The 1980s was when the Religious Right dominated much of the West. What are some books that detail its polar opposite?

I have always had that impression that during the middle ages or even before, women were having many children and it was a common occurrence that some of them would die fairly quickly.

Nowadays it seems that the loss of a child is the most terrible tragedy someone can live through, a tragedy from which parents don t recover.

Were people in the past mentally more resilient to the loss of a child if that was such a common occurrence, and if not, how were grieving these losses?

I want to read about the french revolution but i don't know where to start, can you help me with good references on that topic?

Everything from tactics to military doctrine and then the actual styles of fighting. Are there any specific case studies of the methods of warfare employed by the Chinese Warlord armies, and how does that style of war compare to the ones employed in the first world War and the Russian Civil War, for example

Hello everyone, I'm new here and looking for some assistance.

I have to write an essay on how symbolism in the Anglo-Saxon poem "The Seafarer" reflects both pagan and Christian influences.

The pagan religions I've roughly listed in the past 2 minutes are:

Norse Religions / Norse Paganism

Anglo-Saxon paganism

Zoroastrianism (Only really because it's regarded as having a large influence onto monotheistic religions period, and regarded as being the 1st monotheistic religion but that's a topic of debate)

My question here being, what pagan religions should I use for this essay? As well as what sources and such should I use? I'm sure many of you are aware, but it's quite arduous to find well-sourced information on the values, ethics, beliefs, principles and practices of the vast denominations of Norse religions, due to the fact that it wasn't written down and the people who wrote it down were priests etc. So it's influenced by Christian bias. I get that I'm not going to get anything concrete obviously, but I would just like decent sources and guidance as there's many interpretations or denominations of Nordic Paganism, and Anglo-Saxon Paganism, that are very similar, but differentiate etc. But really finding sources that, at all seem credible for most of this appears to be a bit of a nightmare.

Also if you guys have read "The Seafarer" and could give advice to what symbolism would be good to use and such here it would be appreciated, as well as what Christian denominations to utilize / or sources for that as well, but I'm sure that's quite easier to find than the pagan religions. I have a lot of the poem annotated and such, but if anyone wants to lend a hand, all help is appreciated. But mostly my issue is with the pagan stuff, I know a bit about it from years prior, reading a lot of research papers and stuff years ago, but finding sources and everything, or any specifics seems quite hard to do. Thanks !

I noticed when reading the Edda that Sturulson claims the Aesir gods are later aggrandisements of the memory of kings who came from Troy in the distant past before migrating Northwards. While he points to the etymology of Aesir and Asia as evidence, I was struck by the fact that this story sounds a lot like Aeneas and his foundation of Latium. I know that one possible reason for the Romans adopting Aeneas is to claim relation to Ancient Greek society and its prestige. Is the Edda reflective of a similar trend among Germanic peoples or is it simply a reflection of Snorri's own imagination?

Was there any real difference between how the Empire and the Republic administered regions? Why did it take Jerusalem more than 80 years to rebel? Would there have not been resistance to the Romans throughout?

For example, did anyone ever climb Olympus looking for Zeus? Also, how common was it for non-believers to be upfront about their opinions? Were atheists or agnostics "out"?

A 1999 article by Pers Ahlmark on the record of peace between democracies maintains that "no fighting whatsoever took place between Finland and any of the other free nations, including Britain" during World War II, despite the UK declaring war on Finland in solidarity with the USSR. Is this correct? I was always under the impression that British aircraft had bombed Finland at some point in the war, which would contradict Ahlmark, but I genuinely don't know if any such raids occurred. Did the two democracies' forces shoot at each other at any point during the declared war between them?

I may do a small investigation work about that era, but I would like to inform myself more about it first. I asked for books, but any other kind of media would be welcome as well. I barely can find anything.

¡Thanks in advance!

Thanks for all answer also I would be glad if you could give me sources for your informations.

I'm sorry if the question isn't specific enough. In spite of having an MA in American History and teaching a survey course and high school US history, I'm embarrassingly ignorant on this particular point of US history. I've read about it only in passing in survey books by people like Kennedy or Foner. Right now, I'm reading Death in a Promised Land: The Tulsa Race Riot of 1921 by Scott Ellsworth in order to make myself more educated about that incident for when I teach about it. In chapter 1, he says "Native Americans were the first settlers of the area which was to become Tulsa. The next racial group to be among the area's inhabitants were not whites, but blacks...the Cherokee and the Creeks...had black slaves." That is all. This is really typical of what I've read elsewhere; a passing mention that this was a thing with no bigger context. I'd love a run-down of what this was like or to be pointed toward a good secondary source for learning more about it. Thank you.

