texts: When was the first time Rome was mentioned in outside records (and specifically, in Greek ones)?

texts:
Most information that we have on the history of ancient Rome came from Roman records themselves. However, I'm curious about the first extant document where the city was unequivocally mentioned by foreign records. Given the fact that most of what has survived to modern days from Antiquity was either Greek or Roman, my guess would be that such a reference would be Greek. An Etruscan mention would be of little interest as they may have even founded the city, and an extant Phoenician/Egyptian mention would be unlikely to precede a Greek one.
Also, in a note, more interesting than a "Democles sailed through Rome and Syracuse en route to Crete" would be the first more descriptive mention, maybe a "Democles then tried to bargain with the city of Rome, which had no kings, to allow his army safe passage."


texts: Are there any known instances of sub-Saharan African democracy before European colonialism?

texts:
I've been reading up on pre-Athenian democracy (sometimes referred to as primitive or tribal democracy) where leaders were selected by some or most members of a group and were subject to established rules in order to retain power.  Benjamin Isakhan and Christopher Boehm in The Edinburgh Companion to the History of Democracy refer to tribes oscillating between despotism and democracy due to participatory mechanisms. (12) A consensualised group decision process is also mentioned (36) with egalitarian features are mentioned as a balance against a leader becoming too powerful.*

From anthropology, translations, and political science, there seems to be a growing academic basis for the Dorians, Phoenicians, Assyrians, and Vedic-era Indians engaging in some form of democratic procedure or at least a limited oligarchic system before the Greco-Roman era.

Are there any instances of something similar in sub-Saharan Africa be it a migratory group, a smaller tribe, or merchant city where there was power sharing and some kind of input from citizens?


texts: What is the origin of currency signs being placed before the numerical value?

texts:
For most units, they symbol/abbreviation is placed after the number: 200 m, 75° F, 60 mph, 100 watts, etc.

When stating values of money, such as $500, the dollar sign is placed before the number. This is also true of other currency signs like the euro, yuan, pound, etc.

What is the origin of this practice for currency signs?

Edit: As Anixx pointed out, the official ruble abbreviation (RUB) comes after the value. I think this is the same for all official currency abbreviations: USD, CAD, etc. But this just makes it all the more curious: why would the symbol come before the value, but the abbreviation come after the value?

BTW, I consider this an etymology question more than anything, but because it applies not just to English, I wonder if it had some old origin that transcends any one language (possibly in some ancient Greek or Roman practice). This is why I asked it on History.SE.


texts: Did Soviet Union really consider using atomic bomb against US aircraft battlegroup?

texts:
In this video youtube narrator says that:

  "During Cold War Soviet Union considered American battle-group such a dire threat that they predicted the only way to defend against them would be by use of tactical nuclear weapons <...>"

So my questions would be:

Is that really a thing?
Did the Soviet Union fear these battle-groups so much, that atomic bombs weren't off limits?
Let's say they did use one against one of the groups. Would that mean full-blown atomic war or neither side would want to push this further (one would come to mind) because of MAD? Since this wouldn't be a full-scale attack, it could easily be pulled off, because of many incidents, that involved one side seeing, that other launched few missiles towards them.

Yes, second question might or is categorized as "What If" question, but I don't think I read/heard anyone mentioning about the particular scenario and the repercussion of it.


texts: Why did Germany have so many important scientists and thinkers around the turn of the 20th century?

texts:
I got an impression that Germany at the turn of the 20th century had a lot of very important thinkers and scientists, who created foundation for lots of modern theories and philosophical concept. Freud, Hegel, Kant, Schopenhauer, Gauss, Weierstrass, Dirichlet, Hilbert, Jung, Weber, Koch, Petri, Schrödinger, Heisenberg, Fromm and so on.

Is there some historical, political or economical background for this phenomenon? Or it is only my personal bias and there is no phenomenon at all?


texts: Was the assassination of Kirov really that significant in consolidating Stalin's power?

texts: I understand that the assassination of Kirov was what triggered the launch of the Great Purge and therefore, what allowed for Stalin to consolidate his power, but would there be something more important than this that allowed for Stalin to consolidate his power? Could it be that the assassination of Kirov was not necessarily that important in order for Stalin to consolidate his power as there were other, more important factors?


texts: What was the reason for the Ottoman empire to adopt the crescent moon as its flag/coat of arms?

texts:
The Ottoman empire used the crescent moon as its symbol extensively. Any reasons for the symbolism?

I have read references to polythesim of Turks contributing to the crescent and star (which predates the empire by hundreds of years), but looking for more detail as to how and why it got adopted during the 12th century.


texts: Did the western Allies and Russia try to cooperate in World War I as they did in World War II?

texts:
America's General Eisenhower referred to it as "cross-ruffing." Coincidentally or otherwise, the timing of Operation Torch came close to the Russian counterattack at Stalingrad, and Operation Husky preceded the Battle of Kursk by a few days. And the Western leaders met with Stalin at Teheran, Yalta, and elsewhere to coordinate the various countries' activities? Late in the war, the western Allies and the Soviets met at Torgau, Germany.

Was a similar level of cooperation undertaken by the Western Allies and Russia in World War I? The logical place for this was Turkey. During most of 1915 (and into early 1916, Britain and France attacked the Turks at {Gallipoli]2 in Northwest Turkey. Late in 1915, the Russians attacked northeast Turkey with over 300,000 men, capturing Erzurum (Turkish Armenia). In early 1916, they advanced to Trabizon, on the Black Sea, just as the Allies were leaving Gallipoli.

Also of note is the fact that early in 1916, the British and Russians both invaded Iran in the Persian campaign, but could never seem to get to the same place at the same time.

Were these actions part of an intended, if unsuccessful attempt at coordinating, or meeting the British by the Russians? I am puzzled by the fact that the Russians sent "only" tens of thousands of men toward the British forces moving north from southern Iran (and later southern Iraq), while the bulk of Russian Caucasus forces were in northern Turkey. Given that the Gallipoli campaign was unable to open up a transport route to Russia, would it have made sense to try for a connection through Iraq or Iran (the latter was the case in World War II)? Or was the hypothetical Iraq/Iran route so inferior that the Russians felt the need to stake their fortunes on a slim chance of a linkup with the British in northern Turkey?


texts: What was this building and what happend to it?

texts:
I recently visited Lofoten in Norway and in small village called Myrland there was a building of some sort near the beach. It looked like docks. It was protected by the sea wall that was build from massive stone block held together by massive iron rods. It was and breached in the middle. Here is photo of the wall.

My question is what was this structure and what happened to the wall. Thanks


texts: Was Mohammed known and respected in seventeenth-century Europe?

texts:
I’m reading Andrew Pettigree’s fascinating book, The Invention of News: How the world came to know about itself. In the early days of newsprint, many felt that only people who actually needed to know about foreign wars and suchlike — merchants, statesmen — would profit from reading news.

It was only at the very end of the seventeenth century that a German author would join the debate with an unambiguous statement in favour of reading newspapers. Kaspar Stieler’s Zeitungs Lust und Nutz (The Pleasure and Utility of Newspapers) was a ringing endorsement of the right to follow the news:

We who live in this world, must know the present world; we get no help here from Alexander, Caesar or Mohammed if we wish to be wise. Whoever seeks this wisdom and wishes to partake in society must follow the papers: must read and understand them.

I was struck by the way Steiler lists Mohammed alongside Alexander and Caesar. These seem an odd trio. Are we talking about Mohammed the prophet, or Mohammed the war leader? The company he’s keeping in this excerpt imply the latter.
How did Europeans of the age view Mohammed? Was he seen as a dispenser of wisdom? A false prophet? Or merely a secular conqueror, like Alexander? And, if as a conqueror, was he respected and admired, seen as a great leader, as Alexander was?
When Europeans thought of Mohammed, did they think of Islamic power, Jerusalem and the Crusades, the Ottomans, Moorish Spain? Or did they think of Mohammed the man, in his own time, unconnected to contemporary Muslims?

Pettigree’s reference:

Kaspar Stieler, Zeitungs Lust und Nutz (Hamburg: Schiller, 1695), quoted Groth, Geschichte, p. 19.


texts: Cultural history of Saudi Arabian rulers' uniform beard style?

texts:
Why is it that all Saudi Arabian rulers and princes, both of the present and past generations, apparently wear the same style of chin beards? (Yes, they wear the same styles of headdresses as well.) Is it in veneration of their dynasty's founders, is it somehow prescribed by their religion (Wahhabism), or something else?

How can the "history" of this specific beard style in the Middle East among the ruling elites and the wider population be summed up?

Here are some example images (in Wikipedia) of present and past rulers:

King Salman
the late King Abdullah
King Faisal

Also, here is a group picture (in a German newspaper article):

King Abdulla and his successor Prince Salman in 2010


texts: How accurate and balanced is Paul Johnson's 'A History of the Jews'?

texts:
'A History of the Jews', by Paul Johnson, takes an authoritative tone and is dense with citations. But its scope is enormous and it sometimes draws very strong conclusions. Given the state of the art of scholarship in 2015, how accurate and balanced is Paul Johnson's account from 1987?
I ask because I'm reading it now and I'd like to know if what I'm reading should be taken seriously. For instance, I recently learned that Zealot by Aslan contains a good deal of unfounded conclusions and distortions by omission, and that the author's credentials are suspect. I'd hate to read Johnson's massive history only to find out that I'm not learning what I think I'm learning.
Edit: Somehow this question was closed as "opinion-based". My question (from 5 years ago) was and remains a question about academic scholarship.


texts: Would Lauri Törni have recieved the Waffen-SS blood type tattoo?

texts:
Lauri Allen Törni served with Finland during the Winter war, and due to being an officer, visited Vienna to obtain Waffen-SS training. Does this mean he would have had the SS blood type tattoo applied?

One reference on a different website I've found (albeit not a very high quality one, with no citations) claims:

  "Even though he never fought with the Waffen-ss and spent only a short time in the organzation as an officer cadet, his ss past would come back to haunt him for the remainder of his time in Finland and when he later immigrated to the US."

