According to the book Gallic Wars by Caesar, when he went into Gaul there were some tribes and villages who almost immediately accepted Roman rule, while other areas rebelled. The tribes who rebelled were mainly decimated.

The question I have is: has anyone investigated the possibility that the tribes who readily accepted Roman rule may have been not ethnically part of the dominant culture of Gaul at the time?

From what I hear the main culture in Gaul was Celtic, although there was possibly German tribes too. But as far as the Celts are concerned they too were said to have invaded Gaul at some point in time subduing and perhaps to a degree displacing a previous population that would have been more indigenous to Gaul than the Celts.

And so what the Romans did in Gaul may have been a repetition of what the Celts did, militarily subduing a previous population.

So with this information it leads to the speculation that its possible that the tribes who readily accepted Roman rule may have viewed the Celts as invaders who had displaced other ethnic groups, and perhaps that could have been a reason why some tribes who accepted Roman rule were quick to accept Roman rule.

However this is speculation on my part, I don't know if anyone has investigated this sort of thing or if investigating it would even be possible. I have also heard that Celt referred more to a culture than an ethnic group, and the Celtic tribes were often hostile to each other.

The last Tarantino movie makes Bruce look both arrogant, and a weak fighter. This unsurprisingly caused some controversy. Tarantino also said this is how Lee acted in real life.

What was his personality really like?

I’m going to be moving to Spain in 2 weeks and I know very little about their history I will be there for 3 months teaching language arts and I don’t want to be the ignorant American coming in. Yes I could google this but if someone could give me a short summary of the major events and also a brief history on Gibraltar I’ve heard about it a lot but not sure exactly what the history of it is, thanks!

I don’t know stocks I presumed that it’s all just a guessing game form my knowledge of it I thought that the crashes are gradual but would billions just drop over night?

Through history, there appears to me that a lot of cultures have their own breads: Chinese buns, Pitta, black bread, farl, tortillas, and the list goes on. Obviously there are differences between all of them, but the commonality seems to be that they all take a grain, refine it by grinding it down, and then adding water and other ingredients. Was this independant? Is there a theme? What made humans decide to cultivate plants and create breads in this way?

I admit I struggle to understand how people rationalize ceremonial monarchs in a democracy like the Modern UK, but to makes no sense at all to have a ‘divine right’ king on top of a ‘people’s’ dictator. What did the Italian people think Victor Emmanuel was if Mussolini is some sort of all-knowing leader? Why would Mussolini keep the man who lead Italy to its ‘mutilated victory’ in power? And, if the r/askhistorians mods can find it in their hearts to forgive me, what did Hitler have to say about this situation? If you have anything to say about the Balkan fascists and their Kings that’s okay too.

In my cursory reading on the topic, it seems like this was more hope and empty promise than a real policy (whereas in high school history it sounded more like this was a real promise that the Union just never delivered on), and I'm unclear on how "fair" this would even be as far as reparations would go. (Can you even put a number in dollars to the effect of slavery?) It's also unclear to me whether this policy was meant as a reparations policy or if it had some other purpose.

Reddit historians, please set me straight.

[deleted]

I'm aware that the wokou were more multinational than the name suggests, but I've understood the core of them were still Japanese.