texts: Were Jews cut off from the Babylonian Geonim?

texts:
This is the view that I'm familiar with about the decline of the Geonim:

  The Mesopotamian Gaon reached the height of its prestige in the 10th
  century- with Saadia Gaon (d. 945), but the political split in the
  Islamic world at this time created difficulties of communication
  between the western communities in both Moslem and Christian
  countries. Through the growth of rabbinical centers in [...the west], the
  academies of Mesopotamia became less consulted and the Gaonate
  declined. Aryeh Grabois The Encyclopedia of Medieval Civilization p.
  340

The political split he's referring to is the emergence and dominance of the first Shia Caliphates around the Middle East and in Africa.

I thought that the Fatamid Caliphate was particularly responsible for this "cutting off" because it almost bisected the Near East, and it was the center of Shi'ism.  I also read that the Fatamid Caliphs sided with  certain Jews to oppose Exilarch. However, the Exilarch is not synonymous with the Gaon, and they were usually at odds with each other.

  Medieval Jewish tradition ascribes the creation of this position [Nagid] to the Fatimids' desire to remove the influence of the *exilarch on Egyptian Jewry. This view has been accepted by modern scholars. S.D. *Goitein, however, holds that the office of the Nagid developed independent of the aspirations and the policies of the Fatimids. Apparently the first of the negidim was Paltiel of Oria. https://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/fatimids

I'm beginning to question all of this now. I've recently learned that the Fatamids, while Shia, were forced to be tolerant because Egypt had a Sunni majority, and also numerous Jews and Christians. Many people moved to Egypt in the 1000's and then converted to Judaism (JVL.com "Fatamids").

Documents found in Cairo portray Talmudic Jews and Karaites living together more peacefully then one may think from reading traditional rabbinical sources that were hostile to them.

All of these things mentioned above lead me to believe that Talmudic Jews were not challenged in the Fatamid Caliphate. That leaves other Shias, the Buyids, Hamdanids, and the Qarmatians, as possible adversaries.

There were Gaon during the Buyid period. Sheria Gaon (d. 1006), Hai Gaon (d. 1038)

What I'm looking for is specific theories regarding the shift of Talmudic scholarship to the Mediterranean and Europe. I'd like to know what specifically cut them off, or if there is another detailed explanation for their movement out of Mesopotamia.

I have some other ideas, but can't substantiate them. These are that the progress of Jews in the west made the Geon obsolete, or that the stability of Egypt made Babylonia obsolete. I'd also be interested in additional or alternative complications to Jewish communications with the east, such as the recession of Islam in the Mediterranean, the rise of Venice or Pisa, or the Byzantines.


texts: What are some of the risks of relying on their accounts when studying the history of Native cultures?


texts: How successful was the Anti-Imperialist League?

texts:
America's imperialist era was characterized by informal empires and the annexation of various states, such as the Philippines. Eventually, people such as William J. Bryan found out about the immoral methods used by Americans to gain this territory. He helped form the Anti-Imperialist League because of this.

How successful was the League in getting the message out to others about American methods?


texts: How did Americans adopt processed and off-site butchered meat for domestic consumption in their food supply?

texts:
Meats supplied for domestic consumption through the US supermarket system are either processed or pre-cut.  This contrasts with other food cultures where meat is supplied as whole animals, or slaughtered / butchered on the site of sale.

We can estimate that earlier in US history, meat was slaughtered and butchered domestically in rural areas, or slaughtered and butchered at point of sale for domestic consumption.

What caused the change to processed and off-site butchered meat for domestic consumption?  Does this relate to commercial consumption?  Did consumer preference lead this cultural change, or did processing techniques or capital intensification lead this change?  When did this change occur?  Who were the major agents of change?

Is Sinclair's The Jungle an adequate characterisation of the point of change?


texts: Did average church-goers understand mass in Latin?

texts:
Since around the 4th century AD, Latin is the official language of the Catholic Church. As such, most of this period, the official language of the Mass was Latin (there has been exceptions). A key change occurred in the 1960's, with the Vatican Council II, when it was allowed for mass to be celebrated in secular languages.

Now, we can divide mass in three components:

preaching: I imagine this was always done in a language church-goers could understood. For instance, I expect preaching was done in Romances languages in the 16th century and not in Latin.
Bible readings: it seems it wasn't until Vatican II that Bibles other than the Vulgate (Latin) was allowed to be used for readings (exceptions existed, link above). For instance, even if preaching in Spain in 17th century was done in Spanish, readings were in Latin.
rites: in Latin until Vatican II, with exceptions (see link above).

So, given that most of the mass was in Latin until the II Vatican Council, my question is: did the "average" church-goer understand the words of the mass? I am looking for any evidence that suggests the majority of people did or did not understood the mass (surely the educated elite did understand it).

Now, let's recall the Catholic mass was at least a weekly obligation, and with a very define (and thus repetitive) structure. Perhaps, after attending many years, people did understood the words. This is, there was an average basic understanding of Latin for mass-purposes. For instance, the Our Father and other prayers. Moreover, there seem to be something called "Sabir", or Meditterranean Lingua Franca, a sort of common language used for different purposes across Europe, and spoken by those engaged in commerce and diplomacy (not peasants). So Latin was still around in one way or another after the surge of Romance languages.

Any evidence is of help.

Update: there is an interesting resource here that lists the structure of the mass through the ages. It can be seen that many sections included silent prayers that are today non-secret. An interesting addition, I think, to the issue.

I did a google search on the exact question, without advancing further. I get the feeling this is a footnote in history books, not a major research question. As you can see I made a related question in Christianity.SE before asking here, to provide background.


texts: Is anyone able to identify this? It appears to be a part of a badge as there is a leather backing on it.


texts: How were the Burmese able to sack Ayutthaya when it was one of the wealthiest and most powerful cities in Asia at the time?

texts:
So I’m “watching” (more like skipping to the interesting scenes) the Thai lakorn/historical drama Sri Ayodhaya and in one episode, this one professor said that Ayutthaya was an incredibly wealthy and powerful kingdom and the city itself was also very well defended and wealthy too due to Ayutthaya being an extremely crucial and important trading city. In the latest episode, one other visiting professor also states that King Ekkathat commanded a large army and the city itself was very well defended.

If that’s the case, then how was it that Hongsawadee/Burma was able to sack and pillage Ayutthaya and burn it to the ground? I mean, shit, according to this one article/book that I read, people at the time saw the sacking of Ayutthaya as the literal apocalypse, and I could easily understand why. If I was Ayutthayan/Siamese and I was alive at the time and I saw Hongsawadee troops burn houses down and loot everything in sight (IIRC, some Hongsawadee soldiers even looted Buddha statues that were made of gold), I’d think that the world was ending, especially if I was led to believe up until that point that Ayutthaya was one of the greatest cities in the world that was forged by the Heavens or whatever.

So how was it that the Burmese were able to take and burn Ayutthaya to the ground? I heard that it was due to the political instability of the royal court of Ayutthaya along with incompetent rulers and power struggles/corruption but is that it?


texts:
In 2013 Israeli researchers from Tel Aviv university discovered a large cairn, buried under the water of the freshwater lake "Sea of Galilee" in northern part of state of Israel:

Researchers find underwater monument in the Sea of Galilee
Enormous underwater structure in the Sea of Galilee
Israel Ancient Structure

I understand that the structure is about 12 meters long and buried about 5-10 meters under water (considering shifts in water level in that lake).

I further understand since 2013 there is no further published data about this structure anywhere but there might be data in peer reviewed journals I can't access (please share data if you have access in an answer):

When and how was the cairn structure in the "Sea of Galilee" covered in water?

This site might have some aspect of a Megalith; I haven't seen enough pictures of it to determine.


texts: Why was being divided a boon for Europeans, but not for anyone else?

texts:
I often see the thesis that European nations became good at warfare because they never united, and improved their technology and skill at warfare due to competition between one another. Compared to, for example, China, which united early and then stagnated.

But this doesn't really make sense when looking at other nations. The principalities of Rus were divided among competing rulers, and then the Mongols came and conquered them. The various states of the Indian subcontinent were also divided, but the East India Company was able to conquer them and rule them for a hundred years. Ireland was divided, and the English beat them. England itself was divided, and couldn't stand up to the vikings.

Hence the question - was the disunity and war in Europe somehow special, or this entire argument essentially wrong?


texts: How and in what ways has our understanding of the historical method improved since the publication of E. H. Carr's "What is History" in 1961?

texts:
This is partially answered in this question, but that only characterizes the modern consensus on what history is able to answer - it does not go into depth about how that modern consensus has evolved.

Since Carr's seminal publication was so instrumental in kickstarting that dialogue, I thought I would ask for an account of this evolution after 1961.


texts: When and how did English become the Lingua Franca?

texts: Specifically, how did it supplant French as the international language? Even in the height of Pax Britannica, many English upperclassmen still saw French as the more romantic language. How was this status quo changed - was it Britain's empire and dominance of trade, or American dominance of trade and her soldiers being stationed in different parts of the world later on?


texts: How do nations maintain sovereignty over conquered nations?

texts:
After the battle of Hastings, William defeated the English with ~7000 men. What I don't understand fully, is how an army of 7000 can maintain control over England, which had around 1.7 million people living there at the time. Perhaps this is not the best question, since William did have a claim to the throne.

What I'm asking essentially is, how did nations control other conquered nations when the armies they had were fractions of the actual populations of the conquered nations.


texts: Did the Malaysian king convert to Islam because he was disappointed with a Chola invasion?

texts: It seems countries in that part know little of their pre-medieval history. Anyway, I read this on Wikipedia, and would like some more details. It seems, the conversion to Islam was a slow affair with many smaller kings accepting first and that trend proceeding.


texts: Were quaestors in the Roman Republic entitled to lictors/fasces?

texts:
I apologise if this is too basic a question, but Wikipedia seems to contradict itself! It says here https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quaestor that a Quaestor was entitled to one lictor and one fasces, but here https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cursus_honorum it says they wore the toga praetexta but had neither lictors nor fasces.

