chinese civilization started in the yellow river valley and eventually populated south of the yangtze. did this mean most of the talent/power were established north of the yangtze first?

Northern steppe warrior dynasties were able to unify china (mongols, manchurians), but seems like southern "barbarian" tribes weren't able to do the same going northwards?

Land south of the yangtze eventually came to support large populations and the north depended on grain shipments from the south. why weren't there more southern power bases that used their population and food supply advantage to take over the north?

Geographically, seems liek there are more hills/mountains in the south that make conquest trickier for an invader, yet the presumably less defensible plains of the north couldn't be occupied sustainably from a southern force? Was there more warfare generally in the north that made them more battle hardened compared to a maybe less conflicted south?

Hi all,

I'm working on a book set in Louisiana during the 1920s. The premise is that a (white) woman (Beatrice) makes a deal with the Devil (Frank) to save her sister's life.

There's a scene where Beatrice goes to a bar to listen to the "new" jazz music. This scene is important because it's where she meets her love interest, Angelo, a (black) musician.

Now, since it's in the South during the 20s, segregation was legal. However, I found this link that mentions there was at least one "black-and-tan" club in New Orleans where integration was "tolerated" by police, so bribes. Lots and lots of bribes. 

So here's what I'm thinking. The Sheriff owns the property outright at first. Frank comes along and buys it off of him and pays him to look the other way for a "liquor license" and for letting black folks and white folks mix. 

So either, at the beginning, the bar is mostly black, in which case two white chicks waltzing in is going to create a stir ("White customers may have been seen as intruders by other customers"  )

or the bar is mostly white, and Frank bringing in a black band is going to create a stir since it's a relatively small town. For the book's trajectory, Frank is going to make a stir in town either way because he's letting people mix, which the Powers that Be cannot tolerate.

My question is which is more historically accurate/likely--that white ppl invade a black space or Frank somehow convinces white customers to tolerate black customers in their midst?

I’m quite new to looking into anything historical, but I’d like to read English translations of Ancient Greek texts, but I don’t know who to trust. So many translators seem to have been 19th - 20th century writers. I know it’s quite easy to Google who was the more accurate, but I don’t want read something that’s going to completely skip over paragraphs because the subject wasn’t acceptable at the time of the translations publication. Are there any translators I should stick to? Or perhaps a few I should avoid?

I do also want to say to the mods, I’m sorry if this has been recently asked, I had a look through the faq’s and couldn’t find this question, but I might have missed it. Also, thank you for running this subreddit, I came across it this morning and have spent all day flinging myself down rabbit holes because of it. It’s been great.

I ask because I was researching the myth of Persephone and Demeter, and according to a channel called Sarcastic Mythology on youtube, epithets were often used to describe these two and other Greek gods.

This never seemed to be a problem in the religion I was raised in (we follow Vedic scripture). In fact, we actively chant deities' names in order to win their favor/grace.

I would appreciate sources, because when I generally follow a source back to its origin I usually can't find from where the author derived their information.

I only have a layman's knowledge of both the Spanish conquest of the Americas and the Roman conquest of Gaul, but it is my understanding that in the former, most of the heavy lifting when it came to actually fighting the Aztec Empire was done by native Mesoamerican people who had allied with the Spanish, and the extent to which Cortes' conquests were only possibly with a large amount of native help was traditionally underestimated (and still is in popular perception), partly because Spanish accounts tried to marginalise it in order to exaggerate the impressiveness of their own military achievements.

Given that pretty much all our sources for the Gallic Wars are classical Roman writers, with Caesar himself chief among them, is it possible that the same was true for Gaul? It is well established that Caesar greatly exaggerated the sizes of the forces opposing him in his Commentaries, so he had no qualms with playing fast and loose with the truth to accentuate his own brilliance. Is it likely then that he omitted a lot of decisive action on the part of the Gauls in his retelling of the conquest?