(post #6)

Which seems to be strongly suggesting the presence of the tattoo as evidence of said service that he can't just anonymize away from.

Seeing as how I don't want myself or any burner emails to be associated with that site just to ask for a source or further reading, would there be any indication today as to a definite answer to this question?

I need it for a historical piece including the man himself, and I hope to include him having said tattoo as a major plot point.

For those unfamiliar:

Wikipedia page on Lauri Törni

Wikipedia page on SS blood group tattoos


texts:
The Kingdom of Aksum is known for its trading prowess, with trade partners as far away as India.  Do we know what kinds of ships they built and used?  Ethiopian freshwater tankwas are made of papyrus, but this sounds too flimsy for the open ocean, and I've never seen one big enough to use as a cargo vessel.

Edit: I removed "open" and added a note about size, as I was really trying to compare tankwa use today, on Lake Tana, to the size and stability of a ship that could travel from Adulis to India.

Personally, I'd prefer if they used technology similar to the a baghlah dhow, but can't tell if they (or a sufficiently large precursor ship) were available that far back.  Copying Roman designs would fit the classic Eurocentric model of history, and I kind of hope it isn't true. I'm also uncertain whether Aksum would have had access to enough trees near the coast to support any substantial number of wooden vessels.

Edit 2: This discussion is bringing up a lot of useful ideas for me, and I'd like to upvote comments (especially the note about lateen sails), but apparently I still lack the reputation to make it happen.


texts: Why was immigration from France to the United States lower than from some other countries?

texts:
Large waves of immigrants to the United States arrived from various European countries at different times in history, including Irish, Germans, Scottish, Poles, Russians and some lesser waves from Scandinavian countries.

As far as I know, there is no counterpart from France. That is, no sizable wave of French people who decided to uproot themselves for life in the New World. Given France's turbulent history, I find that surprising. Is there an explanation for why the Irish, Germans etc uprooted themselves, but much less so the French?


texts: Did Peter the Great support a Russian circumnavigation?

texts:
Peter the Great modernized Imperial Russia, reforming both its army and navy. He was keen to catch up with other European powers and built the Baltic port Kronstadt, a shipyard at Arkhangelsk, and the empire's first navy base at Taganrog.

By Peter's time, ships from Castile/Spain, England, Portugal, and Holland had already circumnavigated the globe. The Admiralty cartographer Fedor Soymonov recommended that Peter send a Siberian expedition to open trade with the Philippines and America, which didn't happen, though Peter did send Vitus Bering on his first expedition from Okhotsk around Kamchatka. I'm not sure whether this was preliminary to another trip that Peter would have sponsored had he lived longer. The first Russian voyage around the world, that of Krusenstern, took place most of a century after Peter's death.

Is there evidence that Peter hoped, tried, or intended to sponsor a circumnavigation?


texts: What was done to improve the safety of jousts after the death of Henry II?

texts:
While jousting in a tournament to celebrate his daughter's marriage in 1559, France's Henry II received a splinter in the eye, and died not long afterwards. According to Wikipedia, this marked the death of jousting in France, but the practice continued in other countries.

What improvements to the safety of jousts were investigated and made in response to Henry's death? How widespread was their adoption?


texts: What uniform is Alexander Duncan McLennan wearing?

texts:
I am trying to identify this uniform. It’s a photo of my great grandfather Alexander Duncan McLennan 1861 - 1919.

He was born in Glasgow in 1861 so was Scottish. The only record I can find of an A McLennan at that time in military history suggests he may have been in the 2nd Battalion of the Scots Guard but I don’t have anything to cross reference that to to confirm or deny that.

The black armband suggests the photo may have been taken in 1901 when Queen Victoria died.


texts: Why were rockets not popular as part of artillery until 20th century?

texts:
Why were rockets not extensively used throughout the world like cannon until the 20th century? Maybe one may ask the reason for pointing out 20th century. I guess it's fair enough after thinking about sailing ships full to the brim with cannons or star forts which were built to withstand heavy cannon fire. Even in WW1 rockets did not play an important role.

I am not saying that they had never been used. Numerous military leaders (from Mongol commanders to British ones) made use of rockets in naval and land battles including siege warfare for both offensive and defensive purposes. But in the end, rockets were never as popular as cannons despite being invented around the same time and rocket's explosive/incendiary attributes - even for early rockets.

One reason would be the inaccuracy problem encountered in rockets.But in return, especially early cannons and their ammunition were extremely heavy (see Dardanelles gun); from a logistical point of view they should be nightmare for users. I can add some other poor attributes of both, but I think that much is enough to make my question clearer.

So, both (rockets and cannons) seem to have some disadvantages when compared to each other. Then, returning to where I started, why? Also, is there any surviving handbooks or training manual for soldiers of those days which compare such fire support weaponry or clearly favors cannons over the rockets?


texts: When was the top spring on umbrellas invented?

texts:
Modern umbrellas have a rider (a hollow cylinder) that slides up the shaft to force the umbrella vanes open. It is held in place by a spring latch that protrudes close to the top of the shaft - I've seen it called the 'top spring'.

How early was this convenience widely manufactured? Was there some other locking mechanism used before that (e.g. friction, a bolt/screw, etc.)?

I've tried looking for images of antique umbrellas but it's hard to determine the age of the umbrellas pictured, and most of them don't show the upper part of the shaft.

[I'm reading an old passage in a foreign language describing the locking mechanism and the exact details are important for understanding the entire discussion therein].


texts:
I'm reading Washington Irving's Life of Christopher Columbus, where he writes:

  Two of them were light, half-decked caravels; the Santa Maria, on
  which Columbus hoisted his flag, was completely decked.

Does 'half-decked' refer to how the decks were constructed?  Or perhaps something to do with how the ships were loaded with cargo?


texts: What is the origin of the term "Developer" in the context of software?

texts:
The term "software developer" is a popular term for those who create software. The processes of writing software is often called "software development".

What is the origin of that term? How did the verb "develop" come to be how we talk about creating/writing software?


texts: Ancient Egyptian hieroglyphs jʿr.t (iaret)

texts:
Is this how to write "jʿr.t (iaret)" or Uraeus?

Does "jʿr.t (iaret)" mean "rearing cobra" as stated on Wikipedia?

The Uraeus (/jʊˈriːəs/; plural Uraei or Uraeuses; from the Greek οὐραῖος, ouraîos, "on its tail"; from Egyptian jʿr.t (iaret), "rearing cobra") is the stylized, upright form of an Egyptian cobra (asp, serpent, or snake), used as a symbol of sovereignty, royalty, deity and divine authority in ancient Egypt.

Or should it be understood as having the more generic meaning of "to ascend" as suggested by Wiktionary?

Etymology
From jꜥr (“to ascend”) + -t.

UPDATE:
Concerning -t Wiktionary gives many different uses.

Suffix. Used to form feminine singular forms of nouns and adjectives.

Suffix. Converts nouns and prepositions into feminine adjectives: the feminine nisba adjective ending.

Suffix. Forms adverbs from certain adjectives; -ly

Suffix. Forms the infinitive of anomalous verbs, weak verbs (except for fourth weak verbs with a geminated stem), and causative biliteral verbs.

Suffix. Forms the complementary infinitive of all verbs.

(Usage notes: Weak verbs can alternatively take the endings -wt or -yt to form the complementary infinitive.)

Suffix. Forms the terminative of all verbs.

(Usage notes: Third-weak verbs can alternatively take the ending -yt to form the terminative, more frequently when passive than when active.
When this ending is attached to a verb ending in d or t, it is occasionally left unwritten.)

Please, in which way is -t being used in "jʿr.t (iaret)"? 1-6? And if it is being used "(1.) to form feminine singular forms of nouns and adjectives" then what would be used to form masculine singular forms of nouns and adjectives?


texts: Were there any natural disasters that decisively changed the result of a later election by killing the electorate of one side?

texts:
I'm thinking of something similar to this:

Let's say instead of a general election, the UK had decided to hold a second referendum on Brexit. Among the two options Remain & Leave, it's unclear which will win (in the first referendum, the results had been 52% Leave 48% Remain). However, before the referendum, a natural disaster destroys London and kills everyone in it. London's population voted 60-40 to Remain, so without this Remain-voting population, Leave wins the second referendum easily.

Has this ever happened? Wikipedia has a list of natural disasters that caused a lot of deaths, but moving from that to referendum results is not easy. Presumably we would need 1) a high death toll, and 2) regions of the electorate which are more polarized than others, and the disaster only hits one region. Among the ten deadliest disasters, 6 happened in China (which doesn't have real elections/referendums anyway), 2 of the remainder occurred before modern democracies, and of the final two (the 1970 Bhola cyclone and 2010 Haiti earthquake) I can't find any indication of an impact on subsequent elections.

One possibility could be some kind of deadly cyclone in the Caribbean, since some US regions are politically polarized, but death tolls from these cyclones seem too small (e.g. Hurricane Katrina caused billions of dollars in damages, but killed "only" 1,836 people).

It doesn't have to be a deadly natural disaster - if the disaster causes people to move en masse, and that causes a different election/referendum result, I'm also interested in that.


texts: The monumental/architectural sculptures of Petra - has there been any research on the likely craftsmen who executed them?

texts:
The Nabatean people who founded Petra are described as a pre-Islamic Arab people. Centrally located on the spice trade routes, they achieved fabulous wealth and settled in the city of Petra.

A recent documentary I viewed on this topic explored the methods used for creating the beautiful sculptures, gigantic building facades carved into the sandstone, combining motifs from Babylonian, Greek and Roman architectural traditions. The execution was, however, unique to Petra, being cut sequentially out of the rock itself, top to bottom.

It was mentioned that the Nabateans originated as a Bedouin people. There are many skills associated with Bedouin life - survival and thriving in a harsh environment, openness and hospitality, terrific warrior skills - but monumental sculpture would not be one I would expect.

