating large territorial purchases by USA?

texts:
There were at least 2 times when USA extended its territory by purchasing it outright - Louisiana+ from French and Alaska from Russians.

The Louisiana Purchase was the acquisition by the United States of America of 828,000 square miles (2,140,000 km2) of France's claim to the territory of Louisiana in 1803. The U.S. paid 60 million francs ($11,250,000) plus cancellation of debts worth 18 million francs ($3,750,000), for a total sum of 15 million dollars (less than 3 cents per acre) for the Louisiana territory ($233 million in 2011 dollars, less than 42 cents per acre).
Alaska Purchase: The negotiations concluded after an all-night session with the signing of the treaty at 4 a.m. on March 30, 1867, with the purchase price set at $7.2 million, or about 2 cents per acre ($4.74/km2).

While the historical non-monetary reasons for the transactions were already discussed on History.SE, there was obviously also a financial side involved.
Every transaction involves the buyer and a seller somehow deciding on a value that the item holds for them.
Question: What exactly was the process and the logic/algorithm by which both Russian, French and American governments arrived at the valuations quoted above?
The answer should reference historical documents, not just guesses.


texts: Why is the battle of Hampton Roads known as the Monitor vs the Merrimack?

texts:
The American Civil War battle of the ironclad warships which took place on the Elizabeth River in Virginia has several common names.  One way which it is commonly referenced is as simply the "Monitor vs. Merrimack".  In Hampton Roads there is even a bridge tunnel named after the two ships (Monitor Merrimack Bridge Tunnel).

It makes sense why the USS Monitor is included in the name, because it was commissioned for use by the Union Army in the American Civil War.

The USS Merrimack on the other hand was a United States frigate commissioned before the war which was sunk and later used by the Confederacy as the hull for the CSS Virginia given the south's limited industrial resources during wartime.

Though technically both were present in the battle, why isn't the battle more commonly referred to as the "USS Monitor vs CSS Virginia"?


texts: Around 1750, How many Native Americans (if any) spent the winter in the Keweenaw Peninsula, Michigan?

texts:
This is the Keweenaw Peninsula in Michigan:

I've been reading about it's history during the colonial era. Apparently the Native Americans mined copper from this area because there were great copper deposits near the surface.

I'd like to know if any Native Americans spent the winter there, and if so, about how many? What tribes did so? Just Ojibwe, or others? Were there perhaps even permanent settlements where they grew corn or other stuff?

The year I'm interested in is around 1750. If it matters, the exact area I'm interested in is the southern half of the peninsula---both coastlines and the inland area.

(I have many similar questions for this time period about Native American history in many areas in North America. If anyone knows some good books about that, don't hesitate to recommend them.)


texts: How did the paintings of the Middle Ages and the Renaissance survive to present day?

texts:
I mean, before the appearance of museums and galleries,how they kept them in proper conditions, coped with humidity and the right temperature?
If drying oils can last 2-4 hundreds of years with the help of varnishes, then the base (canvas, board) cannot.


texts: Did Stalin believe Israel would go communist?

texts:
In Anne Applebaum's recent book Iron Curtain: The Crushing of Eastern Europe 1944-1956 she claims the USSR supported the new state of Israel and states "Stalin believed Israel would quickly join the communist camp".

She doesn't cite any references for this, but is it true? And if so, what grounds were there for Stalin believing Israel would align itself with the Soviet Union?


texts: What is wrong with Russian claim that 7 million people starved to death in the Great Depression in the USA?

texts:
An article published in Russia claims that 7 million people are demographically unaccounted for during the Great Depression in the USA, and can therefore be assumed to have died as a result of the economic hardships, presumably mostly by nutritional deficiencies(?).

article: http://english.pravda.ru/world/americas/19-05-2008/105255-famine-1/

I do not know how to evaluate this claim.  Can anyone help me understand why it has merit or not?

I read a similar question on this site:  How many people in the US starved to death during the Great Depression?.  This similar question does not deconstruct the Russian researcher's claims, just refers to them as "demonstrably false".

I would have commented on that question, but I do not have enough reputation to do so (this being my first day on this site).


texts: Identify mid 20C Western male dress uniform: three button, large high lapels, trousers, white collar dark tie no hat

texts:
can anybody identify the uniform on the photo? Thanks!

These are relatives of mine, and I was hoping to find out in which country they are based on the uniform. Should be US or Argentina, based on what I know. The photo could be from early 50's?
Male uniform, mid 20th century, mid coloured jacket with single breast buttoned high, with high large lapels.  Two top pockets, two waist pockets.  Clear waist line stitch.  Dark soft shoulder boards, single medium stripe and circular insignia on boards.  White shirt with inbuilt collar, both collars pinned.  Dark tie with a tight small knot. Pressed and creased trousers.  No hat.


texts: Why wasn't there more use of wind power in antiquity?

texts:
Wind power [was never] taken seriously in the ancient world [...]
though Hero of Alexandria described a windmill connected to an air
pump designed to blow an organ, there is no evidence for the existence
of any rotary windmills before the tenth century CE.
- Ancient Technology, pg 17.

Mechanical knowledge had a long way to go in antiquity, but my understanding is that the Romans and Hellenistic Greeks made limited but significant use of water power for mills, clocks, and more rarely, automatons. My question here is pretty straightforward: Are there any clear reasons why wind power was never used, especially considering that watermills require a constant and fairly heavy flow of moving water? (Not that you can set up a windmill just anywhere, but it's surprising to me they don't appear as an alternative in areas without strong rivers.)
For this question please take antiquity to mean the Mediterranean and Near Eastern world from the end of the Bronze Age in 1200 BC up to the decline of Rome around 500 AD.
I was wondering if it might be something in the difficulty of engineering wind. An answer explaining why it was difficult to engineer and what technical innovations led to wind power becoming viable in the Medieval and Islamic worlds would fit the question parameters very well.


texts: What reasons did the Confederacy have for believing they would have a quick victory?

texts:
At the beginning of the U.S. Civil War, both sides were very confident in a quick and easy victory. I can see why the North would think so: they had a better trained army, better infrastructure (including many more miles of railroad), and superior industry.

Why were the southerners so confident they would win? Is it because the capital, Washington D.C., was so close to the front lines?


texts: Is it known if Caracalla had any other lovers or possible bastard children?

texts:
Are there any known accounts of Caracalla's lovers or mistresses after
Fulvia Plautilla mentioned by ancient historians?


texts:
Energy sources and resources like oil and coal are vital for the survival of modern civilizations.

Are there any good historical examples of wars, or low intensity armed conflicts, over the control of such energy resources?


texts: What actions did the KKK take against miscegenation after 1967?

texts:
Although the racial attitudes of the (third) KKK are well known, I haven't been able to find much about actions, demonstrations or speeches by the KKK against the repeal of anti-miscegenation laws in 1967, or against individual couples in those states.

What are some known anti-miscegenation actions, demonstrations or speeches by KKK members or leaders?


texts:
I was reading about Mohenjo-daro sites in current day Pakistan.

The text talked about something called "lower town". What is lower town in that context?

  "Kalibangan is situated on the left bank of the river Ghaggar in Rajasthan. There is same pattern of planning as at Mohenjo-daro and Harappa. There is a citadel on the West side and a lower town on the east."

SOURCE: Above excerpt is taken from the book titled "Ancient India", by V. D. Mahajan, S Chand Publications.


texts: How to make sense of Civil War regiment reports?

texts:
I'm reading through my book on the 48th VA Infantry by John D. Chapla and interspersed throughout the book are these reports that I'm having a hard time making sense of.

http://imgur.com/yrLex9q

I really don't know how to read these and there's no explanation in the book. The Present side, I'm guessing, is everyone that is there, but what's the difference between Off and EM?  The breakdown further into For Duty and Extra Duty is also unclear, as is 'Det Svc' on the Absent side.


texts: Why did carrier battle groups require multiple carriers?

texts:
During the Pacific War, both USN and IJN operated (or at least preferred to) carrier battle groups composed of multiple carriers plus their screening ships. IJN's Kidō Butai - which carried out the assault on Pearl Harbor - consisted of 6 carriers. Late in the war, USN mainly operated Fast Carrier Task Forces, which were composed of multiple task forces of 3-4 carriers each plus their escorts.

During the inter-war period when people weren't familiar with how to use carriers, the USN operated single-carrier groups. Fleet Problem XIII exposed weaknesses with this setup, and recommended more carriers per group:

  The exercise showed that one carrier was insufficient for either fleet attack or area defense, so the practice of two or more carriers operating together became policy. Admiral Harry E. Yarnell said that six to eight carriers would be required for a Pacific campaign, but no orders were placed for new carriers, as Depression-era financial difficulties caused President Herbert Hoover to limit naval expenses.

Later when supercarriers appeared and after the post-war drawdown, the USN reverted to the single-carrier carrier strike group which persists today.

My question is: why did WWII-era carrier battle groups require multiple carriers? And why did the USN go back to single-carrier groups? Was it:

Putting enough planes in the sky
Eliminating a single point of failure, the carrier
Cost


texts:
I recently came across a lot of questions on Anime and Manga Stack Exchange by this user who is the

  curator of an exhibition on Easter Island in popular culture (http://www.moaiculture.com)

I helped him with an answer but then I too was interested in knowing why are there so many references drawn to this place. Similarly Sci-Fi Comics by Korean Authors frequently refer to Jeju Islands.

