The obvious example I have in mind is Galileo Galilei - but I'm curious if there were other, lesser known, cases of ingenious people getting into trouble with the church.

I understand that ever since King John's surrender of his territory to the Pope, the Holy See technically never gave up their claim of ownership. I know they imposed taxes on England, and that Edward II and Edward III refused to pay them. My question is, did the Papacy continue to imposes taxes on them, or did they eventually stop? I'm aware of the Peter's Pence tax and how it was paid until the 1500s, but I'm referring to the tax to England from the Papacy as a vassal to its lord. Incidentally, if the original claim of ownership was never rescinded, does that mean that the United Kingdom is still under Papal rule? Could the Holy See exert any authority over it?

I understand that the Cold War played a part in developing an international idea of human history, but I’m interested to see how the thoughts behind and practice of History more generally was changed by the Cold War as well as how historical interpretations of the Cold War changed as a result of significant shifts in the availability of information like the release of soviet archives in 1991. From what I’ve read there only seem to be vague references to this shift in forewords and conclusions of other books, but I would be really interested to find a book looking at the topic in depth.

TL;DR Does anyone know of books that approach the topic specifically or have a detailed understanding of how the Cold War changed the study of history?

Whenever Africa is discussed in texts, rarely are the regions ever talked about in an interconnected sense. North Africa is almost always seen as some isolate from the rest of Africa, the Horn of Africa is only seen having relations with the middle-east, West Africa (what most people end up talking about when they try to cover "All of Africa") beyond Islam is also isolate, the rest of East Africa is neglected beyond some Indian Ocean shenanigans, and Central and South Africa are by far the most isolated.

What I would really like to understand is the connections between these many regions, especially central and the rest of East Africa. I know that Africa is vast and diverse, but I find it hard to believe that these different regions had no note-worthy contact whatsoever!

I know that the "Socialist" part of the Nazi name was pretty much false advertising, but every time I see one of those current right wing memes that tout Nazi gun control, higher education, and health care I always wonder if there really were any socialist programs initiated?

Title

In middle school I learned that civilization began in Mesopotamia and Egypt around 3000 BC.

In high school I was told civilization was a problematic term, and that we should talk about urbanization, which was a slow process that took thousands of years, and there was nothing uniquely significant about 3000 BC other than the development of writing. And that it is the start of writing which privileges that date in our minds.

So is there any meaning to the naive statement that "civilization began around 3000 BC", or is that just something they used to tell kids?

Hi all, I'm wondering if anyone knows anything about tea drinking/preparing and the Union Army of the American Civil War, I'm doing some reenactments and I want to try to be as accurate as possible, if anyone has sources I'd like those too, need as much info as possible, Thanks in advance!!

I have heard before that Hitler's inspiration for the"Final Solution" came largely from Canada's treatment of the largely Ukrainian population of Eastern Europeans in Canada during WWI. While they've been mostly unmentioned in Canadian history until recently, as I understand it Castle Mountain Internment Camp and others like it throughout Canada were making international news in their day due to their poor treatment of prisoners. It makes sense to me that Germany could have exploited this as propaganda during WWI, leading to Hitler having seen it (although I'm sure the concept of POW camps at the time was similar). Is there any evidence that the Canadian camps had any influence on Hitler?

I haven't read much specifically on this topic (most of my information comes from more general textbooks and pop history books), but my general position is that despite its grandiose implications it was largely ineffective. What should I read that reinforces/challenges this view?

Wouldn’t a crossbeam alleviate some of the suffering of the individual? A stake with arms nailed above the head would allow gravity to do its full effect on the body. Effectively making the heart work harder to pump blood up the arms and eventually leading to asphyxiation as the blood from the arms pools in the body cavity. A person would die in about a half hour, in excruciating pain the entire time. Being able to support your weight on a crucifix could lead to several days of survival.

Seems to make more sense to use the cheaper and easier to produce method of killing, not to mention needing one less nail as the hands together would both be pierced by a singular nail.