Is anyone aware of any study on how this came about in Petra? Did they appropriate workers from different parts of the world to execute these wonders? Did the skill evolve among the Nabateans themselves? Is there anything in the archeological record that would point to this development? E.g., small sculptures, tomb sites, etc.


texts: Why China was able to unify and not Europe?

texts: If you look at a map of China through the ages, you will usually find (from about the Han up) a huge mass representing China. On the other hand, you look at a map of Europe, and you'll usually see a huge number of states. Why was China able to unify and not Europe?


texts: How widespread was pacifism in the WW2 USA?

texts: Approximately what percentage of people supported pacifism during WW2 in the USA? I'm not interested just in the opposition to war, since some people could protest against US involvment from ideological affilation towards Nazism, but how big a role did actual pacifism play?


texts: Has anyone tried to map the Tribal Hidage

texts: The Tribal Hidage set out the number of households living in different kingdoms and sub-kingdoms of Anglo-Saxon England. Has any work been done to map this data, in particular comparing it to the detailed records of the Domesday Book or other detailed censuses closer to the time? In particular I'm interested in the smaller "Middle Angle" tribes mentioned such as the Gifle, Hicca and Willa.


texts: The local Korean deli uses cheese in many of their dishes; my friends from several other East Asian countries have commented that they still consider cheese to be unusual and not part of their normal diet.  It is entirely possible that this is a sampling error, but I'm curious when cheese entered the Korean diet. (I did some google searching, but the results about modern Korean diet overwhelm the historical sources, and the historical sources don't refer to cheese at all.)


texts: How did US defense spending split on weapons categories in ww2?

texts:
How much of production was devoted to tanks, planes, ships, ammunition etc.? Links to published papers are very welcome, as well as sources for the other powers in the war.
I'm not interested in production numbers of individual weapons on their own but rather how much of production or spending was devoted to each category. Employment numbers might be a useful proxy.
This is a paper which gives some numbers about Germany, but I couldn't find anything for the US (DOI: 10.5787/44-2-1178).
I checked the wikipedia article on military production https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Military_production_during_World_War_II
but it only provides either total defense spendings as a percentage of gdp or the number of weapons in each category. I didn't find any sources of anyone having estimated the share of production devoted to each category of weapons for the us. As comparable calculations have been made for Germany in the linked source, the idea of production being fungible is not unrealistic.


texts: What do the numbers on this 1960s anti-integration sign mean?

texts:
I was reading a CNN article this morning that features the below image:

Protests over integrating schools is not new. In 1965 members of a parents’ association picketed outside the Board of Education in Brooklyn, New York, against a proposal to integrate public schools.

I’m curious about the sign on the far left: “6-3-3, 5-3,4, 2-2-2, ?-?-?”
My first instinct is that these were ratios of races of students, but that seems improbable to me as segregation was (as far as I know) enforced in terms of “white” and “colored,” which would only account for two numbers.  I did a cursory Google search but found nothing.
What do these numbers mean? What event in the history of integrating American schools are they referencing?


texts: Was "Street" more common than the abbreviated "St." in pre-1910 American newspapers?

texts:
As a hobby I like to research buildings and other structures around where I live, and part of that entails searching old newspaper archives. Generally this is in California. Since I am not looking at particularly remarkable buildings (simply exploring the local history) - the kinds of things I find are generally property transaction announcements, classifieds, obituaries, etc. .
I have noticed but am not sure if there is any credence to this, that for example, if the modern address is written:

123 Fake St.

That it is exceedingly rare to find the abbreviated form of the address prior to 1910 or so, and that even in small print font classifieds the reference is usually always the unabbreviated and the as-read form:

123 Fake Street

Since this observation includes both official, and unremarkable announcements , and it is notable enough to me to require running different queries depending on the time period in question.
I want to know if there is any credence to my notion that there is a change in use/spelling of road/street types to abbreviated forms and what if anything drove this change.


texts: What was the price of going from England to New England as a passenger in the 1600s?

texts: Lots of places mention that traveling to New England was so expensive that many people became indentured servants to get across, but I couldn't find a place that actually says how expensive it was.


texts: Is the Krishna (a god within Hinduism), an appropriated historical figure?

texts:
Some people on quora etc, put claims to redefine the events within in the Hinduism theology as verifiable & scientifically true historical events and in such an attempt, the Mythological narrative is juxtaposed with the local cultural ones and people who might have been real person in the verifiable course of history are appropriated by the religious revisionist into their own theological narratives.
I have heard from several people across, on some of these kinds of research based works which have given some accounts of as to how Krishna and Rāma, and many others, might indeed have been real people of local tribes (we are talking about the Pre Indus civilization times), which over time as a result of Hero "Glorification and mytholization" narratives were thus appropriated into the itihasas of Hinduism and over the course of time in the Puranic literature became outright gods.
I'm looking for any such relevant works or research papers, books, et al., which might describe, decipher and explain the above described phenomenon of: "history's appropriation by religions".
And what has been the research community reactions to these works?


texts: What happened to civilians in Greece in the Balkan Wars

texts: I have looked and found nothing about this. I need this for a history project about why someone immigrated from Greece (Amfissa, Delphi, Phocis). Any tips? Were they on rations? Was there a threat from invasions, etc... Thanks!


texts: What is the name of the theory that says an early discovery can stop technological development?

texts:
Some time ago I read a claim that an early discovery can lead to a great scientific stagnation. The example given was the Chinese porcelain, that resolved all the known problems, and stopped the research, but not the problems that a more advanced metallurgy could resolve.
I can remember neither the author nor the name of the theory. Can anyone help?


texts: At what date did the Ostrogoths formally stop ruling as Roman tributaries?

texts: During the decline of the Western Roman Empire, various Germanic tribes that had been settled as 'foederati' or federates effectively took over swathes of Roman territory, being settled in these regions while the area was still de facto Roman territory. The Visigoths, Burgundians, and Odoacer of Italy ruled as de jure viceroys of the Roman Emperor, with the Visigoths formally renouncing this is 475AD. In Odoacer's case, he ruled in Italy until he was overthrown by Theodoric, King of the Ostrogoths, in 493AD, who continued the pretence of merely being a viceroy for the Eastern Roman Emperor. However, this legal fiction can't have been retained over the whole of the Ostrogoths' rule in Italy, as the later Emperor Justinian I saw fit to invade and conquer Italy in 535AD (the year after finishing off the Vandals in Africa). So my question is, when was this legal fiction of Roman rule in Italy ended?


texts: Why didn't the silk road run north of the Black Sea?

texts:
I have read many times that the only way for Europeans to get to China, or vice versa, was through Anatolia and Persia.  This gave Istanbul an advantage in throttling trade, as well as Mesopotamia and locations in Persia.

I am sure that due to climate considerations, those were the easiest routes, but when those were blocked by unfriendly regimes, why didn't trade or travel go north of the Caspian and Black seas?  Through what today is called Kazakhstan and Ukraine?  Is there a reason that it was particularly difficult to go that way? I have never read about any significant traffic that way.  On the contrary, it is usually stated that the only way to China was through Persia.


texts:
Are there theories of approaches to history, or styles of history, insofar as the subject is taught at schools and universities?

For example, E. P. Thompson seems to favour a Marxist interpretation of certain events in his work, supported by references to the works of other historians and verifiable evidence.
Winston Churchill seemed more loose, almost anecdotal, in some works I have read. Bertie Russell's "History of Western Philosophy" is a well-referenced and polished, but occasionally subjective, work.

I have heard (somewhere!) that Chinese historians favour an approach where there is actual documentation or other tangible evidence.

I appreciate that history books are written to appeal to a variety of different audiences, but I am more interested in what is acceptable to other academics. Would, just for sake of example, Thompson's, Churchill's or Russell's works be harshly criticized at some academic level because they do not conform to certain (modern) standards?


texts: Why did Argentina seize South Georgia immediately prior to the Falklands invasion?

texts:
What purpose was served by Argentina's occupation of South Georgia immediately prior to the invasion of the Falklands? The famously elaborate operation, involving marines masquerading as scrap metal merchants and obscure diplomatic slights would appear to have achieved nothing of value. A miniature side show compared to the main Falklands war. What did Buenos Aires intend it to achieve?

If it was meant as a test of British resolve it surely made no sense to launch the full Falklands invasion almost in parallel and before evaluating the British response. If it was intended as a diversionary tactic it turned out to be anything but. If Argentina intended it to be strategically vital to defending the Falklands they were deluded since the British easily retook it some weeks later.

Why bother with South Georgia as a preliminary campaign? If, as Argentina intended and hoped, the Falklands occupation had been accepted by the British and the rest of the world as a fait accompli then South Georgia would quietly have been included in any eventual settlement.


texts: What happened to Gordian III in the Battle of Misiche?

texts: I read in the Wikipedia that: "Roman sources do not mention this battle (Battle of Misiche) and suggest that Gordian died far away from Misiche, at Zaitha (Qalat es Salihiyah) in northern Mesopotamia." but "Persian sources claim that a battle occurred (Battle of Misiche) near modern Fallujah (Iraq) and resulted in a major Roman defeat and the death of Gordian III." So, I want to know what is the accepted view on the Gordian III death based on opinion of modern historians?


texts:
It was recently reported that German TV actor Horst Tappert (1923 - 2008) had been identified as having been a member of the Waffen SS in World War II. However, it was also reported that a German historian had said that the circumstances of his SS membership remain unclear.

What are the facts? Was he or was he not in the SS?


texts: Were Communists drafted for the Vietnam war?

texts: Given that it wasn't illegal to be a member of a Communist party in the US, how did the military handle draftees who might be sympathetic to North Vietnam? Were men who were members of the Communist Party exempted from the draft? If they were drafted, how were they treated in the military if they talked positively about Communism or said that they hoped the North Vietnamese would win?


texts: Effects of the successful defense of the Soviet Union against Germany on the opening of the western front in WW2

texts:
I remember reading somewhere that the Allies (USA/UK) was not really keen on opening a second front to help the Soviet Union until the Soviets started to make progress in defeating Germany around 1942, 1943.

These wins generated fears in the Allies that the Soviets can actually defeat - or at least have a truce on good conditions with - Germany w/o their help and thereby gaining (more) influence over the liberated territories, thus these fears eventually lead to the accelerated creation of the western front (Normandy/Italy).