As far as I can see, quaestors were more senior civil servants that  magistrates; they did not possess imperium, so why would they have the lictors/fasces?


texts: What was the role of quality in early manufacturing facilities?

texts: We all know that quality is a very important thing in todays industry. But was it always like that? What was the role of production quality before we had Shewhart, Deming and so on? Did companies and government-driven manufacturing facilities always worry about quality and if so, how did they try to achieve it?


texts: Did American colonist soldiers learn guerrilla fighting tactics from the Native Americans?

texts:
I don't know everything about the revolutionary war, but what I remember from high school history was that the colonists used a kind of guerrilla fighting, while England's army used inflexible battle plans, like marching as a unit. What I'm wondering is whether the colonists picked up these techniques from Native Americans?

Secondarily I'm wondering if I remember right from high school history that their flexible fighting techniques were a definitive factor in winning the war.


texts: How effective was the (Western) Allies bombing campaign over Germany in drawing down the Eastern Front Luftwaffe?

texts:
The strategic air campaign over Germany by 8th US Air Force and "Bomber Harris" for the RAF has elicited decidedly mixed opinions.  Depending on who you listen to it was a noble effort or it was a waste.
Allied airmen losses were horrendous, German civilian deaths massive and German industrial output actually rose (albeit probably due to the rationalization efforts of Todt and Speer).
At the same time, it is true that, after Dieppe, the alternatives of a true second front in continental Europe were limited, so that bombing was probably one of the few way to strike at Germany.
However, we also know that the Luftwaffe gradually lost its air superiority on the Eastern Front which made Germany's situation there ever more untenable.
Is there any study that quantifies how much of a Westward shift of German fighters happened from early Barbarossa to say late 43, once Allied bombing really got underway?  Were the Allied raids a major cause to the gradual weakening of the East Front Luftwaffe?
Please, I am not asking about the losses suffered by Luftwaffe transports during Stalingrad. This is about losing control of the skies, i.e. weakening ME109/FW190 availability over Russia because of transfer to protect Germany.
Edit:  it's not specifically about moving planes around, East to West.  Allocation of replacement planes and pilots, even fuel allocation, if shortages resulted in less Luftwaffe activity in the East.  In a roundabout way, even prioritization of design and production of bomber-destroying aircraft, like the ME163, would have affected the East front.
Basically, how many Luftwaffe resources, defined broadly, do we see used to protect Germany, as opposed to used elsewhere, the most important other location being beating the Red Army on the ground and in the air?


texts: Was Frederick II of Hohenstaufen really a medieval Dr. Mengele?

texts:
According to legend, the Holy Roman Emperor Frederick II, who was intelligent (spoke six languages) and influential, also purportedly used cold-blooded methods to further his "scientific" inquiries. According to the Wikipedia entry:

  [Frederick] was also alleged to have carried out a number of experiments on people. These experiments were recorded by the monk Salimbene di Adam (who despised Frederick) in his Chronicles. Amongst the experiments included shutting a prisoner up in a cask to see if the soul could be observed escaping though a hole in the cask when the prisoner died; feeding two prisoners, sending one out to hunt and the other to bed and then have them disemboweled to see which had digested their meal better; imprisoning children without any contact to see if they would develop a natural language.

I've read this elsewhere long ago, and as there isn't too much information about Frederick, I'm wondering if anyone can point to a definitive source. Certainly Salimbene di Adam might have had an axe to grind, but the consistency of the accounts makes them seem believable and, given the character of Frederick (his belief in reason, his winning of Jerusalem by treaty rather than by war), which points to an unconventional mind that was unhobbled by conventional restraints.

Can anyone clarify this issue? Was Frederick a real monster or someone who had been given the 13th century version of a swift-boating by the Church he defied?


texts: What was the largest battle axe used in battle? By largest, I mean probably just heaviest.  I managed to find a post on quora about the heaviest weapon that didn't have a great answer.


texts: Haredi (Orthodox Jewish) view on Zionism pre-1948

texts:
Prior to the establishment of the State of Israel, what was the general Haredi (Hasidic, orthodox non-Mizrachi) stance on political Zionism?

Did it change with the establishment of the state? If so, in what way?

Any recommended readings on the topic?


texts: What is the origin of the English Ship Building Philosophy?

texts:
I was reading an article on the Vasa the ship built under command of King Gustav Adolf, the ship sank during its launch on August 10, 1628.  Part if the article mentions that the ship was somehow unbalanced and the idea proposed is that it was built with two different philosophies.  One of which is the English/Mediterranean version which supposedly were built around frames with well structured and precise measurements for the planking, the other half of the ship was supposedly done by the Dutch method which just built the ships quickly from the bottom up.

I can kind of understand the Dutch version, at least from a land perspective where like a house you can craft something from the bottom up and use what you have; which is the suggestion of the Dutch method.  But what would be the origin of the English method which obviously meant a more involved process with craftsmen and some serious education to deal with the mathematics it would take to design the ship before it was built.  In some ways I'd almost see this as going back to the early civilizations in Europe (like the Romans or the Greeks) with the knowledge passed down or evolving over time.  Would this be the case or did this arise out of a later time?


texts: When Genghis Khan took power, what was the population of Mongolia?

texts: I searched around for this and was surprised how little data I could find. I want to know the population of all tribes that Genghis Khan had under his control when he became the Great Khan (1206). Hasn't there been some study and some estimate by any historians?


texts: Context for peace between UK and Germany around the Fall of France

texts:
Reading up on Churchill on Wikipedia, I found reports on a discussion inside the British cabinet whether to ask for peace following the Fall of France (see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/May_1940_War_Cabinet_Crisis). It seems that initially there was a majority for that, and that it took  significant effort by Churchill to sway his ministers.

One argument put forth by Churchill was that any condition Hitler would ask for then would be so onerous, that fighting and loosing the war wouldn't be much worse. Moreover, the plan was not to approach Hitler directly, but to make first contact with Mussolini.

Now, none of Hitler's fundamental war goals directly impacted the British Empire. He fought them because they wouldn't let him take other peoples land, not because he wanted to take their land. In fact, he could even have given some stuff back he had already conquered (say Norway) in a peace treaty.

So, did the British government consider accepting the annexation of Poland as such a near-worst scenario? Or did they view Hitler's goals much differently from my own reading, and if so, who is right?


texts: Are there any influences of sinification in modern times?

texts:
Sinification is the process of changing a civilization into a Chinese style. It was very prevalent in Korean civilization, a bit less in Japan, and very little in Vietnam.

Are there still any examples of sinification in modern times?


texts: What is the name and meaning of a World War 2 CCC Medal with both the Polish Eagle and British Statant Gardant Lion?

texts:
While looking through a collection of World War 2 medals, I came across this one (picture attached) and have been unable to identify it.

It is in the form of a shield, appears to have a Polish eagle in the top left and the British lion from the Victoria Cross on the bottom right. It also has the letters "CCC" along the top.

Can anyone identify the name and meaning of a World War 2 CCC Medal with both the Polish Eagle and British Statant Gardant Lion?


texts: What is the oldest discovered Neanderthal boat or raft?

texts: I read how there is evidence that Neanderthals used to sail on the Mediterranean using primitive 'boats'. Have we discovered any of these boats, and if we have, what is the oldest of these Neanderthal rafts that we have discovered? My source says we haven't found any rafts and that most would have decayed since they would have been wood, however, that source was from 2012. Has anything been discovered changed since then?


texts: Why was the last battle of the War of 1812 fought fully half a year after the official end of the war?

texts:
As part of my research to answer this question, I came across a mention of the June 30, 1815 battle between the USS Peacock and the  East India cruiser Nautilus (in the Indian Ocean) as being officially the last battle of the War of 1812.

Why did this battle occur so long—fully half a year—after the December 24, 1814, Treaty of Ghent, which officially ended the War of 1812?

Did the two ships involved simply not know about the treaty, or did they choose to fight because of some other factor?


texts: Why are some monarchs sent to exile after a country is declared a republic?

texts:
Personally, I like monarchy. Monarchs are symbols of national unity and rich heritage. Just look at the British monarchy. It is a matter of their pride. And, I also think that countries like France, Italy, Turkey and so on are very unlucky not to have monarchies.

We see in some countries that, when they changed from kingdoms to republics, monarchs were exiled even though they could not do any harm to the republic, when the whole situation was under control and they didn't even commit any crimes.

For example, Mehmed VI of Turkey, Farouk I of Egypt and Umberto II of Italy were exiled.

Why didn't these countries adopt constitutional monarchies so that the monarchs could be granted an honored life?


texts: Did the Allies punish their own war criminals?

texts:
Wiki says "There were a number of war crimes involving Allied personnel that were investigated by the Allied powers and that led in some instances to courts-martial." No citation was given for this statement, however.

Did the allies actually do this? What are some major examples?


texts: Did contemporaries refer to the liberation of Yugoslavia in 1945 as a liberation?

texts: Tito of Yugoslavia, with help from the Russians, expelled Wehrmacht troops from Belgrade in 1944, establishing himself as sole dictator with virtually no political opposition that wasn't in prison or a concentration camp. Was that situation still seen as a liberation from the viewpoint of the citizens of Yugoslavia at the time?


texts: How to determine the date of a kaleidoscope?

texts: I am an amateur collector old kaleidoscopes. I am not an expert on this and would really appreciate some input from experts if this kaleidoscope is from the Victorian era.  How could I tell? What questions would distinguish between a Victorian era kaleidoscope and a more modern kaleidoscope?


texts: Did significant numbers of Japanese officers escape prosecution during the Tokyo Trials?

texts:
Acclaimed novel The Narrow Road To The Deep North centres its plot around war crimes committed by Japan during World War 2, specifically slave labour on the Burma Railway..

The book strongly implies that the Tokyo Trials, which prosecuted those accused of war crimes in the Pacific theatre, failed to find and try significant numbers of high ranking officers and officials who may have been guilty of such crimes. Instead, the trials are presented as focussing on the lower ranks.

