As a European, history I read was often from the perspective of Europeans. For example, it was the need to look for trade routes that drove ocean exploration. In trading with Indian kingdoms of the time, in Indonesia and in China it said from the perspective of what the Europeans wanted to acquire. Silks, exotic spices, etc. But what was that the people and nations wanted in return? What was prized in China that came from Europe? What about in India?

Hi all，

I have the following situation: I read a scholarly secondary source and find a reference to an archival source. I track down the source and read it myself and then decide to use it myself. If I have tracked down and read the source myself, can I just directly cite the primary source without mentioning the secondary work I originally found the reference to the source in?

So far it seems to me that it is fine to just cite the primary source (and that is what I have done so far) :

1. The Chicago Manual says that citing of the primary source is preferred and authors are asked to track down and cite the primary source. In that case, the manual does not seem to suggest that citing the secondary literature where the reference was originally found is necessary.

2. As a graduate student, one is often given the advice of looking at other secondary literature to get an idea what kind of sources might be useful for one's own work. If this is a common practice amongst historians but reference to where one has originally found the source, then one would expect to see footnotes also referencing the secondary work where authors first found the reference. However, this does not seem to be the case.

3. Finally, what happens to me often is that after looking up the original source I find other bits or quotes that are interesting and use. So the content of the source I use is not identical anymore with the bits of the source that the original secondary source I found it in did.

This is my understanding so far, but would be very curious to know what you think.

[deleted]

Me and a friend of mine have recently gotten into a debate over the British Empire. Specifically, over its economics benefits. He contends that the British Government was primarily funded by the British Taxpayer in the Home Isles and that a majority of revenue made in the colonies stayed with the local colonial governments, while I contend that the British Treasury was primarily filled by the profits from the colonies. This is relating to the later Empire around the Second Industrial Revolution btw.

Basically, I've come to ask which of us is right and if theres any sources or reading on this topic. Specifically, how much of the British GDP and the money spent by the government came from the colonies such as India.

Let's say that I want to learn more about the Roman Empire, the politics, the public opinion about it but i dont want to rely directly to books or academic, how i am supposed to search for sources of this time period? I know i could go to the academic paper/book sources but the choices of those sources could be biased towards the author's opinion, so How do i search for this type of information?

[deleted]

I understand that successful can be a subjective term, however, you can interpret it in your own way i suppose. Also, when I say Spanish Empire I'm speaking to dates ranging from the 15th - 19th centuries. All answers are greatly appreciated! Thank you in advance.

I understand that Shoguns were at the top, below them were Samurai, Artisans, and so on and so forth. However, what were Ninjas considered to be in the grand scheme of Japanese society?

When you walk down the street today in any city in the United States it's easy to spot luxury and high quality goods on others (you can recognize a Louis Vuitton purse or a Lamborghini and associate those items with wealth and high quality). I know Middle Ages is vague and I'm sure the answer varies by region. For conversations sake, let's say we're in England roughly 1200-1500 AD. My question is: were there branding marks on Sir Knight's armor that I would recognize and say oh that's a good guild that I know of! Or would it just appear to be of higher quality in comparison to others?

I have heard of the date 1066 so much but not 1016 when Cnut became king of whole of England - Why is it so?

They certainly had the resources for it, and could have caused significantly more American casualties.

Say I had something like schizophrenia around 1400 ad, I know how I would have been treated in Europe (thrown in the streets and forced to survive as a beggar). But how would I have been treated elsewhere, I.e. the Americas or Africa?

Hello!

I was driving home recently and landed on some Beethoven playing. I recognized it right away, but I could also tell that the version I was hearing was not my favorite version, which triggered some questions..

Long story short, I began to wonder about instruments in the time period of the popular classical composers - were the instruments as refined as they are now? Movies show scenes of concerts with symphonies, etc., and it all seems to be amazing music, but.. was it? Were the instruments as nicely made as they are now? Did the arrangements sound as good as they do now?

Are there any books that are focused on how japanese invasion/occupation helped the CCP to win in the Chinese Civil War. I can’t find any :(

Wagner has something of an association with Nazism for a number of reasons, including of course Hitler's praise for him, the ties of his children with the party which of course directly intertwined them, not to mention his own anti-Semitism. Rightly or wrongly, the association was (and is) very much 'a thing'. It reminds me somewhat of the similar association with Nietzsche, which is generally pushed back against now, but at least in the immediate aftermath of World War II, saw a serious slight against him as "a Nazi philosopher". As such it lead me to wonder whether Wagner suffered a similar repudiation for a time, and more generally how this connection played out with his legacy in the years since the war.

What's a good book to start learning Arab history?