Is this theory true?


texts: To what extent did the 1793 yellow fever outbreak in Philadelphia influence the process of relocating the capital to Washington DC in 1800?

texts:
Yellow fever outbreaks were frequent in the southern US in the late C18th. The 1793 Philadelphia epidemic was one of the most severe outbreaks of infectious disease in US history, killing 10% of the residents of the city and causing 40% to flee (more information on that outbreak here).

Some time ago, I remember reading that this epidemic played a significant role in the decision to move the capital from Philadelphia to Washington DC. Looking into it in more detail (I'd like to use it as an example in a forthcoming lecture), it sounds like it would be more accurate to say that the capital was already due to move to Washington DC as a result of the Residence Act of 1790, but that the Philadelphians were lobbying to reverse that decision during the 1790s, and ultimately the YF epidemic was a factor in their failure to get a reversal reconsidered.

There are more details on the move from Philadelphia to DC in this article by the US National Constitution Centre. However, the only place YF is mentioned , it simply states "a yellow fever epidemic hit Philadelphia in 1793, raising doubts about the safety of the area". It doesn't say who had those doubts, how we know about them or what actual effect they had, if any, on decisions about the move.

It seems plausible that such a massive public health problem could influence decisions on this topic if there was still any plausible chance of reversal, although it is equally apparent that there were other significant factors in favour of a move to DC.

Did the 1793 YF epidemic or (more broadly) the history of YF epidemics in the region affect any appeals regarding the move, or is there any evidence that public support for the move to DC was strengthened on the basis of the threat from YF?


texts: Why did the Union army favor a "western" route to approaching Richmond during the American Civil War

texts:
Anyone can answer this question, but I am particularly interested in hearing from people with a knowledge of northern Virginia geography.

For the Union, much of the focus of the Civil War was attacking and capturing the Confederate capital of Richmond, Virginia.

Early in the war, the North's General McClellan waged the brilliantly conceived but poorly executed Peninsula campaign from the coast using seapower, but he was the exception.

After this campaign and the battle of Antietam, McClellan's successors preferred to swing west through Fredericksburg (Burnside), Chancellorsville (Hooker), and the Wilderness (Grant). This was true even though the terrain favored the Confederates (who won all three above-mentioned battles).

What made this route (through the same general area) so attractive to different Union generals?


texts: Where can I find the primary source for Herodotus' Histories?

texts:
I'm looking for information re: the primary source for Herodotus' Histories.

The two primary sources on the Wikipedia page for Herodotus Histories both trace back to Godley’s translation. Godley's translation is based on Stein's translation. Stein's translation is in German, which I don't read.  It may contain a reference to a primary source, but I wouldn't know.  Any ideas?


texts: Could a nobleman's land be enclosed within another noble's land?

texts:
In medieval (in the broadest sense, I'm not thinking of a specific decade) Europe, lands were split up amongst noblemen, and these noblemen had a hierarchy. Barons are lesser than earls which are lesser than dukes and so on.

I see two ways of this happening, and surely only one is correct.

Method One:
The King gives (for example) 10% of his land to his trusted Earl, and 5% each to three barons.

Method Two:
The King gives 10% of his land to his trusted Earl and then cuts 1% of that land to give it to a Baron. Thus the Baron's land is inside the Earl's and the Baron has some kind of fealty to the Earl. In time of war the king would call on his earls who would in turn call on their barons.

Which of these (if either) is more accurate?

I realise "medieval Europe" is an enormous scope so answers in general of examples from any time/place in that rough area would be great.


texts: Was there a case where a king died while the heir to the throne was unborn?

texts:
I read this interesting passage in Wikipedia:

  when Queen Victoria succeeded her uncle King William IV, the wording
  of the proclamation even gave as a caveat:

  "...saving the rights of any issue of his late Majesty King William
  IV, which may be born of his late Majesty's consort."

  This provided for the possibility that William's wife, Adelaide of
  Saxe-Meiningen, was pregnant at the moment of his death—since such a
  (so-named posthumous) child, if born and regardless of the gender of
  the child, would have displaced Victoria from the throne.

Has a such hypothetical scenario happened in any hereditary monarchy? Was there anyone who took the throne "temporarily", only to be later displaced by a better heir who were born after his/her predecessor's death?


texts: What coin/pendant is this and is it worth any money?

texts: This was found a long time ago by my neighbour who has now passed it on to me. It has NAX IOIA on the coin with what I believe to be a kings or gods face on one side and some grapes and vines on the other.


texts: What would one call a skilled metal worker in Jerusalem, circa 600 BC?

texts:
I'm doing research for a book of fiction in which the main character is a skilled metalworker in ancient Jerusalem, circa 600 BC. I want to be authentic and historically accurate.

This person is able to construct fine swords, steel bows (for hunting), and ornate bronze objects.

I'm trying to find the answers to a few questions:

What would his profession be called? Words like blacksmith, silersmith, coppersmith, and goldsmith come to mind, but if he worked with a variety of metals, what would his profession have been called?
How would such a worker have obtained clients? Is he a freelancer, doing work for all comers? If so, how did he advertise his services and get the word out? Or would he have been attached to a wealthy person or royalty, and worked exclusively for that person?
How much would he have been paid in shekels for constructing a fine steel sword (of the highest craftsmanship, with jewels, etc)? How about a fine steel bow for hunting? (Earliest known usage of steel has been dated at 1800 BC.) Would shekels have necessarily been the medium of exchange? Or would he have just as likely been paid in fungible gold or silver?
Now suppose that the fine sword were delivered to the client, but the client didn't pay. What legal recourse did the craftsman have? A lawsuit? Reporting him to a judge? How did that process work?

Thanks in advance for any advice.


texts: Why did East Germany fail? And why did DDR need hard currency 1986-1989?

texts:
Sometime back I saw Deutschland 83 then Deutschland 86 and finally Deutschland 89. The sad part is even though you see the series, you don't really understand why did East Germany fail? Why exactly did East Germany go bankrupt, what went wrong? This is never explained in either of the three mini-series. How much Moscow was responsible for it or any part of it, not known.
The only answer remotely about the whole situation seems to be this question but it is an entirely different question altogether. Looking to know more, thank you.
There is also no explanation provided why the East German Mark failed. I looked at Wikipedia, and hard currency seems to be something like the Euro or the US Dollar or maybe even the Chinese remnibi as they are now pegging their currencies to a basket of currencies and allowing it to fall or rise within a certain range in that.
While it is fascinating to know about those turbulent times, it seems one is left with an incomplete picture of what happened and why?
There is a quote by one of the actors in (I think 1986/1989 series) in which she implies that Soviet stopped funding East Germany but doesn't give any figures as to how much they had been funding per year to give some idea. There is also a documentary which sheds some light as to how East Germany tried to make a shortfall but that also doesn't get into the question as to why East Germany failed.


texts: Is it true that many great ancient warriors were vegan?

texts: This video states that. And also, most interesting - it states that Alexander's the Great army was vegan.


texts: What are the ancient origins of the Medicine Ball?

texts:
Seeing this question about the oldest known exercise equipment, I remembered a scene from I, Claudius when Tiberius is working out with a medicine ball, so I thought that might be a good candidate. I began looking for verification that the medicine ball is as ancient as Rome or older.

At first, I thought had it: there are scores of websites with factoids roughly equivalent to the following (from a South African newspaper):

  TODAY medicine balls come in a range of weights, sizes and funky
  colours but ancient drawings date the equipment to almost 3000 years
  ago, when Persian wrestlers trained with sand-filled bladders.

  In ancient Greece, the physician Hippocrates is said to have stuffed
  animal skins for patients to toss for “medicinal” purposes – hence the
  name today of “medicine ball”.

These factoids are repeated by multiple US Patent Applications mention, the "Secret History of Balls", fitness blogs, this website selling medicine balls, and by a Reuters article published in various UK and US newspapers.

But I noticed a few things. First, the blurbs are very inconsistent about whether Persian wrestlers, soldiers, or sailors used medicine balls (and whether the Persian evidence is textual or pictorial). Second, just about every mention of the Hippocrates/Persia/Medicine Ball connection is from 2011 or later. Finally, no one cites a passage from Hippocrates or a classicist on the topic. The closest any article gets to citing an authority is a reference to "Deborah McConnell, master trainer at equipment manufacturer Life Fitness."

I tried text searches of the collected works of Hippocrates. I Google Image searched "Persian Medicine Balls", and then I spent some time on Google Scholar, but I can't find any mention of the Hippocrates or Persian connection. This is beginning to have the feel of an invented fact.

Prima facie it seems very plausible that ancient civilizations threw around heavy balls filled with sand, but is there any solid evidence that Ancient Persians or Greeks trained with medicine balls or that Hippocrates recommended as much?


texts:
According to Wikipedia (and other sources I saw) so very little is known about Ivan Marchenko that his name is not even mentioned in official documents around that time; even his date of birth is unsure.

