texts: How did Ceaușescu survive the condemnation of the invasion of Czechoslovakia in 1968?

texts: According to Wikipedia the communist leader of Romania (member of the Warsaw Pact) said that the invasion of Czechoslovakia by the Warsaw Pact forces is a "grave error". How could he "get away" with this speech? I mean the Soviet Union just proved they are ready to invade an ally if it steps out of the line... Why did Romania not suffer consequences?


texts: In what case was being called a Federalist considered libel?

texts:
I know, according to this site here: , in Indiana on 9/3/1857 (see note below), a man was accused of being a Federalist, sued for libel, and won a thousand dollars. The site describes

  "Joshua Harlan, plaintiff, and John Allen, defendant. Judge Sparks was at the time President Judge, but was not on the bench until after the verdict was returned. The case was tried before the Associates. General James Noble was counsel for the plaintiffs, and John Test for the defendant." quod.lib.umich.edu

I can't find the name of this case, and which court it was tried in. Presumably, the name would be Harlan vs. Allen, but I've searched for that online and can't find anything. This leads to my confusion over which court it was tried in- obviously not the Supreme Court, but I don't know if it was in a county court or the Indiana state court, since I can't find the case name to search for it. What's the name and where was it tried?

My research:

Lots of books about the fall of federalism, in which it would presumably make sense to mention how far Federalism had fallen out of the public opinion
The site mentioned above
Various government databases of Indiana state trials
Just searching Google for "Harlan vs Allen"
Just searching Google for "federalist libel Indiana case 1857", and things like it
Searching Google for "indiana franklin county third circuit trials 1857", and things like it
Etc.

Edit:

Seems like it's in Franklin County, Indiana, in the 3rd Circuit, but I've tried searching for that too and can't find the name still.
"Assuming it's the same John Allen, it's in the 3rd circuit on Sep 3rd 1857 if the doc you linked to is anything to go by." – Denis de Bernardy
"Date is wrong. Judge Sparks appointed 1813-died April 1815. Your information is from a memoir written in 1857. The trial would have to be between 1811 and July 1813. – justCal

**NEW INFORMATION!!!!!!
I also found it in the periodical Case and Comment, Volume 17 (pp 116-117). The book is a lawyer's magazine, and Volume 17 goes from June 1910-May 1911.

---So- I still have no idea what date this is or what the name is- any thoughts?


texts: What techniques were used to make rings in medieval times?

texts: There is a lot of information on the internet regarding the process by which rings are made today using modern tools. What techniques were used before the 17th century to do it?


texts: What, exactly, was the role of Bertrand du Guesclin in the Hundred Years' War?

texts:
I know that Bertrand du Guesclin was the constable of France from 1369-1380, whose role in the "roll back" of English domination of France was second only to that of Joan of Arc.

Although he won a number of victories against the English, none of them were as spectacular as English victories at Crecy, Poitiers, or Auray. My understanding is that du Guesclin was renowned for his "Fabian tactics" and war of attrition. Because he was not a high ranking noble, many Frenchmen refused to serve under him, and his armies were smaller than French armies typically were, meaning that he enjoyed less favorable numerical odds than other French commanders. Yet he managed to regain a considerable part of western France during those eleven years.

How was that?


texts:
I'm wondering if anyone knows where someone has recorded the 'average' height of a Roman fortlet in Britain (Scotland specifically), or some information on the ranges to which they were built?

I'm asking as I'm currently creating a model that uses visibility, as so I need to know the height that the observer would be at.

Thanks!


texts: Historical tax revenue as a proportion of GDP

texts: Modern countries vary widely in how much they tax their citizens (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_tax_revenue_as_percentage_of_GDP).  Where do historical monarchies fit into this spectrum?  For example, what proportion of GDP was taken in tax under Henry VIII?  How does the Roman empire compare?  Is there wide variation between countries and over time?


texts: Why was France granted an equal status among victors of World War II?

texts:
How is it that France emerged from World War II with a similar status as the U.S.A., Britain, the Soviet Union, and China in terms of possession of a permanent seat on the U.N. Security Council, uncontested possession of nuclear weapons, etc?

I understand that Charles de Gaulle "somehow" managed to downplay his beloved home country's status as an early victim to German aggression in World War II and line it up among the victors instead. Is this the case and if so how (e.g. at what conferences) did he pull it off?

This is not to diminish the role of the French resistance (and de Gaulle's own contribution in that regard), but its role in defeating Germany seems hardly at the same level as those from the other allies overall (perhaps excluding China).

Update: The following quote from Andrew Roberts' Masters and Commanders: How Four Titans Won the War in the West, 1941-1945 seems pertinent:

  When soon after its inspection the Free French leader Charles de
  Gaulle demanded that France should have a seat on the Combined Chiefs
  of Staff, Ismay replied that if Canada, New Zealand, Holland, Belgium,
  Denmark and Norway also had the right to be represented, 'the only
  place we could have a meeting is the Albert Hall.'


texts:
In the essay "Of Empire", Francis Bacon wrote:

  All precepts concerning kings are in effect comprehended in those two remembrances: Memento quod es homo and Memento quod es Deus or vice Dei—the one bridleth their power, and the other their will.

The Latin sentences mean "Remember that you are a man" and "Remember that you are God, or God's vicegerent"—that is, God's delegate, standing in for God.

I'm interested in the analogy between arrangements like a king's appointing a governor-general in a far-off province to perform the king's duties and speak with royal authority in the king's absence, and thinking of the king as a sort of governor-general appointed by God to tend to the king's Earthly kingdom, in God's "absence". My question is:

What's an example of a king clearly acting on the principle that he is God's governor-general on Earth?

The closest thing I've found so far is a speech given to Parliament by King James VI & I in 1609 or 1610, in which he said:

  The state of Monarchy is the supremest thing upon earth; for kings are not only God’s lieutenants upon Earth and sit upon God’s throne, but even by God himself they are called gods.* There be three principal similarities that illustrate the state of Monarchy: one taken out of the word of God and the two other out of the grounds of policy and philosophy. In the Scriptures kings are called gods, and so their power after a certain relation compared to the Divine power. Kings are also compared to the fathers of families, for a king is truly parens patriae, the politic father of his people. And lastly, kings are compared to the head of this microcosm of the body of man. [Source]

I understand the speech to basically argue, "As king, I've got certain divine responsibilities, and that means I've got certain divine rights, so stay out of my way." It doesn't describe an action that James or another king felt compelled by divine responsibility to do even though he might have had personal or political reasons against it. Such an action would be an ideal answer to this question.

By the way, even though Bacon was writing in the European tradition, I'd be happy with any classic or well-known example of this phenomenon from any culture or period in history.

*I believe this is a reference to John 10:34, which refers to Psalm 82:6, "I have said, Ye are gods; and all of you are children of the most High" (thanks to this answer).


texts: How many people died of hunger and malnutrition in the post WWII 20th century?

texts:
I'm looking for a global overview of hunger and malnourishment deaths in the half century following WWII. While Wikipedia helpfully provides a list of famines, this only lists famine events - typically defined thus:

  At least 20% of households in an area face extreme food shortages with a limited ability to cope
  The prevalence of acute malnutrition in children exceeds 30%
  The death rate exceeds two persons per 10,000 persons per day

I'm looking for good estimates for hunger deaths and excess mortality due to malnutrition in the period, including those outside of famine events as describe above.


texts: What is the motivation of having heavy infantry to the right and light infantry to the left flank?

texts:
In Napoleonic wars era, a line contains mostly regular troops except for two kind of elite units, the heavy one, e.g. grenadiers, they normally are the bravest, strongest troops with the best stamina, suitable for shock troops which is posted to the right, and the light one who are normally the best shooters/skirmishers, normally posted in the left flank.

What is the advantage or the motivation of this particular arrangement? I could somehow understand why the best units are posted at flanks , possibly to allow or guard against flanking attacks, but why is there preference to post best storm troops to the right and best shooters to the left (as opposed to the other way around, or have it symmetrical)?


texts: Why did Zhang Xueliang and Yang Hucheng receive different punishments for their role in the Xi'an Incident?

texts:
Having failed to persuade Chiang Kai-shek to abandon war with the communists and instead unite to fight Japan, Zhang Xueliang and Yang Hucheng finally opted for force and captured Chiang in the Xi'an Incident, not releasing him until he had agreed to fight Japan alongside the CCP. In the aftermath, both were arrested by Chiang. Over a decade later, when the KMT retreated to Taiwan after the Chinese civil war, Zhang was taken along as well and continued in captivity for several more decades, while Yang was secretly executed.

What reasons have been given by historians to explain why they received different punishments? Did the KMT give any explanation of why they imprisoned one but executed the other?


texts: I have a 48 Star flag that I have recently acquired from a seller off of a similar setting to Craigslist. He said he’s found it in an attic and really has no other information on it. Because the size is near 4 ft x 9ft, and it is truly tattered, I believe it had been flown somewhere other than in front of an average home. I have come to believe it could have flown on a ship from the mounting holes (as shown in the picture), they are very thick and sturdy galvanized eyelets to keep the metal from rusting. These eyelets are very different than those of a “normal flags” folded-over fabric with a grommet in it. Is it possible this flag could’ve been flown on an American ship? Or is it just an oversized home flag? In closing THIS FLAG IS MASSIVE!


texts: What are some government expenditure reports from the Middle ages?

texts: I'm curious to see how much money went where in the medieval governments of Europe, but I'm not even sure where to start looking.


texts: Why did the United States enter World War I?

texts:
The topic of World War I came up last night with a few strangers, at a bar, of course. One seemingly knowledgeable gentleman, who happened to have Howard Zinn's A Peoples' History of the United States in his bag, suggested that America entered World War I solely because England owed JP Morgan a large sum of money. By sending troops to Europe, America was, in effect, protecting its investment. I suggested there was more to it than just that: isolationist guilt, perhaps.