My favorite archetypal myth is that of the storm or thunderer god facing off and defeating a giant serpent or dragon. A variation of this myth occurs in practically all Indo-European religions and is most likely occured in the theorized Proto-Indo-European mythology. Thor fighting Jormunandr in the Germanic mythos, the Hittite storm god Tarhunt slayed the serpent Illuyanka, Zeus and Typhon, Perun and Veles in Slavic mythology, Indra and Vrita in the Vedic religion and many more variations. The gods I just mentioned were all thunder/storm gods in their respective mythologies and they all killed a serpent in their stories.

A similar myth exists in the religions of the ancient Near East. Hadad Ba'al was a storm and rain god in the Canaanite and Mesopotamian religion. Hadad Ba'al fought and defeated Lotan, a sea serpent who was the servant of the sea god Yam. A varation of this myth is als found in the Hebrew religion with Yahweh fighting the Leviathan. Yahweh had some storm god qualities and an association with thunder.

I initially figured that the near East adapted the myth from the Hittites, who entered Anatolia around 2000 BC and took over the lands of the Hatti and the Hurrians. However it seems to be that this myth also occurred amongst Hurrians and Hatti.

I now think it was a myth that originated in the Proto-Indo-European Mythology, which was most likely practiced by nomadic pastoralists of the Pontic-Caspian steppe. These people used horse carts and were really mobile, which lead to an expansion of their culture. The Uruk period in Mesopotamia started in 4500 BC and lasted until 3100 BC. During this same period the Kvalynhsk culture of the Pontic steppe developed into the Yamnaya culture, which around 3300 BC started the initial waves of the Indo-European migrations. Given their regional proximity and the mobility of the steppe pastoralists, there certainly could have been contact between these early cultures around that time, and maybe this is what lead to the existence of a Storm god vs Dragon Serpent story in both Indo-European and ancient Near Eastern religions.

These are my thoughts on this subject, but what I would like to know is what the actual historians think is the origin behind this shared story. What are the main theories for why these two cultures share this myth? Did the Mesopotamian adopted this myth from interactions with Indo-European cultures or vice versa? Or is it actually a case of a myth which independently developed amongst two separate cultures?

I am trying to get some perspective into the life of common people during the crusades. I am especially interested in life of the following people:
- common European soldier
- common muslim soldier defending the city
- common people inside the city

I would like to know what kind of equipment did soldiers have, what went through their minds, how did they view the foreigners, did they have any special friendship bonds in the army and were they scared for the lives of their comrades, where were the common people during the siege and what were they doing, what were they eating (soldiers on both sides and common people inside the gates), what did an average European soldier leave behind at home to come to the crusade etc.

As said in the title, I am the most interested in the siege of Jerusalem, but I will be glad to read any answer.

I will appreciate every answer, but I would especially appreciate those that will also point me to some reliable sources where I could find the answers to these questions. Thank you in advance.

PS: English is not my first language, so I apologize for the mistakes.

According to Matthew 26:15 in the New Testament of the Bible, Judas Iscariot is offered 30 silver pieces to betray Jesus.

What sort of coinage would a "silver piece" have been in the 1st-century AD Judean province of the Roman Empire have been? What would have been the buying power of that money?

Would it have been enough to buy land or otherwise dramatically increase one's wealth and social status?

Or perhaps the alternate question could be what prevented the Middle East with the fertile crescent or Europe with its generally arable land from achieving similar numbers?