What evidence is there that he was a real person?


texts:
In school I learned about the British Agricultural Revolution - at the time this was explained as 'increased efficiencies due to crop rotation'. (This now seems a bit simplistic.
We know that in Scotland, the Highland Clearances were in part driven by the fact that farming sheep became more profitable than having farming tenants.
In this particular situation - something must have changed the economics of sheep farming. Was there increased demand for wool due to mechanisation of wool processing? Did a national market for mutton increase the price of sheep meat?
But there were many improvements in agriculture at this time:

crop rotation
enclosures
mechanisation of farming equipment
national markets for farming produce
better transport infrastructure for farming produce
decreased relative income of living on a farming lot compared to city factory jobs

My question is: What changed to make British Enclosures more profitable than tenanted subplots?
--
Edit: Explanation:
My reason for asking this question is that somewhere around the 16th-18th centuries - enclosures became profitable. Why did they become profitable? What changed?
Here we read:

Yes, the was a process called enclosure. It started in the 16th century in England, and picked up momentum in the 17th and 18th centuries.
Prior to the enclosure times, farming had taken places in small plots, with less fertile "common" lands in between for grazing or pasturing that could be used by anyone. Based on the economics of the Middle Ages, such "patchwork" agriculture was the best use of land.
An agricultural revolution that began in the 16th century, and extended to later centuries changed all that. Growing economies of scale made it more efficient to farm land in "bulk," even if some of the pieces didn't fit so well with others. So large landowners began to combine small pieces of lands into larger ones, "annexing" the small patches of formerly common land in between by "enclosing" them, and making them off limits to others. Sometimes, people were bought out of their lands or rights to common lands; fairly. At other times, rich people bent the law to "condemn," or otherwise "privatize" land that was formerly held by others, or by the public in common.


texts: Please help me identify this uniform and insignia from possibly the Utah Territorial Militia?

texts: This person is Charles Robert Jones, my 3rd great-grandfather. He served in the Utah Territorial Militia during the Utah Black Hawk War. The year would be about 1866. Could this be the uniform and what do the markings mean? He emigrated from England in 1862 and may have even served in the Civil War.


texts: Holders of what offices are usually used to inaugurate the new head of state in various countries?

texts: In the USA it is the Chief Justice of the United States. In Russia it is the Chairman or the Central Electoral Commission. In Byzantine Empire it was the Patriarch. What are other examples? What are the patterns?


texts: Did Noah Webster ever state why he Americanized spelling?

texts:
I am aware that Noah Webster (1758--1843 AD) is responsible for the majority of the differences between British and American spelling (IE: "color" v "colour"). Over time, it seems, in his Speller textbook, he slowly phased out the British spellings for spellings he personally favored.

According to the Wikipedia page about Noah Webster:

  Slowly, edition by edition, Webster changed the spelling of words, making them "Americanized". He chose s over c in words like defense, he changed the re to er in words like center, and he dropped one of the Ls in traveler. At first he kept the u in words like colour or favour but dropped it in later editions. He also changed "tongue" to "tung"—an innovation that never caught on.

My question is, did Noah Webster ever explicitly state why he made these changes, either in his books or private correspondences? Also, are there any records of him consulting others while making these decisions or did he act unilaterally?


texts:
I believe he was a French king who ruled shortly before the Renaissance, but I'm probably wrong.

The story goes like this:

A knowledgeable courtier reported to the king that there was in his kingdom a man who could tell the future: not quite an oracle, nor a wizard: merely a God-fearing fellow who had this special gift and whose fame was growing by the minute.

The King demanded that the seer be brought to him.

Shortly before the man's arrival at the palace, the King gathered his guards and told them to wait outside the chamber in which the interview was to take place and, upon the seer's exit, grab him and cut his throat.

As the guards stood waiting outside, the seer entered the chamber. After a brief exchange of greetings, the King asked:

"When am I going to die?"

The seer was an insightful man. He quickly realized what was to follow and, upon some reflection, replied:

"The week following my death, Sire."

After composing himself as best he could, the King expressed his gratitude to the seer. When the seer was on his way out, the King followed him closely, and, the moment the door opened, gestured desperately to the guards from behind the seer's back that they should stand the hell down. The guards got the point, and did.

Who was this king, and who was the seer? Any ideas?


texts: Why was it Italy that attack ed Tripoli under Ottoman control in 1911?

texts:
This was the invasion that triggered off a lot of pre-WW1 events including the second Bulgarian war.

But why did Italy invade Tripoli in 1911? It would make sense to me if Austro-Hungary invaded it since it wanted to be the next superpower following the Ottoman Empire, but why Italy?


texts: Was Fakhri Pasha really nicknamed "Tiger of the Desert" by the British?

texts:
It is mentioned in multiple places (eg. in "With Lawrence in Arabia" by L.J. Thomas, in this article, and even in the Wikipedia page about him) that Fakhri Pasha (Fahreddin Paşa), the commander of the Ottoman Army and governor of Medina from 1916 to 1919, was nicknamed as "Tiger of the Desert" by the British, or even more specifically T.E. Lawrence (aka Lawrence of Arabia).

Is there any truth to this nickname?


texts: Why did Emperor Xian's flight from Chang'an take one year?

texts:
During the end of the Han dynasty, the capital Luoyang fell under the control of the warlord Dong Zhuo who, fleeing a coalition of lords against him, burned it and moved the young Xian Emperor to Chang'an. After Lu Bu assassinated Dong, Chang'an fell under the control of the warlords Li Jue and Guo Si, who fought each other soon afterward. The emperor escaped and eventually reached the ruins of Luoyang. According to Chinese Wikipedia (and other sources), this trip took one year:

後來李郭二人內訌戰鬥，民不聊生，献帝与一批朝臣于兴平二年（195年）七月逃离长安，途中多次成为李傕、郭汜、张济、杨奉等军阀争夺挟制的目标。
...
汉献帝与朝臣历经一年才于建安元年（196年）七月到达旧都雒阳。

Translation:

Later, Li and Guo fought each other, the people fell upon hard times, and the Xian Emperor fled Chang'an with a group of courtiers on July of the second year of Xingping (AD 195). On this trip, on multiple occasions they became the target of capture by Li Jue, Guo Si, Zhang Ji, Yang Feng and other warlords.
...
The Xian Emperor of Han and his courtiers finally reached the old capital of Luoyang after a year in July of the first year of Jian'an (AD 196).

Here's a map showing Chang'an and Luoyang; they are < 400km / 250miles apart:

From https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/f/f4/Dufuschina.jpg/300px-Dufuschina.jpg

Although the trip passes through difficult terrain and a few mountain passes, it is also a key artery in the empire and very well travelled. The trip shouldn't take anywhere close to a year under normal circumstances.
So why did it take emperor Xian one year? What were they doing? What happened during this trip?


texts: Technological transfer/worker migration e.g. in ancient Egypt

texts:
My question revolves around how different inventions were shared between humans in ancient times, for example in ancient Egypt (between 3000 and 0 BC).
Nowadays, science is often publicly funded and will publish its results openly for all humans to (theoretically) read - notable exceptions to this are business secrets and military/national security inventions and technologies. This makes sense since all-out wars and conquest are largely a thing of the past and many people agree that bettering everyones lives with globalization and sharing of wealth to some extent is better than a nationalistic us-vs-them mentality.

Of course, this has not always been the case in human history, so I wonder what this was like in the past. When someone invented a particularly effective method of farming, or other technology that was needed by basically all humans (at least in that geographical area) and of non-military nature, how long would it take to and how would it reach neighboring countries? On the other hand, were there tries to keep inventions that you don't want to share with your neighbors, such as military stuff, secret from them?

My thoughts and guesses on this:

war, especially among neighbors, was extremely common. Thus, it might be very beneficial to keep as much secret as possible
Copying someone or something is of course much simpler than inventing it (eg the Egyptians were ruled by a foreign power for a few generations because they had never seen chariots before, until they created an army of them themselves), keeping knowledge hidden is very difficult
However, back then it was much easier to hide knowledge than nowadays: Learning foreign languages is much harder (I assume, no books, education is extremely expensive and rare, no internet, etc), people were much more local, less mobility, less media, expensive media (e.g. scribes)
Not sure: How easy or common was it to migrate to a different country? Say I'm born in Egypt but I don't like it there (or the neighboring country is richer) - can I just move to a different place? Are there border controls? Can I go there, note all their technologies and move back and share them there?

Thank you for your answers.


texts:
What is the gun traverse limit of the 75mm armament on M3 Lee/Grant?

http://www.onwar.com/weapons/tanks/firearms/fm3a4med.html and http://afvdb.50megs.com/usa/m3lee.html say 15 degree L/R.

Does anyone know of any direct and reliable source such as from US army archive records?


texts: How did France worsen its relationship with Turkey?

texts:
Several years back Turkey barred some French companies to participate in one of its arms procurement tender. Turkey doesn't allow French military air-crafts or ships to pass its territorial space. Moreover, the row continues in connection with a French parliament-bill that aims at recognizing Armenian genocide.

What is the root cause of the deterioration of French-Turkish relationship? And, when did it start to deteriorate? Why France is undermining its relationship with Turkey? Why is it so important to pass a bill that threatens the relationship?

On the other hand, Turkish-German and Turkish-Italian relationships seems not to affected.

Why?


texts: What did the kings and aristocrats in Europe use before toilet paper was introduced?

texts:
The current news of people hoarding toilet paper made me wonder what could be used instead and history should be able to provide some good answers since this is a universal human need!

Historically, poor people used whatever at hand for toilet paper, leaves, sticks, moss and so on (and later on, news paper) - but what did the rich, kings, aristocrats and so on, use before toilet paper was introduced?

Limit it to Europe and up until 1800 or so (but feel free to include Rome and Greece during antiquity).


texts: When did people start caring for the handicapped?

texts:
Did people in the past concern themselves with the welfare of the handicapped, such as the blind and the deaf, or did they neglect them?

Was e.g. the "Amnericans with Disabilities Act" a new threshold in this regard?


texts: Could the Confederates have done better at Gettysburg if they had put cavalry in front of, rather than behind, Pickett's charge?

texts:
On at least two occasions when cavalry was used in charges, it was "wiped out." These include the (in)famous charge of the Light Brigade at Balaclava, and Marshal Ney's cavalry charge at Waterloo.

These charges did succeed after a fashion, however. The Light Brigade spiked a battery of guns, and the sacrifice of Ney's dragoons cleared the way for a (short-lived) infantry advance.

The Confederates launched "Pickett's charge" (of infantry) on the third day of the battle of Gettysburg (coincidentally or otherwise following the arrival of J.E.B. Stuart's cavalry).

Do the above, or other historical examples indicate that the Confederates would have done better to have the cavalry lead the way, e.g. to silence the Union artillery that devastated the Confederate infantry ranks? (The purpose of the cavalry was to "exploit" the infantry charge IF it broke the Union line.)

"Better" in this regard does not mean that the Confederates would have won, only that they would have "upgraded" their chances from "none" to "slim" or reduced their prospects of defeat to "a chance versus a certainty."