In most wars, there seems to be a clear reason for America's participation. What was the main reason for US participation in World War I?


texts: Why did the French Revolutionary General Pichegru defect to the Royalists?

texts:
General Pichegru was a famous French Revolutionary military leader who had won great victories in 1795. And then, all of a sudden:

  Although he had become a hero of the Revolution, he allowed his
  colleague Jourdan to be defeated, betrayed all his plans to the enemy,
  and took part in organizing a conspiracy for the return and crowning
  of Louis XVIII as King of France. (wiki)

What was the matter with him? Why did he change his allegiance?

He originally came from a peasant family so I doubt he could have had much genuine affection for the ancien regime. And his rise was through the Jacobin faction - not a likely breeding ground for royalism. Nevertheless, his later career and sad demise do evince a sustained effort on behalf of, if not genuine belief in, the royalist cause.

Was it purely personal ambition? Was he trying to play Monck? Was he trying to play Napoleon before Napoleon was a thing?

All the books on the period mention "Pichegru's treason" but everybody just seems to take it for granted.


texts: Did teenage Sultan Osman II use people as targets?

texts:
Long ago I read in The Story of the Greatest Nations and the World's Famous Events (or in some other edition), that the teenage Ottoman Sultan Osman II (reigned 1618-1622) used prisoners of war for archery practice, and when he ran out of prisoners of war he used palace pages as targets.

Does anyone know if that story is true or false?


texts: What was the wage of the soldiers serving in the CEF compared to the soldiers serving in the British army?

texts:
I believe that the title explains the question quite well however I will elaborate.

We know that soldiers, even conscripted ones were indeed paid during their service in the two different armies. However, is there any difference to how they were paid? Was one paid better than the other?

I have fumbled through many archives and googled the question phrased in many different ways to no avail.

Sources would help greatly, thanks.


texts: Is there a Welsh or Irish equivalent to the Declaration of Arbroath or Magna Carta?

texts:
Are there any pre-modern documents (or were there any, if they didn't survive) in Welsh or Irish history, which are broadly equivalent in intention and purpose to the Declaration of Arbroath or the Magna Carta?
Are there Welsh or Irish documents that assert national rights against authority, whether internal or external? For example, there could be the rights of Welsh lords against their king, or against an English king.
I'm not a historian. Apart from Google, I wouldn't know where to look.


texts: Was Switzerland pressured either by Allies or Axis to take part in World War 2 at any time?

texts:
In the second world war, Switzerland mostly maintained it's neutrality and served as protecting power and mediated communications between the Axis and Allied powers.

A Wikipedia  article  Switzerland during the World Wars states that

  Switzerland's trade was blockaded by both the Allies and by the Axis.
  Each side openly exerted pressure on Switzerland not to trade with the
  other.

Above pressure seems to be mostly economic. But I am curious to know about diplomatic or political pressure exerted either or both   Allies or Axis (Nazi Germany) on  Switzerland.

Did any of the Allies or Axis powers try to exert a diplomatic or political pressure on Switzerland to take part in the war from their side or for providing military troops, resources etc?


texts: What type of workers were there who built the pyramids in Egypt?

texts: What type of workers were there who participated in building the Pyramids. What were they called and what was their role? Also, what sort of treatment did they get?


texts: What was the image of Jhwh before it was almost erased from history?

texts:
Clay tablets found in Mesopotamia tell us that Adam was an earth god. In Genesis Adam was demoted to human status probably to make a monotheistic text possible.

Did Jhwh have an image (idol) before and what was it?

And if Jhwh had an image, could Eve and the serpent (possible the Proto Canaanite mother serpent in Unas’s Pyramid texts)  combined be excluded from being the imagery (or consort Astharte) of Jhwh?

(Reason for the second part of the question is that the name Eve is an analogy for both ‘sky’ and ‘snake’ in Ancient Semitic languages and Eve may have been a form of the sky goddess (Astharte?).
Astharte Queen of heaven would become Mother Eve which is an analogy of Mother Serpent.)

I would also like to add that the image provided in LangLangC’s answer has a female sitting on a lion’s throne. If the figures on the left of the seated female are two lions, there might be a word pun on her name in שתי אריות as an analogy of Astharte/Ishtar. Possibly the Akeru are depicted here in a Semitic understanding of the two lions of the horizon in Egypt.

Against this background it is interesting to interpret Jhwh as J(hand in the meaning of ‘worshippers’ as the Ka hieroglyph shows two arms raised in worship. And ‘Hwh’ as ‘sky’ giving a reading of ‘worship the sky (god(dess))’. Jhwh would be an epithet that remained after losing the original name and syncretising Astharte and El, which might equal Adam and Eve (earth and sky).
But I don’t want to answer my own queation, just would like to know if Eve can be scientifically excluded from being the name origin of Jhwh before the Genesis version of Jhwh appeared?


texts: Was there an ancient cult of worshiping one's own reflection?

texts:
Are there any sources about an ancient cultic worship of one's own reflection (in water)? Have historians found any evidence of such a phenomenon?

The idea is found in some early Jewish commentaries:
The Bible relates that Gideon amassed an army of 32,000 men, but God dismissed the idea of defeating the Midianites with such a large force because it would not be apparent that the victory came through Him. Instead, the army was eventually whittled down to 300 men by way of a unique litmus test: Gideon took his men to drink from a pond of water and God commanded that all those who kneeled while sipping from the water, were disqualified from Gideon’s army (Jud. 7:1–8). The classical commentators have explained that only those men who lapped with their hands to their mouth to drink water were considered righteous enough to join the army, but those who kneeled were not. Those who kneeled displayed idolatrous tendencies by revealing that they were accustomed to kneeling.
R. David Kimhi explains that they either bowed to Baal or to their own reflection in the water.

The notion of people worshipping their own reflection is found in several places in rabbinic literature: The Talmud (TB Nedarim 9b) tells of an individual who became a Nazirite because he saw his reflection in the water and was inspired to commit a sin, which some commentaries explain means that he wanted to make himself into a god (see Shitta Mekubetzes there and Pirushei u-Nimmukei Rabbeinu Ezriel to TB Nazir 4b). Elsewhere, the Talmud (TB Chullin 41b) outlaws slaughtering an animal next to a pond of clear water because it looks like one is slaughtering the animal as a sacrifice to his own reflection.


texts: When and where was rape first criminalised independently from adultery?

texts:
The ancient legislation I know about do not have any concept of rape, but of adultery / married, and virgin / not virgin.

The monotheist religious texts condemn rape as adultery outside the wedding, and allow it inside the wedding. In this system, the victim of a rape is condemned for adultery (unless she screams really hard and lots of people hear her, see the bible). If a man rapes another man, both are condemned for adultery and homosexuality. These rules were applied for quite a while in a lot of places.

The laws of the Roman empire (before it became Christian) did forbid sex with unmarried women, but allowed adultery with married women, so a rape on a married woman was not criminalized. Homosexuality not being forbidden, a rape on a man would not be condemned either.

Hence my question : when and where was it first criminalised independently from adultery/"virginity stealing" ? There seems to be kind of a shame factor on this (which is understandable).

Side note : I am so happy to live in the 21 st century


texts: What was the summer uniform of the streltsy?

texts: The Russian streltsy (shooters) of 17th century are usually depicted in winter uniform wearing fur hats and dress. What was their summer uniform?


texts: Can anyone help to identify this picture of a relative wearing a possibly Polish/Russian/Prussian uniform?

texts:
I found this photo and tried to match to uniforms of the time around 1911. Can’t find one with similar pockets or stripes. Can you help to identify? My sister says person on left is grandfather. They think he came from Poland when it was occupied by Russia but are not positive.
Adjusted image:


texts: Why didn't the Pakistani military try to gain Kashmir from India in 1971 instead of launching an offensive in Rajesthan?

texts:
In the 1971 India-Pakistan war, while the Indian Army with the help of the Bengali guerillas were making inroads into East Pakistan, the Pakistan Army launched an offensive through the Rajesthan border aimed at capturing the Jaisalmir airbase, some 100 kilometers into the Indian territory, a move that was successfully repulsed by the Indian Army. And, the all-out war had started with Pakistan Air Force launching air strikes from the west on several Indian cities, as far into Indian territory as Agra. Am I right?

Now my question is, instead of expanding their offensive from the west into the rest of India, why didn't Pakistan just focused on capturing as much of the Indian-held Kashmir as they could, and in particular the sole route that India has into Kashmir?

Given that the West Pakistanis were unpopular in East Pakistan anyway, would it not be a better strategy for the then political and military leadership of Pakistan to reduce focus of the armed forces from that flank of the country and turn to Kashmir, especially the route that leads into Kashmir from Indian Punjab?


texts: Which US Presidents travelled around the world?

texts:
Shortly after President Grant left office, he went on a round-the-world journey, with stops all over Europe, in Russia, through the Suez Canal, to China and Japan, arriving in San Francisco and then crossing the North American continent.

I believe he was the first US President (or former President) to do so.  Please correct me if I am wrong.

I am guessing such journeys have become more common as travels have gotten easier and cheaper (Grant spent something like $25,000 for his journey).

Which other Presidents have made a round-the-world journey as a single trip?

My information about President Grant is from Jean Edward Smith's wonderful Grant.


texts: Why are pre-Harappan strata grouped together with Early Harappan strata? Does this not obfuscate the development of the civilization?

texts:
(1) I don't understand why some sites are called early Harappan because these sites are pre-Harappan so why we use wrong name with that. Can any one explain?
From 'India's Ancient Past' by RS Sharma, Ch. 9: Chalcolithic Cultures, p67:

Chronologically, there are several series of Chalcolithic settlements in India. Some are pre-Harappan, others are contemporaneous with the Harappan culture, and yet others are post-Harappan.
Pre-Harappan strata on some sites in the Harappan zone are also called early Harappan in order to distinguish them from the mature urban Indus civilization.
Thus, the pre-Harappan phase at Kalibangan in Rajasthan and Banawali in Haryana is distinctly Chalcolithic. So too is the case with Kot Diji in Sindh in Pakistan. Pre-Harappan and post-Harappan Chalcolithic cultures and those coexisting with the Harappan have been found in northern, western, and central India.An example is the Kayatha culture c. 2000–1800 BC, which existed towards the end of the Harappan culture. It has some pre-Harappan elements in pottery, but also evidences Harappan influence. Several post-Harappan Chalcolithic cultures in these areas are influenced by the post-urban phase of the Harappan culture.