A direct comparison with the Nuremberg trials is also implied, suggesting that more strenuous efforts to find the guilty were made and that lower ranks were treated with greater leniency as a result.

Is there any accuracy to this suggestion?


texts: If Aristotle said "Birds of a feather flock together," why is it attributed to Plato?

texts:
In Aristotle's Nicomachean Ethics is found:

Not a few things about friendship are matters of debate. Some define
it as a kind of likeness and say like people are friends, whence come
the sayings 'like to like', 'birds of a feather flock together', and
so on... (Book 8, 1155a32)

Elsewhere (e.g., Wiktionary) the phrase is attributed allegedly to Plato. Why is it attributed allegedly to Plato if it can be attributed certainly to Aristotle? ("Attributed", not in the sense of the earliest ever use of the phrase, but in the sense of the oldest surviving instance.)


texts: Looking for good documentation about daily life under Stalinist USSR

texts:
I am contemplating the idea of making a role playing game set in USSR under Stalin, specifically the period between when he gained full power (roughly 1930) and operation barbarossa (June 1941).

I am looking not only for documentation about the politics and famous figures, but also the daily life, immersive elements like what people wore, ate, did during free time (if any), layman political activity like mandatory lectures, incorporation of new technologies, etc...

I realise the topic is mindnumbingly broad, but any start of a thread is appreciated.


texts: How was the current month and day disseminated to the townspeople of Medieval Europe?

texts:
How was the current month and day disseminated to the townspeople of the Medieval Europe?

I'm quite sure that personal calendars weren't a thing back then... but I could be wrong...

If they had a shared calendar... where was it stored and how did the information of the date get to the people from that location?

I think it wasn't newsprint... as Oldest Newspapers has the oldest European Newspaper start in 1605...

It might be Avvisi, the precursor of European newspapers... but those only existed from 1500s onwards... and mainly for Italy...


texts: How do historians get their hands on diaries and letters of ordinary people?

texts:
In several books by different authors historians often refer to diaries. Often, these are diaries of ordinary people. There are also countless statements like Such and such German officer wrote this and that to his wife.

How do these documents (diaries and private correspondence) get into historians' hands (especially during and after World War II)?

I can imagine these scenarios:

A person who witnessed some important event goes to the archive and gives their diary to the archive.
Some old person dies. Their relatives find a diary and instead of throwing it out, send them to an archive.
Letters from the front probably go through a censor. They may have made copies of it and these copies land in the archive.
Today we have blogs which are saved by the Wayback machine and the e-mails are probably stored by service providers like Evernote or government agencies like the NSA. I'm wondering, if my letters and diaries will some time appear in some future historian's research.


texts: Is there any first-hand evidence of intentional spreading of disease among natives in the Pacific Northwest?

texts:
I was working as an interpreter at a city park, and was giving a guided tour of the coast. Because the north end of the city is where an old Native wintering village was, and the outline of it was fairly imposing, I got to talking about how early European explorer Captain Vancouver initially left a blank spot on his map because he was scared of a tribe that big, before returning once he heard that they had been weakened by disease. After the cruise, someone who claimed to be knowledgeable about Native American history said that he intentionally gave blankets infected with smallpox to tribes further north to weaken the tribes further south, but I haven't been able to find any concrete evidence of this.

I had heard mixed reviews of the idea that disease was intentionally spread through blankets in the Great Plains, however if there were something like a journal entry or order to that effect, I could teach this version instead. The reasons I am doubtful of this, in the Northwest at least, are that a) this would require them to carry smallpox-infected blankets around South America, b) I don't knw the credibility of the person who told me, and c) I can't find anything about it, as the only reference to this refers to the Smallpox Epidemic of 1862, which happened in Canada, and the period of Cpt. Vancouver was in 1795.


texts: What was the state of the German rail system in 1944?

texts:
Could an SS officer get from Auschwitz to Berlin by train in July/August/September 1944? I need to know how Allied bombing might have disrupted the system.

For context: I am writing a mystery which includes a memoir of a survivor of Auschwitz. I want to be as accurate as possible... presumably the disruptions didn't keep them from shipping people TO Auschwitz. Would an officer leaving Auschwitz use a different rail line?


texts: Would Victorian era British soldiers wear their short sword bayonets while wearing uniform when off duty?

texts:
In depictions of the Victorian era we often see lower ranks of soldiers wearing uniform when off duty in pubs or frequenting fairs, or just milling about as extras in the background etc.

My question does not refer to firearms, but rather a sheathed bayonet.

When a soldier was off duty, and wearing his uniform, would he carry his bayonet openly on his belt?

This specifically relates to British troops garrisoned at home but off duty.

If they did typically do this, would the police of the period have the power, or the inclination, to have them remove their weapon in public?


texts: What wiped the Buddhism traces from Kerala History?

texts: I have been told and taught that,Keralam like all the South Indian states, was a destination of Buddhism. But I see literally no traces of Buddhism here now.I would like to know what actually happened that wiped away the signs of Buddhism from Kerala.


texts: How were nobles 'promoted' in aristocracies?

texts:
According to this list, how were nobles promoted? For instance, Baron to Viscount, and Duke to Archduke? If ranks are hereditary, were there only a specific number of each rank given out in each country? Is there a record of this? For instance, does England's Parliament have a document outlining these numbers?

Otherwise, Google is somewhat sparse.

And aristocracy seems like a better tag than nobility.


texts: What did other European powers say when Portugal and Spain signed the Treaty of Tordesillas?

texts:
In 1494, Portugal and Castile (succeeded by Spain) divided all lands outside Europe, including the newly "on-discovering" Americas, between them signing the Treaty of Tordesillas.

What were the biggest and well-organized European powers at that moment?
We know now that this Treaty was not followed by England (and Great Britain), The Netherlands, France, among others.

I would like to know what these or other powers said at the time of this deal.
Did they send letters of reproval?
Did their political/military/citizens make sarcastic remarks since Portugal and Spain were being too greedy?


texts: How much impact did US Policy of containment have?

texts:
This will border dangerously close to a discussion rather than question/answer, but I would like to know whether there exists any consensus regarding the effects of the United States' policy of containing Communism post WW2.

How "strong" is communism today without this policy?  Is this an open question with answers falling along ideological lines, or have we come to anything close to a consensus?


texts: What is the oldest authentic example of people complaining about modern times and the young?

texts:
There are quotes, attributed to a king of Mesopotamia, and to Socrates and Hesiod, about how lazy the youth are, and how things were better when they were kids. Unfortunately, the veracity of the quotes are dubious at best, and one was satire.

So what are the first example of quotes which express beliefs such as these, but in seriousness instead of jest, and which are correctly attributed?


texts: Why did the assasination of Franz Ferdinand trigger WW1?

texts: I understand that there were also other reasons other than the assassination, but this is widely considered the trigger for WW1. Why? And why did the whole world get involved with this one assassination and start such mass-violence?


texts: How long before an event gets into history?

texts:
Does the discipline of history have any convention in determining the difference between "current events" and "history"? How do professional historians determine when an event has passed from politics and into history? Is this a matter that historians approach on a case by case basis, or do different writers have different opinions?

For example, a popular rule of thumb sets the cut off at 10 years - everything before is history and everything since current events. What is the historian's version of this rule, if in fact any exists?

A related question on the distinction between History and Politics - moved out of comments in order to preserve the link.


texts: Explaining differences in settler-first peoples mating

texts:
There was fairly little mixing between European settlers and the first peoples in what is today USA and Canada. There was extensive mixing in what is today Mexico (modern day: 65% Mestizo, 17.5% Amerindian, 16.5% White, 1% Black, Asian, or other, source: wiki: Mexico. Argentina had very little mixing (modern day: 97% European, 3% Mestizo, source: wiki: Argentina ).

Are there existing theories, literature?

Here are my rough ideas, (disclaimer: not backed up with research!)

Gender balance of settler community

If a settler community was considered a family destination (like the USA), then European men and women moved and had children with each other. Settler communities that were composed primarily of men would mate with women from the first peoples.

Religious conversion and development of new national identity

Shared religion and integration into a shared national community would make mating more likely. There was large-scale conversion to Catholicism among first peoples in Mexico. There was not large-scale conversion to the varieties of Christianity among first peoples in USA/Canada. Co-religionists would make more feasible mating partners. What is more, co-religionists could be more likely to develop a shared sense of national identity (e.g., as "Mexicans") than a people following very different religions. Having different senses of national identity would make people less likely to mate (e.g., in Canada and USA).


texts: Did nomadic Bedouins outnumber sedentary Arabs in 7th century Arabian peninsula?

texts: In the present states like UAE, Bahrain and Saudi Arabia, were there more nomadic people than sedentary or settled Arab peoples during the 7th century?


texts: What was the income tax rate in the UK during WWI and WWII?

texts:
I found that the highest income tax rate was 99.25% during the Second World War, but I can't find anything related to the income tax during the First World War.

Would you have some numbers to give me regarding these taxes there were during, and at the end of WWI and WWII in the UK?


texts: How effective are rope helmets as protection?

texts:
I accidentally found this in some 15th century painting

in "The Arrest of Christ" in the "Karlsruher Passion"

from Master of the Karlsruhe Passion (Hans Hirtz?) "The Disrobing of Christ"

and after further search in Google

image from https://www.reddit.com/r/ArmsandArmor/comments/bm2wea/medieval_rope_helmet_used_from_the_1200_to_the/

My question is: how effective are these helmets against attack, such as slash, cut, and pierce, and maybe blunt force especially to range weapons and shrapnel. And: are rope helmets similar in principle to function like a gambeson? And were these helmets actually  used historically?


texts: When was the property tax introduced in early Mexico? Who paid?

texts:
Owners of property in Mexico today pay a property tax called impuesto predial.

According to Agustín Cue Cánovas's Historia Social y Económica de México, in the colonial era property taxes were not a source of royal income. They were seemingly introduced some time between independence and 1844, when impuestos sobre propiedades contributed something under a million pesos to government income.

