It's widely accepted that he either died of alcohol poisoning or actual poison but we know that opium usage was widely spread in the army as treatment for PTSD and more. Is it possible he OD'd on oblivion juice (opium + wine) or could this just have enhanced his alcoholism?
1 Answers 2020-05-17
What was the effectiveness of standard issue helmets for both sides? Does any historical data exist to provide evidence that they saved lives?
1 Answers 2020-05-17
I feel like I see this meme a lot but I’ve never known how accurate it is.
1 Answers 2020-05-17
In the past, it was generally understood that if you had a population center then a wall should be built around it to protect it from roaming barbarians or even conventional army's. However at some point the idea of the city wall became obsolete even against the militias who do not have comparable military equipment with modern nations.
1 Answers 2020-05-17
And how many "layers" of vassals are between me and the king? Ie: is the king my Lord's Lord, or is the king my Lord's Lord's Lord's Lord?
1 Answers 2020-05-17
I'm trying to get a idea of what various northern U.S. accents may have sounded like in the mid-19th Century, and I was wondering if there are any "oral history" recordings of northern/Union Civil War veterans? All of the recordings I've found thus far are either of southern/Confederate veterans or former slaves.
It's very difficult to research the history of U.S. English without getting completely inundated with either people asking if Americans really spoke like Cary Grant prior to ~1965, or people claiming that an Elizabethan-era Englishman would have sounded indistinguishable from Foghorn Leghorn.
1 Answers 2020-05-17
"Mr. Hassan! What is the largest number of command levels ever knocked out in a single battle?”
The Assassin scowled harder than ever. “I’m not sure, sir. Wasn’t there a while during Operation Bughouse when a major commanded a brigade, before the Soveki-poo?”
“There was and his name was Fredericks. He got a decoration and a promotion. If you go back to the Second Global War, you can find a case in which a naval junior officer took command of a major ship and not only fought it but sent signals as if he were admiral. He was vindicated even though there were officers senior to him in line of command who were not even wounded. Special circumstances—a breakdown in communications."
Anyone know?
1 Answers 2020-05-17
It is nearly impossible to avoid current events when doing history. Our understanding of the past can go a long way in informing our understanding of the present, and the potential future, so the two can be tied together quite intimately. Nevertheless, maintaining a certain level of remove from the present can be important in doing history as well, and this is doubly true in the type of medium that /r/AskHistorians represents. Over the next few Roundtables, we'll be dealing with current events, politics, and the like, with our first stop being the (in)famous Twenty Year Rule, which reads as follows:
To discourage off-topic discussions of current events, questions, answers and all other comments must be confined to events that happened 20 years ago or more, inclusively (e.g. 1998 and older).
###Why Twenty?
To start off, we'll be the first to admit that 20 years is slightly arbitrary. We could have chosen 25, we could have chosen 15. 20 is a nice round number though and keeps the math simple! While depending on your perspective, yesterday is already 'History', we find it to be vitally necessary to have some buffer zone, and as explained in the following, 20 reflects a decent balance point.
####Distance, as Historians
Soon after events unfold, our understanding can be quite chaotic. News reports might disagree vehemently on what happened, participants might contradict each other on why it did, and few sources might even be available to make sense of the whole matter. None of that entirely goes away, but as historians, we are much more able to sift through the various, competing sources and find meaning and understanding from them. Two historians of 4th century Rome might disagree on their interpretations of imperial power, but at the very least the dust has long since settled since the events themselves.
Compare that to two people attempting to write about the ongoing conflict in Syria, where the dust is still very much in the air, and more being produced daily. It can take years for us to be able to sift through accounts, make sense of reports, and get our hands on the kinds of sources that are necessary to write good history. The closer we are to an event, the tougher it is to be able to take a step back and see the bigger picture and place it in context. Journalists may often do an excellent job in the moment, but they are, at best writing the first draft of history, and it is usually one which will need much revision down the line.
In the end, there are some events it would be safe to allow discussion of within a few years, just like there are others we'd probably prefer to wait a century for, but a rule like that would be unworkable. As such, the choice of Twenty Years offers a pragmatic balance, giving us an appreciable distance that is sufficient for most events, while not pushing things too far back as to cut out a great deal of history.