If you were to sit and play any fantasy video game inspirations from medieval history would be obvious from the outset. Medieval fantasy games today and their interactions with religion have a long history. As in almost all things fantasy related, this is partly a reaction to JRR Tolkien's works. While much more prominent in his materials such as the Unfinished Tales and the Silmarillion Tolkien's work is infused with religious ideas, but in his most famous and popular works, The Hobbit and The Lord of the Rings religions features rather sparingly. Despite his reputation as a master world builder, religion and religious expression in the cultures of Middle Earth is nearly non-existent in his two most popular works, instead being reserved for his own mythologies, where it still takes a back seat in many of the stories. However Tolkien is not the only influence on modern fantasy. The modern fantasy video games got their start as essentially D&D simulators, and the influence of Dungeons and Dragons is still felt. Religion in D&D is far more of a fact of life that barely warrants intellectual debate or dispute. The gods just simply are, and followers of them align themselves based on the forces/ideas that these indisputably existing figures embody.

These past influences are easily seen in modern fantasy games today, which draw both from historical examples as well as incorporating or reacting against prior entries into fantasy canon. The Norse and Roman art styles at work in The Elder Scrolls V Skyrim, the Slavic folklore and monsters of The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt, or the Gothic architecture of the Dark Souls series. Many game series borrow heavily from historical styles of art, architecture, armor, clothing, and folklore for their own purposes, and fantasy video games are no exception. Many these games and series have become adept at using history for artistic and narrative inspiration, often incorporating historically inspired events as a part of the games plot or backstory. For example, Skyrim references both the First World War and the collapse of the Roman Empire in its own “Great War” and The Witcher 3 draws upon the witch hunts of the early modern period. However, there is one area of medieval history and life has been neglected by most medieval fantasy games, religion. This might seem counter intuitive at first, for no fantasy game would dare not include some form of religion. Dark Souls has a plethora of cathedral locations and its own pantheon, and both the Elder Scrolls and Witcher franchises feature institutional churches, with their own doctrines, practices, and hierarchy, but in many fantasy games the approach to religion is ultimately superficial.

For example, in The Witcher 3 the Church of the Eternal Fire is set up purely as an antagonistic element to the player. There is no nuance in the game’s depiction of this organization. The members of its hierarchy are at best cynical manipulators using their position within the church as a means for greater power and wealth, or more often, the figures of the church are zealots using their authority as a cudgel against marginal groups who are violently persecuted. In other game series such as the Elder Scrolls, deities such as the Aedra and Daedra are utterly mundane features of the world, and this is equally unnuanced. The Daedra in particular are relatively easy to contact, and they are ingrained into the setting, with each race and culture having their own particular preferences for worship. Games in The Witcher and Elder Scrolls series have attained critical and commercial acclaim, but they do not help their audience reach a better understanding of medieval religion, instead they perpetuate myths about the Middle Ages that scholars have long struggled against. Despite invoking the effects of medieval religion, such as elaborate vestments, gothic temples, papal stand ins, and so on, the depiction of religion in these games is decidedly non-medieval.

I am not here to deride these games for their lack of “medieval accuracy”, but instead to call attention to a series that I think successfully manages to capture a more accurate depiction of medieval religion, by drawing directly from medieval religious debate. The series that I am referring to is BioWare’s Dragon Age series.

The first game in the franchise, Dragon Age: Origins, centers around fighting off a horde of very Tolkien-esque orcs led by an evil dragon. The second game, Dragon Age 2, is a rags to riches story that combines dungeon crawling with examinations of systemic injustice and persecution. The most recent title, Dragon Age: Inquisition places the player at the head of a multinational organization seeking to root out the sources of chaos and instability across a continent. At first glance it might appear to a casual observer that the series is little better off than many of the other medieval inspired fantasy series. Dragon Age’s nation of Orlais is as unambiguously based off of France as Skyrim is inspired by medieval Scandinavia, and the heavy-handed medieval antecedents do not stop there. The Tevinter Imperium is heavily colored by the Roman Empire/Byzantine Empire being an empire that once spanned the continent now reduced to a much smaller realm dominated by an unconquerable city, its slave economy and names such as Calpernia, Livius, and Danarius, the Kingdom of Ferelden is derived from England with its own proto-parliament and conflicts with Orlais, the Anderfells region contains German names such as Weisshaupt and Hossberg and is extremely de-centralized in rule, mimicking the Holy Roman Empire, and the list goes on.