A bunch of it's appearances are listed here

My Question primarily are-

When did Easter Island start to become such a frequent  participant in Japanese Comics? Are there any historical reasons for it?

Some of my research-

I have found that they appeared in European literature as paintings as early as 1775-1776 (could've been earlier but I have found no evidence of the latter so far). The painting was made by William Hodges who was one of the crew members of James Cook's Second Voyage to the Pacific Ocean.

Early European drawings particularly a 1770 Spanish Map also have these structures. The original manuscript maps of the Spanish expedition are in Naval Museum of Madrid and in The Jack Daulton Collection, USA.

These aim to suggest that European literature was the first one to incorporate the Islands but nowhere were there any mentions of it's early incorporating into Japanese Culture.

Some reasons for it being quite popular are

Easter Island is, geographically, very isolated from the rest of the world. Its remoteness has encouraged the myths. Also, many aspects of the island's history continue to be debated and theorised, allowing for alternative ideas to be proposed.

There is a popular myth that the moai are able to come alive: that they can walk, talk, see, and hear. The humanisation of the moai has been aided by mythical accounts that present the island as uninhabited and abandoned. The human-looking moai fill the gap that remains once the native population has been removed.

Another part of the extraordinary history of Easter Island, are the rongorongo inscriptions, of which only 26 tablets and artefacts exist since many were destroyed through war and fire. They are now scattered around the world's museums and archives, and nearly 150 years since their discovery they remain undeciphered.
Considering that rongorongo is not widely known, comics depicting moai often weave the glyphs into the story, where they are discovered as an arcane language inscribed into architecture, at the base of the statues, or as tablets found around the island.

Source- http://www.moaiculture.com/


texts: What do we know about Hitler/OKW's plans concerning USSR if Molotov/Ribbentropp Pact hadn't happened?

texts:
Molotov/Ribbentrop was signed Aug 23, 1939 and Hitler invaded Poland Sept 1, 1939.  Came as a bit of a surprise, considering how much Hitler hated both Communists and Slavic people.  And the talks started only in early 1939 and really heated up from July on.
Do we have any documentation/memoirs on what the Nazis were intending to do if they had not gotten Stalin to sign that non-aggression pact?
The USSR had considered backing Czechoslovakia in 1938, but didn't have a way to get its troops there.  It did for Poland.  It had also backed the Republican side against Franco in Spain, opposing Germany.  (And, yes, I realize Russian-Polish relations were not Russian-Czechoslovak in nature).
Since Germany was able to invade so soon afterwards, one can speculate that it was a risk Hitler was willing to assume anyway.
But it also means that plans must have been made for operations in late 1939/1940 without the non-aggression pact.  Do we have any knowledge of what Germany was planning to do differently?  We know they had covering forces on the Franco-German border, what did they plan to do with Russia?
Just to keep in mind - as I kinda figured out while writing this question - the extremely short span between the Pact actually getting signed and the invasion means that what happened at scale was likely substantially what would have happened anyway.  I.e. Hitler did not put together a full-scale invasion in a week after getting Stalin's green light (although he might have held back given a big enough red light).  However, they had to have planned for Russia's opposition and determined next steps in advance.  What did that planning look like?  You don't put together military plans at that level without some traces.


texts: What did the word "leisure" mean in late 18th Century usage?

texts: What did the word "leisure" mean in the name of a Cornish tinmine. It has not been possible for me to find any definition of this term other than in connection with "free time" and suchlike. What could it have signified at the end of the eighteenth century?


texts: Were there historical examples of "citizen's arrest" concept in history independent of British common law?

texts:
I know that the concept of "citizen's arrest" in USA originated from British common law.

It seems that in a lot of countries listed in Wiki are ones that have the same origin of that law, since they were once ruled by Great Britain in one form or another.

  In common law jurisdictions, the practice dates back to medieval Britain and the English common law, in which sheriffs encouraged ordinary citizens to help apprehend law breakers.

Are there other countries where the concept historically originated independently of British Common law? E.g. that have records of the laws of that nature on the books stemming from before they could be obviously imported from British sphere of influence?

There are a couple of countries listed on Wiki that aren't ex-Brit colonies/mandates (Brazil, Portugal, Germany, France), but it only gives present status, not the origins of each country's law.


texts: Have human runners delivered messages faster than horses?

texts:
Is it true that there have been human runners who have outran horses (over the course of a long period of time)? I have even heard people say that some runners can beat riders who change their horses repeatedly. But I have never seen evidence for this.

Have you heard of any cases that show a human runner to be able to beat a horse, or even a rider who changes horses?


texts: How and why did Charles XII get to Poltava?

texts:
The decisive battle of the Great Northern War between Sweden and Russia was the battle of Poltava. That's located deep in the Ukraine, southeast of Kiev, between Cherkassy and Kharkov.

That seems like a strange place for a Swedish army, especially one based on the Baltic in Livonia (which encompasses Latvia and Estonia). One would expect such an army to march east to Moscow, or perhaps north to the newly-founded city of St. Petersburg.

Apparently Sweden's King Charles XII had led his army west across Poland, all the way to occupy Saxony (the home of the elected King of Poland), with the aim of making Poland a puppet state, then back east across Poland for an invasion of Russia via "Lithuania," (which then also included modern Belarus and parts of the Ukraine).

Did King Charles XII create a new "base" in southern Polish cities like Krakow and Lublin from which to draw supplies and reinforcements for what would then be a logical invasion of the Ukraine? Was he trying to conquer Ukraine on behalf of his new Polish allies? Or were the allies in question perhaps the Turks (natural enemies of Russia)? If so, were they supplying him across the Black Sea, and up the Dniepr River?

What was he doing at Poltava? Was he trying to "go around" the main Russian army and take Moscow from the rear? Basically it doesn't make sense for a Swedish army to be that far south, except possibly at the head of a "grand coalition" involving other countries.


texts:
Today is the 155th anniversary of the signing (but not the release) of the Emancipation Proclamation.

Critics remarked even at the time that it didn't free a single slave, since it only applied to areas where the president's authority was not being recognized. Perhaps that's underselling it a bit, but it was certainly true that it happily left slaves in union slave states to continue their condition indefinitely.

So of course today I see people on twitter saying it freed the slaves, followed by a deluge of #WellActually responses, occasionally followed by defenses that say, "Yeah, but I only have 140 characters!"

That got me thinking, what would be a good accurate explanation of the importance of the Emancipation Proclamation that fits in 140 characters or less? Its possible we could help save twitter, and perhaps even a journalist or two, a lot of bandwidth.


texts: Did any deputies in the USSR ever get recalled via provisions in the 1977 constitution?

texts:
Many socialist countries, including the USSR, had provisions in their constitutions for recalling deputies by voters/citizens.
For instance, 1977 constitution of the USSR has

Article 107. Deputies shall report on their work and on that of the
Soviet to their constituents, and to the work collectives and public
organisations that nominated them. Deputies who have not justified the
confidence of their constituents may be recalled at any time by
decision of a majority of the electors in accordance with the
procedure established by law

Was recalling of deputies ever done in practice in the USSR using the procedure outlined in article 107?


texts: How were cities administered in the early Byzantine Empire?

texts:
First of all, I would just like to note that I am not looking for an answer concerning Constantinople, but rather how other cities were governed (e.g. Thessaloniki, Adrianapole, Nicaea, Smyrna, Pergamon... or any other city in Anatolia, Thrace or on the Aegean). Some of those cities might have had a special status at some point in history where there were the seat of a local strategos or doux, but I'm interested what are some of the structures of local administration one could expect in more or less every city, primarily:

Was there a city council and who are its members?
What powers could that council expect to have?
Was there an elected official in charge, i.e. a mayor? What was the name of that official, how long was the term?
If not elected, who was the appointed official in charge and who appointed him (I think I can probably assume that it was always a him)?
What powers did the official in charge have?

By early Byzantine I was thinking of anything from Justinian until the Macedonian dynasty. I am aware that this period might be scarce on resources and I appreciate any extra details up from Diocletian to the 11th century, since some segments of low level administration probably functioned similarly if not the same.

I have done some googling but couldn't find anything directly related to the subject except maybe a passing reference that the judicial power would be in the hands of a praitores or kritai, and a few stuff how Constantinople was administered focused mostly on titles. Therefore any help is appreciated.


texts: Please help identify these old coins found in Germany?

texts:
We found these two identical coins in our garden (near Wuerzburg, lower Franconia / northern Bavaria):

Coin side A: coat-of-arms of sorts:

(the scale units are centimetres / millimetres)

Coin Side B - "templar-type cross":

Unfortunately rather eroded, and apparently notably cut / sheared off around the outside.
It looks like one side has a Templar-Type cross, with some symbols or heraldic signs between the arms of the cross. The second side bears a shield / coat of armor, surrounded by letters (clockwise from top right, 'H' ? , 'A', 'W' ? , '7' / 'Z', 'P', 'L', '8' ?).

Very curious what these would be.