(2) Harappan civilization has the following phases:
(1) pre-Harappan

(2) Early Harappan
(3) Mature Harappan
(4) Late Harappan

(5) post-Harappan

So, when excavation begin, in the first soil layers we get post-Harappan culuture, and then Late, then pre, and so on.
But, if we combine pre-Harappan layers into Early Harappan (as above), we lose the distinction between the developing and the developed state of the civilization. Does this not lose information that would tell us about how the valley developed?
(3) and here, Harappan zone means area around the Harappan city, am I right??
(4) I have also provided diagram what I understand until now. Is this correct?


texts: Compare skeleton crew to normal crew on a galleon

texts:
Consider a typical galleon used for cargo around the 18th century.

How would the number and roles of the crew differ between a normal, full crew, and a "skeleton" crew, on a voyage of a few weeks?


texts: How many lines did an ancient Greek copyist write per day?

texts: In Scribes, Script, and Books: The Book Arts from Antiquity to the Renaissance by Leila Avrin, on page 153, it is mentioned that copyists were paid average .25 denari per line (or 25 denari per 100 lines). How many lines did a good copyist write per day and how many characters were there on a line?! I'm thinking of time span around 200BC - 200AD.


texts: Did Japan ever retaliate for the Russian attacks of 1806?

texts:
In 1806 two Russian naval vessels burned several settlements and kidnapped several citizens in far northern Japan ("Russians in Alaska" by Lydia Black).

Did Japan take any military action in response to these raids?


texts: Where can I find a speech of a priest to encourage people against invasion?

texts:
Where can I find an example speech of a Catholic priest to encourage the common people in order to defense their city against the invaders -mainly for the Thirty Years War era?

Thanks!


texts:
I'm an American science student, and as such have to constantly fight with the metric and English unit systems. One thing that a couple other students and I were wondering is why, of all the different quantities to measure (length, weight, energy), did time become standard between the systems?

Edit: I am asking more about the history of the unit than the act of timekeeping itself. For nearly every other quantity I can think of, with the exception of charge, there is an SI and an English unit for it. The meter and the foot, the pound and the Newton, the BTU and the calorie. I know that SI units now define the English ones, that the French tried to make a decimal time system, and that "standard" is kind of a misnomer, but the real question is why do both modern systems use the second as their base time unit? Why isn't it ke (just for example, I don't know of any other vastly different units) in one and the second in the other? I can't see it being because of international coordination, because the US gets along fine measuring in English units and doing any conversions on other quantities, while the rest of the world uses the much better system. So to summarize, the unit specifically is what I'm wondering about, not timekeeping in general.


texts: Has the feminization of the labor force continued after WW1?

texts:
I've read that during the World War I, the labor force has experienced a strong feminization, in order to compensate the lack of men (engaged in the army).

At the end of the war, has the rate of women in the labor force dropped ? If yes, has it returned to its 1914 level ?


texts:
Puerto Rico is an unincorporated US territory. The US won the island from Spain in the Spanish-American War along with the Philippines and Guam, so it is also referred to as a colonial possession, specifically by the UN's Decolonization Committee.

Many US states were territories the US gained in wars. The territories ceded in the Mexican-American War had large numbers of Mexican citizens living in them, for example. Has Puerto Rico experienced fewer privileges and autonomy than other US territories? What were commonly the rights and treatment of the people like in US territories in the Continental US?


texts: Where can tactical maps for battles of the Mexican Revolution be accessed?

texts:
There are a bunch of resources on the Mexican revolution, but I've never seen an academical text that narrates the major battles in the struggle along with tactical maps.
Thus, I'm looking for a resource on tactical maps of the major battles in the Mexican revolution. In particular, I am interested in the battle of Zacatecas city in 1914. If anyone know this, feel free to answer.
Sources does not need to be in English.


texts: What evidence is there that Alfred paid the Danes to leave Wessex in 876?

texts: The Danes struck at Wareham in 876. Alfred made peace there with Guthrum, and there was an exchange of hostages. However, the Danes broke the peace and during the night they killed the hostages and left Wareham on horseback. I've seen modern references to money being paid to the Danes to sweeten the peace deal at Wareham. What primary sources show Alfred buying the Danes off in 876 or earlier?


texts: Why was the Cold War carried out over the whole world instead of between Siberia and Alaska?

texts:
I was wondering why the conflicts, missile deployments etc. throughout the Cold War were basically all taking place in Europe, Africa and Asia, when in fact the US and Soviet Union were only separated by a few kilometers over the Pacific.

Wouldn't that have been the "ideal" area for a nuclear standoff?

This also makes the Cuba Crisis look weird to me. Why make such a big deal out of transporting missiles all the way to Cuba, when the Soviets could have just moved and placed them within their own territory?


texts: How and when did the word "nuclear" replace the word "atomic"?

texts:
In the early "Atomic Age", nuclear technology was generally termed "atomic" in English. There was "A-bomb", "atomic reactor" and "Atomic Energy Commission".
But over time the word "nuclear" gained ascendance. Nowadays it is used almost exclusively, even the nickname for nuclear weapons is "nuke".
Obviously, nuclear is technically more correct, since this technology manipulates the nucleus, and uses its binding energy, but how did the more correct usage catch on? Who were the first to consistently say "nuclear"? When and how did the government begin to use it to name things? Did it go differently in the US and in the UK?


texts: In 1940s/50s how did refugees earn US citizenship?

texts:
I'm writing a piece about a polish refugee at the start of WW2 and I am trying to figure out the process for an unaccompanied minor, whose parents are supposed to be dead if that makes a difference, to become a US citizen in the late 40s or early 50s.

Does the country of origin (Poland here) make a difference?
How does the minor status affect the process?
What were the conditions (having lived in the US for x years, etc?) at that time - it is easy to find the rules today, but were they the same during WW2 with the many European refugees?
Does it matter if the parents are alive or supposed dead? (confirmation difficult in post-WW2, Soviet occupied Poland)
Does it make a difference if the boy is adopted by US citizens (considered orphan as parents are supposed to be dead) ?

There are plenty of examples for refugees becoming permanent US residents and citizens, but I could not find the exact process at that time for an unaccompanied minor.

I understand one had to be adult to become a citizen. So to amend the question: What would be the process once the person had his 19th birthday?


texts: When did covered wagons disappear from America?

texts:
Throughout 19th century Americans migrated west to settle land and most such trips were on foot and on covered wagons.  With the arrival of trains the wagons stopped, but my guess is that not everyone stopped using the wagons right away, since it would be expensive to take all your belongings on a train.

I would like to know when people stopped using covered wagons all together.  Did people suddenly stop using wagons as soon as trains arrived and if not how long did it take and what finally persuaded everyone to stop using the wagons.  Also of interest would be to know when the last caravan using covered wagons left for the west.


texts:
Plutarch described the last days of Alexander the Great in his book "Life of Alexander" based on records kept by Eumenes, Alexander's general secretary. Alexander had a high temperature for at least 5-6 days, and at the last day he couldn't speak. Is malaria the cause of his death, or did he have leukemia due to injuries sustained in battle?

Edit
(feel free to rollback if you do not agree with this edit)
There are several claims in Wikipedia [Death of Alexander the Great](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Death_of_Alexander_the_Great) but it's not clear how valid each claim is. Are there any clearer source?


texts: I've found this term "Quivira", both here and in an old journal by some explorer published in the 1500s. What I'm confused about if is "Quivira" is a term that was applied to the huge village that the explorers discovered, or if they never used that term to apply to the village and instead "Quivira" was a mythical place that they never successfully found.


texts:
I was having a conversation with family and friends this weekend and this question came up: "what was the last profitable war?"  Of course in history there were wars that turned a profit, ones I can think of are the Dacian war and some of the Mithradatic wars.  But once we get to a more recent history it is hard to think of many wars that have been profitable.

The best we could come up with as a possibility were some of the English wars in India. The last war we could say was definitely profitable would have been the 4th crusade, and that was only definitely profitable for the Venetian's.

I have been using google and wikipedia primarily for my research as I am on vacation, and have looked up pretty much all of the wars I can think of but I am sure there are some we have missed.

Also as a caveat, no minor wars, which would eliminate the wars the Dutch fought against minor island kingdoms in their "spice wars" and no wars where a belligerent doesn't fight but receives some recompense for being in the alliance. Also as far as profit, it has to be a financial profit, money, land, etc... No political profit, or other intangible things. So in other words, only short term profit.  The profit refers to the regime, government, king in charge, not profitable to some people in society.  The profit from the war is meant mainly in spoils, land, etc.

I will edit to make changes, it cant be profitable for just an arms dealer or the like. I am referring to profitable for the country, government, regime, etc. I am also talking about short term profit, 3 years from conclusion of peace. Long term profit is way to subjective. I would also say that one of the causes of Rome's problems was they ran out of profitable wars to engage in and never could meet their expenses without them.


texts: Where was the Barberini psalter created?

texts:
Would you know where the Barberini psalter was created?

I have checked the on-line sources and cannot find the answer (maybe I have overlooked it?)

It was created in the 11th century. The obvious answer would be "Florence, because Barberinis lived in Florence in the 11th century", but I am not sure because the objects can be named after their later owners, not after those who have commissioned them.


texts: What reached Scandinavia/Northern Germany first: Muslims, or Islamic texts?

texts:
Years ago i had the chance to leaf through some Qur'an translations (Latin, German? some bilingual with Arabic text) in a library in northern Germany which are dated to 16th century and later. As we know that Muslims and their thoughts and sciences where more or less known in European countries and cities around the Mediterranean. I would like to know when they reached northern parts of Europe especially for: Germany and Scandinavian countries.
I know that the German poet and thinker Goethe (1749-1832) already wrote a poem about Mohammad as a young man!

But my focus is what came first Muslims themselves, or books, like translations of books written by Muslims or the Qur'an? What evidence is there?

