A little while back, I studied the Italian Renaissance and built a solid foundation of knowledge about the different techniques of Italian artists. I’ve had this question for quite some time, and I can’t find a clear cut answer. I understand that other European artists during this time had different techniques of creating art, but I haven’t found a contemporary of Bosch who created art in a similar fashion. I asked my lecturer and he said that the Netherlandish ways of painting were extremely different because of the sociocultural and religious factors of the region during this time... but I don’t understand how this could make his art so different.

Does anyone know why the Netherlands would be so different to other neighbouring regions in the way that art is created? Or have an insight into the mind of Bosch during his time? I know there isn’t much information about his life, but maybe there’s some insight into the events that were unfolding around him that influenced his terrifying imagery.

Also, what kind of techniques did he use that made his work so different to Italian art? Why wasn’t he more popular during this time? Or was he following a trend (alongside other artists I don’t know about)? Is there anyone that painted similarly to him?

Sorry for the long post! I’m just really curious about his contributions to the Renaissance and why he’s not talked about more in the academic world!

I read a book about it and i didn't understand why they didn't conquered Khazars. Did Arabian commander Mervan just wanted them to be muslim?

Title says it all. I’m a junior history major at a small liberal arts university and I’d like to get published as an undergrad to help in the admissions process for grad school. I am planning on getting a history master’s and PhD. ALL tips are welcome!

Also, if anyone has any general advice on publishing papers or finding good sources on historical topics (especially primary sources) or anything at all, that is highly appreciated!

So I was watching some gun cam footage of a German fighter making an attack run on a formation of American bombers during WW2 and I had never realized they had to fly through friendly flak to do so. This got me wondering, how often were German pilots shot down by their own AA during the bombing campaign? Was it a frequent occurence, and was there anything the Germans did to try and mitigate the danger?

For anyone who's read this book, what exactly is Pirenne trying to argue? From my understanding, he's trying to portray how the development of the Roman Empire was influenced by the advancement of Islam. However, I'm not really sure what the central point of the book is.

Any help is appreciated.

Like say when Columbus went to North America was he just sailing like “damn this day is super long”?? Did the change in time zone ever majorly mess with people when they travelled? When countries agreed to meet each other at 3 pm would there be drama bc they didnt know that each other’s 3 pms were different? Kind of a dumb question but i am curious

I've read about how there were some slave owners who tried to keep slaves still (It wasn't like most of the slaves were reading the newspaper to see the legal changes being made, and even if they did, they could obviously still be beaten or worse for trying to leave.), and that a lot of slaves ended up as sharecroppers in the same place where they were slaves. But in general, did the master or foreman just walk out into the field one day and say "Alright, you're free to go?" Were there enforcement officers who went to plantations to check for slaves or to tell the slaves that they were free?

What it says on the tin. I’m an aspiring historian about to get a bachelor’s in the subject, but due to taking a weird path towards my degree, I’m lacking in a lot of historical theory. So how do historians individually and/or collectively determine the reliability of a source? What factors make them decide what to include and exclude? And what value can we still glean from unreliable sources?

Thank you!

Hello, historians! I am writing a short story, which features a poacher in the 1700s. I've done research on the social impact, the laws, the poaching gangs, the increasing violence. but I know little of techniques. when would they poach? where? how? nets? snares? traps? I know about fowling guns but what others? target species? partridges, pheasants, hares? please as much and as detailed as possible would be ideal. thank you all.

So just rewatching the excellent film Post Mortem and the protest scenes reminded me of how little I know about this.

Was there a lot of protests? Is this a partial factor in the violence ? Did peoples opinions change over time? I know Chile is notorious for right wing leaders, but I know the pink waves influence is felt today!

Do we have diaries from the period?

Were there ever any Nazi German pilots who wanted to escape to e.g. England and surrender? Was there a way they actually could've escaped their own forces and successfully surrender without getting shot down first by Allied air defenses?

In the frame of a long hafted weapon, what would be most common for a simple farmer to have? would they have a long hafted bill hook, or more likely have a spear or boar spear?

thanks!

What was the purpose for money being created? I assume goods and services were traded before its creation so I'm wondering why there was a need for it. Was it to do with debts, like how bank notes were created?

I've recently been reading about opposition groups in Nazi Germany, particularly the Edelwiess Pirates and the Swing Youth. I know these groups existed, but how were members able to avoid mandatory participation in the Hitler Youth/ League of German Girls? How was Nazi youth group attendance monitored and enforced? I was (perhaps mistakenly) under the impression that the Gestapo pressurised families of non-attenders and threatened non-attenders themselves.