The design doesn't match what I can find online about coins minted by the local mint in Wuerzburg, nor in fact does the "cross" design appear common in German medieval coins at all. The cross design reminds me more of French Guenars / English Groats, but the heraldics aren't fleur-de-lis / Plantagenet lions.

Anyone got an idea what these may be ?


texts: What media did Irenaeus used to write his letters?

texts:
Eusebius of Caesarea (AD 260/265 – 339/340)  in his work Church History (Book V, Chapter 20 "The Writings of Irenaeus against the Schismatics at Rome") said:

Irenaeus wrote several letters against those who were disturbing the sound ordinance of the Church at Rome. One of them was to Blastus On Schism; another to Florinus

and then Eusebius cites the letter:

These things being told me [Irenaeus] by the mercy of God, I listened to them attentively, noting them down, not on paper, but in my heart.

The same passage in Greek (Source):

[5.20.7] ταῦτα καὶ τότε διὰ τὸ ἔλεος τοῦ θεοῦ τὸ ἐπ' ἐμοὶ γεγονὸς σπουδαίως ἤκουον, ὑπομνηματιζόμενος αὐτὰ οὐκ ἐν χάρτηι, ἀλλ' ἐν τῆι ἐμῆι καρδίαι·

What media did Irenaeus use to write those letters?
How was the media preserved for Eusebius to quote them two hundred years later?

Irenaeus (130–202 AD) could not have written on paper which was invented much later?  What media had Irenaeus used to write his letters? Where could the letters be stored for almost two hundreds year until Eusebius got them?
The obvious answer to some of the above questions would be to say that Irenaeus used/refered to papyrus. But taking in mind that:

it was rather expensive and unreliable material since "papyrus was replaced in Europe by the cheaper, locally produced products parchment and vellum of significantly higher durability in moist climates"

it appears that it was not widely used for taking notes since "until the middle of the 19th century, only some isolated documents written on papyrus were known, and museums simply showed them as curiosities"

I find this answer doubtful.
UPDATE
First I would like to thank everyone for answering my question. Nevertheless, let me once again emphasize that "Irenaeus refered to papyrus" is not the answer I'm looking for (see above).
The age of "ancient papyrus" can hardly be determined precisely today. Recent article in Nature Scientific Reports concludes:

As we can infer from the studies of the aged reference paper samples, the effect of artificial aging cannot be told apart from the effects of natural ageing by the methods used by us.

And since "until the middle of the 19th century, only some isolated documents written on papyrus were known" we can only be sure that papyrus can survive ~200 years in modern museums (between glasses, with air-conditioning, modern chemistry etc).


texts: Which was the earliest book of names for naming babies?

texts: Nowadays one finds books and online websites that help you to name babies. What are the earliest instances of these? I would assume that these would be in Europe, China or the Middle East, but if other geographies/cultures were using them, that would be acceptable too.


texts: Why is there a Pegasus on Huey Long's grave?

texts: The tombstone of Huey Long on the grounds of the Louisiana statehouse is engraved with depictions of his achievements as a politician.  On the front, however, is a large Pegasus.  Was the Pegasus a symbol related to Long during his life, symbolic of something about him, or is it purely decorative?


texts:
To my mind Fritz Lang's Die Nibelungen (1924) is a work of absolute genius, perhaps surpassing even Orson Welles' Citizen Kane (1941) in movie history. It is very rich, beautiful, yes tragic, and deep. When I was in school we would write essays to interpret the story as an allegory for doom brought by Germans onto recent history; when I last saw it it stroke me (also) as a relevant allegory for even more recent global environmental problems ...

Now my question is this: The movie is also rich in patterns, e.g. patterns decorating both interior walls and garments as in this scene ("blind loyalty"). I've been wondering for some time whether they were chosen by the director primarily because of historic veracity (an architect friend once told me that e.g. the inside walls of medieval Gothic churches used to be painted in bright colors) or for more pragmatic artistic reasons (they obviously add useful texture to black-and-white and black-and-yellow movie versions).

What evidence for deciding this question can be brought from the perspective of history?


texts: What is the purpose of the bridge to the Russkiy island?

texts:
Russky bridge is a bridge to a sparsely populated Russky island in the Far East whose construction started in 2008 and completed in 2012. It is the world's largest cable-stayed bridge, the 1104 m long central span of which is also record-breaking. The bridge has the highest bridge pylons in the world with a height of 321 m.

The bridge has six lanes with a capacity of 50 000 cars per day.

But the total island's population is only 5 000 people most of whom do not have cars. The island has no road network so the bridge terminates with a dead end. The people who live on the island still have to use a ferry to reach the mainland even after the bridge construction completed.

The cost of the bridge construction at over 1 billion dollars is equal to the annual budget of the whole Primorkiy Krai.

So what was the actual purpose of the construction of the bridge?


texts: Did women suffer from alcoholism as much as men in 19th century America?

texts: What was the general view on women drinking alcohol (and becoming intoxicated) during the 19th century in the US and did they become alcoholics in about the same extent to which men did?


texts: Was there a reason Hitler saluted differently to everyone else?

texts:
When people think of the nazi salute, the hand is generally out in front, around 45° palm down.

Sometimes it would be lower, which I think reinforces that it's a "palm open and down" gesture:

Here, we see many civilians taking a less disciplined, more upright approach, but everyone (except Hitler) still has their palm down or at least forward.

So why did Hitler salute with his palm clearly upwards?  I think it makes him look aloof and undisciplined, very different from propaganda photos.

If he wanted to be seen as this:

Why did he salute like this:


texts: Is (or was) there a version of the Maltese Cross with the right arrowhead missing? Does it have a name?

texts:
I'm trying to answer a question (link in Spanish) in the Spanish language site about a funny definition a user found in the Royal Spanish Academy's dictionary. It follows:

  martillo

  m. Cruz de la Orden de San Juan, quitado el brazo derecho.

Literally:

  hammer: The Cross of the Order of St. John, removing the right arm (or arrowhead).

I suppose the name 'hammer' refers to the figure that remains when you remove the right arrowhead of the Maltese Cross:

I've been trying to find information about the origin of this meaning of the word martillo. So far I have found a book, written in 1828 in Spanish, that says that the order was divided into knights, priests and servants, and also says that (my translation, sorry):

  The current badge of [the knights] is an eight-pointed gold cross, crowned and enameled in white, angled in gold lises, which they carry in the buttonhole of the coat, pending from a black ribbon. The friars also wear it, but they must have the same cross of white cloth on the manteo or dress on the left side, whose distinction is also used by professed knights; and the servants carry it of only three arms, of enamel or linen, according to their condition.

This is the only reference to such a version of the cross, the same book also states that a martillo is "the cross of St. John with the right arm removed, as the servants must carry it", so it seems clear that such a version of the cross did exist, and that it was the emblem the servants must wear. I just would like to know:

Does (or did) this version of the cross really exist? If so, why is the right arm of the cross the one to be removed and no other?
Does imagery that depict this version of the cross exist? Where can I find an image (a painting or similar) of it?
If so, did it have a similar nickname in other languages or is it just something that happens in the Spanish language?


texts: Is there a common name for periods between Medieval and 19th century?

texts:
Time up to fall of the Roman Empire is called Ancient. The following 1000 years is "Medieval". Since Napoleonic times we can say it is "modern history".

Is there a common name for the time between fall of Constantinople and French Revolution?

The problem for me is that I don't want to say eg. "times of Renaissance, Baroque, Classicism" etc., but I'd like to use one single name. For example New World history could be divided in three main periods: "age of discovery", "colonialism" and "imperialism".

I'm looking for something such general as "colonialism" but in relation to Europe.


texts: An American Civil War battle where a general was ordered to advance to a certain point and wait . . . so waiting was all he did?

texts:
I'm trying to pin down something I once read about what went wrong with the Union's plans for a certain battle in the American Civil War. I think I once read a few paragraphs about this in a book by Bruce Catton. But that doesn't narrow it down much, because I've read at least eight of Catton's books about various aspects of the Civil War. And I may not even be correct that it was one of his books that told me about this episode.

Here's what I seem to remember about the sequence of events that I'm trying to pin down.

A Union force was preparing to fight a battle with a nearby Confederate force. The commanding general of that Union force gave written orders to one of his subordinate generals. The orders were intended to maneuver that subordinate's soldiers (a division, or a corps, or whatever it was that the subordinate commanded) into a position where they could approach the Confederate right rear flank, coming up from behind, and thus catch that end of the Confederate line in a vise.
However! The senior Union general didn't exactly mandate all of the above in the written orders he sent to his subordinate. The orders said something more along these lines (loosely paraphrased from my imperfect memory):

  "Tomorrow morning your troops will advance to the crossroads at
  such-and-such a village. Then you will wait for my further orders to
  tell you if I need you to keep swinging around to get behind the
  Confederates while I'm assaulting their front line with the rest of my
  force."

