Hi everyone,

I'm going to be writing a research paper on racial difference in colonial Mexico and I'm wondering if anyone might have an idea of where I can find primary sources on this subject? Or perhaps if anyone is knowledgeable of this subject, to direct me towards some sources.

I want to discuss how and why categorization of people along racial lines emerged along with the advantages/disadvantages afforded to groups depending what racial category they belonged to. I recognize that over time, racial difference in Latin America probably became more abstract given greater miscegenation. Rather than pointing to a lineage, people probably used phenotype to distinguish themselves and others.

Thank you for your time.

Julius Nepos was the second-to-last ruler of Roman Dalmatia and said to be the last de facto Western Roman Emperor. However, Ovida was the last ruler of Roman Dalmatia for a couple months. Would this make him the last de facto Western Roman Emperor instead of Julius Nepos?

My understanding is that Chinese characters were adopted pretty early on (400 AD, according to Wikipedia), but it looks like the ancestors of modern Koreans can be traced back at least to 300 BC. Thus, there was a period of time when Korean speakers could've had a separate writing system. Is there any evidence of this?

A foot archer can fire a higher poundage bow farther and more accurately than a horse archer and are more numerous. Spearmen can be nearby to stop any attempt at a cavalry charge, so how would steppe armies not only win against Chinese armies but dominate them?

The Greeks had a large number of stories about gods and supernatural beings. How did these stories come about? Were many of them taken from other cultures, or were they mostly created by Greeks themselves?

It seems that more often then not people are not getting any questions answered. Just flipping through different threads you see that a post has 20-40 replies yet only one answer remains. The rest have been removed. While I understand the need for enforcement of rules and sources cited many interesting questions are left open due to removal of discussion. The sub has become almost useless for getting answers for this reason. Out of 30 replies you may have one that hasn’t been removed or that isn’t a notification of removal by mods. Unless the information is blatantly wrong, miscited or disrespectful it should allowed. We are stewards of history not censorship.

U.S. history is filled with government officials creating legal loopholes to prevent Native Americans in assorted regions from voting. Including after those laws. I am interested in whether the laws brought more attention to Native voters in places where the government allowed it.

Like, not all the bible stuff with performing miracles and water walking but was there a guy called Jesus at the time and are there any special things about him? Not religiously, just facts.

When did Slavs settle in the Balkans? Who were there before them? The most common Ydna is I2 and second most common R1a meaning we do have evidence of slavic migration but what is the I2 representative of?

In today's post about rule one holocaust denial is specifically mentioned as an example of bigotry which will not be tolerated. Holocaust denial is undoubtedly reprehensible and exemplifies the broader consequences of anti intellectualism. That being said where does holocaust denial come from and what were their objectives?

Hitler had a lot of weird beliefs aside from the whole nazi thing that seems like paganism more then anything else.

Greetings, I was wondering if any of you reddit historians could please answer a question of mine. Is there any historic evidence of people in ancient greece following another religion than the hellenic paganism that is usually associated with the hellenic world? Thank you in advance to anyone willing to respond.

In the preface to The Plantagenets: Warrior Kings and Queens who made England, Dan Jones states that the Plantagenets ruled from Henry the II to Richard II's deposition by Henry Bolingbroke (Henry IV). But afaik, Henry IV and Richard II were both descended from Edward III who himself descended from King John and, consequently, Henry II. So why is Richard II considered the last plantagenet king when both him and Henry IV had the same blood?

Is it more of a territory-ruled question? Did the name depend on also controlling Anjou?