When was the property tax introduced and who paid?


texts: Did pagan tribes in the Arab peninsula use bells for superstitious or religious reasons before and with the introduction of Islam?

texts:
This is what I have found so far:

"In conclusion, we may note that a leather neck band, also called kilada, on the camel to avert the evil eye, especially if a bell hang from it, is suggested in one tradition." First Encyclopaedia of Islam: 1913-1936

"Silver bracelets or anklets, most often trimmed with tiny bells, are the most popular choice for children. The sound of the bells would protect the young wearer from evil spirits . . ." Saudi Arabia, Volumes 13-15

"Another group is one which is superstitious and which believes that someone may cast an evil spell upon their animals and they hang these collars [with bells] or ta'awidh around their necks." al-mawrid

I am looking for any additional information. In particular, I am seeking sources that are more detailed on the matter since the sources that I've found barely cover the topic. I am also curious as to whether bells were hung in homes for protection from the evil eye. It would be nice if these sources mention time period as well. Thank you.


texts: Why do (almost) all countries have a flag, coat of arms, anthem, national holiday etc.?

texts:
A number of official symbols are used by virtually all modern nations. These include:

National flag1
Coat of arms
National anthem
National Day

Given that it is often difficult to get even two of the world's countries to agree on anything, how did that come to be? One should expect that there would be at least one nation that "goes against the grain" by declaring that they wish to use, say, a ceremonial rod instead of a flag, a dance instead of an anthem or three National Days instead of one, but alas, that seems not to be the case. In fact, although I have cautiously added the word "almost" to the question's title, I have been unable to find a single country that lacks any of the symbols listed above.

1 Additionally, it seems that with the exception of the Flag of Nepal, all of the world's flags are rectangular.


texts: I enjoy watching cop dramas and in The Closer (Season 1, Episode 12), a criminal might be exonerated because authorities mis-identified the body of a victim. In American legal history has anyone been charged with the murder of an unidentifiable body, a Jane or John Doe? If so, does it happen frequently?


texts: When and how did the USA and the UK become allies?

texts:
You may remember that the United States and Great Britain had a minor spat in 1776, which shall we say, did not put them on the friendliest of terms. In 1812, while Britain was focused on its war with France, the same country decided to take advantage of the situation and declare war on the United States.

The 1820's saw the Aroostock War and border disputes between Maine and Canada. There was also the Pig's Ear War and whilst 54' 40 or fight didn't result in anything major, it is reasonable to say that the USA and the UK were not on particularly great terms. Moreover, during the American Civil War, the UK came close to recognizing the Confederate States of America.

And yet, by the time the USA needed to demarcate its Alaskan boundaries in 1900, the UK was a good friend. By WWI, the USA were supporting its English ally even over against the Germans, who arguably had populations that were almost as big. And, certainly by WWII, there was a special relationship that finally helped tipped the balance.

So, given this history between the USA and UK, here's the simple question. How did the US and the UK become such good friends? Obviously there's the historical connection, but overcoming the animosity of having to fight for your independence (and the stain of having lost its colony) has to hurt.

When, and how did USA and UK patch things up?


texts: Did American leaders give any serious consideration to proceeding with Nixon's impeachment and trial after he resigned?

texts:
After President Nixon resigned, was any serious consideration (e.g. by members of Congress or important opinion leaders) given to proceeding with his impeachment and trial? The motive, of course, would have been to seek the maximum penalty of "disqualification to hold and enjoy any Office of honor, Trust or Profit under the United States." (Quoted from Article I, Section 3, Clause 7 of the U.S. Constitution.)
Edit. In the answer by sds it is asserted that the U.S. Constitution does not permit the impeachment of an official who has resigned. That assertion is probably wrong. (I am not a lawyer.) The precedent is the case of William Belknap, Secretary of War under President Grant. Quoting the Wikipedia article:

On March 1, Belknap and his counsel went before Clymer's committee, but Belknap declined to testify. On the morning of March 2, Treasury Secretary Benjamin Bristow told President Grant of Belknap's impending impeachment. In a White House meeting soon afterwards, Grant asked for Belknap's resignation. This move was clearly an effort to forestall the pending impeachment proceedings; by resigning first, Belknap could argue that Congress had no authority, since he was no longer in office. Grant accepted Belknap's resignation at 10:20 A.M. Clymer's committee was informed at 11:00 A.M. Although Belknap's resignation caused great commotion among House members, it did not prevent action by the Clymer committee. The committee unanimously passed resolutions to impeach Belknap and drew up five articles of impeachment to be sent to the Senate. Belknap, by then a private citizen, was impeached by a unanimous vote of the House of Representatives. Speaker of the House Michael C. Kerr wrote to the Senate that Belknap resigned "with intent to evade the proceedings of impeachment against him." Belknap's case was constitutionally unprecedented and would serve as reference for nine other civilian officials' resignations before trial, including President Richard Nixon.
[. . . .]
Starting on April 5, 1876, Belknap was tried by the Senate, which was presided over by Supreme Court Chief Justice Morrison Waite. For several weeks Senators argued over whether the Senate had jurisdiction to put Belknap on trial since he had already resigned office in March. Belknap's defense managers argued that the Senate had no jurisdiction; the Senate ruled by a vote of 37-29 that it did. With 40 votes needed for conviction, the Senate voted 35 to 25 to convict Belknap, with one Senator not voting, thus acquitting Belknap by failing to reach the required two-thirds majority.

Edit. In any case, my question about sentiment for proceeding with President Nixon's impeachment after his resignation is not answered by simply pointing out that such a procedure would be pointless and unconstitutional. Consider that Democratic leaders in Congress are currently planning to hold an impeachment trial for President Trump after he leaves office.


texts: Can you identify the plane in the picture?

texts: Can you help identify this U.S. Air force four engine prop, numbered 2753.


texts: Did the Soviets excel in one area of weaponry during World War II?

texts:
The Germans had some of the best machine guns and tanks during World War II. Likewise, the Americans had a big advantage with the M1 Garand (which Patton famously called "The greatest battle implement ever devised").

My question is: Did the Soviets similarly have an area of military equipment that was far superior to that of other nations? For example, were their mortars or aircraft better than those of Germany, America, Britain, etc.?

My question isn't just a comparison of Soviet and German equipment, but a comparison between all major nations involved in WWII. It wouldn't count if Soviet mortars were better than Germans' but worse than Americans', for example.


texts: Why was Tegh Bahadur executed by the Mughal Emperor Aurangzeb?

texts:
This Wikipedia article indicates that he was executed because the ruler wanted to strengthen his grip on power:

According to the official account of the Mughal Empire, written 107 years later  by Ghulam Husain of Lucknow in 1782,
Tegh Bahadur, the eighth successor of (Guru) Nanak became a man of
authority with a large number of followers. (In fact) several thousand
persons used to accompany him as he moved from place to place. His
contemporary Hafiz Adam, a faqir belonging to the group of Shaikh
Ahmad Sirhindi's followers, had also come to have a large number of
murids and followers. Both these men (Guru Tegh Bahadur and Hafiz
Adam) used to move about in the Punjab, adopting a habit of coercion
and extortion. Tegh Bahadur used to collect money from Hindus and
Hafiz Adam from Muslims. The royal waqia navis (news reporter and
intelligence agent) wrote to the Emperor Alamgir [Aurangzeb] of their
manner of activity, added that if their authority increased they could
become even refractory. — Ghulam Husain, Mughal Empire records

Tegh Bahadur, according to Mughal Empire records, was collecting money from Hindus (which is kind of treasonous at that time).
This book states he was killed because he didn't convert to Islam.

Why was he killed?


texts: Did Kublai Khan's army consist largely of Mongol warriors or native Chinese?

texts: Kublai's army is always referred to as a 'Mongol' army but I suspect that after the initial conquest of China, his army consisted largely of native Chinese. Is this correct? Did the Japanese and Burmese really fight actual Mongol warriors - born and raised on the Mongolian steppe?


texts: Did the Germans purposefully arrange to send Lenin to Russia to start a revolution?

texts:
A recent documentary, The World Wars, on the History Channel suggested, strongly, that the Imperial German government secretly arranged safe-passage for Vladimir Lenin to return to Moscow from Switzerland in 1917.  Moreover, the Germans gave him financing through 1918 with the hope that Lenin would start a revolution that would cause Russia to withdraw its war with Germany during World War I.

If true, who came up with the idea and was there any consideration that a communist Russia could eventually be a threat to Germany?

How much did the arrangement cost the Germans, money-wise?

EDIT: Here's the transcript of "The World Wars" episode dealing with Germany's "Secrete Weapon"

[BEGIN TRANSCRIPT]
[Narrator] Germany devises a plan to eliminate the Russian threat once and for all.  The Germans load a secrete weapon unto a heavily guarded train headed for Russia.  It's a weapon that promises to destroy their enemies from the inside out. [Dramatization showing a train station with the caption "St. Petersburg, Russia"] That weapon is Vladimir Lenin.  Lenin is the leader of Russia's communist revolutionaries, hell bent on toppling the Russian Czar.  For the past ten years he's been in exile in Switzerland ... until Germany sends him home on a train along with over ten million dollars to fund his revolution.

[a Historian speaks] "The Germans decided that they would take this enormous gamble and bring Lenin back to Russia to bring about a Revolution to get Russia out of the war.  That's about as radical a step as you can take" [Quote with caption: Robert Gellately. Historian, Florida State University]

[Narrator] When Lenin gets to Moscow, he's greeted by an old friend. Six times he's been exiled to Siberia and six times he's escaped.  His name is Joseph Stalin.

"Comrade" [Dramatization of Joseph Stalin speaking to Lenin]
"Comrade" [Lenin replies back]

[Narrator] Reunited, the two play right into Germany's plan as they begin to plot an armed rebellion.  Over the next few months, Lenin and Stalin recruit a massive workers militia using the ten million dollars from the German government.  They quietly amass a stockpile of weapons until they are ready to make their move.