Confederate general James Longstreet was quoted in the Killer Angels (book and movie) as saying, "No 15,000 men could take that hill." Would 23,000 men (8,000 of them mounted) have had a better chance?


texts: In England, how many Jews died during the persecutions of the crusades during 1190-1200?

texts:
As is well known Steven Runciman, a British historian known for his work on the Middle Ages, definitively clarified what the Holy War had been: "The Holy War itself was nothing more than a long act of intolerance in the name of God, which is the sin against the Holy Ghost".

However I'm not interested in generic discussions or debates on this matter, but I want only to know precise notices about the massacre of Jews in England during 1190-1200.

In "God's War: A New History of the Crusades" Christopher Tyerman wrote:

  [...] during the recruitment for the third crusade in England in 1190
  were attack on the Jews especially vulnerable with the king's campaign
  for funds, his approaching departure and immediate financial
  requirements of the crusader who converged in English town ports and
  main roads in the early months of the year. In Lent 1190, bands of
  English crusaders, some motivated by a misguided notion of serving God
  and the cross, began looting Jewish property in commercial centers
  such as King's Lynn and Stamford. The violence reached a ghastly
  climax at York in mid march Well-connected local crusaders led a
  concerted attack on the Jewish community that culminated in a mass
  suicide and massacre at the royal castle, now Clifford's Tower, after
  which, revealingly, the bloodstained crusaders went to York Minster to
  destroy the Jews' bond of credit stored there.

Questions are: How many Jews died during these persecutions? In England, was the Jewish population drastically reduced when these persecutions ended?


texts: Housing Materials, Structure and Style in the late Middle Ages in Germany

texts:
So my friend and I are coming to develop an Age of Empires-esque game set in the late Middle Ages. Like any good developers we're doing our research first and we've come up with some issues. When trying to research pre-Tudor (Note, I'm using this as a time reference, not trying to imply Tudor occupied Germany as I have no idea if that was a thing or not) housing the majority of information that comes up is about Tudor housing, and pictures demonstrate iconic styles associated with the Tudors.

Our questions are:

What materials were used in the construction of housing? We understand that the richer you were the more likely your house was to be stone, and less likely to use clay and earth as a mortar, but specifics are hard to come by.
What layout did the buildings take? The more basic housing would be single rooms, we assume, but what rooms generally took precedence and would the more expensive housing generally follow specific layouts?
Gothic architecture is renowned for its arches. Where there any pre-Tudor architectural norms or flagstone shapes that would have been common?

Any help is greatly appreciated as well as any resources we can use to help educate ourselves!

As you might be able to appreciate we'd like to ensure its not horrendously inaccurate, and besides- Its a good excuse to learn!

Thank you.


texts: When and how did classic "Italian" cuisine come to be?

texts:
Most people can recognize "Italian" food.  Pasta, tomatoes, basil, etc.  But many of the plants used in Italian food, didn't actually originate in Italy.  Or even anywhere in the Old World.  The tomato, for instance, is a South America plant that eventually migrated to Europe after contact. Likewise, another quintessentially Italian ingredient, Basil, originated in India.

So when and how did these plants become so quintessentially Italian?  When and how did modern Italian food come into being?


texts: Reception of Acemoglu-Robinson 'extractive institutions' thesis?

texts:
Daron Acemoglu and James Robinson believe that a great deal about the economic, social, and political life of a country can be explained by the quality of political institutions, especially the degree of extractive exploitation they embody. Their book Why Nations Fail has been well-received in the popular press and Their blog posts supporting it seem, to a layman, compelling and persuasive.

How have their ideas been received by the historical profession? What have they published about extractive institutions in the specialist, peer-reviewed literature? How original are they and how much do they owe to prior thinkers? What about their reception by political scientists, economists, sociologists, anthropologists, and other possibly relevant professional disciplines?

Obviously this question is somewhat open-ended, so answer or ignore as much as you like.


texts: Would occupying Big Round Top have been a good idea for the Confederates?

texts:
A lot of attention was given at the end of the 19th century to the "what if" the Confederates occupied the Little Round Top at Gettysburg, but there's the Big Round Top nearby and the Confederates took it almost without a fight. Would it be better for them if they just sat on it and not have committed themselves to the Little Round Top fight? I know that placing artillery on top was probably not possible, but it might still have been a good position, as the Federals were nervous about the Confederates being there and drove them away.

EDIT: I think I now understand. While something akin to a victory might have been possible on either Round Tops, a concentration there and subsequent baiting for a Federal attack was not general Lee's intention. He wanted to smash the Union left wing in a frontal attack and cause a rout. When that failed, there was no secondary objective (like taking the Big Round Top).


texts: Since there had not been any offensives launched by either side against the other, why declare war just because Japan had attacked the USA?


texts:
In the historic TV Series Black Sails we see a character Thomas Hamilton (circa 1706) in London acting to end piracy in Nassau:

  Determined to end the pirate threat in Nassau, Thomas enlisted Lieutenant James McGraw of the Royal Navy to help him convince parliament to grant blanket pardons to all the pirates of Nassau to restore English governance.

James McGraw points out that it is in Parliament's interests to oppose this initiative, as the pirates of the Bahamas were a convenient bogeyman, ie they gave the populace someone to hate. For this reason, the British Parliament was likely to drag their feet on getting rid of the Nassau Pirates.

My question is: Is there evidence to suggest the British Parliament was reluctant to deal with the Nassau Pirates because they made a convenient bogeyman?


texts: Could Nazi Germany afford its rearmament programme?

texts: Is it probable, given the state of the German economy, that without a war and the acquisition of territory and resources, Nazi Germany could have afforded its vast rearmament programme beyond (say) the early 1940s ?


texts: What percent of the population could vote in Venice between 900 and 1200 AD?

texts:
Venice's political institutions became much more inclusive between 900 and 1200 AD especially with the creation of the Consilium Sapientis. How many of Venice's population were citizens entitled to vote as part of the Concio for members of the Consilium Sapientis and the Doge?

I've checked wikipedia and done some rather extensive research on Venice. It seems about 5% of the population were patricians, but non-patrician citizens could also vote, and I haven't found any estimates for the proportion of people who were citizens.


texts: Why did the Germans build battle cruisers with a different profile than the British?

texts:
Battle cruisers of the Scharnhorst class had a displacement of 32,000 tons and a speed of 31 knots, but carried only 11 inch guns.

On the other hand, British) battle cruisers like the Renown had a displacement of only 26,000 tons, a speed of 32 knots, but 15 inch guns.

Why were the German battlecruisers larger and more heavily armored than their British counterparts, about the same speed, but carrying lighter guns? I thought the idea of battle cruisers was for them to be as heavily gunned as battleships, but faster, with a sacrifice of size and armor protection as the offset. But the Scharnhorst was larger but lighter gunned than the British equivalents. The British classified the two German ships as "battleships" They were, in fact, only slightly lighter than the Nelson class battleship]3, which, however, had 16 inch guns. The two German ships were also much lighter than the newer but slower King George V battleships (which the Germans could not have known about).

This makes even less sense when one realizes that the Germans also built pocket battleships that had two-thirds of the firepower (six 11 inch guns vs. nine) of the battlecruisers, but were otherwise much closer in size to the British heavy cruisers that they were supposedly the equivalent of, due to the limitations imposed by the Versailles Treaty. Also, in "Mein Kampf," Adolf Hitler himself expressed a preference for German ships that were more heavily gunned than their British equivalents so they could win the "single combats" he hoped would ensue as a result of German attacks on Allied shipping.* The pocket battleships met this criterion, the battle cruisers did not. The Germans also built two battleships, the Bismarck and Tirpitz, that were superior to any single British battleship.

Or did the lighter 11 inch guns make the Scharnhorst and Gneisenau seem less threatening to the British and others so that there was a "deception element involved?

*During the war of 1812, the Americans won number of notable victories because their ships were heavier than their British equivalents. That is, while a British man of war could beat an American frigate, a British frigate would be an underdog against a supposedly comparable American ship.


texts: Was there a continuity in architecture from the Minoan civilisation to classical Greece?

texts: The Minoans used columns in their palaces and the Mycenaeans used columns in their megarons which were inspired by the Minoan column, but were the columns of classical Greek temples and buildings a continuation of the Mycenaean columns or were they distinct from this tradition?


texts: Was Abu Simbel also designed to serve as a border between Egypt and Nubia?

texts: Abu Simbel is a spectacular looking site located in the most Southern part of Egypt and in very close proximity to the Sudan-(Ancient Nubia).  Although Abu Simbel was a massive Temple dedicated to Pharaoh Ramses II, the Temple's facade has 4 enormous statues overlooking the Egyptian-Nubian panorama. Having said that, was this Temple also a type of ancient border signalling to the Nubians-(as well as to any visitor(s) from lands South of Nubia) that they were entering Egyptian territory?


texts: What is my grandfather's shoulder patch?

texts: This is a photograph of my grandfather...  his DD214 shows his last unit as Co C 52d AIB APO 221


texts: In Tolstoy's War and Peace, one character is captured after the Battle of Austerlitz and is taken as a POW. Was his experience historically accurate?

texts:
Prince Andrei Bolkonsky is captured after sustaining a wound in battle and is taken as a POW. He, along with other officers of the Russian Army, were treated with care and respect by the French, and Napoleon himself visited the prisoners. Were their experiences historically accurate? What were the conditions of a POW during the Napoleonic wars?
Some text to give you context:

“You are the commander of the Emperor Alexander’s regiment of Horse Guards?” asked Napoleon.
“I commanded a squadron,” replied Repnín.
“Your regiment fulfilled its duty honorably,” said Napoleon.
“The praise of a great commander is a soldier’s highest reward,” said Repnín.
“I bestow it with pleasure,” said Napoleon. “And who is that young man beside you?”
Prince Repnín named Lieutenant Sukhtélen.
After looking at him Napoleon smiled.
“He’s very young to come to meddle with us.”
“Youth is no hindrance to courage,” muttered Sukhtélen in a failing voice.
“A splendid reply!” said Napoleon. “Young man, you will go far!”
Prince Andrei, who had also been brought forward before the Emperor’s eyes to complete the show of prisoners, could not fail to attract his attention. Napoleon apparently remembered seeing him on the battlefield and, addressing him, again used the epithet “young man” that was connected in his memory with Prince Andrei.
“Well, and you, young man,” said he. “How do you feel, mon brave?”