From the subordinate general's point of view, the key word in those orders turned out to be "wait." After sunrise on the day of the battle, he started his men marching in the correct direction. They encountered no opposition along the way, and reached the village in question (well out of sight of where the actual fighting was now taking place). Then the general commanding that detachment parked his butt in a chair and sent back a courier to headquarters, with a written despatch saying (in effect): "We made it to the village. How are things going on your end? Do you still want us to keep marching and swing around behind the enemy?"
Having sent that message, he waited . . . and waited . . . and waited. All day, in fact! He may have sent a follow-up message after a few hours, asking the same thing as the first message, but nobody ever got around to sending him a reply saying: "Yes, proceed with the original plan." I don't remember who actually "won" or "lost" the battle. It may have been something of a draw, but it certainly was not the crushing victory which the Union commander had been hoping to achieve.
When that Union commander finally realized what had happened -- after it was too late to do any good -- he was annoyed. But he also had to admit that the subordinate general couldn't be court-martialed for scrupulously following the strict letter of his written orders.
I'm pretty sure that neither the commanding general in that operation, nor the subordinate general who was so good at sitting on the sidelines while a battle happened without him,
were the sort of generals who later became particularly famous and respected for their contributions during the war. For instance, we're not talking about Ulysses S. Grant, William Tecumseh Sherman, or Phil Sheridan. (I don't think we're even talking about George B. McClellan!) But I can't remember where or when this particular battle took place. Does anyone recognize it from my description of that fiasco?


texts:
The flag of Paris is blue and red.

What was the red chosen for?
What was the blue chosen for?

I have heard that blue identified with Saint Martin, and red with Saint Denis, but the Wikipedia pages of these two saints do not mention these colours, so I have doubts.

Answer with the most solid references win.


texts: How can we be certain of customs in the primitive age?

texts:
I am currently reading Our Oriental Heritage by William Durant.

In Chapter IV. The Family, Durant writes of woman:

  In the hunting stage she did almost all the work except the actual capture of the game. In return for exposing himself to the hardships and risks of the chase, the male rested magnificently for the greater part of the year. The woman bore her children abundantly, reared them, kept the hut or home in repair, gathered food in woods and fields, cooked, cleaned and made the clothing and the boots.

Here he refers Müller-Lyer's Family as a resource which I do not have at hand.
He then adds:

  Because the men, when the tribe moved, had to be ready at any moment to fight off attack, they carried nothing but their weapons; the women carried all the rest.

It was that latter part that struck me as odd and brought me to thinking. How can we know that? If I am indeed being ambushed, and I carry a spear and, say, a bowl of fruits, I can just drop the bowl and defend myself.

I remember that I was taught in school that in "The Hunting Stage", women did domestic work and men hunted and I accepted it without skepticism. Durant himself states that, in early days of human history, the physical difference in strength and endurance between the sexes was perhaps more or less neglectable but I can accept that men might have a more natural inclination for gruesome work (and a greater innate aversion to domestic work)

But Durant describes the customs of these early days in great detail. How can we know for a fact that women carried most things? How can we know, even, that women played no part in hunting or fighting? If I look at early cave paintings, I, being no expert, would not dare to state for a fact that absolutely no women are depicted here.


texts: Why were harvest times in Cyrenaica earlier than in Greece in antiquity?

texts:
In The Corrupting Sea (2000), the authors state that Cyrenaica's harvest time was "a month earlier than that of most of Greece and well before that of the Black Sea" (p. 72), and because of this the area was very important for Greek economy in the 4th century BCE. For this claim, their source is Brun, P. (1993) 'La stèle des céréales de Cyrène et le commerce des grains en Égée au IVe siècle', which I couldn't find online and even if I did I wouldn't be able to read it, seeing that I can't read in French.

Since no other sources or details are given, I speculated that Cyrenaica's geographical position, closer to the Equator than Greece and the Black Sea, provided it with stronger sunlight, which made harvest times there earlier. But as I said this is mere speculation, seeing that I have not considered soil and other weather conditions. Also, I assumed that the same crops were planted in Greece and Cyrenaica, namely wheat.

The Wikipedia page on Cyrenaica confirmed that this region exported wheat. Also, the most promising page I found was linked to harvest festivals, that could happen in different times of the year in different places because of differing climates and crops, but there was not much information beyond this.

Therefore my question, which I apologize for its very specific nature, is this: what ambiental factors could have lead to this difference in harvest times specifically in ancient Cyrenaica?


texts:
Alexander the Great founded many Alexandrias. Following his example, the Diadochi and the Epigoni did the same: Antigonia, Demetria, Lysimachia, Seleucia, Antiochia, Cassandreia...

This trend seems to have started with Philip II of Macedon and Philippi:

  Philippi was established by Thasian colonists in 360/359 BC with the
  name Credides. In 356 BC Philip II of Macedon, conquered the city and
  renamed it to Philippi.

Was there any city named after a real person before the rise of Macedon?

Places taking its name from a legendary or mythological character (Byzantium, Heraclea, etc) are discarded.

Question was inspired by this:

  At this time Antigonus was tarrying in upper Syria, founding a city on
  the Orontes River, which he called Antigonia after himself. (...) It
  happened, however, that the city did not survive very long, for
  Seleucus dismantled it and transported it to the city which he founded
  and called Seleucia after himself.

Diodorus Siculus 20.47.5


texts: What is the silver object on the desk and what is 'Elizabeth I' doing with it?

texts:
Hollywood movies have never been known for their historical accuracy, which is often sacrificed in the pursuit of entertainment, and the plot & script of the 1939 film 'The Private Lives of Elizabeth and Essex' take more liberties than most.

However, there is an interesting detail at around 11m 30secs when 'Elizabeth' is working on some documents. Twice, after seemingly signing off on documents, she picks up the silver object pictured below and appears to sprinkle something on it.

Unlike the plot and even the costumes to some extent (though period influences are apparently evident), there seems to be little motive for fabricating this detail. Historical research on this film was in the hands of Warner's Head of Research Herman Lissauer, described in one source as "competent and industrious" (though presumably his views on the historical accuracy of the plot were not requested).

Can anyone confirm the authenticity of the scene pictured above? If it is authentic, what is 'Elizabeth' doing?

The only thing I can think of is that she is using some kind of scent but I can't find any evidence to support this. Also, would someone use scent on a document which appears to be related to affairs of state rather than being a personal letter?


texts: Presidents of the French Tribunate from 1799 to 1807

texts:
who were the presidents of the French Tribunate from 1799 to 1807?
the French wiki only has an undated list of names (http://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tribunat):

Pierre Daunou
Jean-Nicolas Démeunier
Jean Bérenger
Gabriel Malès
François de Jaucourt
Félix de Beaujour
Pierre-François Duchesne


texts: Who was arrested at El Cojo with Eliot de Castro?

texts: According to Bancroft's "History of California" II:274, Spanish authorities acting on Governor Sola's orders detained Eliot de Castro, working for the Russian-American Company, along with "an American and four Russians". Who were the others?


texts: Did Mountbatten favour India in partition of India-Pakistan?

texts:
Christopher Beaumont's said that Mountbatten pressured Radcliffe to change the boundary in India's favour.

See this BBC article:

  The documents repeatedly allege that Mountbatten put pressure on Radcliffe to alter the boundary in India's favour.

Is this true? If yes, why did Mountbatten side with India?


texts: When people use spears to fight cavalry do infantry stab the horse or the rider?

texts:
I am just curious. In most games spear infantry is a "counter" against cavalry. How does that really work anyway?

Any clips on actual cavalry fighting infantry that's historically accurate would be awesome. 3D simulation is great.


texts: What did education look like in occupied countries during WW2?

texts:
For example, Germans occupied Poland, then Ukraine as a part of USSR. And this occupation went on for several years. Did universities keep on working? Schools? How did the curriculum change? I understand that there was no need to change maths. But what about history? Economics? Literature?

Were new textbooks written? Or were those lessons and faculties just abolished? Maybe someone knows concrete examples of how Germans dealt with those issues?

Was it very different in Ukraine and France for example? Maybe Germans thought that Slavs didn't need schools and colleges at all?


texts: Is there any evidence that Celts produced chain mail?

texts:
Since I started to interest myself in history of the northen Europe, and especially the history of Celtic people, I read a lot about their inventions, in terms of warfare.

The quote from wiki

  The use of mail as battlefield armour was common during the Iron Age
  and the Middle Ages, becoming less common over the course of the 16th
  and 17th centuries. It is believed that the Roman Republic first came
  into contact with mail fighting the Gauls in Cisalpine Gaul, now
  Northern Italy, but a different pattern of mail was already in use
  among the Etruscans. The Roman army adopted the technology for their troops in the form of the lorica hamata which was used as a primary form of armour through the Imperial period.

I really started to doubt that, because armor of course is a huge advantage. But yet, most of the encounters of the Celts with the Romans were a defeat to the Celtic side.

Is there any actual source or finding to support that Celtic tribes have produced mail armour? Is there for example any evidence, that the Brennus of Senones and his troops used mail, when they attacked the early Roman Republic?


texts:
During the 1850’s and 60’s, was the free North (and its cause in the U.S. Civil War) considered more virtuous than the slave-holding South?

Do we find authors or politicians in the U.K. or France expressing outrage or contempt for American slavery or the American southern states because of slavery? Do we find public comment that while some advantage may lie in taking the Confederate side in the U.S. Civil War, it would be disgraceful or evil to support that side because of slavery? Was a pro-South or pro-Confederacy posture disreputable? Was this attitude arguable, controversial, or obvious?