"I've arranged to take the train stations and the telephone communications." [Dramatization of Joseph Stalin speaking to Lenin]

"And the palace guard?" [Lenin questions Stalin]

"Many of our sources say they are sympathetic to our cause." [Stalin replies back]

"Our training has been perfect." [Lenin says]

[Narrator] The communists storm the winter palace.  The Soviet Union will soon rise to power.

"This is just the beginning comrades." [Dramatization of Stalin speaking to Lenin at the conquered palace]

[Narrator] Just days later Lenin signs a decree that takes Russia out of the war.  The German plan works ... bringing them one step closer to victory.

[Commercial Break]

[Narrator] Europe is at war and in a bold move the central powers have ended the fighting on the Eastern Front sending exiled revolutionary Vladimir Lenin back to Russia where he seized control of the country and took the Russian army out of the fight.  Germany can turn it's attention to the other allies... [end of the discussion regarding Lenin]
[END TRANSCRIPT]


texts: Why was the US army slow to adopt the use of radar prior to Pearl Harbour?

texts:
According to Wikipedia, the US radar station SCR-270 picked up the Japanese approach and reported it, but this report was ignored as the duty officer, who believed the sighting to be American bombers coming from California. It also states that SCR-270 was still in training mode. So far, everything is clear in this specific case but, looking at the bigger picture, I can't find a reason or reasons why. The article SCR-270 goes on to state:

Despite the high level attention and the excellence of the school in training on the use of the SCR-270 and its integration and coordination with fighter intercepts, the army did not follow through on supporting the junior officers who were trained at this session

Further, Wikipedia states that:

Except in rare cases, there was little interest in assisting or even cooperating with the goal of setting up the air defense system.

The British had already demonstrated the value of radar, and shared both that knowledge and the specific technology they were using with the US.
Aside from the tendency of some people to ignore things they don't understand (which appears to have been the case with some army officers, though this may be hard to prove), are there any specific reasons why this 'high level attention' was not properly followed up on?


texts: Did the Romans "copy" their political system from the Greeks?

texts:
This is an outgrowth of the discussion here. My sense is that the Romans developed their system autochthonously, probably with some influence from their Etruscan neigbours and one-time-overlords.

There probably was some influence as detailed in wikipedia but at a somewhat later stage. I'm also not sure the story is not apocryphal (it comes from Livy and his early history is a wonderful read, but not all of it is straight fact...).

My question is: what is the current status of scholarship on the development on the Roman constitution? How much of it was influenced by Greek models?


texts:
When I was in first grade I was told it was the Wright brothers who invented the airplane and I still find their names on the first page of Google. But I have heard of an Indian who invented the airplane eight years before Wright brothers  first unmanned airplane in 1895. and he was successful flying in the air and landing perfectly on the ground.
So I am confused who invented the airplane?


texts: How is this pattern from Pompeii also in Cappella Sansevero?

texts:
The labyrinth tiles in Capella Sansevero where built between the mid 1760s to c. 1771 (according to http://www.museosansevero.it/floor/?lang=en). They look like this:

I saw the same pattern in Villa dei Misteri in Pompeii. Here's a picture:

The patterns are almost the same, and it seems unlikely to be a coincidence, specially when both buildings are quite close.

As far as I can find, the Villa was not excavated after 1909, so it would not have been known when the Capella was built. From what I've read, several buildings in Pompeii were excavated around this time, but the frescoes of these places were removed and the buildings buried again. Since the fresco in Villa is in great condition and relatively far away from the rest of Pompeii, it seems unlikely that it was unearthed and buried.

Maybe this is a somewhat common pattern and could have been found somewhere else? Or is it just a coincidence?


texts:
I've tried to search the internet for poet's Ezra Pound genealogy, but I only find extreme-right sites...

A person with the name Ezra seems to have some relationship to Jewish culture/religion. Furthermore, Pound seems like one of those names that were created during the Holy Inquisition in Europe, by the New-Christians (Converted Jews).

Am I correct?


texts: How did the Antarctic Plateau lose the kings' names it originally had?

texts:
The Antarctic Plateau was originally named by its explorers:

Shackleton named it the King Edward VII Plateau, after the king of England.
Amundsen named it the King Haakon VII Plateau, after the king of Norway.

Usually the original names for Antarctic features have stuck, but this feature now has a different name.  How did this happen?  Who renamed it?  When did the new name take hold?


texts: What are the occurences of total war in the Native Americans?

texts:
In this article from Wikipedia, a war between the Pawnees on one side, and the Sioux and Cheyennes on the other side, is represented.
It is claimed this war was a total war because the "non fighters" were targeted and killed.

However I am wondering: is it the only experience of such a total war in the Native Americans?
For example:

The destruction of the city of the Hopis has certainly killed civilians
The Arikaras, settlers, had wars with nomadic tribes around them. Had their villages been attacked?

In general, are there other occurences of Native Americans non fighters targeted in an intertribal war?


texts: Why did Canada, Australia and New Zealand separate from the UK?

texts:
I asked this question in various places on the Web. I haven't received a clear answer.

The USA separated from the UK because the people felt that they were not British, and they weren't.

Weren't Canadians/Australians/New Zealanders also descended from the British?

Or was it that UK was unable to administer them for financial reasons? I will not accept this as an answer. In this case why was the UK able to hold on to to Scotland, England, Northern Ireland and Wales?

Why are Canada/Australia/New Zealand not administered from the UK?


texts: Examples of oppressive regimes which "loosened up" after winning destructive civil war

texts:
I'm trying to find a historical example for the following scenario:

Country is under the rule of a state with an oppressive regime.
The regime is (arguably) highly unpopular/hated among a large part of the population.
An opposition movement (with our without external backing) rises.
A civil war is waged, in which neither side wins quickly or easily, both sides have gains and losses, but eventually the regime wins.
The war causes extensive damage in terms of lives and property, to large swaths of the country.
While the regime wins out (overall or in most of the country), it is much weakened by deaths, defections, wounds, and the destroyed civilian and military infrastructure.
The degree of oppression - granted, a rather nebulous concept - arguably decreases after the civil war is over relative to its degree before the uprising/civil war.
Caveat: The civil war must not be resolved through occupation by an external force, it has to be the same regime (even if supported/funded from the outside) that wins out.

I want to argue this outcome makes sense because the weakening of the regime may make it wary, or even normatively-unable/mass-psychologically-unable, to oppress to the same degree as before. My friend said this has never happened to their knowledge, and challenged me to find an example. She gave examples to the opposite, such as the Spanish civil war.


texts: Does the long dense habitation and cultivation of lands correlate with a high incidence of tetanus and gangrene in badly disinfected wounds?

texts:
William Keen claims in his Treatment of war wounds (written at the end of WW1) that the soil of France, since it was inhabited and cultured since antiquity, was extraordinarily infected with bacteria that if entering the wound would cause tetanus, (gas) gangrene and other problems.

Does historical precedent in other wars and other theaters of WW1 confirm this? Does wounding in old farmlands and centers of civilization make infection more likely than being wounded in the "wild" were humans have not previously lived?


texts: Has any war in recorded history ever resulted in the complete annihilation (civil and military) of an enemy - all of them killed with no survivors?

texts:
Question
In reviewing the Wiki topic on War of annihilation it is clear that there have been several examples (many of them in recent history) wherein the goal of a war was to utterly destroy an enemy by eradicating them from existence. But has any such war, at any time in recorded history, ever succeeded in that goal? Has a complete civilization ever been utterly destroyed to the last person through warfare?
Research
The Wiki article mentions the Herero uprising, Nazi warfare, and other examples as extreme cases of total war wherein it could be argued that complete and utter eradication of a people was the goal, rather than conventional socio-polictical reasons or economical or territorial pursuits or natural resources were the stakes. But none of the examples given succeeded in their radical goals of completely killing everyone.
I have performed several additional Google searches looking for cases where the utter destruction of an enemy was either the goal or the outcome, but have not yet found a case where a war did not end in capitulation of some sort by the losing side in the conflict, or some survivors escaped destruction. So far I have not found a case where everyone was killed, but I think there may be one or more to be found (I have no reason to believe this other than as an observation of our human nature - it seems inevitable that this has occurred at some point in human history).
Clarification
Destroying a government or empire or kingdom and its cities and infrastructure would not meet the requirements I am seeking, unless also the entire civil population was slain, instead of taken captive or sold into slavery or left to suffer in a devastated wasteland. What I'm looking for is an example where not just the empire or the military or the cities and resources of an enemy were destroyed, but also every many woman and child slain - not taken captive or sold into slavery or otherwise dominated by the victor - but totally annihilated - slain - killed.


texts: What capabilities did Southern soldiers in the American Civil War have to get news about the North?

texts: My great-grandfather was a Confederate cavalry soldier fighting under Johnson's remaining forces after Lee's surrender.  In his diary, he writes on April 18, 1865, "Good news today. Lincoln has been killed while in his box at theater.  Washington and Bill Seaward stabbed in several places."  I'm not sure who this "Washington" person is, but I know that the assassination of Lincoln and the attempted assassination of William Seward occurred on April 14, 1865 -- just four days before the diary entry.  I assume that there was no telegraph service between the north and south during the war.  How else did news from the northern states, such as Lincoln's assassination, make its way to the people of the Confederate states and its soldiers in particular?


texts: Counter-reformation opposing "subservience of Church to State?"

texts:
The Catholic Encyclopedia's entry on the Counter-Reformation contains the following, which I found provocative:

  For the principles of the Protestant Reformation are to Catholics principles leading to deformation and to the perpetuation of abuses, such as the subservience of Church to State, or the marriage of the clergy, to say nothing of doctrinal error.

Is it really valid to say that Protestantism made the church subservient to the state? Doesn't Luther's doctrine of the two kingdoms sound a lot like separation of church and state rather than subservience? Is this just a back-handed slap at Henry VIII, as opposed to a realistic appraisal of the Reformation in general?


texts: Was the "music man" on target with his claims of "pool" being trouble in 1912?

texts:
The American show, "the Music Man," was first staged in 1957. (The movie was made in 1962.) In the show, the protagonist characterized the local pool or billiard hall as a place for gambling, swearing, drinking, etc. which did, in fact, reflect the perception of the late 1950s. a time characterized by "McCarthysism". The Wikipedia article said that by the 1990s, about 40 years later, the stigma had disappeared.