EDIT: I just found this about al-Mas'udi, where he seems to know about Kashubians (eastern Pommerania) which is not far from what is now called Germany!


texts: Can you identify this seemingly British uniform in a presumably French portrait?

texts:
The uniform in this presumably French portrait. The portrait was handed down through unknown generations within the de Boissoudy family in the South of France.

Latest family members are perplexed as to why their ancestor is in a "British" uniform. I am speculating that he is not in a British uniform.

Can anyone identify the uniform in this portrait?


texts: Amount of ammunition typically carried by an C18th British redcoat

texts: How many rounds of musket ammunition did the typical British redcoat carry during the C18th & Napoleonic wars?


texts: Did the deity "Horus" pre-date "Horus-Aha"?

texts: Hor-Aha (or Aha or Horus Aha) is considered the second pharaoh of the First Dynasty of Egypt by some Egyptologists, others consider him the first one and corresponding to Menes. He lived around the 31st century BC and is thought to have had a long reign.


texts: After the Mongol Empire fell, did China really turn away from math and physics?

texts:
I came across this from the Wiki article on Chinese Mathematics:

  After the overthrow of the Yuan Dynasty, China became suspicious of knowledge it used. The Ming Dynasty turned away from math and physics in favor of botany and pharmacology.

There's no citation. Is that really true? Were there any decrees by the emperor about it? To what extent did China shun math and physics?


texts: Was there any genuine debate in the pre-1860 United States regarding Native American sovereignty?

texts:
The United States treated Native American tribes as sovereign states.  Relations with various tribes were governed by a series of (often broken) treaties.

At the same time, however, general territorial claims in North America were resolved between the United States and other powers as if the Native American tribes didn't exist.  The Louisiana Purchase wasn't negotiated with the individual tribes living in the Missouri River watershed; it was negotiated with France.  Territorial settlements with Great Britain, Russia, and Mexico were negotiated without input from Native Americans occupying the territories in question.

Did the US government regard some Native Americans as sovereign, and some as not-sovereign?  In cases where the Native Americans were not sovereign, why weren't the Native Americans regarded as citizens?  Was there any debate about this at all, or were these questions resolved on the ground on an ad hoc basis?


texts: When planning Barbarossa, did Germany conceive of the Soviet migration of heavy industry?

texts:
Wikipedia has a very tiny article on this. Basically, when Barbarossa was launched, the Soviet Union started evacuating the factories. They were migrated to places beyond the Ural Mountains.

I'm wondering if Hitler or others conceived of this possibility when they were planning Barbarossa? If not, when did they find out it was happening? Do we have minutes or other notes from the high-level meetings of 1940/1941?

It seems to me that without this migration, all the Eastern European industry would be destroyed by 1941 Nov/Dec, so the ability of the USSR to make war would be nil. I am wondering if Hitler and his Generals thought the exact same thing, but didn't conceive of the factory evacuation.


texts: What prompted Cuba to fight against South African Imperialism?

texts:
After the Cuban Revolution, Cuba fought against South African apartheid against the advice of its Soviet sponsors who were looking for a rapprochement with the US.

What prompted such a move? Although Cuba was Marxist-Communist, there is little in Marx about European imperialism. This was an aporia, that from many accounts, was picked up by Rosa Luxembourg and then later by Mao.

Was Castro influenced by either of these figures or was it merely due to the fact that Cuba historically had a mixed or mestizo population and hence had an indigenous reinterpretation of Marx?


texts: Why did Europeans call Native Americans Indians in the 18th Century AD, After they had found out they were in the wrong continent?

texts:
Why did European people continue to call Native Americans as Indians even after they found out they were not Indians?

Question was inspired by Louis Ck's stand up bit.

Based on what I know:
Europeans were interested in Spice trade, they wanted to explore sea route instead of land route because they had to cross many empire/kingdoms to reach India and vice versa.

They started exploring sea routes, Magellan challenged the earth is round theory, Columbus went the wrong route and discovered land.

Based on skin color, they called Native American folks Indians. fast forward to late 17th century, they found out that Britain were actually in India and they were on the wrong continent.

They still call them Indians, 300 years later.

The only thing common between Native Americans and OG-Indians is Hair color. But, they didn't have technology to verify the other features.

I m assuming Europeans thought "Brown Skin + Black Hair + ride horses + archers and swordsmen"  =  Indians

But, Indians from India had gold, ate spicy food, had architecture while the folks on the north american continent had none of that.


texts: Are there any good sources on the history of the name for Kazakhstan?

texts:
I'm having a very hard time finding sources on the history of Kazakhstan's name changes. My query began when I read this quote:

Have you ever wished you could change your name? In 1995, the people of Kazakstan did just that. Their republic used to be known as Kazakhstan. The "h" in Kazakhstan was added by Russians to make the name easier to pronounce in Russian.
Russians had a history of misnaming the Kazaks. When Russians first met the Kazaks, they wanted to avoid confusing them with the Cossacks, a southern Russian ethnic group. So Russians called the Kazaks the Kyrgyz (kihr GEEZ). Finally, they began calling the Kazaks Kazakhs and their country Kazakhstan. When the "h" was dropped in 1995, the Kazaks finally had a name for their country that finally reflected who they really were.

The above quote is from page 138 of Prentice Hall World Explorer: Asia and the Pacific (ISBN 0-13-062987-1)
The only other reference I could find to Kazakhstan changing its name was this one:

Kazakhstan, which has kept cartographers busy over the past few years by changing their name from Kazakhstan to Kazakstan and back again to Kazakhstan...

http://geography.about.com/library/weekly/aa062998.htm
So the timeline is

Russia introduces an "h" in Kazakhstan at some unknown time during its rule
In 1995 after independence, the Kazakhs remove the "h"
The Kazakhs re-introduce the "h" at some unknown time afterwards.

Are there any good sources that can answer these questions?

Exactly when did each of the 3 name changes occur?
What were the motivations behind each name change?

Since the national language is Kazakh and Russian, why does it matter how it is spelled in English?

Even Wikipedia doesn't mention the "Kazakstan" spelling :(. Thanks in advance!


texts: Are there any records of Turks settling in Anatolia before the 11th century?

texts: I know the mass Turkic Migration into the Middle East occurred during the 10th-11th centuries but are there any records of Turks settling in Anatolia before the Seljuq invasion?


texts: Did Hitler brag about or downplay his war experiences in WW I in appealing to 1932 voters?

texts:
I am currently reading Yuval Noah Harari's Homo Deus: A Brief History of Tomorrow. IMHO it is unfortunately much weaker than its impressive predecessor (as can of course happen with "second" books). At one point the author claims this:

  [Hitler] wasn't a successful businessman or a union activist, he
  didn't have friends or relatives in high places, or any money to speak
  of. At first, he didn't even have German citizenship. He was a
  penniless immigrant.

  When Hitler appealed to the German voters and asked for their trust, he
  could muster only one argument in his favor: his experiences in the
  trenches had taught him what you can never learn at university, at
  general headquarters or at a government ministry. People followed him,
  and voted for him because they identified with him, and because they
  too believed that the world is a jungle, and that what doesn't kill us
  only makes us stronger.

Is there any evidence that Hitler came to power because voters were impressed by his war record or by the lessons that he drew from having served in the war? At another point the author points out Hitler's undistinguished military service record over four years, which makes this conjecture even odder.

  Hitler wasn't a senior officer -- in four years of war, he rose no higher than the rank of corporal.

Yes, 1932 voters may have identified with him, but did Hitler's "experiences in the trenches" of WW I really play a significant role in his ascent except in the broad sense of sharing a generation's fate?


texts: Can the University of Bologna be considered the first university in the world?

texts: There are usually two different opinions: the first group considers the University of Bolgona to be officially the first one, some others instead claim that there might have been other groups of students in the eastern world before.


texts: What was the first example of a foreign mercenary unit?

texts:
Employing foreign mercenaries as royal guards is an ancient trend. The Pope employed Swiss guards starting with the Renaissance. The Basileus had his Varangian Guard. Even the Roman emperors briefly recruited an Imperial German Guard. The benefits are obvious: foreigners have no chance in any local political arena, their loyalty lies with the guy paying their salaries, and any units whose fame crosses cultural boundaries must be skilled and famous indeed.

How far back does this go, though? Who was the first to intentionally employ a unit of fully foreign soldiers?


texts: Did Roman citizens vote in more than one legislative assembly?

texts:
During the Roman Republic, did Roman citizens vote in more than one legislative assembly (namely the Curiate, Centuriate, Tribal Assemblies, and the Plebeian Council)?

For example, was a plebeian soldier required to cast his vote in both the Centuriate and Tribal Assemblies, plus the Plebeian Council?

The aim of this question is to understand whether membership in these four legislative assemblies was mutually exclusive.


texts: Did the USSR invite other astronauts of Apollo 11 besides Armstrong?

texts: Sometime after the return of Apollo 11, Neil Armstrong visited the USSR. I wonder why he was alone? Weren't the other astronauts invited or they refused to visit? Was it because Armstrong was an atheist while the others were devoted Christians?


texts: Do historians agree that wars break out because of miscalculations?

texts:
I am not a historian and have always been curious as to really why wars break out. I find it unthinkable how people can decide to kill each other in big numbers and cannot just resolve all matters peacefully.

Recently I read something that seems to be a genial explanation:

  This belief also underpins Geoffrey Blainey’s famous argument that war breaks out in good part because states cannot agree on the balance of power, but the subsequent fighting then establishes “an orderly ladder of power between victors and losers.” If the rival states had recognized the true balance beforehand, he argues, there would have been no war. Both sides would have foreseen the outcome and been motivated to negotiate a peaceful settlement based on existing power realities, rather than fight a bloody war to reach the same end.

I saw this in Mearsheimer's book entitled "The Tragedy of Great Power Politics."

Following this logic, I can make the following observation: if State X becomes militarily stronger than before and, solely for this reason, makes some territorial demands to State Y, and if the latter refuses to concede territory and then loses the war and the requested territory, which gets annexed by State X, then the guilty side is State Y, because the cause of the war was a miscalculation by State Y. It is because of that miscalculation that people had to die. This reasoning seems to well substantiate why it is fair and just that the loser has to pay reparations regardless of who actually started the war.