Charles Dickens' 1842 American Notes apparently contains the following words:

  While upon the subject of ears, I may observe that a distinguished
  abolitionist in New York once received a negro's ear, which had been
  cut off close to the head, in a general post letter. It was forwarded
  by the free and independent gentleman who had caused it to be
  amputated, with a polite request that he would place the specimen in
  his 'collection.'

  I could enlarge this catalogue with broken arms, and broken legs, and
  gashed flesh, and missing teeth, and lacerated backs, and bites of
  dogs, and brands of red-hot irons innumerable: but as my readers will
  be sufficiently sickened and repelled already, I will turn to another
  branch of the subject.

All things considered, this strikes me as pretty cautious and tepid disapproval. Are there many examples this strong or stronger?


texts: What was the political significance of the investiture conflict?

texts: I understand that Pope Gregory VII and Henry IV were heavily involved in determining who gained the power to appoint church officials. However, I'm a little unsure of the consequences of this conflict and what long term political and economic repercussions there was because of this.


texts: Did the emperor Ashoka really build hospitals or is that a myth?

texts: I've seen a lot of sources claiming that Emperor Ashoka (c. 268 to 232 BCE) of the Mauryan dynasty, the dynasty that ruled most of the Indian subcontinent in the 3rd century BC, was responsible for building some of the oldest hospitals on the Indian subcontinent. For example, see this Aeon article. However, these sources never cite their sources. When I read more scholarly works on the history of hospitals, such as Tiffany Ziegler's Medieval Healthcare and the Rise of Charitable Institutions: The History of the Municipal Hospital, I see no mentions of Ashoka in the history of hospital building. This leads me to the following question: did Ashoka really build any hospitals? If so, what is the evidence that he did, and what exactly was the nature of these hospitals? What does the primary data tell us would let us call what Ashoka built a "hospital" in an institutional sense?


texts:
100,000 years ago on earth there were several hominin groups, or bipedal human like species.  60,000 years ago homo sapiens began to move out of Africa and encountered these other species.

All of which evolved in Africa, all had left Africa at various times.  For 10,000 years evidence suggests these groups lived along side each other.  DNA evidence shows that all of these groups interbreed with the other groups.

They were:

Neanderthals (in Europe and North West Asia)

Denisovans(Asia)

Homo floresiensis (Indonesia)

modern humans (homo sapiens) who dwelled in Africa.

  My question:
  Today only homo sapiens are left, why?  Was the extinction of these other hominin groups due to direct competition, natural disaster, disease or what?


texts:
I understand that their function was for munitions storage, but according to Wikipedia, the Army Corps of Engineers just up and started building the Manlinta Tunnels in 1922.

What was happening in that part of the world in 1922 that, without support from congress, they started building them?

Note: I'm not asking what they were built for (storage), but why then & there?


texts: Did President Kennedy really cut 100,000 government jobs during his presidency?

texts:
In Michel Crozier's book, La crise de l'intelligence, he states that during John F. Kennedy's presidency about 100,000 government jobs were terminated.

Is this figure accurate?
Where can I find any resources that would document the actual reductions?


texts: Was knowledge derived from the scientific method required to build commercial steam engines?

texts:
Historically steam engines got developed in England after the introduction of the hypothetico-deductive scientific method. Was the hypothetico-deductive method or knowledge about thermodynamics or metallurgy required for the development of commercial steam engines?

Or could the technology that's needed for commercial steam engines also have been developed without scientists moving to the hypothetico-deductive method?


texts: What is the primary source for this quote by Julius Caesar's on Celts and Germans?

texts:
I encountered an interesting quote on the English Wikipedia page for Germania some time ago, which seems to have persisted, albeit without citation. I was hoping someone could find a reliable source (ideally the primary source, which is probably Caesar's Gallic Wars, or a translation thereof).

  Caesar described the cultural differences between the Germanic
  tribesmen, the Romans, and the Gauls. He said that the Gauls, although
  warlike, could be civilized, but the Germanic tribesmen were far more
  savage and were a threat to Roman Gaul and so had to be conquered.

This is a fascinating quote in any case, and one that is relevant both to Julius Caesar as a man and on a macrohistorical level in some ways. So any proper citation or hints as to its origin would be much appreciated.

On the tenor of the quoted text, it would at least to seem to accord with my readings on Caesar (which is not insignificant), in that he found the Celts savage and primitive in most ways, but not beyond redemption. Clearly he found the German tribes rather more barbaric and felt the need to launch two swift punitive expeditions across the Rhine and into Greater Germania (which certainly had the desired effect of scaring the tribes and preventing further raids into Gallic territory). Indeed, this was the pretext for the Gallic Wars for a start, after a few Gallic tribes had sought Rome's assistance in driving off Germanic incursions from across the Rhine, as far as I remember. So yes, this quote would certainly appear to agree with Caesar's personal views and actions, as they have been recorded with history. But a more direct citation would be wonderful.


texts: Why did Austronesian/Polynesian people not colonize Australia?

texts:
Australia hosted aboriginal populations since prehistory. However technologically advanced civilizations (in comparison) lived nearby, in Indonesia, Polynesia and New Guinea.

Why was it not colonized by those people? Is there any evidence of interaction/invasions?


texts: How did the Romans discover dry cleaning?

texts: It seems that the Romans would dry clean their laundry with ammonia derived from urine. Considering the source of the ammonia, and the smell of pure ammonia, I find it hard to believe that this connection was ever made. How did one come to the conclusion that soaking clothes in a stinky fluid derived from urine would make it cleaner?


texts: How different schools of historiography characterise a colony?

texts:
The title pretty much resembles the question - I'd like to compare what criteria different schools of historiography (including national and historical) use to determine whether a country/territory is a "colony" or not.
As a starting point, Wikipedia has a long list of colonies here. However, I don't understand how it is constructed, for example:

Britain has a long list of colonies (example India), which were overseas and directly governed by Britain. This sounds like the "classical" definition for a colony.
The Ottoman Empire has a list of colonies, some of them are on the Balkan peninsula. What made these territories "colonies"? They were directly governed, but were not overseas. Fair enough, but they don't seem to be widely recognized as "colonies", only "ruled by" the Ottoman Empire. How did the Ottomans view the lands they ruled, including the Balkans? Is it only that they were not "native" Ottoman lands that they are referred to as colonies? What other criteria are used to categorize them as colonies?
Taiwan is regarded to as a Chinese colony. However, as far as I know, mainland China viewes Taiwan as indivisible part of China and not as a colony. Why is that? What criteria are used to say that Taiwan is a colony (as per Wikipedia) and why the PRC doesn't view Taiwan as a colony?
West Germany is referred to as a "British colony". Why? West Germany was an independent state, right?

I can find more examples, but I think these probably indicate where the source of my confusion might be. In any case, they are just examples and I am more interested in comparing various criteria/definitions.
I would appreciate quoting sources that I can refer to later. Also, geographical/methodological/temporal/ideological variety is greatly appreciated.


texts: I think it may be a Polish uniform, but I'm not sure. The eagle hanging down from the chest pocket seems unique in my web surfing for similar uniforms My family came to US from Snietnica, Galicia in 1907. So either it's a uniform prior to 1907 or it's another family member who remained in Eastern Europe. I would love to know a time range for this style uniform.


texts: How and why did the Cavalry lance temporarily fall out of favour during the 16-18th centuries?

texts:
In the late middle ages, every knight or even his retainers and squires were armed with a spear or a lance. When heavy cavalry gave way to pike squares, we still see the lance still in use among the demi-lancers. Somewhere along the way though, they completely disappeared, surviving only in the Polish army and appropriately enough to be resurrected by them in the 18th century when the effectiveness of the Polish cavalry was shown. Since then, the lance stayed with cavalry until they became mechanized.

A possible culprit is the Reiter employing the caracole which showed tactical supremacy over the lancer in many battles such as Coutras but that doesn't explain why they suddenly became resurgent again in the 18/19th century.

What caused the lance's short disappearance and why? If it indeed was firearms and caracolle tactics, then what made them become popular again later on?


texts: Where and when has Thucydides been studied?

texts:
Thucydides' history of the Peloponnesian war between Sparta and Athens, of which he was a contemporary and participating general, is studied still today in war academies and by political scientists for its timeless insights and hypotheses about strategies and the causes and nature of war.

Has Thucydides been continually studied since then (5th century BC)? Did he influence the later Theban war with Sparta, and Alexander the Great? Did Roman generals and politicians read him? Was he well known in medieval Europe? Did famous later commanders like Frederick the Great and Napoleon read Thucydides? When did he reach outside of Europe and the Mediterranean? During what periods and in which regions has he been influential (today he seems to be mandatory reading throughout the world)?


texts: Is there a different view by political-scientist in history that printing more bill is different from adding few more zeros in a bill

texts: Is there a different view by political-scientist in history mention that printing more bill is different from adding few more zeros on the bill. I know some Africa country tend to doing that.


texts: Were there Jewish Cossacks in the 17th century?

texts:
Based on my research there seems to have been Jewish Cossacks. Based on what I have read it is possible they were Karaites who sought help of Cossacks to retrieve children and or families removed from their control by more 'traditional' Jewish communities (there is back chatter suggesting 'someone' had taken children or wives away from Karaites and they sought help to regain them).