The movie itself, however, was set in 1912, a somewhat different time period, 45 years earlier. Were billiard parlors and the like then viewed in the 1950s light described above? If not, how did billiard parlors later gain their unsavory 1950s reputation? If so, how did they lose this reputation by the 1990s?

(One of the features of the movie is that it featured faux juxtapositions. For instance, the protagonist was shown to be a "con man" when he claimed to have graduated from a certain school in "aught five" (1905) and the local librarian discovered that the school hadn't been opened until 1906.) Thus, it's at least possible that the show "cut and paste" 1950s morality for its nominal setting.


texts: Why would the Rhodesians trust Blacks in their army?

texts:
I was reading about Rhodesia and found that there were Blacks serving in the Rhodesian military. The caption of this picture asserts that they were the majority of the millitary!

I would have expected the black soldiers to frag their white officers, "misplace" equipment, or openly go rogue.

What kept these Black soldiers loyal enough to not do this and what convinced (other than desperate wishing) the Whites that they would be trustworthy?

Were they Ndebele from Matabeland who Shona such as Mugabe would come into conflict with after independence?

Were they vetted followers of Abel Muzorewa who promoted loyalty to Rhodesia in exchange for better rights? (Note, Abel would only come to power briefly in 1979 and the picture is from 1976)

Were they just paid extremely well?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rhodesian_Bush_War#/media/File:Rhodesian_African_Rifles,_Lake_Kariba,_December_1976,_3.png


texts: What types of Poison gasses were used in World War 1?

texts: Due to the nature of trench warfare, some form of poison gasses would have been really useful in the trenches. In the trenches the gasses really would’ve been really useful with the limited mobility of the soldiers and would resulted in maximum enemy casualty. So what types of poison gasses were used in WW1?


texts: Was the Seven Years’ War the first time dogs were used to carry messages?

texts:
The use of messenger dogs during World War I by both sides is well-attested to, but they were also used by Frederick the Great during the Seven Years’ War. Wikipedia says he is reportedly the first person to refer to the dog as “man’s best friend”

The use of dogs for military purposes in various roles stretches back to ancient times, but I’m interested in their use as messenger dogs. Whereas the use of pigeons apparently dates back to “the ancient Egyptians and Persians over 3,000 years ago”, the earliest reference I’ve found for dogs is the Seven Years’ War (so 1756 -63).

Is there any evidence of dogs being used to carry messages before this time?

What is the earliest recorded incident of a dog being used to carry a message?

I’m primarily interested in military situations, but would also welcome evidence of non-military uses which pre-date the Seven Years’ War.


texts: Why do people still leave flowers at the Temple of Julius Caesar?

texts:
I visited Rome recently and did an audio tour through the Colosseum and Roman Forum archeological sites. In the Roman Forum there is the remains of the Temple of Caesar, where Julius Caesar was cremated.

Here is a photo of the site from my visit:

As you can see, there are flowers that have been recently placed at the site, and apparently they are regularly placed there. My question is, why? He died so long ago that surely no one has any close connection to him, though I know he was deified, so perhaps there are some that still worship him?

Or is it perhaps just organised by the staff at the Roman Forum as a tourist attraction? All I've been able to find on the internet is that there is fresh flowers there all year around, which makes it seem strange someone would pay to enter every day to lay them there.

Can anyone shed some light?


texts: Why did Americans give up meat resembling animals?

texts:
Walk into a typical restaurant or supermarket in America, and it is difficult to find meat that resembles animals. Seafood seems to be the exception, as one can easily buy fish, crabs, or lobsters that resemble the animal form in restaurants and supermarkets. Many Americans will feel disgusted to sea a whole pig hanging in a shop, or to find various recognizable animal part in their food, while people in other countries may feel it is normal.

Was this brought from Europe? How long has this attitude about meat existed in America? How did it come about?


texts: How long would it take to travel from England to western Africa in the late 1890's?

texts: I am trying to do some research for a book I am planning to write, and I would like to know how long it would take for a troop transport ship to travel from England to the Gold Coast region of Africa. More specifically, the final destination is the Ashanti tribal region, and the date would be around 1895 or 1896. If anyone could identify any ports of call that might be visited along the way, that would be helpful as well.


texts: How was the Washington Naval Treaty enforced?

texts:
In view of Pearl Harbor, I would be interested to know how the Washington Naval Treaty was enforced - if at all? - given that this was before the establishment of the UN.

Would the the signatories for example have inserted observers into each other's naval departments, or else how could transparency of any sort possibly be achieved?

Since the Japanese formally terminated the treaty in the mid '30s, can it be assumed they did so because if they had not, they'd be discovered and action might ensue on part of other signatories? Does this imply the presence of internal observers?


texts: Why was Reagan sworn in twice for his second term?

texts:
I was looking at Wikipedia's article on Justice Potter Stewart and was surprised to read:

On January 20 and 21, 1985, Stewart administered the oath of office for Vice President George H. W. Bush.

(He was Reagan's vice president.) Likewise the Wikipedia article on that inauguration begins:

The second inauguration of Ronald Reagan as President of the United States was held in a small televised ceremony on Sunday, January 20, 1985, at the Grand Foyer of the White House, and was to be repeated the following day, January 21, 1985 at the West Front of the United States Capitol in Washington, D.C., before being moved to the Capitol's rotunda.

It does not, however, explain why there were two oaths administered. Wikipedia's article on the oath of office also lists dual swearings-in for Reagan's second term, as well as for a few other presidential terms, but doesn't give a reason.
I'm particularly curious about Reagan's, because the article quoted above indicates that the first ceremony was "televised" so (a) there's seemingly no point in the second ceremony since everyone there had seen it already and (b) the second ceremony seemingly would be absurd since everyone there would know it was a sham. So why was Reagan sworn in twice for his second term as president?
Note that I'm not asking why there were two celebrations — people like to celebrate. I'm asking why the oath itself was administered twice.


texts: How independent were the Eastern European countries from the Soviet Union?

texts: How much influence did the Soviet Union have over the other Warsaw Pact countries? Did Moscow directly control them, and direct what they did? Did they often disagree with the USSR over policy? If so, what was the outcome? What did incidents like the 1956 Hungarian Uprising and the 1968 "Prague Spring" say about how independent were they from the Soviet Union?


texts: What is meaning of 4 letter abbreviations in Roman names like Titus Flavius T. f. T. n. Sabinus?

texts:
I am reading about Titus Flavius Sabinus (consul AD 47) and cannot find meaning of T. f. T. n. in his full name as written in Wikipedia, "Titus Flavius T. f. T. n. Sabinus."

All I have found is a list of roman consuls and military tribunes where similar abbreviations are used with various letters.

Searching for TFTN or T. f. T. n. returns modern abbreviations like "Thanks For The Numbers," "The Free Times Newspaper," nothing relevant.

Reading the wiki page history I see no indication why this abbreviation was inserted.

My guess would be T. f. T. n. is abbreviation of province or military regiment?


texts: Are there historical instances of the capital of a colonising country being temporarily or permanently shifted to one of its colonies?

texts:
When the Portuguese Royal Court (over 15,000 souls) fled the Napoleonic invasion of Portugal in 1807, and installed itself in Rio de Janeiro, Brazil, Rio became the capital of the pluricontinental Lusitanian monarchy until 1822.

  This is one of the few instances in history that the capital of a colonising country officially shifted to a city in one of its colonies. (from Wikipedia)

What are the other instances referred to in the above paragraph?  When and where?

EDIT - I thought I had so phrased my question that it would convey exactly what I meant it to.  It seems, however, that "to a city in one of its colonies" sounds ambiguous to some. By that I mean to another country, to a city or place outside the borders of the colonising country. Naturally, it has to be a colony. If the head of a state moves or flees to London and tries to rule his country from there, that is not what I'm looking for.

EDIT II - definition of Colony - A country or area under the full or partial political control of another country and occupied by settlers from that country.


texts:
During the American Independence War the British army made use of mercenaries hired from various German state (About 30,000 German soldiers fought for the British during the American Revolutionary War, making up a quarter of all the soldiers the British sent to America).

Why? Were the Hessians better?


texts: Why are gliders not used anymore in military operation?

texts: I do not think there was any operation involving gliders after WWII, and I'd like to know why.


texts: Was homosexuality rarer in ancient Sparta than in any other Greek state?

texts:
I have been told that this was illegal under the law that

  No man shall submit to another

However, this does not sound to me like it is banning homosexuals, perhaps banning one from being a submissive but that would be all.

Is there any evidence that this activity was any rarer in Sparta than any other Greek state?

Edited in OP's comment: I was told it was one of Lycurgus's laws. However, I cannot find a reference to it anywhere on line


texts: What are the scholarly opinions on the idea of the "European Civil War"?

texts: On Wikipedia, I ran into an article talking about World War I to World War II and some of the adjacent wars before WWI as being a "European Civil War" or a "Second Thirty Years War". What is the scholarly basis of this? I saw a few names but it wasn't expecially concrete. There are listed citations from various authors but how rigorous is historicity of such a claim?


texts: Why were the Mongolian armies able to to use greater percentages of archers than (Medieval) Europeans?

texts:
Much has been made in other posts about how hard it was for European armies to train and maintain large numbers of archers able to use a longbow, crossbow, or similar weapons.

Yet, the Mongolians were apparently able to do that, with the majority (six in ten) of their own (horse-riding) soldiers (but not foreign conscripts) as  archers. Only the English (but not other Europeans) appeared to approach this ratio.