And:

The Emperor [...] said to one of the officers as he went: “Have these gentlemen attended to and taken to my bivouac; let my doctor, Larrey, examine their wounds. Au revoir, Prince Repnín!”


texts: How Many German Born American Citizens served for the U.S. in World War II?

texts:
I have been searching for the number of German born American soldiers in WWII that are still alive (in 2015). I was quite shocked to not even be able to find how many German born American Citizens who fought for the the U.S in World War II, period.

Is anyone aware of a source that covers emigrants from Axis countries fighting in American or other Allied militaries. Given the discrimination many of these immigrant populations faced during and even after the war it would be interesting to find hard numbers regarding their contributions and service during the war.


texts: Was the State of Indiana's legislation changed to fix the value of Pi?

texts:
Is the following an anecdote?

  Mathematicians describe Pi as an irrational number, that is, a number that cannot be expressed as the ratio of any two integers. This was an irksome fact to the State of Indiana in 1897; so much so that legislation was drafted setting Pi alternative values of 3.2, 3.23 and 4.

I read the above fact on a book of quizzical nature, but it seem strange, if not absurd. Can anybody clarify if the State of Indiana has ever approved that legislation?


texts: Were princes and other large landowners motivated to support the Reformation by the frequency of Church holidays?

texts:
Church holidays or holy days were very frequent in the middle ages. Here is one link Medieval Holidays that testifies this:

  "The rural population of the Middle Ages had their days of rest and amusement, Middle Ages holidays were then much more numerous than at present. At that period the festivals of the Church were frequent and rigidly kept, as each of them was the pretext for a forced holiday from manual labour."

My understanding has been that the Roman Catholic Church levied heavy fines upon those landowners who worked the land on these days. Were many large landowners in Germany and elsewhere motivated by avoiding frequent Church holidays as they supported the reformation?


texts: Which was more revolutionary for its time: Television or Radio?

texts:
In terms of broadcast technologies, which was seen as more revolutionary for its time: television or radio? How was each technology utilized in terms of its intended purpose and audience/users in its earliest years? And were telecom companies its earliest providers, presumably having already provided telephone services and telegraph long before that?

Also, was the invention of broadcast technologies seen as a surprising and significant development from prior point-to-point communications like telegraph and the telephone, or was it more of an expected logical progression from those precursor technologies?

Lastly, many communication technologies seemed to be developed for government or military purposes first and only later considered for public use. Was the same the case for either radio or television?

I'm trying to get a feel for how it impacted the societies in the era they were each invented, including early adoption and enthusiasm surrounding their use.


texts: What is the greater significance of the Boer War?

texts:
The Boer Wars are generally viewed as a minor conflict affecting only South Africa; I, however, am skeptical about this. Britain did, after all, send nearly half a million soldiers to fight in the Boer Wars. So I'm wondering, how did the Boer Wars affect the tide of world history elsewhere? I remember reading about how they affected Allied tactics during Word War I; but beyond that I'm in the dark.

What is the significance of the Boer Wars outside of South Africa?


texts: Was there a pre-determined arrangement for the division of Germany in case it surrendered before any Soviet forces entered its territory?

texts:
Listening to the audiobook D-day through German eyes, I thought: what if Germany had surrendered before any Soviet force entered its territory?

In the book, a German soldier says that his motivation after 1943 was to protect his motherland from communist enslavement. Hence, I thought that maybe, from this standpoint, it would have been better to concentrate resistance on the eastern border and let Western forces invade deeper.

Was there any predetermined arrangement, official or non-official, to divide its territory into sectors in the case of Western powers occupying the whole of the country before the Soviets managed to enter it?

Would the Soviet sector have covered less ground than it did in actual history? Or would it have been the same, and there was no benefit from letting Western forces advance deeper?

P.S. My question is not about whether there was any possibility of a conditional surrender, or of surrender to only some of the Allies. I'm curious whether it was possible to escape communist rule by re-distributing the resistance effort to the East.


texts: Which material did the Vikings drink Mead from?

texts:
I believe Vikings drank Mead as their common  alcoholic drink. If that is not right it doesn't really matter. Just replace Mead with whatever is right (beer, wine ...).

The question is what material did they use for their mugs to drink this drink out of? Perhaps it might be clay, wood or horn?

Note: I need the mug commonly used while partying or just sitting together on a table. If for example the "wilderness-mug" is different, it would be nice to know but it's not necessarily object of this question.


texts: Why did the Roberts Treaty of 1833 have a Portuguese translation annexed to it?

texts: According to Wikipedia, the Treaty of Amity and Commerce between Siam and the United States (or Roberts Treaty of 1833) was written in Thai and English, together with translations in Portuguese and Chinese annexed to it. Why was it felt the need of annexing a Portuguese translation to it?


texts: How did the KPD relate to the German state during the Molotov-Ribbentrop pact?

texts:
Between August 1939 and June 1941, Germany and the USSR had the Molotov–Ribbentrop Pact.  During this time, many USSR-oriented communist parties in Europe and North America were (forced to be) rather pro-German or at least opposed to a war against Germany.  From Wikipedia:

The CPUSA dropped its boycott of Nazi goods, spread the slogans "The Yanks Are Not Coming" and "Hands Off", set up a "perpetual peace vigil" across the street from the White House and announced that Roosevelt was the head of the "war party of the American bourgeoisie". By April 1940, the CPUSA Daily Worker's line seemed not so much antiwar as simply pro-German. A pamphlet stated the Jews had just as much to fear from Britain and France as they did Germany. In August 1940, after NKVD agent Ramón Mercader killed Leon Trotsky with an ice axe, Browder perpetuated Moscow's fiction that the killer, who had been dating one of Trotsky's secretaries, was a disillusioned follower.
In allegiance to the Soviet Union, the party changed this policy again after Adolf Hitler broke the Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact by attacking the Soviet Union on June 22, 1941.

Also the German KPD underground communist party welcomed the pact:

„Der Nichtangriffspakt entlarvt die Hetze des Naziregimes über die angebliche ‚Einkreisung‘ Deutschlands. […] Das deutsche Volk begrüßt den Nichtangriffspakt zwischen der Sowjetunion und Deutschland, weil es den Frieden will […] weil es nicht wie das Bündnis Hitlers und Mussolinis und den japanischen Militaristen ein Instrument des Krieges und der imperialistischen Vergewaltigung anderer Völker, sondern ein Pakt zur Wahrung des Friedens zwischen Deutschland und der Sowjetunion ist.“

which essentially means that the KPD claimed that the German people welcome the pact.  So the KPD welcomed the pact.  But did this reduce the anti-nazi resistance of the KPD, and was there any change in the oppression of the KPD by the German state?


texts:
Was wondering about the process of claiming land in the Old West (US) in the 1860-1890 time period.

If I was in Nevada, say, and saw a valley that I wanted to have as a ranch, and there was no other occupation of the land (other than the natives), how would I go about claiming that valley land as my own.

I know about the Homestead act that would allow for about 150 acres, but I am thinking of a larger area of land than that.

Would you go to a nearby town (county seat?) and file a claim on the land? What was the process to claim ownership of unclaimed land in the old West?


texts: What is the significance of numbered tiles on walls in Rome?

texts:
Around Rome, I noticed many numbered tiles (most with four digits, and all with a white background and blue text) around the city. An example is shown below on the right of the image.

Some of these tiles were placed at the entrances of historically important buildings (for example, Santi Quatro Coronati has a numbered tile), but many were at addresses with no discernable importance. I also verified that the number on the tile did not correspond to the street number. (This is evident, for example, for the property in the picture above; the street number is 28).

What is the significance of locations with these tiles? Is there a system behind their numbering / a list of all the locations of the tiles? More images are available in this album.


texts: Which were the last castles to be besieged and fall in the United Kingdom?  I'm separating the two in case a castle was besieged unsuccessfully most recently.


texts: In 19th century India, pre and post Raj, did any private British citizens actually own land in India?

texts:
I've never been able to clarify this question.

From what I can tell, the land that the British occupied in India was either "owned" (if this is the right term) by the Company during the time of its tenure, or by the Crown once the Company was no longer the controlling power in the British-Indian territories.

Notwithstanding this, was it possible for a private British citizen (or any other nationality for that matter) to actually own land in India for themselves?

I don't think it was -- but can anyone here confirm this?


texts:
I was going through my late Uncles WWII photo album from his time in the US Army. To my surprise I came across one page dedicated to the Nazi army. No idea how he came about these pictures. It looks like it was taken from his camera but do not see how that was possible. I am thinking it was maybe taken from a fallen Nazi soldier.

Who are the Nazi soldiers pictured with Hitler?


texts:
I need a listing of some of the most influential ancient Roman virtues for a book I'm writing.  There is a great list, just what I need, here on Wikipedia: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Virtue#Roman_virtues

However, they don't provide any citations for it at all.  My preference would be to find a single reputable reference that includes a listing like the one at Wikipedia.  Failing that, I'd like to find the smallest bibliography of reputable references that collectively defines a similar list.

Thank you for your help.


texts: Compulsion for Germany to accept the Treaty of Versailles?

texts:
At first it is difficult to understand why Germany would have accepted the Treaty of Versailles.

The armistice had been agreed upon 11 November 1918 and was explicitly based on the terms of Wilson's Fourteen Points and the Germans made it clear that they were ceasing hostilities based on the assumption that those terms would be the basis for a future treaty.

Nevertheless, this did not happen. There was no treaty until 28 June 1919, more than seven months later, and when this treaty was signed it was highly unfavorable to Germany and completely abrogated the Fourteen Points.

Why would Germany ever have agreed to this?