However, the sources I have found on the internet so far don't provide much evidence. Are there any factual evidence that confirm there were Jewish Cossacks in the 17th century?


texts: When, and where, was the word 'Anglican' first used in the context of the Protestant Church of England?

texts:
According to Wikipedia, "The word Anglican originates in ecclesia anglicana, a medieval Latin phrase dating to at least 1246 that means the English Church." However, this usage referred to the Catholic Church in England.

Although the use of the word 'Anglican' "did not become general until the latter half of the 19th century", it was used in the context of the Protestant Church of England long before this.

The online dictionary.com says 1625-35 while Merriam-Webster gives the earlier date of 1598. Wikipedia is less specific, saying the 16th century. However, none of these sources say where or who first used it. I've looked at several religious sites but have found no mention of first usage. In fact, these sites use the word 'Anglican' as if it had been in use since the founding of the Protestant Church of England (see, for example, here and here).

Is the Merriam-Webster date of 1598 the first documented use? If so, where was it used, or who used it? If not, what is the first documented use?


texts: When did the ancient Egyptians discover or reach the Nile Headwaters?


texts: The name of a German Nazi supporter who owned many newspapers

texts: I was wondering if anyone could tell me the name of the Nazi supporter was that owned 53 German newspapers and dedicated all of them to Hitler to use to spread his Nazi message through one of the campaigns?  I think he was Alfred somebody?


texts: Would Vikings have worn Fenrir or Jörmungandr as emblem or jewellery?

texts:
After a discussion I had today about Neopagans and Metalculture it came to modern jewelry often sold with wannabe ancient style carvings of Fenrir, Jörmungandr or other beasts of the Nordic pantheon. I could not find any proof against it or supporting it, but are there any artifacts known which show those beings as part of a jewelry, as a ship ornament, on a shield or anything alike?
I highly doubt that it would have been socially acceptable to worship them or show respect in a way of wearing their emblem, but I could not find anything about that so far.
Does anybody know how those deities have been seen or treated in everyday social interaction?


texts:
I recall in history class learning that the Japanese could have attacked the USSR in the 1940s and potentially split Stalin's forces - which presumably would have been more useful for the Nazis than bringing the US into the war.

Which would indicate that Japan wasn't part of the Axis in any real way.

At the same time, after Pearl Harbour, the Nazis declared war on the US (siding with the Japanese), indicating a close relationship.

But again, I cannot imagine the Japanese fitting into the Aryan image if the Russians didn't...

So, did the Nazis have a relationship with Imperial Japan? If not, why are they always referred to as the Axis?


texts: Why did G. Britain & France not declare war on USSR in 1939?

texts: When Germany and the USSR invaded Poland in Sept 1939 from different side of Poland, France and Gt Britain declared war on Germany only.  Why?


texts: Did the Nazis have any unique or especially effective economic policies?

texts:
The Nazi rule in Germany is associated with (among many, many other things) a sudden and powerful economic resurgence.  This is especially impressive since it happened in a country that was practically the definition of economic hell during the 1920s, and because it happened around the same time that the economies of many other countries (such as the United States) was being utterly devastated by the Great Depression.  (In fact, the economic turnaround was so striking that even 20 years later, it would inspire an episode of Star Trek.)

I've always understood that this had mostly to do with inspiring the population, getting their passions up, and applying a little of that German efficiency once again.  Hitler was nothing if not motivating, and the first thing that anyone learns about the Nazis was their (oftentimes terrifying) ability to mobilize large groups of people toward a single goal.

But it's worth asking, did the Nazis do anything specific to stimulate their economy during this time?  Was there an economic wunderkind among the Nazi leadership, or some new economic doctrine associated with the Nazi regime that was especially effective?  Or was it really just a matter of passion and discipline, and a will to return to the greatness that was Germany?


texts: What is the origin of lighting candles on birthdays?

texts:
What is the origin people start lighting the candles on birthdays.
Also please explain what is the reason/logic behind it?


texts: How much firepower did the British navy represent in 1940?

texts:
A question was recently asked about how Britain would have defended herself against a cross-channel invasion by Hitler. A key element in the British defense would be the Royal Navy. At the beginning of the war, it included (among other ships), something like 15 battleships and battle cruisers, 66 cruisers, and 184 destroyers.

One of the main concerns of the British army was that it had lost most of its artillery, and other heavy equipment at Dunkirk.

The Navy's first priority was to sink the German landing ships and covering naval forces. After fulfilling this assignment, the Navy could have been used as "artillery" to bombard (surviving) German land forces. If the above-mentioned ships were performing this "bombardment" role, how valuable would such support be?

Put another way, how much "artillery," or "firepower," would the Royal Navy represent (in batteries, divisions, or whatever other equivalent units of firepower might exist)?
And if were being fired from the sea side, so that German ground forces were caught in a "cross fire" between British land forces and naval firepower, would such firepower be more or less effective than an equivalent amount of artillery supporting British troops from the land side?


texts: Did the ancients build elaborate, automated traps?

texts:
Quite a few movies with archaeology have as part of the plot ancient traps with elaborate automation that are triggered by pressing or lifting something (e.g. Indiana Jones and "Les rivières pourpres 2 - Les anges de l'apocalypse").

Are these ideas based on anything real? Is there any documented ancient automation on this scale? Has any survived to this day?

I am not thinking of technology that you can have in your hand (like Antikythera mechanism), but something where you activate it and something surprising/dangerous happens which is human sized (e.g. secret door opens, stone rolls to crush you, or arrows fired against you).


texts: Why did Stalin exile Trotsky instead of killing or imprisoning him?

texts:
Leon Trotsky, one of the original founders of the Bolshevik Revolution, was strongly opposed to the leadership and policies of Joseph Stalin. In response to Trotskys public criticism of him, Stalin banished him from the Soviet Union.

  In 1924, Lenin died, and Joseph Stalin emerged as leader of the USSR. Against Stalin’s stated policies, Trotsky called for a continuing world revolution that would inevitably result in the dismantling of the Soviet state. He also criticized the new regime for suppressing democracy in the Communist Party and for failing to develop adequate economic planning. In response, Stalin and his supporters launched a propaganda counterattack against Trotsky. In 1925, he was removed from his post in the war commissariat. One year later, he was expelled from the Politburo and in 1927 from the Communist Party. In January 1928, Trotsky began his internal exile in Alma-Ata and the next January was expelled from the Soviet Union outright.

(Source: History Channel)

This seems odd. Stalin had no qualms about arbitrarily executing opponents (he even executed Trotsky's brother in law) Why would he exile one of his harshest critics instead of either killing him - or at the very least keeping him alive but imprisoned? What other factors were at play here ?


texts:
We can read about the Scottish Highland clearances. It does appear that the driving motivation was that sheep pastures were more profitable.

This was the time of the Industrial Revolution, when many people came to the cities, houses were overcrowded, and the surplus of labour meant that working conditions were poor.

It seems to me that the Highland clearances can't have been unique - but were part of a broader pattern across Britain.

My question is: Was it widespread during the 17th and 18th Century for British country people to be evicted and replaced with more profitable agriculture?


texts: What was the status of Arab Christians during the crusades?

texts: Did Arab Christians take an active role in the crusades in the Holy Land or at any point on their trip to the Holy Land. Or were they victims of the crusaders? Did the crusaders typically differentiate between Christian Arab or Jew upon reaching Jerusalem?


texts: What was the first time the '@' at sign was used to address an user?

texts:
The first app I know to use "@" to address people is Twitter and then it caught on. I know that "@" was used in Usenet as a replacement for the word "at", but not to refer to specific users to my knowledge.

Edit:
I am not referring to just using the @ at symbol in general. I am aware of this article: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/At_sign

I am asking for the first time the symbol was used to refer to a specific person or user. For example, @Jane and NOT jane@email.com.

Did Twitter invent this usage when it was founded in 2006? And if so, who made that decision?


texts:
I have noticed that several brands of biscuits have ships on them and have wondered why that is.
A friend suggested that this is for historical reasons but I couldn't find any evidence of that.
Where did the trend of putting ships on biscuits originate and why is it still so popular?
Here are some examples but I believe there are many more


texts: What was the state of relations between Baathist Iraq and Taliban Afghanistan?

texts:
Not sure if this is too recent to be a history question, but...

All this stuff about Saddam collaborating on the World Trade Centre attack has been shown to be humbug over and over again.

The two countries bordered Iran, which was their bitter enemy. Did they try to join forces against it? Or were they enemies themselves, given their different outlooks? It doesn't seem possible for them to just ignore each other.

To be clear, we're talking about the period 1996-2001, when the Taliban were in control of Afghanistan.

Edit: I would like well sourced answers. Primary sources or academic sources, in other words.


texts: When and why did round coins become a practical standard?

texts: In the world today many countries (probably most if not all, but I don't have a reference) use round coins.  It's clear that some coins of ancient times were not round, as can be seen here.  At which point in history did the round coin become the de facto standard, and why?


texts: What precipitated the Meiji restoration?

texts: What other factors, apart from Commander Perry arriving at Edo, precipitated the Meiji restoration?


texts: Did the Palmyrene Empire actually own territory beyond the Euphrates?

texts:
On the Wikipedia article for the Palmyrene empire. It shows an image of the empire in 271 that includes territory beyond the Euphrates in Northern Mesopotamia.