How was this possible? Were the Mongolian bows simpler or easier to use than the European bows? Or did their nomadic way of life, horse- and cattle-herding make it easier for them than Europeans to learn and use archery?


texts: Agincourt - Where was the Earl of Suffolk (de la Pole)?

texts: The English army at Agincourt was divided (largely) into three positions: Henry V in the center, then Camoys and the Duke of York on the sides. One of the most famous English casualties of the battle was Michael (III) Earl of Suffolk. In which division was he fighting? I've been trying to hit up all the big Agincourt resources, but I'm not turning up anything.


texts:
The inscription listed below is on a shell case which was in my grandmothers house. Can any one tell me what they mean.

BRC
QF. 18.PR
V11
FS
TR
MH
9.11.15


texts:
While studying the history of Eastern Europe during the last century, I found that one of the main issues was the Pan-Slavic movement. For example big events such as World War I or the current civil war in Ukraine was a consequence of this movement.

Such movement consider people descendant of the Slavs as members of a international community which currently has the foundation and direction in Russia.

Interestingly such feeling did not develop in others civilizations, for instance Spain, France and Portugal cultures are somehow descendants of the Roman culture but there is not such thing as Pan-latin movement.

There are several accusations stating that Russia is enhancing the Pan-Slavic feeling for the purpose of expanding their influence.
Is this a realistic statement? If so, was it the case for the past century or if not, is the Pan-Slavic movement just a natural consequence of the nations finding an identity?


texts: When did the U.S. Postal Service completely transition from horse-drawn to motorized transport?

texts:
Simple question, hopefully not too broad.

When did the USPS stop using horses & horse-drawn carriages for most of its transport and delivery?

Were there any private competitors (such as modern-day UPS and FedEx) in operation at the time that this transition was taking place, and if so, who was leading and who was following in the transition?


texts: When did the last formal and recorded duel take place?

texts:
It seems that duels are no longer fought because of a combination of both changes in law and in fashions. E.g. Tom Reiss' The Black Count: Glory, Revolution, Betrayal, and the Real Count of Monte Cristo relates that duels were illegal in Paris already by approx. 1805, yet the practice was still fairly common at the time to settle serious disputes among "men of honor".

Since it seems that the end of duels thus cannot be tied to a specific change of law alone, I am wondering when the practice ceased in effect. When did the last duel take place? I am interested in formal and recorded duels (not individual fights between members of a criminal gang, say) esp. in the post WWI period and on the European continent. Wikipedia records a last case in France in 1967 (without mortal consequence to either participant, though). Is that it?


texts: Was the sprouting of seeds for food production known in Europe before 1800?

texts:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sprouting
Was this not known in Europe?


texts: What surface area per person is required for hunter-gatherers?

texts:
I am sure I have read it somewhere, but I can't figure out in which book anymore (I think Steve Pinker's How the Mind Works)

Most of human (pre-)history (and evolution) has happened in a foraging economic and social context. What surface area was required per person for a hunter-gatherer society to thrive? Since the ideal environment for foragers was the Savannah (c.f. Pinker), we could take this as a default ecosystem to compare to other environments, like steps or jungles.

Any numbers? Thanks.


texts: What was the relationship between ancient Egyptians and Hebrews in documented hieroglyphs?

texts:
Are there any documented sources about what happened in ancient Egypt?

Particularly the relationship between Egyptians and Hebrews, as mentioned? E.G. were they best
Friends or were so and so?


texts: Why was 'France' excluded from Henry Lane Wilson's clique during the Mexican Revolution?

texts:
The book by Friedrich Katz, The secret war in Mexico, mentions that the USA minister Henry Lane Wilson organized in part the overthrow of president Madero during the first phase of the Mexican revolution (in Spanish this is known as "La decena trágica").
It is also said that the clique was organized around the central powers at that time, Germany, UK and USA, but for some reason the French were left out. Katz says that the reason is unknown. Is it known nowadays what was this reason?
Of course Mexico had a lot of investment from France, but that was in the dictatorship of Diaz. When Madero took the power as a president, my impression is that the old group (nicknamed "the scientists") were not happy with Madero and that much inversion from France was lost during the transition. Thus, from the economical point of view, there does not seem to be a reason why France wasn't interested in joining Wilson and co.


texts: What happened to the British convicts transported to America after the American Revolution?

texts:
From the early 1600s until the American Revolution of 1776, the British colonies in North America received transported British criminals for, what I have read, a term of 6 to 14 years. I have read (don't know how true) that in total about 52,000 British criminals were imprisoned in America which made up about 10% of the total migration.

But after the American Revolution what happened to the existing convicts in America, were they let go or did they serve out the remaining time based on the British sentence at the time?


texts: Who was the Irish interpreter in Monterey in 1822?

texts:
Kirill Khlebnikov was a Russian business agent who made several visits to Alta California. His "Travel Notes" from 1822 describe Khlebnikov's visit to Governor Sola in Monterey, who sent for "the Irish interpreter". (I think this means that their discussion was held in English.)

Who was the Irish interpreter?


texts: During the Discovery Expedition (1901-1904) to Antarctica, a pre-arranged message point was set up at Cape Crozier so that relief ships would be able to locate the expedition. What exactly was that message point? A flag semaphore point? A hut where written messages were left by the expedition team to the relief ships?


texts: What's this flag flying on a fort at Kodiak, Alaska?

texts:
Naval captain Yuri Lisianskii drew a harbor scene in Alaska about 1805. It was engraved in England for an edition of his book.

(High-res version)

In the image, from left to right, there are flags flying on a building, a ship, and a fort. The flag on the building is the simple tricolor of Peter the Great that Russia uses today. The flag on the ship is the ensign of the Imperial Navy. However, after comparing to other Russian flags and the flag of the Russian-American Company, I can't identify the third one.

What's that flag?


texts: Did purging occur during the American revolution?

texts:
Every nation that has revolutionized in the last 150 years has undergone major turmoil including the jailing and execution of dissidents. France and Russian revolutions were both famously violent transitions.

There had to be rival factions including loyal Monarchists at the time. How were they managed by the Revolutionaries?


texts: What's the oldest treaty still being enforced?

texts: The title pretty much says it all. What is the oldest treaty (of any type) still being enforced between two political entities (i.e., nation-states, cities, etc.)?


texts: Has there been an occasion where ranged weapons were available but not used?

texts:
I have been trying to prove my thinking wrong.  I believe that there can never be an occasion where ranged weapons are available in outdoor battles / skirmishes that they would not be used.

I am hoping to find a case based on historical evidence where this was the case.  In my mind, in the days of sticks and rocks cavemen would throw rocks from a distance and use the stick for close combat not just wait. It seems human nature and logical to try to damage the enemy as much as possible at a distance unless you knew their range weapons were much better than your own.

Also, it would be good to see a case where skirmish parties would not even bring along range weapons and choose to stick with melee.  Lets say visibility might drop at times such as a blizzard or sandstorm but also might be clear.  This would not include missions that were totally inside, in caves or forest.  It would be anticipated that most of the mission would be on open ground.

From what I have found ancient Greeks and Romans had javelins and slings.  And since that time ranged weapons were always employed unless your own range weapons were very inferior in which case you want to close to melee as soon as possible.


texts: Mayan calendar coinciding with winter solstice

texts:
It appears that all anyone has been talking about is the end of the world, misinterpretations aside (at least I hope so) my understanding that this is simply the end of an age of the Mayan calendar.

Given the Mayans were great astronomers and (I believe) their calendar to be based on the stars is there a reason that the age ends on the Winter Solstice (21/12/2012) or is it just coincidence?


texts:
According to the Wikipedia page, the Antiu were desert-dwellers with whom the early Pharaohs waged continuous war.

Is this the extent of our knowledge about them? For instance, do we know anything about why the ancient Egyptians were in strife with them, what their society was like, and so on?


texts: Were defendants at the Nuremberg trial allowed to deny the holocaust?

texts:
In reply to a question on how to respond to Holocaust denial, I answered

  At the Nuremberg trials the holocaust was one of the indictments. None of the defendants pretended that the holocaust had not happened, because this was not credible, and they didn't want to concede that the holocaust was wrong.

However, I wonder if I might have mistaken their reasons for not pursuing holocaust denial as a legal argument.

I read the Charter of the International Military Tribunal, the foundational text for the Nuremberg trial. In Article 21, it says

  The Tribunal shall not require proof of facts of common knowledge but shall take judicial notice thereof. It shall also take judicial notice of official governmental documents and reports of the United Nations, including the acts and documents of the committees set up in the various allied countries for the investigation of war crimes, and of records and findings of military or other Tribunals of any of the United Nations.

So, does this mean that the defendants were not allowed to question that millions of people were killed in the holocaust? Was this one of the 'facts of common knowledge'?


texts: How frequently did monasteries attack other monasteries in Early Medieval Western Europe?

texts:
Recently, I saw this passage in M & H. Whittock, ‘The Viking Blitzkrieg’ (referring to Ireland)

  of the 113 attacks on monasteries between 795 and 820, only twenty-six
  were carried out by Vikings. The rest were either carried out by Irish
  kings on Irish monasteries or were even the work of monks from rival
  religious communities

(my highlighting)

Similar information is given on the archaeology.co.uk website. Investigating further, I found more on this

  Wars and battles between monasteries also occurred in Ireland before
  the coming of the Vikings.

..and also this specific example

  …a bloody war in 817 between the monastery of Taghmon, assisted by
  Cathal mac Dunlainge, king of Ui Chennselaig, and the monastery of
  Ferns, in which four hundred were killed.

This all seems very, uhm, unchristian (though maybe not for the period?) so how unique was the Irish situation before circa 1000 AD? Did monasteries in other west European countries attack each other and, if so, what were their motives (usually)? (I’ve not been able to find examples for anywhere except Ireland)

Note: I am not asking about individual clerics, monks etc fighting, nor about attacks by kings or lords on monasteries (where the motives were usually loot and/or punishment for siding with the wrong lord or king). This question is specifically about monastery vs. monastery (or ‘monastic civil war’ if you like), but evidence up to the 15th century would be of interest if there is nothing earlier.


texts: Where would a British Captain and his wife live in Boston in 1773?

texts: I am writing an historical novel and the two main characters, a colonist who marries a British Captain, move to Boston when he is transferred there. Where would they live. His job was to oversee the wharf area of Boston.


texts: Did German citizens need a visa to enter Switzerland in 1945?

texts:
I'm researching a story that plays in Europe immediately after the end of World War II. There is a character who

is a German citizen and
travels to Switzerland

in 1945 (after the capitulation of Nazi Germany) because she does not want to live under the occupation of the Allies.