​

Also, I apologize if this has been asked before. I didn't find anything searching and it wasn't in the FAQ as far as I could tell. Thanks!

Was there a purpose or meaning behind this feature? Seems like it would be quite cold in the winters.

Some people say white people shouldn't use braided hair and dreadlocks because it'd be cultural appropriation but, as far as my limited knowledge goes, those hairstyles where common in some early European cultures. Is there any proof of that?

I did some research out of personal interest on British and German colonial history. But while for British colonial history basically every aspect seems to be very well documented, for German colonial history many aspects seem to be a black hole.

While I was able to find good resources on the way German colonialists and natives lived together in the African and island territories, colonial Qingdao seems to be not of much public interest. But to me it seems much more interesting as this was basically the most modern and well developed city in the German colonial territories.

I read some books but they are more chronologically documenting. What I really want to know is, how did the Germans and the Chinese live together in the city? What were the special aspects of this little society? How would everyday life work for a German or Chinese resident of the city? I know there was a segregation with a German and a Chinese quarter of the city, which was lifted in 1913 I think.

But I never found much on the workings of this cities society and everyday life contacts between the different people.

Would be super grateful if anybody has insights he or she would like to share. Also sources in German or English would be very appreciated.

Or is the film just...wrong?

The Empire of Japan is one of the three primary Axis Powers alongside Nazi Germany & Fascist Italy which fought against the Allies. Yet Japan's transformation into far-right authoritarianism contrasted with its co-Axis partners.

The rise of fascist dictatorships Italy & then Germany was pretty clear-cut: fascist parties rose to power under a single supreme leader in midst of political, economic & social chaos; and both sought expansionism which then caused WW2. This seemingly does not occur exactly the same way in Japan in which there was no fascist party or a 'Hitler'/'Mussolini' figure.

Rather, as far as I'm aware, the military grew in power and influence as such that it trumped & eventually took over the civilian government without a coup. This then also corresponded with the prominence other extreme ideologies like ultranationalism, State Shintoism, Showa Statism ("Japanese fascism"), and pro-expansionism in Asia, whether to 'liberate' Asia from West or/and 'unify' it under Japanese rule.

While I have a rough idea of what happened, I am struggling to gain a clear understanding as to how and why the situation in Japan during the Interwar and WW2 years occurred.

Why did militarism - and other associated ideologies: ultra-nationalism, expansionism, State Shintoism and Showa Statism - gain traction in Japan that it eliminated the "Taisho Democracy"? Did these reasons go back as far to the Meiji Restoration?

Why did 'process' start in the 1930s? Namely with the Manchurian Incident (1931) despite some of the factors - independence of military and nationalism - already existing decades before.

Why, despite mulitple failed military coups in the early 1930s, did Japan eventually succumbed to a semi-fascist military dictatorship, seemingly by the civilian government under civilian Prime Minister Prince/Duke Konoe Fumimaro?

I have been trying to find evidence of what could happen to a woman who deceived a King in 1722, this would be George I. I was hoping it would at least be petty treason by way of subordination to a person of a higher status but I can't find any examples. I was thinking of household staff who may have done such a thing. There is literally no malice towards the King but deceit or lying to the King I would have thought would have been severely punished at the time given the extent of the Waltham Black Act of 1723. I was hoping to find evidence that someone had deceived the King and at least been locked in the tower as I can't find any evidence of it being a capital offence although that would suit my purposes perfectly. Thus far I have spent a couple of days on an internet search. Can anyone enlighten me or suggest further sources I should check? Thank you all very much in advance. It's for a fictional piece I am writing but I want it to be as authentic as possible.

I've seen the title claim pop up in the net (be it other boards or YouTube). I know it's not really supported by the evidence (lack of evidence for notable population shrinkage, Gaul not having the tech to support a population big enough for Caesar to get "millions" of deaths, no mass destruction of Gallic culture, lack of a "racial hatred" considering Caesar's support for both allies in Gaul and Romanized Celts).

Is it just down to apologism for the Roman Republic? Appropriation of the Gauls by petty nationalists? Something else?