However, I am most interested in the history of the Chantry, the main religious institution of the Dragon Age world. Now the important distinction that separates the Chantry from other medieval fantasy churches is the clear inspiration from medieval history that permeates much of the lore and history surrounding the Chantry within the universe and how this is reflected in the games themselves. Any series can have an organization with vestmented clerics, Curia politics, knightly religious orders, and Dragon Age has all of these as well, but few other medieval fantasy games engage with medieval religious history on such a deep level as Dragon Age does. Not all game series can get away with adapting rather esoteric arguments about theology into their lore as seamlessly as Dragon Age can. Inside the Dragon Age universe real-life theological debate is the inspiration for the religious division between the southern nations, such as Orlais and Ferelden, inspired by medieval western Europe, and the northern, Byzantine inspired, Tevinter Imperium. Within the game’s lore for The Chant, the central text for the Chantry as an institution, there is the line “Magic exists to serve man, and never to rule over him”, and this is a flashpoint for tensions between the two spheres of the Andrastian world. The Tevinter Imperium is far friendlier to magic users wielding power, having historically been dominated by them, whereas the South interprets the line as a need to lock magic away from positions of political power. Consequently, the people of Tevinter take this to mean that magic should serve to the benefit of all, and thus mage rule is on theologically safe grounds. Whereas in the south, mages are restricted from participating in public life and often subject to persecution by the Chantry.

Now why is this a particularly noteworthy addition to the game? Plenty of games borrow historical events for inspiration as a part of their world building. However, in the majority of cases these historical examples are skin deep. In Dragon Age this one example of inspiration, this one line of scripture, forms the basis not only for background lore, but conflicts that the player has to engage with over the course of several games and consequently there is an understanding of medieval religion in Dragon Age that is not present in other series; an experience that is deeply rooted in both medieval history and the history of the games themselves.

The Dragon Age series rises above its competition in depicting how medieval religion both shaped the world around it and was shaped by the world in turn. Through these moments our characters, and thus the players themselves, see the effect that religion and religious debates had in the Middle Ages through the lens of the issues raised by magic in Dragon Age. Perhaps more importantly, players see that religious issues in the Middle Ages were not simple with single causes and single solutions. We see that there were many causes behind conflicts including different beliefs between members of the same religion. The Dragon Age series breaks down the monolithic conception of the Medieval Church and challenges the player to see the nuances that Medieval religion contained. We see in the various Dragon Age games many different characters who are shaped by their understanding of what seems a simple line of scripture.

The characters within the world attempt to impart their own understanding of scripture on the world around them, and players see these efforts play out. We see hardliners for the words as written in the Chant, such as Knight Commander Meredith in Dragon Age 2, whose paranoia about mages drives her to insanity and murder. Issues such as the impropriety of spreading religion through violence and syncretism are raised by characters like Mother Giselle and Inquisitor Ameridan. We see other characters attempt to forge a better future for mages and non-mages alike through Chantry figures campaigning for the clergy to be extended to elves and dwarves. In Dragon Age: Inquisition the mages of Southern Thedas rise up in rebellion against the Chantry and the templars. The player character can choose to ally with them, bring them into a new religious movement, or ignore their plight and ally with the templars instead. Our characters hear how the Tevinter system sidesteps the issue of mage rule in theory but ignores it in practice. In Dragon Age: Origins we see a mother try to hide her son’s magical talent, knowing that if his ability is found out her son will be taken from her. Players see and play out these scenarios that combine religious belief, politics, warfare, and culture in a way that no other game series is able to. These are the moments of the game that are the most exciting to me, showing that religion and the broader world do not exist independently of each other. None of these moments in the series that I mentioned would be possible without the grounding in medieval history that the series has. These moments allow the player to experience medieval religion in a way that is more authentic than other gaming series, and you get to kill a few dragons along the way.