Would this person need a visa to legally get to Switzerland? Were there any privileges for German refugees (civilians fleeing from Eastern Germany)?


texts: Which groups of people were awake at night in antiquity?

texts:
I've come across claims that prehistoric people didn't get much sleep, which seems to be extrapolated from observations of existing primitive cultures. I'm wondering whether there's something more solid for a somewhat more recent time, say during 0-500 CE. This probably varies by region, maybe mostly depending on level of development. A few groups of people that I could come up with that were almost certainly up at night would be

night guards
sailors
astronomers
possibly traveling merchants
people partying in taverns

I'm curious what groups are known to have been active during the night, and I'm not picky with regard to region or which part of antiquity really; anything that's reasonably well known will be interesting.

Question: which groups of people are known to have been active at night in antiquity?


texts: Has any polytheistic religion throughout history given relevance to a god or goddess of cruelty?

texts:
What I particularly want to know is whether any god or major entity in any religion has been primarily associated with cruelty, understood as taking pleasure in causing pain.

I have been unable to find anything on my own on Google. Perhaps a list of major deities and their defining traits as a resource could be enough. If such a deity does exist, I would appreciate a list if possible.


texts: Did a unit of 40 men hold off Rommel's "ghost division" for 18 days?

texts:
I found the following baffling claim on a Wikipedia article regarding the "Chasseurs Ardennais" in World War II:

A unit of only 40 men held off the combined arms of the German forces, including General Rommel's "Ghost Division" for 18 days and only surrendered after running out of ammunition, when asked where the others were, they simply replied 'We are all'.[citation needed]

As this appears to be quite unlikely, no citation is provided and it does not align with the events as presented by the equivalent German page, I highly doubt it. The edit history is dubious as well: a recent edit mocked the claim before being reverted.
Is it just a myth / an exaggeration, or are there any notable sources to support said claim?


texts: The economic prosperity of former colonies and their demographic make up

texts: Most former colonies are now developing or poor countries, such as many countries in Latin America, Asia, and Africa. Some exceptions are Australia, the United States, Canada. Interestingly they are mostly populated by immigrants from Europe. Historically, was their being countries of European immigrants in some way related to their development to become prosperous, first-world countries?


texts: Independent development of ocean navigation

texts:
I am wondering about who can reasonably claim to independently have developed navigating oceans. It is quite clear that the Iberians had the technology around 1500; and that the proto-Polynesians had it during their migrations. That gives at least two independent developments.

It is less clear to me whether the Vikings should count as having ocean navigation (they made it to Greenland and Vinland, but would their technology have worked for other ocean crossing?), and if they do count, whether their technology or accomplishments had any impact on the later Iberian developments.

Tentatively, I would suppose that the maritime cultures in South-East Asia predating the (proto)-Polynesians were sticking close to the coasts, but I am not very knowlegable in the history of this area. For the Chinese Treasure Fleet of Zheng He, I am again neither sure of whether they had "proper" ocean navigation, nor to what extent there could have been an impact from the Austronesians on their technology if they had it.

Definition: My suggested definition of ocean navigation would be the ability to navigate across 1000km of open water sufficiently reliable to sustain trade routes. That's the rough ballpark of what I mean with the term, but I'd be open to suggestions for better definitions.


texts: What wars were there which were contemporaneous with but unconnected to ww2?

texts:
One possible example is the Ecuador-Peru war of 1941. Were there others?

Just to be narrow/precise, restrict attention to any wars that were ongoing any time between Sep 1 1939 and May 9 1945.


texts:
In 1763, Spain traded Florida to Great Britain in exchange for control of Havana, Cuba, which had been captured by the British during the Seven Years' War. wikipedia

Why did Spain trade Florida to the British in exchange for Havana?  Florida is much larger than Havana, and Spain still controlled about 80% of Cuban territory.


texts: Pakistani point of view on the Liberation War of Bangladesh

texts: Being a Bangladeshi, it has been difficult to know the Pakistani view of the Liberation War in 1971. What their exact goal was, how they intended to achieve this goal, what resources they had and how they justified the horrible atrocities that have been confirmed by the recent war tribunal in Bangladesh. Any resources, insights, links to pdf documents are welcome. This is for research purposes and I'm working on a deadline. Thanks in advance.


texts: How did the Weygand Line collapse so quickly?

texts:
The Weygand Line I am referring to is the line established by Maxime Weygand in the aftermath of the hugely successful Fall Gelb. Immediately after the evacuation of Dunkirk, French soldiers were being repatriated back to France and presumably bringing back with them knowledge and expertise on the German's tactics. French military technology was also on a parity with the Germans, with better tanks (such as the Somua S.35) and artillery. Their lines were also anchored on the rivers Somme and Aisne. The advantages the Germans had was the number of divisions (142 vs Weygand's ~60) and the qualitative superiority of the Luftwaffe. Significant advantages, yet, it only took 3 weeks for the French army to utterly collapse.

How did the French army collapse so quickly? Were the German advantages in numbers and air superiority that decisive?


texts: What are some Chinese sources testifying the extreme weather events of 535-536 CE?

texts:
The Wikipedia page Extreme weather events of 535–536 lists under "Documentary evidence" that:

  Low temperatures, even snow during the summer (snow reportedly fell in August in China during the Northern and Southern dynasties, which
  caused the harvest there to be delayed
  "A dense, dry fog" in the Middle East, China and Europe

The page does provide a reference (Ochoa, George; Jennifer Hoffman; Tina Tin (2005). Climate: The Force That Shapes Our World and the Future of Life on Earth. Emmaus, PA: Rodale. p. 71.), but upon reading the referenced book, I noticed that the original quote was itself unsubstantiated, as shown in the picture I took below (at the end of the book there was only a Further Reading list):

I then proceeded to find other academic sources online. One article titled Spatial Response to Major Volcanic Events in or about AD 536, 934 and 1258 includes a passage quite similar to that found on the Wikipedia page, except slight variation in time:

  The above results for Mongolia are consistent with the observations of
  summer frosts and snow, crop failure, decreased star visibility and
  famine documented for northern China in July and August of AD 536–7.

it listed the following citation for that passage:

  Pang, K. and Chou, H.-H.: 1985, Unpublished research, in S. Weisbard,
  ‘Excavating Words: A Geological Tool’, Science News 127, 91–94.

So I went to this cited article, which contains the following:

  The effect of this volcano was also felt in China. Pang reports that,
  during the spring and fall equinoxes each year, the ancient Chinese
  looked for Canopus -the brightest star in the constellation of Alpha
  Carina-to assure themselves of good times ahead and to demark the
  seasons. In A.D. 536, however, Canopus was not seen. Pang found
  records from the state of Ching in southern China reporting frost and
  snow in July and August that killed the seedling crop, causing a major
  famine the following autumn. The accounts also show that the effects
  of the eruption were noted until 538. Other kingdoms reported similar
  disasters; one record indicated that the weather was so severe that 70
  to 80 percent of the people starved to death, says Pang.

Unfortuantely, the article does not provide any specific references to this quote, and it seems that Pang's research was indeed unpublished.

I have just begun to look into the massive amount of Chinese chronicles from this period with the hope of finding the exact entries quoted by Pang, in particular the highlighted quote concerning the severity of the disaster, which seems like to be highly exaggerated. In the meantime, I would really appreciate if someone could point me to a specific passage from an ancient Chinese source that confirms aforementioned descriptions.

Thank you.


texts: What caused this cratering pattern at Hiroshima?

texts:
I was reading this article here, which includes an interesting photo of Hiroshima:

The caption on the photo indicates that it was taken three weeks after the atomic bomb was dropped.

The photo seems to show a 'scattershot' pattern of relatively small (I'm guessing maybe 50-100 feet in diameter, based upon the size relative to buildings and vehicles) and strikingly uniform blast/impact craters, spread across a wide area.  My question is, what caused these?

I know the simple answer is almost certainly "the atomic bomb", but what specific aspects of an atomic blast and/or the design of the bomb used to produce it would lead to this sort of result?  Intuitively I would expect a single large crater/blast area, and what the photo shows looks more like it would have been caused by some sort of cluster-munition than an atomic weapon.

How does a single atomic bomb produce this kind of pattern?


texts: Where can I find historical taxation/revenue datasets for imperial countries in the early 20th century?

texts:
I'm a grad student trying to conduct research, and my project depends on finding a dataset which enumerates taxation and revenue by colonial-era and post-colonial governments within the early 20th century. The British colonial blue books offer a lot of good primary source data for Africa specifically, but this is somewhat lacking on its own. Given how distinct colonialism in Africa was from colonialism elsewhere (with African colonialism focusing more on extraction than settlement), failing to address cases outside of Africa would be pretty flawed. I also can't limit myself exclusively to British colonies, since there's a wealth of literature claiming that the colonial strategies employed by the British fostered distinct institutions from the colonialism of other metropolitan nations.
In short, I need a large dataset of state revenue expenditures, the composition of those expenditures (e.g. how much was spent on military, how much on healthcare, how much on education, etc.), and taxation within the early 20th century. This should preferably cover both colonial and non-colonial governments during that time period.
I'm more than willing to accept a dataset which covers only part of these specifications. I'd be very grateful for any help. Thanks.
EDIT: I assumed this was obvious, but "colonial govts" here refers to the govts of colonial dependencies that remained under European control at the start of the 20th century (e.g. French West Africa, Indochine, British African colonies, etc.).


texts: Did the Black Death affect Muslim's prayers in the mosque?

texts: How did the black death affect Muslims? Were they not allowed to go pray in the mosques? So if Muslims where not allowed to go to the mosque how did they complete their prayers?