How common among historians is the view that war is a result of a miscalculation, and how acceptable is it in historical articles to blame the side that made that miscalculation?


texts: Why has Hainan been so little fought over?

texts:
There are two really substantial islands off the coast of China, namely Taiwan (Formosa) and Hainan. Whereas Taiwan has been occupied, colonised, renamed and fought over for the last 600 years, Hainan gets hardly a footnote in most histories.

The Portuguese named Taiwan (for Western atlases and history books), the Dutch and Spanish colonised it (or started to), the Japanese occupied it for decades and finally and famously Taiwan was the last stronghold for anti-Communist forces escaping the mainland. In Hainan, nothing comparable occurred.

Superficially it might seem both islands' appeal to foreign powers would be roughly equal - both offer a substantial offshore base in a strategically vital area. And while Taiwan would have been handier for the Japanese, Hainan would seem to be more accessible for the European explorers and colonisers moving up from the South.

Wikipedia's page at least explains why Taiwan made a better base than Hainan for the Kuomintang but says nothing about why European invaders bypassed it.

Is it that Hainan lacks harbours or has no spices or other natural resources to interest invaders?


texts: What was the scope and extent of Herbert Eulenburg's criticism of the Nazi regime during WW2?

texts:
During Nazi Germany, Eulenberg’s dramas were banned, his books were no
  longer printed or sold. Yet, he stood firm against the threats of
  party members, who continuously denounced the pacifist and humanist as
  a “red-haired Jew”. If it had not been for his great fame he would
  have ended up in a Nazi concentration camp.

  Eulenburg was a member of the Reich Chamber of Literature (part of the
  Reich Chamber of Culture).

  During World War II, he published short articles under his pseudonyms
  “Siebenkäs”, “Lynkeus” or “Der lächelnde Zuschauer” in “Der Mittag”, a
  Düsseldorf daily newspaper. At the same time he wrote a multitude of
  dramas, in which he sharply attacked and disputed the current
  political situation. (wiki)

Were these critical dramas published or performed?

What exactly was in those short articles?

(The website of Der Mittag seems to offer for purchase back issues, presumably scanned, but the coverage is virtually non-existent for the whole WW2 period: only a few issues from late 1939 and that of 22.11.1943 are available)

What I am trying to figure out is how much criticism was permitted, since obviously the authorities could easily shut it down if they really wanted. I also suppose that the true identity behind the pseudonyms was easily establishable.


texts: At what point did noblemen stop being the backbone of the military?

texts:
During the Dark Ages one of the primary responsibilities of noblemen was to engage in warfare. It was a large part of their education, and a nobleman was expected to be able to win easily against a commoner in a sword fight.

Nowadays noblemen are not fighters. You do not expect Sir Paul McCartney to do well in a fight.

So in what period of history did noblemen actually stop being expected to be directly involved in military conflict?


texts: Does history use hypothesis testing using statistical methods?

texts:
To what extent does the study of history use hypothesis testing? By Hypothesis testing I mean the usage of p-values and significance levels to dictate how an actual event differs from the event by chance;
An example where it could be used in history:
To evaluate the change in attitudes of female politicians since laws in country A was changed. The sample would be all politicians of country A for a single year and evaluate the p value with assumed distribution X~B(sample size, 0.5). This can then be graphed to show that the distribution is becoming less/more/as true.
The math would probably take more into account but the basic idea is the same


texts:
I'm currently working on a research paper for my World War II class and I've decided that I wanted to pursue the topic of education in Nazi occupied Europe during WWII.

However, after doing loads of research, I'm having a very hard time coming up with resources pertaining to my topic. I either need to refine or switch countries. Nonetheless, my question is about sources. Do any of you know good sources that speak of education in Europe during the Second World War? Are there good books, scholarly articles, interviews out there?

Any guidance and feedback would be greatly appreciated!


texts: Can anyone help identify this French military uniform?

texts:
Can anyone help identify this French Military Uniform?

The picture belongs to a woman – my father's 2nd cousin found through DNA matching – and she says it's her grandfather, who was a Frenchman. She was never told the man's name, and we are trying to find his identity – and believe it is one of my ancestors.

I had a great grandfather who was a Sergeant in the 1st Regiment of Zouaves in 1854, but this picture appears to be dated much later, so I don't think it was him. I don't have the date for the picture, but guessing somewhere around 1890–1900.

I posted another picture of him as an older man – also wearing a uniform – with a number 108 on the collar.

Any leads would be much appreciated.


texts: What did Tacitus write about Nero and the Great Fire of Rome 64AD?

texts:
I have always been fascinated by the history of ancient Rome and this is one of the topics I always wanted to know a little bit more about.

The rumor about Nero himself giving the order to burn down parts of the city is a widespread assumption about this part of history. In some books I read about Tacitus mentioning Nero's involvement, at least when it comes to accusing the Christians of setting the city on fire.

I would like to ask:

What did Tacitus write exactly? Did he believe that Nero was involved?
Are there any other reasonable theories? Have some been written down by "contemporary witnesses" of this period?


texts:
I watched The Life of Brian and I heard this quotation:

And from our fathers' fathers' fathers.
Reg: Yes.
Stan: And from our fathers' fathers' fathers' fathers.
Reg: All right, Stan. Don't labour the point. And what have they ever given us in return?
Xerxes: The aqueduct.
Reg: Oh yeah, yeah they gave us that. Yeah. That's true.
Masked Activist:  And the sanitation!
Stan: Oh yes... sanitation, Reg, you remember what the city used to be like.
Reg: All right, I'll grant you that the aqueduct and the sanitation are two things that the Romans have done...
Matthias: And the roads...
Reg: (sharply) Well yes obviously the roads... the roads go without saying. But apart from the aqueduct, the sanitation and the roads...
Another Masked Activist: Irrigation...
Other Masked Voices: Medicine... Education... Health...
Reg: Yes... all right, fair enough...
Activist Near Front: And the wine...
Omnes: Oh yes! True!
Francis: Yeah. That's something we'd really miss if the Romans left, Reg.
Masked Activist at Back: Public baths!
Stan: And it's safe to walk in the streets at night now.
Francis: Yes, they certainly know how to keep order... (general nodding)... let's face it, they're the only ones who could in a place like this.
(more general murmurs of agreement)
Reg: All right... all right... but apart from better sanitation and medicine and education and irrigation and public health and roads and a freshwater system and baths and public order... what have the Romans done for us?
Xerxes: Brought peace!
Reg: (very angry, he's not having a good meeting at all) What!? Oh... (scornfully) Peace, yes... shut up!

Historically, what did the Romans do for Judea? Did they build aqueducts, roads, sanitation, etc.?


texts: Why were British ships not of the same quality as French and Spanish ships until the latter part of the 18th century?

texts:
In Patrick O'Brian's 'Men-of-War', it says (apparently referring to around the time the Victory was built [1759-65]),

  ...most of the British ships were not nearly so well built as the French or the Spanish: they were often slow; they nearly always carried too many guns; they were sometimes very crank - that is, they leaned over in a wind so that they could not open the lower gun-port or the sea would rush in; and occasionally they fell to pieces in a storm.

He then goes on to cite the example of the 'Forty Thieves' (ships of poor construction due to some 'dubious practices' according to Wikipedia), and says that sometimes the royal yards were not much better. Despite this, O'Brian notes that the Royal Navy won all the great fleet battles for a variety of reasons (better gunnery, seamanship etc). Wikipedia also mentions financing, superior tactics and other factors, but states that design and construction were not superior up until around 1750.

O'Brian also notes that British ships were sometimes built

  ...following the plans of the beautiful and fast sailing French or Spanish ships that were captured

Given Britain's maritime history and the critical role the navy has played in defending the country (e.g. against the Armada, and note also the successful invasions by the Vikings and William the Conqueror in the times before Britain had an effective Navy), why was British ship-building of such a low standard (leaving aside the specific case of the 'Forty Thieves') compared to its main European rivals in the first half of the 18th century?

I have read SE:H question 'What is the origin of the English Ship Building Philosophy?' and the answers there. Rather than answering my question, David Paigen's answer seems to indicate that English shipbuilding skills declined from the 16th century. Is there any particular reason for this?


texts:
Title pretty much self explenatory.

Im a student myself (but not of history), and I am looking for a good book on the period that is not too heavy, but gives good coverage for early east Slavic history, Kievan Rus period etc

Thanks in advance


texts: Did Russia declare war on Germany before its invasion of that country on August 7, 1914?

texts: I was looking through some lists of war declarations from the first World War and I did not see any declaration of war by Russia on Germany or Prussia. The Russian army did invade Prussia on August 7, 1914. Was there no declaration of war by Russia on Prussia before this invasion?


texts: Why did the US have a plan for the event of war against Britain in the 1920s?

texts:
By pure chance, I found out there was a Plan red for the event of war between the states and Britain. The plan was conceived in the late 20s and early 30s of the previous century. It seems the article makes no mention of the expected reasons for such a war.

Initially I assumed it was customary to plan for the event of war with any serious rival - particularly since there were a series of Colour Plans for various war theatres. But the plan was classified until 1974, which seems to indicate it was not expected there would be such a plan.

So, did the United States expect war against Britain and why?

Wikipedia further states the following, which I don't know how to assess, but which seems important:

    War Plan Red was developed by the United States Army following the 1927 Geneva Naval Conference and approved in May 1930 by Secretary of War Patrick J. Hurley and Secretary of Navy Charles Francis Adams III and updated in 1934–35; it was not presented for presidential or Congressional approval. Only the United States Congress has the power to declare war.


texts: Why did the Soviet Union have multiple airplane manufacturers?

texts:
Generally, Communism believed in economic central planning, with each field being serviced by one "company" (to avoid waste).

Why was it that the Soviet Union had multiple airplane manufacturers, many of which had openly competing airplanes (MiG and Su, for example, both made fighters).

