As it was the ancient heartland of the empire I imagine that it would be considered special to the medieval Romans. Obviously after the Arab conquests the Romans were never again in a position to retake the peninsula, but if the stars had aligned the right way would retaking Italy have been a higher priority than say, Syria?

Switzerland didn't have a treaty with Britain so why risk Britain joining the war.

Things like how Colombus is seen as a hero in certain cultures, but a villan in others.

Is there a nonbiased version of world history available online?

I’ve seen the Monroe Doctrine interpreted as the beginning of US imperialism in Latin America by effectively declaring the Western Hemisphere an American sphere of influence. However, couldn’t it also be interpreted as the US seeking to protect the newly independent Latin American republics from recolonization by European powers? Which interpretation reflected Monroe’s initial intentions and how did the implementation of the Monroe Doctrine change over time?

With Nordic tattoos being sort of in style right now it got me thinking. How many of them are something that a Viking or nord would have actually had? Are we westernizing and stylizing them just to make them look cool or are we being at least partially historically accurate? Or did Vikings even have tattoos? I really have no idea. Thank you in advance for any response!

Edit: I’m referring to the Viking age from ~800-1050.

Hey folks,

I hope this is relevant. As I have spent months browsing fascism and communism related material on Reddit, I've recognized how valuable posing this question to the community might be. I am attempting to design curriculum (as a social studies and history teacher) surrounding the challenge to liberal democracies that originates post-WWI across Europe in the form of fascism, communism, and socialism, often coupled with authoritarian and potentially totalitarian ruling methods. Students (and people in general) tend to really struggle to both define and understand these ideologies and resultant labels today despite their increasing use, often in the form of insults. As a result, I have a few questions as I undertake this process:

1. Can anyone recommend fundamental secondary or primary sources (both small and large in scope) that may help to address these concepts and historical content at a secondary (high school + college) level? I've enjoyed reading Umberto Eco's essay on Ur-Fascism as well as Paxton's The Anatomy of Fascism. I have also considered Mark Mazower's Dark Continent a fundamental text for my unit. Would anyone have similar interesting sources addressing the the concepts of socialism and communism? Obviously, the use of primary sources from Mussolini, Hitler, Marx, Lenin, Faranacci, Stalin, and others are useful here.

One of the ways I am going about designing the teaching of this is to draw clear and direct parallels of the systems of liberal democracy, fascism, and socialism/communism to the organization and governance of a school system (specifically the school systems my students are currently in). I recognize that this can be simplistic and poorly done, and thus I am hoping to ensure that I generalize to this organization (the school) in the most valid and accurate way possible, even if there are necessary problems in this analogy.

Fundamentally, I am working with this assumption: the division of power, decision making, and control in a school system can be analogous to the division of power, decision making, and control in society and thus can be used as an analogy to help students understand these different methods of society's organization (fascism, socialism, liberal democracy)

1. Is this a viable way for students to understand these larger political, social, and economic systems? How do I ensure that I do not make critical simplifications.

Finally, can anyone help me add to (or correct) my current conception of the school-society analogy:

• Leadership and administration (superintendent, principals, etc.): heads of government/cabinets
• Press and media: school newspaper, school YouTube channel, other forms of indirect communication
• Capital, labor, economic value: grades and schoolwork
• Workers, peasants: students
• Bourgeoise, owners, capital classes: teachers
• Security (our school has much of this): police, military, etc.
• Student organizations: trade unions, interest groups, activists, etc.

Obviously there are far more parallels to draw, what do you think of mine so far? I know this is not inherently a historical question, but I hope it still qualifies as valid to ask on this board as it has been an invaluable resource in my planning and understanding, and your responses (rest assured) will have important impacts on our future generations.

Half the wild west stories I read, or early Canadian history, places a huge importance on railroad building. Yet it seems like railroads started dying off in the 20th century. What happened?

I read this theory in ‘The Swerve: How the Renaissance Began’ by Stephen Jay Greenblatt, Stephen Greenblatt. It makes the argument that there was an active anti-pagan campaign. Quote from p43

“To be sure, there were a certain number of abbots and monastic librarians who treasured not only the parchment but also the pagan world written on them...Between the sixth century and the middle of the eighth, Greek and Latin classics ceased to be copied at all. What had begun as an active campaign to forget-a pious attack on pagan ideas-had revolved into actual forgetting”.

Perhaps this would make a good topic by itself.

Hello! I heard that the chinese Qing Dynasty banned the practice of martial arts and I'm trying to search more sources and facts about it. When exactly they banned it and for what reasons? What happened to martial arts in th aftermath of this ban?

Thanks in advance!

To put it another way, I remember watching the landings in the late 60's and 70's and thinking I might retire to a nice lunar community where the gravity would be lighter. Where's my GD Moon Base? :-)

I stumbled across a table of early Roman Emperors with their hair color, eye color etc. listed on a white supremacist forum, according to which most of them apparently had blonde or light hair as well as blue/grey eyes. I also read that Romans prized features such as fair skin, light eyes as well as light hair (based on the number of Roman Gods or heroes described as having such features) and that there was a disproportionate number of Patricians possessing such features.

Of course, they draw the sort of conclusion where "Aryans" have always been considered Ubermenschen or whatever, but is the premise even true? If so, it does surprise me considering the occurence of such features in the Mediterranean now and back then. Are there any parallels between Ancient Rome and Greece regarding this?

So, I'm working on a story and I've hit a wall. I need some advice on war tactics with a medieval setting. The situation is this: The King has very much neglected the land and a count with support of the people and a claim to the throne has risen up and started a revolt. The King has the tactic of staying in the castles. Works well in the colder season but poorly in the warmer ones. At this point, his battle trained wife has had enough and takes command. By now the count has most of the land and a bigger army. She should win but I want the battles to actually be smartly planned out instead of the, typical stuff you see around.

What kind of tactics should I look to and what kind historical events should I look to for reference? What situations are similar to this one?

I bet this happened very rarely, if ever, but I imagine it must have happened at least once or twice!

Hello, I am searching for any information related to all kinds of showmanship during that period in Europe, mainly France. Theatre, magicians, religious reenactment, what kind of spectacle was being put up, how did people tour along, what did they get in return. Etc. Book recommendations would be perfect, thanks a lot.

I've been trying to get a better grasp of medieval history and much of that has involved moving my focus High medieval France and Germany. From what I've managed to grasp, Charlemagne was crowned emperor of the Holy Roman Empire in 800 A.D. Before that, he also was king of France, bringing control of France under that of the HRE. However, I've had trouble figuring out the relationship between France and the Holy Roman Empire after Charlemagne's rule. Did they immediately split? Or did it take time? Or was France never truly part of the HRE? I'm fully aware I could just have a poor understanding of the time period.

As a side question, I'm also curious about France's relationship with Germany before the Holy Roman Empire. From what I've managed to gather, Germany was a result of the Franks splitting into two kingdoms: west and east Francia, one of which became France and the other of which became Germany. Is this at all accurate?

Thank y'all in advance!