####Distance, as Users
In much more practical terms, 20 years also helps out with the enforcement of other rules. With the average redditor being on the younger side, most events allowed by the rules are at most vague, distant memories from the TV. Cutting things off that far back cuts down on the temptation to offer personal recollections of an event, which of course is banned by the No Personal Anecdotes rule. If a question about the public reaction to Vietnam is asked, only a small cadre of redditors would even be in the position to break the rules with their own memories, while one about the response to the 2009 Surge in Afghanistan getting popular could very well result in an inundation of "Well, I didn't support it!" responses.
####Modern Politics
As we "enjoy" another election season, plenty of subreddits are devoted to discussion of the campaigns, but this isn't one of them. Both from the User side and the Historian side, above, current and recent politics simply aren't suited to the type of evidence-based historical work that is expected on the subreddit. Discussing political administrations decades in the past can often be hot-button issues as it is, as how Reagan or Carter's legacy is understood, for instance, can still hold high political stakes today, so ones which are much more recent, such as Obama or Trump, take the above issues and crank them up to 11, with the added element of a personal stake in the matter. We simply don't believe, even excluding the issue of distance, that we could moderate threads such as one asking about the 2016 election in a way that would be fair and to our standards, so we chose not to.
###The Exceptions
####Historiography
The clearest exception to the rule is what we term the 'Historiography' exception. The discussion of history in a modern context is fair game. Questions about the study of history or historical methodology are always fair game. So too are questions about current academic debates about historical interpretation. Questions about popular understanding are usually OK as well, such as school curricula or historical commemorations.
####Crossing Over
It is rare that events end neatly on December 31st. The rule of thumb to follow is that it is OK to toe the line, but you shouldn't be hanging in there by the end of your heel. For instance, a question about the 2000 NFL season would be fine, even though it ended in 2001. But a question about the 2000-01 NBA season wouldn't fly, as the bulk of that happened in 2001, even though it started October 31st.
The same is true for answers. That NFL answer would of course be allowed to follow through to the Super Bowl. It would be silly not to! We don't need to pretend like existence ended at midnight, and explaining tailing effects in an answer is generally OK, but make sure you are considering how it reflects the bulk of your focus. If in doubt, the mod team is always happy to offer our input too.
###Why Was That Approved?
Sometimes we approve something that should have been removed under this rule, either by mistake, or simply because it is something obscure enough not to realize the rule ought to have applied. If you see this, please report it! If you aren't sure we'll know why, don't hesitate to reach out to us via modmail. If you know the answer, please consider doing that before you write a whole answer, as it can then create an annoying Catch-22 otherwise.
###But Your Subreddit is the Best
Hey, we wish we could get you the answer you want, to our standards too! It just isn't something we feel capable of providing. There are some great communities on reddit though which deal with more recent events, but as always, make sure to read their rules before posting!
You can find the rest of this Rules Roundtable series here
3 Answers 2020-05-17
I'm worried about a fictional character help
2 Answers 2020-05-17
What was so different about the invasion of Greece that it took 216 days for the Axis forces to stop most resistance in comparison to a global superpower like France who surrendered after 40 days.
1 Answers 2020-05-17
First time posting here, but I'm really curious about Chinese history in this regard. I've read that as dynasties came and went, China became more and more centralized in its government and relied less on individual aristocrats to handle their government and military. Please correct me if I'm wrong.
I'm curious if a Chinese commoner could possibly make their way towards being part of the common folk to rubbing shoulders with the aristocracy.
1 Answers 2020-05-17
In the 15th century the Peasant Republic of Dithmarschen formed, I was just wondering what that meant for the actual peasants living in Dithmarschen.
1 Answers 2020-05-17
I've recently read the book Hard To Be A God in which the main character Anton is an under cover operative in an alien world which has not progressed since the Medieval ages. Anton takes the identity of a medieval lord, Don Rumata, who is known as the best swordsman in the world who has never lost a duel. Anton explains this by saying he uses sword fighting techniques that will not being known on this plant for another 300 years?