Why didn't they "merge" them into one large bureau?


texts: Why is the capital of Turkey Ankara rather than Istanbul?

texts: Turkey's predecessor state, the Ottoman Empire, had its capital in Istanbul. Are there any reasons for the capital's move when it became Turkey?


texts: What trains were used on the Dakar-Niger Railway in the late 1950s and early 1960s?

texts:
What trains were used on the Dakar-Niger Railway in the late 1950s and early 1960s, i.e. the transition to independence? Are there any images available?

I can find images of the railway from 1950 and 1979. I'm guessing the locomotives that are in the first link (1950) were used throughout the 1950s (or are at least representative) given that they were apparently built in 1947 (with a similar set in 1954), but I'd love to be able to confirm this guess.


texts: Was the act of servicemen exchanging their weapons for enemy weapons common during WWII?

texts:
I have often heard that soldiers (particularly Allied soldiers) would swap their weapons for enemy weapons during World War II. Allies would take German weapons, like the MP40, that were seen as a step up from some of their weaponry. Unfortunately, I cannot recall where I have heard these rumors from.

Are the rumors of soldiers swapping their weapon for enemy weapons true?
This quora post answers some questions about the logistics behind why swapping weapons is poor. As well, replies to this reddit post point towards soldiers collecting souvenirs and armies procuring large quantities of weapons to be re-chambered and distributed. My question is specifically about the exchanging of weapons for "better" enemy weapons.

I can understand soldiers on the front line taking whatever weapons are available to them if theirs suffered a catastrophic malfunction or ran out of ammunition. However, this poses difficulties when resupplying, given the drastic differences in ammunition types between armies. Even if they did manage to obtain ammunition, once they're removed from the front lines would they even be allowed to retain the weapon? I would imagine that they may even be reprimanded for losing their service weapon.


texts: What was said about Vermont in the Paris negotiations of 1782?

texts:
In November 1782 the Preliminary Articles of Peace between Britain and the United States were signed.  They specified where the boundaries of the United States were.  I have two questions:

(1) Did anybody ever attempt to define the boundaries of the United States before that?

(2) Vermont was included within the boundaries.  Some things about this are crystal-clear:

Vermont was then under a government that denied that Vermont was a part of the United States, after Vermont's petitions to be admitted as the 14th state had been repeatedly denied due to vehement objections from New York.
New York's government adamantly insisted Vermont was a part of New York (as King George III ruled it was, in an order-in-council on July 20, 1764).
When Vermont became the 14th state in 1791, its constitution of 1786 continued in effect and the governor and all other officers of the state of Vermont simply continued their terms of office that were already underway.  This makes it appear that some at least tacit retroactive recognition to official acts of the state of Vermont before its admission to the Union was at work.  Indeed, the act of Congress admitting Vermont to the Union called the already existing entity that had applied for admission "the State of Vermont".
The New York legislature's act of March 6, 1790, consenting to Vermont's admission, said they were consenting to a new state being formed within the existing boundaries of New York, and that their claim to Vermont would not be renounced unless Congress decided to admit Vermont to the Union.  Thus New York was carefully avoiding any retroactive recognition.  (However, the following October, when the negotiations on the boundary were concluded (on which New York's consent was contingent) the commissioners of New York proclaiming the successful conclusion of the negotiations referred to "the community actually exercising independent jurisdiction as 'the State of Vermont' ".  Thus the commissioners acknowledged that the de-facto situation existed.)

One must surmise that one reason why the American diplomats in Paris felt they had to insist on the inclusion of Vermont within the boundaries of the U.S.A. was that one of the thirteen states claimed Vermont, and the peace negotiations in Paris were no occasion to make decisions about that particular dispute, nor about the boundaries of Vermont. So my question is: What, if anything, was actually said about Vermont during the deliberations and negotiations in Paris?


texts: How does it arise that there are two Colorado rivers, and how does one distinguish between them?

texts:
The storm in Houston has drawn to my attention, a fact of which I was previously unaware, that there are two quite separate Colorado rivers.

In Britain we have various instances of rivers with the same name e.g. Avon, Ouse etc. But we usually distinguish them by talking about "The Great Ouse" and the "Yorkshire Ouse" etc.

Please could someone explain to me how it arose that there were two Colorado Rivers, And if I describe one as "the Texas Colorado", what do I call the other?


texts:
I'm interested in the state of the Frankish kingdom at the time of the Merovingian peak, before they were deposed.

I have heard hints of lavish lifestyle, but I take this to be much the same way that people today spite the "1%" with differentiating between 'the wealthy' and 'the obscene.' Was it this reason, or something else, that made them so reviled?


texts: Were there Jewish diplomats in Nazi Germany?

texts:
It is pretty well known that Nazis discouraged US companies from having local representatives who were Jews. I imagine it did not happen all at once and the way foreign Jews were treated was quite different prior to WW2 than German Jews were. Interestingly, Irving Thalberg needed surgery and I guess Germany was so superior to the USA medically prior to WW2 (as it was in many other areas) that he went there and was successfully treated even though friends were worried about this.
I doubt that there were many Jews in the USA diplomatic corps in those days but we do know that Molotov replaced a Jewish diplomat and that in fact there were many Jews in the Soviet corps. So in the early days of USSR Nazi dealings, did Jews actually visit Nazi Germany or have other dealings with Germany?


texts: Spanish colonial cattle ranching cultures

texts:
Many Iberian colonists in the viceroyalties of New Spain (Mexico) and La Plata (Argentina) practiced cattle ranching. Both sides practiced branding and rode horses to control their herds. Many of the colonists, and their breeding stock, were Andalucian in origin.

During the colonial period, how did these two cattle cultures diverge? (One factor of which I am already aware is that La Plata cowboys adopted Incan-style bolas.)


texts: What was the first supranational organization?

texts: The European Union is the only organization at the moment that exhibits a high level of integration amongst its member nation states, but is it the world's first supranational type organization? Are there examples of nation states in the past banding together in an EU like fashion?


texts: Did a starving Great Wall guard let enemies through?

texts:
I watched a documentary once about the Great Wall of China. In it, it claimed that a soldier or guard at the time of one of the dynasties let an enemy force through in exchange for food because he was starving due to not being paid enough.  I am writing a white paper on physical security and wanted to reference this as a fact but am finding it hard to search for this because of all the Chinese restaurants called Great Wall and most of what I find on protecting the wall is about protecting it from deterioration in modern times.

Can someone confirm this as fact with more details to help me search for references (ie. Which dynasty, which enemy, etc).

Thanks.


texts: Besides Crecy and Poitiers, in what battle was the Longbow the decisive weapon?

texts:
I am looking for the Longbow itself being the decisive weapon, not the Longbow men, as was the case in Agincourt. This could mean some significant disadvantages to the enemy, including things like: the Longbows inflicted a high number of casualties or the Longbows being a strong force multiplier that it helped the English army win.

I didn't include Agincourt because the Longbow was not the decisive factor IMO; it was the mud and the battlefield as a whole.


texts: Did the roman conquerors have directives/guidelines to either integrate or assimilate foreign tribes/folks?

texts:
It is likely that Romans made no distinction between today's terms integration and assimilation. They did everything that was necessary for the expansion of the Roman empire and worked from experience. Due to the communication lag between Rome and conquerors in distant, marginal territories, there had to exist directives/guidelines on how to deal with newly conquered cultures/tribes.

While the Romans adopted a lot of foreign culture as well (e.g. Greek philosophy, mythology), they likely didn't allow conquered tribes to practice their religion/language any more (?). That's probably the rough border line between integration/assimilation compared to today's meanings. Maybe they even married foreign women and killed foreign male adults/children to "speed up" cultural assimilation.

What known and/or documented procedures did conquerors/military tribunes conduct to assimilate foreign cultures in the best way? What was "officially" prescribed by the Roman senate and philosophy?


texts: What oath did medical students take in Nazi Germany between 1933 and 1945?

texts:
The World Medical Association responded to Nazi
medical atrocities not by reasserting the time-tested
Hippocratic oath, but by asserting a new modern
oath, subject to change every 10 years. Source: Freedom2Care

Background

While researching the topic of medical ethics in relation to the altruistic nature of the Hippocratic Oath juxtaposed with euthanasia (Aktion T4), compulsory sterilizations, human experimentation and mass murder performed by physicians in the Third Reich (I hesitate to say Nazi Doctors as so many do, because not all who participated in these barbaric actions were actually SS nor even Nazi party members, though many of course were), I came upon this interesting piece of information in the Wiki article on the Oath:

  In Germany during the Third Reich, medical students did not take the Hippocratic Oath, although they knew the ethic of "nil nocere" — do no harm.

While there have been many versions of the Hippocratic Oath, and indeed some modern medical societies and institutions administer completely different oaths governing ethical behavior, I have been unable to find a text of the Oath used in Nazi Germany which replaced the Hippocratic Oath during those years – if indeed any oath at all was administered.

Question

Was there a custom Third Reich medical oath?  If so, what is the text of that oath (preferably in English)?  Or was there no oath at all?


texts: Have historians envisioned how World II would have developed without Churchill as Prime Minister of Britain?

texts:
The question isn't about what would have happened in that event. It is: Have one or more recognized historians delved into this question (of what would have happened if Britain had surrendered to or collaborated with Germany under another leader than Churchill)? What were the findings of their inquiries?

(In "The Rise and Fall of the Third Reich," William L. Shirer hypothesizes that the relationship between occupier and occupied would have been a hostile one, but doesn't go into what the implications would have been for war itself.)


texts: What were some Greek equivalents of a Roman triumph?

texts:
In ancient Rome, it became common to honor successful military leaders with a parade in their honor. The standard form might involve the general getting snazzy clothes and a gilt chariot, his soldiers enjoying the city's praise, and showing off all the bullion, treasure, and slaves taken as plunder.