However the article mentions nothing about a war with Persia which owned Mesopotamia and this video shows the Palmyrene empire not owning Northern Mesopotamia however that video is by years.

So my question is, did the Palmyrene empire actually own Northern Mesopotamia? If so for how long and also when did it conquer/receive it?


texts: Primary sources on Medieval Christian depictions of non-Christians (in English)

texts: I'm a history student and I'm looking for primary sources in English (not Latin) that could help me with my research. I'm trying to find primary sources preferably written by Christian monks about the Vikings, (pagan) Slavs, Magyars, and the invasion of Iberia. I am trying to find similarities between the way different non-Christian groups were portrayed. Any help is appreciated.


texts: Why was the first production PzKpfw V (Panther) called the Ausf.D, and the second production version called the Ausf.A?

texts:
Background

The first Panther (PzKpfw V) production variant, produced from January 1943
through September 1943 was called the Ausf.D. (see below)

The second Panther production variant, produced from August '43 - August '44, was called the Ausf.A. (see below)

The third Panther production variant, producued from March '44 to April '45, was called the Ausf.G (see below)

Question

Why were the model variant designators D, A, and G used out of alphabetical order?  The main Wiki article on the Panther Tank, as well as the Wiki article on the Panzer V variants, and the Panzer V Panther reference article on the Tanks-Encyclopedia.com page all reference the naming order out of sequence from the production order without an explanation as to why that happened.

Earlier Panzer types (e.g. PzKpfw III and IV) used alphanumeric sequential nomenclature for the variants which matched the production order.  For example the PzKpfw IV variants were called the Ausf.A, B, C, D, E, F1, F2, G, H, and J in conjunction with the production order (note that "I" is almost always skipped in engineering nomenclature to avoid potential confusion with a similar-looking "1").

Is there a documented reason why the Panzer V (Panther) variants were named out of order?

EDIT

Some very good information has been provided in the Answers and Comments below, but no clear documented case has yet been presented.  The information presented is plausible but it still appears no clear answer is available.  I doubt there are any first-hand witnesses remaining who could answer from personal knowledge (?)


texts: Nazi Germany's secret service SD was first called Ic-Dienst, what does "Ic" stand for?

texts:
The "Ic-Dienst" was founded as a security organisation of the SS in 1931, in 1932 it was renamed "PI-Dienst" (Presse- und Informationsdienst), after that it got its well known name SD ("Sicherheitsdienst").

Unfortunately I cannot find any information about the first name. So what does "Ic" stand for?


texts: Did Ali give his allegiance to the three first caliphs?

texts:
The reigns of Abu Bakr, Umar, and Uthman as the first three khalifas (caliphs/successors) of Muhammad instead of Ali are one of the main point of contention in the Sunni/Shia split.

I wonder if Ali gave allegiance to (or otherwise accepted the reigns of) these three caliphs? Did he do this freely or under duress? There wasn't any major conflict started by Ali during these reigns, and "the establishment" eventually elected Ali as the fourth caliph after Uthman, so it seems that he got along fine?


texts: What happened to Soviet citizens on Finnish territory before and during winter war?

texts:
How many Soviet citizens were on Finnish territory immediately before the Winter War? Other than diplomats. I suppose there would have been trading officials, some engineering personnel etc.

What happened to them in Finland?

Were all of them recalled by the Soviet government?

Were there any extraditions just prior to the war?

Were there any exchanges of non-combatant citizens during the war?


texts: Public knowledge of hypothetical nuclear weapons before Hiroshima?

texts:
The following is an account of an impromptu conversation aboard the Enola Gay while in flight toward Hiroshima. According to Rhodes, The making of the atomic bomb, p. 707, the pilot, Colonel Paul Tibbets, was "wondering if [the crew] knew what they were carrying." Tail gunner Robert Caron guessed "a chemist's nightmare," then "a physicist's nightmare." Tibbets dissembled, "Not exactly." Caron recounts that then,

  [Tibbets] started to crawl forward up the tunnel [to the front section of the plane]... I sort of tugged at his foot... He came sliding back in a hurry, thinking maybe something was wrong. "What's the matter?" ... "Colonel, are we splitting atoms today?" This time he gave me a really funny look, and said, "That's about it."

At this point, Tibbets decided to get on the PA and to the crew that the weapon was a nuclear bomb.

I was surprised by this anecdote, both because most of the crew didn't know when they took off and because Caron was so easily able to guess.

The Rhodes book is told mainly from the point of the physicists, presumably because that's who the historical sources are. He doesn't say much about public knowledge. The 1942 creation of the first nuclear reactor at Chicago had been part of the Manhattan Project, and was kept secret, especially because they didn't want the Germans to realize that sufficiently pure graphite could be used as a moderator. Apparently Einstein had to have the possibility of a nuclear chain reaction explained to him as late as 1939, when he signed the Einstein-Szilard letter. Meitner's paper describing nuclear fission had been published earlier that year.

What was publicly known before Hiroshima about the possibility of nuclear weapons? Was the possibility of a nuclear chain reaction publicly known, while details such as moderators, cross-sections, and neutron multiplicities were secret? Or was publicly available scientific knowledge just a vague idea that there was energy in nuclear reactions, but nothing as specific as the idea of nuclear chain reaction? I know that people working on the Manhattan Project originally discussed ideas like dropping radioactive dust on Germany.


texts: Was there a Japanese Exchange, à la Columbian Exchange?

texts:
After the European (re-)discovery of the Americas, there was a widespread transfer of animals, plants, culture, human populations, communicable diseases, technology and ideas between the Americas and the Old World (primarily Europe). This became known as the Columbian Exchange).

Some examples of this, in the form of animals and food stuffs, would be the potato and the horse.

Before the Columbian Exchange, (white) potatoes were unknown to the old world. After being brought back by traders and merchants, they were fairly quickly adopted as a staple food stuff, providing much needed starches. Although not completely related to just the potato blight disease, the fact that potatoes were ruined as a crop throughout Europe in the 1840's was a leading factor in the creation of the Great Potato Famine of Ireland. This famine (and admittedly other factors as well) caused the population of Ireland to drop by 1.5 million from 1841 to 1851, instead of the expected raise of about a million.

During the exploration of the Americas, the Europeans brought many things with them (including disease), such as the domesticated horse. With the horse, the North American West was conquered (indeed nothing is, IMO, as American as the American Wild West). It can be said that some tribes of Native Americans became more accomplished at horsemanship than the peoples who brought them over.

I really don't want to get into a political (Meiji Restoration) or medical (diseases) discussion, but would rather just discuss 'fun facts', perhaps food stuffs or animals, as discussed above.

Were there any foods introduced into the Japanese culture AND accepted by them to the point of being called, perhaps, a staple food? What about any taken from them back to the Old World?

Were any animals introduced into Japan by Europeans that are now treated as 'a part of the natural fauna' of Japan? Or the other way?


texts: Who was responsible for the partition of India? Did it happen due to Mohammed Ali Jinnah or Mahatma Gandhi? Or were the British of the view that the country needed to be divided?


texts: Were there rules about the number of retainers for the Achaemenid Empire?

texts: In Rome, magistrates (and later the emperors too) each had a fixed number of lictors, according to the rank of the office they held. Is a similar regulation of the number of retainers according to rank known for the Achaemenid Empire? Or other ancient Eastern states?


texts:
In History at school we learnt the PANDA method to analyse sources, to test for bias and authenticity.

Purpose - What is the purpose for which the source was created? Was it to convert people to a specific way of thinking?

Author - What background is the author from? Could there be possible bias from the authors viewpoint as a result of their circumstances?

Nature - What form is the source in? (e.g. poster, map, photo, etc)

Date - When was it produced? Is it primary or secondary?

Audience - Who is the intended audience? (e.g. Aryans/Jews/male/female/etc)?

What are the advantages/shortcomings of this method as a quick & dirty guideline for analysis of sources?


texts: What calendar was used by the kingdom of Ireland?

texts:
For a research project I have, I need to identify some important dates. In order to do that, I'd like to know which calendar was used by the Kingdom of Ireland, specifically during the Irish rebellion of 1641.

So, does anyone know which calendar it was? I'd rather have an answer with a reference, if possible.

If possible, I'd also be glad to have any information on this calendar - holidays, months and their synonyms, ...


texts: What was the significance of the seven wonders of the ancient world in ancient life?

texts:
What is the background of the 7 wonders of the ancient world?

How significant were the wonders to those in ancient societies?


texts: Could a citizen in Nazi Germany sue the government or doctors over the eugenics program?

texts: What would've happened if a person in Nazi Germany sued doctors or the state for murder of their disabled relatives? Also, were people allowed to view public records in Nazi Germany? Were records reliable (was there fraud)?


texts: When was the testudo / tortoise formation first used by the Romans?

texts:
When was the earliest known use of the testudo formation by the Romans?

Wikipedia's article on the testudo formation includes a quote from Cassius Dio which mentions the use of a testudo formation at the Battle of Carrhae in 53 B.C.