The only explanation I can think of is that England, France and Italy must have maintained a naval blockade on Germany and prevented any imports or exports from that country and essentially tried to economically starve them into signing the Treaty of Versailles. Was this the cause? If so, was Germany blockaded on only the North Sea (Hamburg), or was the Baltic Sea (Kiel and Danzig) blockaded as well? Obviously Germany could have traded with Holland and Denmark. Did England blockade Holland and Denmark, too?


texts: Is the Native American relationship with colonists described in In the Days of Poor Richard historically accurate?

texts:
I was reading In the Days of Poor Richard by Irving Bacheller (the full book can be viewed here). At the beginning of the book, there is a long paragraph describing the main character that goes like this:

The first time I saw the boy, Jack Irons, he was about nine years old. I was in Sir William Johnson's camp of magnificent Mohawk warriors at Albany. Jack was so active and successful in the games, between the red boys and the white, that the Indians called him 'Boiling Water.'

Though no date is given, I think the scenario being described in this quote is set in the middle of the 18th century, judging by the name Sir William Johnson. The quote seems to indicate that the Mohawk people and the colonists cohabited well with each other, to the point of letting their children played with each other and interacting with them.
This detail directly contradicts with what I know (or think I know) about the relationship between Native Americans and colonists during the 18th century. I did some search around the Internet and all I found was confirmation of what I already know. According to this website and this website, the Native Americans and the colonists did have a good relationship with each other in the 1600s, but over time, the relationship gradually went sour due to various reasons such as diseases brought by the colonists and bloody conflicts. By the time of the 18th century, the Native Americans had already developed trust issues with the colonists and vice versa, as echoed in a few paragraphs later of In the Days of Poor Richard (this is a description of another character named Solomon).

He had been the best scout in the army of Sir Jeffrey Amherst. As a small boy he had been captured by the Senecas and held in the tribe a year and two months. Early in the French and Indian War, he had been caught by Algonquins and tied to a tree and tortured by hatchet throwers until rescued by a French captain. After that his opinion of Indians had been, probably, a bit colored by prejudice.

I'm very conflicted about these details, since the book claims to base itself on "old letters, diaries, and newspaper clippings in the possession of a well-known American family", which implies that the author did careful research for the book he wrote. So my question is: is the detail of the Native Americans getting along with the colonists described in In the Days of Poor Richard historically accurate?


texts: How did mid-19th century American legislation affect the corporate structure of railroad companies?

texts:
It is my understanding that a part of the complexity that the Standard Oil Company built up was due to the nature of US corporate legislation (while, of course, the rest was that they wanted to hide ownership in other companies, etc) in the 19th century which prevented corporations that were incorporated in one state from engaging in certain activities in another state. I've been wondering how such legislation would have affected American railroad companies, given these had to cross state borders in many cases.
What corporate forms did a typical 19th century American railroad companies take? Did a typical 19th century American railroad company have a separate incorporated entity in every state? If so, what were the benefits of this structure?
Additional question if it fits into the structure of understanding the above questions: what considerations did railroad companies have to have for owning property and generating revenue in a different state to the one it was incorporated in?
With respect to my prior research, I've been unable to specifically figure out what activities were complicated if a company was not incorporated in that state. I've investigated corporate law and its development as well as trusts—while trusts would probably have been useful for a railroad corporation they were properly introduced in 1882 so a bit too late for this question (and the Standard Oil Company already had "disparate companies, spread across dozens of states" by this point).
My memories regarding possible state inhibitions come from Chernow's 'The Titan', but I didn't note the relevant passages at the time and I don't have an online preview in my location. Possibly, one of the main reasons why having a different incorporated body in a different state was beneficial is that this made owning local property easier, but I'm not 100% sure of this.
I've looked at some specific companies as well to see if this is generally described in those articles, but it isn't:

Chicago, Burlington, and Quincy Railroad, which ended up having tracks in 14 states, but there's no mention of more than one incorporated entity;
New York, Susquehanna, and Western Railway, as above;
Grand Trunk Railway, notes a separate company "Grand Trunk Railway of Michigan" with a separate charter in Indiana but these companies merged two years after their inception;

Some useful background information is provided in this question, but it doesn't nearly go into depth about this aspect of railroad corporations. This question is closely related but doesn't have any answers.


texts: How successful were Einsatzkommando Tunis and how much was Rommel complicit?

texts:
This Einsatzkommando was headed by SS officer Walter Rauff and according to his wikipedia article it had great effect on the local Jewish population. An example is given, a quote from a German TV documentary:

"More than 2,500 Tunisian Jews died in a network of SS slave labour camps before the Germans withdrew. Rauff's men also stole jewels, silver, gold and religious artifacts from the Tunisian Jews. Forty-three kilogrammes of gold were taken from the Jewish community on the island of Djerba alone"

Is there further evidence of their actions in North Africa, or the extent of other anti-jewish efforts carried out in North Africa?

Rommel had apparently promised his cooperation with Einsatzgruppe Egypt.  This was a small force that, presumably with the cooperation of Africa Corp troops given the Einsatzgruppe's small size, would have massacred around Palestine had the war gone better for Germany. source, wiki. Is there any evidence of this type of cooperation in Tunis (between army units, army command and the Einsatzkommando)?


texts: What role did the Ancient Samurai heritage play on Modern Japan during WW2?

texts:
Some of the policies adopted by the WW2 Japanese army , seem to be along the lines of the ancient samurai code of Bushido. Policies such as extreme loyalty to the emperor , honor unto death and suicidal warfare.

My question is about the missing connection/link between these two era of Japanese history.

How did modernization of Japan in the Early twentieth century affect the Samurai, and why was there such a strong influence of the samurai on the Japanese army who followed similar methods of warfare ?

Were there any officers in the Japanese army, who were descendants of the samurai ?
If there were such officers/soldiers, did they wear any insignia on their uniforms, to mark their samurai legacy ?

Were these officers/soldiers allowed to wield any other weapons or the samurai katana, apart from the standard issue firearms ?


texts: What was the role of Egypt in Soviet-Afghan war?

texts: Just wanted to know the role of Egypt in the Soviet-Afghan war..like what did it do,who were it’s allies and enemies...I have researched on Wikipedia but didn’t find anything useful except that it had some relations with the USA...


texts: How did redenomination prevent the Weimar Republic from further decline?

texts:
My school is currently teaching us European History in the 20th century, and we were on the topic of the Weimar Republic.

It got me thinking, how exactly did redenomination of currency save the Weimar Republic? I am looking for concise answers and still doing my research.

I appreciate any and all help rendered. Thank you!


texts: Did Roman Britannia leave any impacts on English?

texts:
I was discussing French influence on English language with some other users and while on the topic of if the Latin influence on English language came exclusively from the Normans, it occurred to me that I have never given a thought to whether Roman Britannia left any lingering effects on the subsequent Old English of Anglo Saxons.

Now on cursory look it seems unlikely because Anglo Saxon migration to the British Isles only occurred when the Roman authority in the Isles had effectively ceased to exist. And the British subjects of the Roman Empire were mainly the Celtic people i.e. Britons, not the Anglo-Saxons.

But it is possible that Anglo-Saxons may have borrowed words from the Celtic British people which may have in turn be borrowed from Latin rulers. It is also possible that they may have borrowed some words while they were on the main continent Europe.

Is there any evidence for or against Roman influence on Language of the Anglo-Saxons?


texts:
Most of history i have heard has been about states, monarchies, grand buildings, etc. I'd like to get a picture of the general population throughout history. For example:

where and how the general population lives
what does an average person believe in
how does the society look upon women, men, strangers, community, religion, faith
how long is the workday
what is the life expectancy
how many children survive to adulthood
how socially mobile is the society

As most of the population is probably illiterate, are there any primary sources?


texts: Did Ali say that only Muhammad's descendants can rule?

texts:
Islam stackexchange wasn't able to answer this question. It quotes Wikipedia:Ali.

This is a politically charged question I think.

Sunnis and Shias see Ali positively. So if there are Sunni records that say even Ali think that way, it'll be something.

So are there any historical sources or biographies or hadith that say that?


texts: Were Israel-Iran relations better in the 80s? What changed?

texts:
If you look at the Iran-Contra affair (mostly around 1985), you'll see that the middleman in the arms for money/hostages deal were Israeli companies.

Were Israeli-Iran relations better at that point?  I assume the Israeli government knew about that deal.  Was it just because, at the time of the Iran-Iraq War, "the enemy of my enemy is my friend"?  At the same time, Hizbollah already was active in Lebanon, so that bit of irritation existed already.

What changed?  Palestinians are mostly Sunni, are they not?  So not an obvious faction for Iran to support.  And both countries are far from each other.  What motivated the escalating enmity, besides Iran's nuclear ambitions?


texts: Was the Somerset Decision in 1772 in England the real underlying cause of the American Revolutionary war?

texts:
I had a discussion with a Brit the other day and naturally the topic drifted to our historic break from the UK in 1776 and I boasted of our noble fight for liberation and freedom.  The Brit was amused and said I was brought up believing "rubbish".

He said the real reason for the revolutionary war was not for freedom but on the contrary for preserving slavery.  He said one of the first articles in the US Constitution was to protect slavery.  This was in response to a landmark court decision "Somerset vs. Stewart" in England in 1772 where a slave was not required to be sent back to his master in Virginia since "slavery was antithetical to the British constitution and English common law".

http://www.ouramericanrevolution.org/index.cfm/page/view/p0149

This decision really rattled the bourgeoisie in the American colonies since their economy was heavily dependent on slavery, hence their motivation for financing the rebellion and declaring independence 4 years later.

The Brit also emphasized that the colonial common folk were worse off economically post revolutionary war.  He cited even heavier taxation and more concentration of wealth at the top causing revolts of which Shays' Rebellion in Massachusetts was an example.  He said a dozen families owned most of New York state for example.

In reality, indeed we look back and can see the multitudes of colonial common folk having little to do with the taxes the British charged to property owning upper class, the colonial conventions held in Philadelphia where the decision for independence and republic shaping took place, or being concerned with slavery.  The masses just did not have much accumulated money and were too busy just surviving day to day.  Practically none of them could afford the luxury of going to Philadelphia for several months, owning slaves, or paying taxes.  So what cause would the colonial common folk be willing to risk their lives for?  Fighting for whose freedom and freedom to do what?

After pondering and doing some searching, I am afraid what the Brit said made an impression on me of the ugly truth to our history.  Was the American rebellion primarily motivated to preserve slavery?