In ancient Greece, things certainly varied from city to city but they must have had some usual honors they bestowed upon their military leaders. Do any of y'all know what Athens and Sparta's celebrations or awards would have usually been? and any special or well-known examples from other Greek cities?


texts: What is this (possibly WW1) officer's uniform and regiment?

texts: This photograph comes from an old family photo album - our family is of British descent who lived in South Africa.  Unfortunately those who knew this person have since died and we are hoping to track down who he was.  We suspect the uniform is WW1 but were wondering if it might be older.  Apologies that I can't provide any further details.  Any help would be much appreciated. Thanks.


texts:
Image is a photo of an original tin type (photographic method introduced in 1856, in popular production until roughly 1867), hat appears to be U.S. Civil War - Union, "X" patch on right front breast region, single row of buttons, rectangular belt buckle, sword is straight-bladed, heavy "D" guard, does not appear to have the same guard as a NCO sword, though.

Can anyone identify / confirm that this image is Civil War?
Any other details?


texts: Was there ever any organization of thieves or pickpockets?

texts: Can anyone suggest any historical examples of an established group specifically dedicated to organized thievery (any combination of property based crimes such as pick-pocketing, lock-picking, fencing, robbery, mugging, etc.)?  I would be especially interested in any religious influences and ethical motivations/convictions of such an organization.


texts: Did the Great Society programs ameliorate poverty or exacerbate it?

texts:
Once time ago Martin Luther King Jr., in his "I Have a Dream" speech, said:

  We must honestly face the fact that the movement must address itself to the question of restructuring the whole of American society. There are forty million poor people here, and one day we must ask the question, “Why are there forty million poor people in America?” And when you begin to ask that question, you are raising a question about the economic system, about a broader distribution of wealth. When you ask that question, you begin to question the capitalistic economy. And I’m simply saying that more and more, we’ve got to begin to ask questions about the whole society. We are called upon to help the discouraged beggars in life’s marketplace. But one day we must come to see that an edifice which produces beggars needs restructuring.

In fact the above piece, questions the capitalistic economy. Dr. King calls for at the very least massive government spending to make up for centuries of discrimination, and possibly for socialism in the United States.

President Lyndon B. Johnson indeed implemented part of this vision in his Great Society program which was supposed to solve the poverty problem in the USA, with obvious emphasis on the black population.

However, with the lapse of 50 years poverty is clearly not gone. Furthermore, some people contend that massive government spending, Great Society-style, has not really helped blacks over time but rather instead exacerbated their condition.

Is there a reliable objective study that addresses this issue?


texts: What were the flaws in the U.S. Strategic Bombing Survey?

texts: According to this source, "Some historians have identified flaws in the [U.S. Strategic Bombing] survey, based on contemporary evidence." I have unsuccessfully searched the internet for these historians and am curious if anyone here can help me find them and explain the specific flaws in the U.S. Strategic Bombing survey. Thanks.


texts: Why did Chamberlain act to appease Hitler leading up to the outbreak of World War 2?

texts:
There are accounts that British Prime Minister Chamberlain sought to appease Hitler because he just didn't want Britain involved in a war at that time. Others also argue that Chamberlain was naive and gullible.

Given the clear provocations of Germany during this time, why did Chamberlain actively choose to appease Hitler leading up to World War 2? Furthermore, why didn't parliament and influential advisers seek to override his decisions?


texts:
I've heard that he was not. Later, I've heard that he would have joined the fray if not because of political consideration.

I forgot the source.


texts: When the United States Congress passes an amendment, how are its votes counted?

texts:
For a constitutional amendment to pass in the United States Congress, must the two-thirds vote include those present only (i.e., abstentions count against) or those present and voting (i.e., abstentions do not count)?

Have there been amendments where this would make a difference?


texts: What is the 'rank switching' done by Roman Legionnaires in HBO's 'Rome' called, and did it actually happen?

texts:
I'm talking about the formational fighting show in this video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pJO2UfG9KcI

Where did the show's creators get the source material? If so, what was it called, when did this style of fighting start and was it effective?


texts:
Why did post-colonial Arabs fail to advance in science and technology?

For example, Israel was much younger than Egypt, but, it become a world leader in science and technology.

What factors contributed to the scenario?


texts:
Because all of my knowledge of Tifinagh came from the Wikipedia article, I was quite puzzled to read this blog.
For those of you that just don't bother checking, the author describes the different positions of English and French scholars.

Nobody is quite sure where the Berber script, used by the nomads of Northern Africa, came from.  English sources are pretty certain that Tifinagh evolved from the Phoenician script that settlers brought with them when they founded Carthage in about 1000 BC.  French sources admit the possibility that it evolved from a much older, unknown, native script. [...]
Both languages’ sources say that there was an eastern dialect and a western dialect of the script.  Both agree that Tifinagh was used until about 200 AD, when the artifact record died out, but there is disagreement on the dating of the start of its use.  Because of a small number of bilingual texts and its continuation into the modern era (more on that later), scholars are pretty sure what phonemes the glyphs correspond to. The English sources say that, like Etruscan, they cannot read the language.  French sources say that the Eastern dialect has been deciphered.  Because of who was in the area, they are both pretty sure it was a language of the Berber nomads. [...]
Unusually for scripts of that era, Tifinagh was usually written vertically, and even more unusually, most commonly from bottom-to-top.  Only some glyphs were allowed at the beginning of lines.  These could be used to tell which direction to read the writing in.

What evidence support either version? I am particularly interested about the French version, as I have some vague idea of the English one.


texts: What's the story behind this photo of hikers who brought white plague cure to President Wilson?

texts:
"LOS ANGELES HIKERS WHO BROUGHT WHITE PLAGUE CURE TO PRESIDENT WILSON. AT WHITE HOUSE"

I stumbled upon this interesting photo at the United States Library of Congress site, which seems to refer to Woodrow Wilson, but I can't find any information about the incident described in the caption. Just curious. (There are also a couple of related photos, here and here.)


texts: Have people ever been deterred from reporting an event because the report might seem impossible?

texts:
I'm seeking occurrences in history where people or organizations did some activity, but witnesses who would speak about the activity, would be considered insane, because of the unlikely nature of the event. Because of this 'deterrent effect', the activity could be continued.

It can be crimes or another event that fits the description. The term 'activity' can be interpreted freely.
It can also be a 'cover up' from the organization, in the sense that people 'act as if'. People can be dressed or act in a way that deters them to report an accompanying event. In that way, the accompanying activity isn't reported because of the 'cover up'.


texts: Synagogue Scene in Der Ewige Jude: Looking for more information

texts:
This question is fairly technical, but I've run into a dead-end and the historians whom I have asked have been unable to help me. If anybody can direct me to something on this subject, I would very much appreciate it.

I’m trying to find out some more information about the infamous synagogue scene in Der Ewige Jüde: the 1940 propaganda movie directed by Fritz Hippler. According to Shimon Huberband, it was filmed in the Vilker shul in Lodz, and the cantor was Oszer Winograd. All of that was fairly easy to verify, with the aid of online sources. What I have been unable to verify is Huberband’s claim that the Torah reader started by calling out, “Today is Tuesday!” While the day of the week is sometimes called out in this fashion, the Torah gets read on Mondays, Thursdays and Saturdays only, and this was supposedly a subtle way of indicating to any Jews who might be watching that the scene was filmed under duress.

My source for the foregoing is Shimon Huberband, Kiddush Hashem: Jewish Religious and Cultural Life in Poland During the Holocaust (trans. David Fishman; New York, 1987), 322-323. This claim, that the reader called out "Today is Tuesday!", gets repeated now by other historians – most notably Saul Friedländer, The Years of Extermination: Nazi Germany and the Jews, 1939-1945 (New York, 2007), 21-22.

Having watched the scene a dozen-or-so times, I can verify that nobody says this line. Maybe it got cut, or maybe it is drowned out by the German audio-commentary, … or maybe Huberband was wrong? He was in Warsaw at the time, and he doesn’t say who told him. Yehoshua Moshe Aronson, on the other hand, was present in the synagogue and he doesn’t seem to mention it – instead, he claims that his suggestion at the time was that the reader read from the “curses”: a section of text, found in either Leviticus or Deuteronomy, that speaks of violent calamity brought by God against the Israelites. Aronson does not say whether or not the reader did this, and due to the poor quality of the recording it is impossible to verify from the film itself.

Aronson wrote a book about his experiences called Alei Merorot. I have thus far been unable to get my hands on it, so my source for the foregoing information is Esther Farbstein, Hidden in Thunder: Perspectives on Faith, Halachah and Leadership During the Holocaust (2 vols; trans. Deborah Stern; Jerusalem, 2007), 31-32.

I would very much like to know if either of these subtleties was actually adopted by any of the people officiating at this faux-service. Any further information that could be provided as regards the production of this scene would be much appreciated. Thank you.


texts: I saw and heard these words in a video in my history class last year but my teacher didn't elaborate on what they meant. In the context of the video, it sounded as if they were social positions or jobs. At the time, we were learning about the Vikings and the High Middle Ages in Europe.


texts: Spain's tributary empire vs. Portugal's seaborne empire

texts:
While the Spanish built a huge colonial empire in the Americas, why didn't Portugal colonize the South Asian coast and only aimed at controlling trade?

Why did these empires pursue such different strategies?


texts: Did Heisenberg undermine the German atomic bomb by deliberately hiding his expertise from the Nazis?

texts:
In his massive book Heisenberg's War: The Secret History of the German Bomb, Thomas Powers says that Heisenberg, who never became a Nazi and balked at the immorality of building a bomb for Hitler, did what he could to guide "the German atomic bomb effort into a broom closet." But Powers also knows that the evidence is not conclusive and that Heisenberg, who lived until 1976, did little to clear things up. prospect.org

I'm not well informed on this story.
Question is, did Heisenberg undermine the German atomic bomb by deliberately hiding his expertise from the Nazis?


texts: When did people first try to limit which weapons could be used in war?

texts: The first example that I know is about chemical weapons after the first world war.


texts: What level of public support did Adolf Hitler have in his final year of power?

texts:
In his final year in power, what level of support did Adolf Hitler still command and what drove that public perception?

I ask as an insight into populism and at what point do populations reach a tipping point where they turn on the leader who promised them a return to glory.