  For if [the legionaries] decided to lock shields for the purpose of avoiding the arrows by the closeness of their array, the [cataphracts] were upon them with a rush, striking down some, and at least scattering the others; and if they extended their rank to avoid this, they would be struck with the arrows.

Is there an earlier example of the testudo? The source does not have to mention the formation by the name "testudo" (as in the above quote). If the earliest mention of the formation does not include the name then when was it first mentioned by name?


texts: In the Lombard period, could not the Byzantine Empire have occupied Rome?

texts:
The Italian campaigns were finished in 556. The three chapters schism between the emperor and Pope came to a head. Some popes were dragged to Constantinople. This shows that the Emperor was exerting influence in Rome. The Lombards invaded Italy in 568. In 590, the Vatican erected the sign of St. Peter, symbolizing its independence and the creation of the Papal States.

The Exarchate of Ravenna included a small strip of land, through Perugia to Rome. This is how Rome survived the Lombard invasions, but was isolated enough to be independent. It appears to be a fine line; the empire could maintain the "bridge", but couldn't tell the popes what to do. I'm wondering if they actually tried to occupy Rome, that they couldn't have handled both the Roman and Lombardian response, and would have lost other Italian regions. For example, when Justinian II tried to arrest the Pope, the people in Ravenna and inland rebelled, before they even got to Rome. (Although, I like T.E.D's story of hiding under the Pope's bed more.) On the other hand, if Rome wanted
assistance against Lombardia, then constantinople could assist Rome via Perugia, but then Constantinople would have wanted something in return?


texts: Why did Alexander found or rename a number of places after himself?

texts:
According to Wikipedia, Alexander founded or renamed each of the following places after himself:

  Alexandria, Egypt
  Alexandria Arachosia, Afghanistan; now called Kandahar (a contraction of Iskandahar)
  Alexandria Ariana, Afghanistan
  Alexandria Bucephalous, Pakistan, on the Jhelum
  Alexandria Carmania, unknown site in Kerman Province, Iran
  Alexandria Eschate, "the Farthest", Tajikistan
  Ghazni, formerly Alexandria in Opiania
  Alexandria on the Caucasus, Afghanistan
  Alexandria on the Indus, Pakistan
  Alexandria on the Oxus, Afghanistan
  Alexandria Prophthasia, Afghanistan
  Alexandria Susiana, Iran
  Alexandria Troas, Turkey
  Alinda (Alexandria on the Latmos), Turkey;
  Cebrene (formerly Alexandria), Turkey
  Iskandariya (Alexandria), Iraq
  Iskenderun (Alexandria ad Issum), Turkey
  Kandahar (Alexandria), Afghanistan
  Merv, Turkmenistan, sometimes also called Alexandria

Firstly, is this list accurate? Secondly, what was the purpose of this practice? Was it simply vanity? Did he also found or rename other places based on the names of, say, his parents, wives, or generals?

(I suppose that he did name one town after his horse, Bucephalus.)


texts: What did the term "Parage" mean in middle ages Langued'oc?

texts:
In the book "Massacre at Montsegur" Zoé Oldenbourg mentioned the term "Parage" that was used in that time in the area:

  It was the honour of the Occitan nobilty, so humiliated
  by these Northern Frenchmen, that the King and his knights were
  going to defend: the freedom of their brothers-in-arms, and the
  cause of la courtoisie — or Parage, as it was known in the langued'oc.
  The meaning of this word (like that of so many others) has over the
  centuries been weakened and narrowed down to a remarkable
  extent ; at this time it evoked the very highest moral values current
  in secular society. The greatest compliment that the most impassioned
  lover could pay his lady was to say that she was courtoise; and
  when, in the Chanson, William of Tudela's continuator puts speeches
  into his knights' mouths, they are constantly invoking Parage, as
  they would some divinity.

although the quote contains an explanation of the term, I would like to read more about what it actually mean to the people at that time. To what extent do we have evidence of people celebrating or proud of the parage in literature and maybe symbolism of that time.


texts: What happened to prisoners in IS occupied territory?

texts:
What I would like to know is, how IS treated prisoners, they encountered in their newly controlled territory. Did they free the prisoners? Did they re-sentence them, or kill them?

I tried Google-ing it, but I get a lot of irrelevant results.

Hope this is on topic here.


texts: When was the first instance of Generals Morand, Friant & Gudin being referred to as "The Immortals"?

texts:
Generals de Division Morand, Friant, and Gudin were at times referred to as "The Immortals", as noted in the thesis Marshal Louis N. Davout and the Art of Command by Major John M. Keefe (1994)(pp36, my emphasis)

  Davout's command consisted of the divisions of the three "immortals", Gudin, Friant, and Morand, an additional division under St Hilaire, two heavy cavalry divisions under St Sulpice and Montbrun, and one light cavalry division under Jacquinot  (see Appendix B, Order of Battle). This amounted to 67,000 men. The divisions of Gudin, Morand, and Friant came to be known as Davout's immortals. They had been together since the Camp of Bruges in 1804 and shared victory with Davout at Austerlitz and Auerstaedt. They were considered "immortal" in the belief that they could not be defeated.

I am wondering when, and by whom, this sobriquet was first used in reference to these three accomplished commanders.

Update #1

As per a suggestion by sempaiscuba I have checked Memoirs of Napoleon by Louis Antoine Fauvelet de Bourrienne and only found three relevant usages of "immortal", none referring to Davout's subordinates:

  At that time, when he saw his glory and power augmenting, he said to me in one of our walks at Malmaison, in a moment of hilarity, and clapping me on the shoulder, "Well, Bourrienne, you also will be immortal!"−− "Why, General?"−−"Are you not my secretary?"−−"Tell me the name of Alexander's," said I.

  −−[Bonaparte did not know the name of Alexander's secretary, and I forgot at the moment to tell him it was Clallisthenes (sic). He wrote Alexander's Memoirs, as I am writing Bonaparte's; but, notwithstanding this coincidence, I neither expect nor desire the immortality of my name.−−Bourrienne.]−−  (pp 241)

and

  .. and to Ney, the hero, rather than the Prince of the Moskowa, whose name will be immortal in the annals of glory, as his death will be eternal in the annals of party revenge. (pp 485)

and

  The conduct of Marmont on that day alone would suffice to immortalise him. The corps he commanded was reduced to between 7000 and 8000 infantry and 800 cavalry, with whom, for the space of twelve hours he maintained his ground against an army of 55,000 men, of whom it is said 14,000 were killed, wounded, and taken. Marshal Marmont put himself so forward in the heat of the battle that a dozen of men were killed by the bayonet at his side, and his hat was perforated by a ball. But what was to be done against overwhelming numbers! (pp 515)

Update #2

I have found two contradictory accounts. placing the date of the distinction before and after Auerstadt:

  All that day Davout, with his three famous Divisional-Commanders, already known as the Three Immortals, Gudin, Friant and Morand, held out near the village of Auerstadt, ...
  from Napoleon and his Marshals

  Friant made all the major campaigns with III Corps through 1809, being known as one of the 'three immortals; (along with Gudin and Morand) after Auerstadt in 1806.
  from Once There Were Titans: Napoleon's Generals and Their Battles, 1800-1815


texts: Land Ownership in Palestine - Big Landlords or Small Peasants?

texts:
I have seen pro Arab sources cite surveys like these (see image) that demonstrate that most of the privately owned in Palestine land belonged to Arabs.

I have seen Israeli sources assert that much of the privately owned land conquered in 1948 (and 1967) belonged to big landowners (often in Syria) and not to individual Palestinians who claim they lost their land.

How much of the land was owned outright by individual peasants and how much was owned by big landowners, and how much was sort of like an English common and collectively owned by the peasants of a village but technically owned by a village head?

Given the late Ottoman Empire's reputation for meticulous record keeping and overall competence, does this information even exist?


texts: Are there any records of Vikings burning each others 'island of boats' out of desperation?

texts:
According to Wikipedia, the Vikings sometimes tied their boats together in order to provide a stable battleground and to make it easier for the crew of other boats to help each other.

Despite the fact that these 'islands of boats' had no mobility at all (even the sails were furled), making them extremely susceptible to fire (as seen in the Battle of Red Cliff), I was unable to find any records of Vikings burning each other's boats. Presumably this was because the intent of battle was to capture the boats themselves. According to Hurstwic:

  A war ship was a valuable item, not only for the prestige and monetary
  value that went to her owner, but also for her utility in future
  battles. As a result, the intent in naval combat was to gain control
  of the ship (and any valuables she might be carrying) while minimizing
  any damage to the ship. This goal was achieved not by attacking the
  ship, but rather by attaching the ship's crew.

However, it appears to me that the losing side in a confrontation would have a large incentive to burn his enemy's island of boats out of desperation.


texts: How widespread was practice of fusion of Graeco-Roman and barbarian names?

texts:
There are some instances when barbarian names were romanized in order to be similar to already existing Roman or Greek names. Just some examples that come to mind:

Hebrew Martha -> Marta ("of Mars")
Hebrew Mariam -> Maria (feminine of Marius)
Germanic Hiermann (banner holder) -> Germanicus (brotherly, uterine)
Slavic Kuzma (blacksmith) -> Cosmas (Greek "of cosmos")

I wonder to what extent this practice was widespread and when it appeared? I also wonder how the spread of Christianity affected this.