So my question is, could a swordsman from the 1700s, with the knowledge of swordsmanship of the time, easily beat a swordsman from the late 1400's?
Was there such a great difference between sword fighting techniques within those 300 years? If so what improvements were made?
3 Answers 2020-05-17
My knowledge of the French Revolution is somewhat general but I remember how abusive the French oligarchy was which divided the upper classes from the lower classes and instigated the sheer massive anger of the French people when the French oligarchy started to make the lives of the French more difficult because of the increase in taxes because of the severe debt that France was in after the loss of the French-Indian war and when it wanted to side with the Americans during the American Revolution.
And of course, the revolution got even bloodier and more extreme as time went on from the Reign of Terror to the continuous reformation of the French Assembly and how the new French Republic was going to be constructed.
Then all of a sudden, Napoleon took command and started conquering Europe and later declared himself Emperor, then was later exiled and came back again as Emperor but was later exiled again.
I am quite surprised that the French did not seem to object against Napoleon about this considering that one of the reasons why the French Revolution happened in the first place was because of the desire of a governmental reform especially that this happened during the Age of Enlightenment
1 Answers 2020-05-17
The Roman Historian Lucan Writes about how the druids do not gather in Temples, Rather they would gather in Woodland groves, so here is my Question. Where are these groves? did they move around?
Also we know that vast amounts of the world was covered in woodland so Is it possible that the Druids existed a lot longer than we know and as such could it be possible that stone circles could mark the location of these groves?
2 Answers 2020-05-17
Today:
Welcome to this week's instalment of /r/AskHistorians' Sunday Digest (formerly the Day of Reflection). Nobody can read all the questions and answers that are posted here, so in this thread we invite you to share anything you'd like to highlight from the last week - an interesting discussion, an informative answer, an insightful question that was overlooked, or anything else.
3 Answers 2020-05-17
Japan picked it's written language from China. The traditional dress from all three seem pretty similar at a quick glance. Architecture seems pretty similar between the three, ect. I'm guessing that at some points in their histories they must have had somewhat friendly relationships between them?
I vaguely know WW2 caused a massive rift between Japan and the others but were they friendly before then? Did it change as often as the various ruling parties changed in each country? Was there a constant period of time were they were peaceful and happy?
Thanks for any help!
1 Answers 2020-05-17
I was reading about the Siege of Petersburg and it listed that the Confederates had 60,000 soldiers and 25,000 deserted. How would a Confederate soldier go about deserting without being caught? How they turn themselves into Union forces or would they try to slip their way back home?
1 Answers 2020-05-17
It's a claim I often see on reddit. Only medieval priests could read Latin, so they could lie about the Bible's content. This was often placed around a inaccurate understanding of indulgences, so I am often skeptical. Surely if this occurred on a large scale, the local bishop would have the authority to stop it. However, I haven't been able to find any evidence towards these claims. Most of them seem to relate to the fact that translations weren't readily available until the printing press, and that the Church suppress translations when there were heretical movements. Is there evidence this claim is true, and if so, what was the extent that it occured?
1 Answers 2020-05-17
1 Answers 2020-05-17
1 Answers 2020-05-17
https://mothership.sg/2019/02/arthur-percival-singapore-surrender/
The aforementioned article mentioned that Yamashita’s forces were running low on ammunition and resources during the invasion of the island, and that the British may have outlasted the Japanese had they not surrendered. How accurate is this assessment?
1 Answers 2020-05-17
Even if we assume they all were 'originally' semi-auto and converted off-screen. I am most interested in Uzi since it is a compact weapon with small overall length (which I believe would be considered a short barreled rifle nowadays and heavily regulated)
1 Answers 2020-05-17
1 Answers 2020-05-17
I’ve always heard that Paul’s Boutique (Beaste Boys)//Cant Touch This(MC Hammer) were kinda the catalysts for having to “clear” samples from artists.
Rap had been around for 10ish years before that- had no one tried to sue before that? Did they have any work arounds? Rap moved records before 1990- did no one notice or care?
Also including this gem, because it’s funny: https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=6TLo4Z_LWu4
1 Answers 2020-05-17