Did this ever occur or did the German population defend Adolf Hitler into the years after his demise even after the discovery of the concentration camps and the defeat of the German militaries?


texts: How did American colonial rights and conditions compare to those within the British Isles?

texts:
A major point of contention between American colonists and British administrators was that the American colonists, being the descendants of Englishmen, allegedly should have been entitled to representation and other unique rights.

However, in reality what were the differences between the rights and circumstance of the colonists, and those living within the British Isles?

Did most American colonists have it better or worse than most British (England, Scotland, Wales, Ireland) before the revolution in the 1750s?


texts: Why did Japanese samurai disembowel themselves?

texts:
Japanese samurais were known to commit ritual suicide by stabbing themselves in the belly. Why? Why not hang themselves? Cut their own throats? Does Japanese culture view disembowelment differently from other deaths?

Maybe hanging is too much trouble to do in a battle, but samurais kill themselves in peace time too, and its always by disemboweling. So military convenience cant be the whole story.


texts: What did farmers/laborers use for boots before modern rubber existed?

texts:
The need or usefulness to protect one's feet while doing certain duties in farming, heavy labor, and the like (such as construction with pointy things and hard edges everywhere), I am assuming has always existed - admittedly more in some pre-industrial settings than others.

But industrial (synthetic) rubber, on a wide scale, has only been available in recent times.

What was, or were, the precursors to the current, modern-day rubber-soled heavy duty boot?

Was there even as much a need to wear some heavy foot protection before the rise of modern industry anyway?

Perhaps the need for 'heavy duty' protection has increased with the rise of industrial machinery and equipment capable of chopping, dropping on or crushing your feet, and softer forms of footwear (like with thinner leather soles) or barefootedness itself was simply common among laborers of pre-rubber times?

Early Modern European (and North American settlement) communities are of particular interest.


texts: Why wouldn't the South make salt from seawater during the American Civil War?

texts:
This article goes into some detail about the state of cooking in the Union and the Confederacy during the American Civil War.  One of its interesting claims is that the South was suffering from a lack of salt which greatly limited their ability to cure and preserve meat.  It states that much of their salt had previously come from Wales, but that had been cut off by the Union naval blockade.

Why would the South be getting its salt from across the Atlantic?  Why wouldn't they make salt from seawater in the coastal regions and ship that to the various parts of the Confederacy?


texts: Could someone who had joined a monastery decide to leave?

texts:
Could a nun or monk that had been admitted to a monastery "quit" and (more or less) return to the life they lived before joining?
I am mostly interested in Europe and Christianity approximately before democracy. (The reason for that interest is that I assume that when personal liberties started to be formalized, religious freedom became common. The church no longer could prevent someone from leaving.  The church could punish with excommunication someone who left, but wouldn't have the authority to jail someone who left the church.)
The Wikipedia article about monasteries doesn't address this issue.


texts: Is there any evidence of improved sanitation in the years following the Black Death?

texts: I've been reading up on the Black Death and surprisingly have not found any evidence of improved sanitation in the years immediately following the event. Was there any improvement? Were people aware of any links between the plague and the poor sanitary conditions of the time?


texts: Apart from the Inuit, and candlefish on the northwest coast, did pre-Columbian America have lamps or candles?

texts:
Lamps have been around in the Old World since the Palaeolithic (one was found in the Lascaux cave). Candles are thought to have originated in the Bronze Age, but were certainly used by ancient Greeks, Romans, and Chinese within the 1st millennium BC. Were they used in the Americas before the arrival of Columbus?

Lamps were certainly used in the arctic, where they were known as Kudlik. The arctic peoples were of course late arrivals to America.

Candles of a sort were used by the northwest coast peoples. A local fish called the Eulachon, but known more colloquially as the candlefish, contains a lot of oil. The locals simply inserted a wick into a dried fish, and lit it. There are some videos of people lighting fish.

Apart from these two examples, I have not found any references to candles or lamps in early America. It is always harder to show an absence of course. Is anyone out there aware of examples? Otherwise I guess people just huddled around their fires at night...


texts: Could the warriors of the Tollense battlefield be considered the world's first standing army?

texts:
Slaughter at the bridge: Uncovering a colossal Bronze Age battle - from Science Mag (2016)

Apparently an amateur archaeologist discovered this site in 1996 and there were thousands of warriors involved in a battle along the banks of the Tollense River.

What caught my eye was this, in full quote:

  They weren't farmer-soldiers who went out every few years to brawl. These are professional fighters.

On the importance of this site and progress to-date:

  So far the team has published only a handful of peer-reviewed papers. With excavations stopped, pending more funding, they’re writing up publications now. But archaeologists familiar with the project say the implications are dramatic. Tollense could force a re-evaluation of the whole period in the area from the Baltic to the Mediterranean, says archaeologist Kristian Kristiansen  of the University of Gothenburg in Sweden.

My knowledge of military history is not that hot, but I do recall that the Assyrians created the world's first professional (standing) army. In particular, Wikipedia points to Tiglath-Pileser III (r. 745-727 BCE).

But Science Mag says this battle occurred around 1200 BCE, i.e. Late Bronze Age -- approximately half a millennium earlier than the Near East Assyrians.

My Question(s)

Wouldn't these warriors be considered the world's first
standing army?
Am I missing something here or is this archaeological dig that
significant?
Also, what is this line, "Tollense could force a re-evaluation of
the whole period in the area from the Baltic to the Mediterranean",
referring to?
Not sure if this is wrong to ask here, but if this site is that important, how could they run out of funds?


texts: Until when did Castile consider all Basques to be noble?

texts:
According to J. I. Israel's Race, Class, and Politics in Colonial Mexico: 1610-1670 (pp. 112-113), Basques in the Spanish empire had a special universal claim to nobility:

  Perhaps the most remarkable characteristic of Basque society was the possession by every Basque of noble status. In theory at least, anyone, wherever he lived, who could prove that he was descended directly and without admixture of impure blood from one of the familial lineages of Vizcaya or Guipúzcoa was recognized in Castilian law, and in the law of all the dependencies of Castile, as a noble. Furthermore, this unique birthright was acknowledged afresh with every succession to the Spanish throne and every new publication of the fueros or privileges of the Basque provinces.

Wikipedia clarifies that this rule universally conferred "hidalguía", the status of nobility.

How long did the Basques' special privilege last?


texts: What were the differences between the Waffen SS and the Wehrmacht in their role during the war?

texts: I can't find any good answers. The Waffen SS was more of a private army while the Wehrmacht was a national army I think. Except that the Waffen SS was given orders by the OKW just like the Heer and they didn't seem to be used in a different way than the Heer. I searched on the internet. What came up wasn't what I was searching for. I also have a book talking exclusively about the Waffen SS, but never talking about the differences with the Wehrmacht. Yes they are like "private" but they seem to have had the exact same role in the war. They were sent to battle like every other unit.


texts: Has any music act ever topped the Beatles in sales?

texts:
The Beatles in 1965. Source: Wikipedia

Elvis Presley is widely hailed as the King of Rock and Roll, but in 1966 John Lennon said the Beatles were "more popular than Jesus" in a London Evening Standard interview.

Based on record sales, this Wikipedia article and this Business Insider article of top music acts would certainly seem to bear that out (but Wiki has the caveat that several mega-artists are not included in their list).

Elvis may always be the King, but the Beatles outsold him considerably, and may well have been "more popular than Jesus" with the popular culture youth in the 1960's. But has any music act in modern history (20th to 21st centuries) ever been bigger than the Beatles (worldwide, in number of recordings sold, on any and all media including wax, vinyl, tape, CD, and digital downloads)?


texts: Why is the Harappa (Indus Valley) civilization considered one of the six independent cradles of civilization?

texts:
In addition to the proven Sumerian presence in Harappa, all its crops originates in the Fertile Crescent or Far East, which proves that they have been influenced by foreigners since the Neolithic period.

All the other cradles of civilization are in the same areas that developed agriculture, so why is it different with the Harappa civilization?


texts: What percentage of buildings in Greater London were destroyed during WWII?

texts: I would like to do as direct as possible comparison with the bomb damage which occurred in German cities. This is listed as percentage buildings destroyed in Max Hasting's Bomber Command. I already know the tonnage of Bombs dropped on London and have heard a rough figure of 1 million buildings destroyed although I'm unsure of the original source of this and it seems too high to me.


texts: Oldest appearance of "brand names" in history?

texts:
I was watching a documentary about the Ulfberht swords from Scandinavia, and one thing caught my attention: it mentioned that these swords were made over a range of time and location that was broad enough that they couldn't have been made by the same craftsman.  That "Ulfberht" name, even if it started as a craftsman's mark, became simply a name for a sword of that particular style, design and quality.  Effectively, it became a brand.

That made me wonder: when was the first appearance of "brand names" for products?  (For the purposes of this discussion, we can define a "brand name" as an abstract label associated with a particular product and/or production facility, but not with any particular person or simple descriptor.  So, not a "Da Vinci painting" or "Italian marble," but something equivalent to a "Nike shoe," where designers can come and go but the name retains its continuity.)

Were there product lines, like swords or dresses or furniture, in Ancient Rome that were known by name, independent of their maker?  In China, or Medieval Europe?  When did a product first become detached from its maker in the minds of the consumers?


texts: Were the Quebecois ever considered higher-class because they spoke French?

texts:
For a very long time, French was, well, the lingua franca. All courts spoke French, from England to Russia. Everyone else, as always, tried to emulate what the nobles were doing, and learned French if they could.

This made me wonder - what did that mean for bilingual nations? The Quebecois have a unique position in that their side was the losing one, and Canada was an English possession. But they still spoke French, this fancy language of the courts and nobles. Did this ever work in their favour - were they seen (either in Canada or abroad) as more sophisticated than their English-speaking countrymen?


texts: Who was the British liaison officer shunned by French colleagues in 1918 France?

texts:
I seem to recall reading that during the German offensive of March 1918, the British retreat led to many Frenchmen suspecting that Britain was about to abandon them.

Most particularly, I'm sure I read somewhere that a young British liaison officer,  at this time, found himself shunned by his French colleagues, and was rather upset about it. Does anyone recall reading this, and if so where? I haven't been able to find it again.