Cato The Elder (In On Agriculture 10-11) suggests the requirements for running a 150 acre orchard includes thirteen workers, one of whom being a swineherd, another a shepherd. For a sixty acre vineyard, he suggests sixteen workers, including one swineherd, and a willow worker (Secondary question, what is a willow worker?), and no shepherds.

Orchards and vineyards are not pigfarms, so why does he suggest swineherds and a shepherd?

Take Smaug for example. A dragon guarding large a large amount of gold. When did this narrative start and what was the reason for it?

This was a question that I asked my teacher 10+ years ago and didn't get a clear answer on. It is wild to me that in 21 years we ended up seeing Germany be a such a super power to start invading neighbors again. Were the "Harsh terms" of surrender not strong enough? Did Germany benefit from not getting invaded and keeping their infrastructure? It is wild to me that kids born during the war would be the ones leading another 20 years after.

Thanks in advance

Did the ROC while it was still in power in Mainland China ever had elections or anything close to an actual republic?

Im currently debating someone who claimed that italian soldiers were competent on the eastern front is this true ?

I know of all the Latino-Americans who have been in the U.S. for hundreds of years. My question is regarding the populations (for the sake of the rule, as of 2002) of America and Mexico. One is primarily mestizo--indigenous, white, and some black. The other is primarily white with some black. But specifically, the population of Mexico is more mestizo than America, which is majority white. Why did America not have more mestizo (indigenous + white (+some black)) population, especially compared to Mexico, which is primarily mestizo?

Obligatory race is merely a social construct. I'm just interested in how two regions (current U.S. and current Mexico) have such disproportionately different percentages of mestizos (U.S. has more white).

i saw someone said something him making tanks kill medics for no reason, something about killing returned prisoners and families of captured soldiers and something about a meat grinder?

idk if that stuff happened or if it's people on the internet exaggerating/ making stuff up

I just finished "Lincoln in the Bardo," of which, probably about 1/3rd is historical written accounts from contemporaries of Lincoln.

Although many of these accounts disagree on particulars, I was blown away by the quality and quantity of the testimony. Many of these men and women wrote as well as modern journalists/novelists, giving rich descriptions of what things looked and felt like, what people said, etc.

I wonder to what extent many of these personal accounts have vanished from the modern era, and to what extent they've been replaced by accessible material that's equally or more valuable.

People rarely write letters today, and journaling isn't as common as it once was. Emails are certainly a thing, and people write things and leave them on hard drives. But email accounts have passwords that heirs might not know, and hard drives get scrapped when computers are thrown out. Someone is unlikely to find their great grandfather's emails like they once found his letters in the attic.

On the other hand, the proliferation of photos and videos must be giving historians a lot to work with, and that people might leave accounts in public places on the internet.

So what's the consensus on how grievous a blow the digitization of material has been to historians?

I’ve heard that there was significant repression of union movements throughout US history - did this stifle all their growth from the beginning?

I’d love to know if there’s more to the story, or what some key historians think. Thanks!

During the Malayan Emergency (1948-1960), the British and their puppet government in Malaya fought a campaign in Malaysia against the communist MNLA rebels, comparable in brutality to the Indochina Wars (though on a far smaller scale). One thing I noticed about the MNLA is that it was overwhelmingly Han Chinese, whilst the indigenous anti-communist forces were mostly ethnically Malay.

Why was there such a ethnic divide between the communists and anti-communists, and why were the Han Chinese (the wealthier merchant class) fighting for the communist side?

America isn't exactly known for Heavy Tanks (unlike Germany) in WW2, however at the very end of the war they had a few projects, such as the T28, T29, T30, and T34. What would've happened if they were fielded earlier (say, D-Day, 1944), and produced in large numbers? Would they have been a detriment to the war effort? Would the war have ended sooner? I find these tank projects truly fascinating, and would love to see some interpretations as to how they might've affected Europe in WW2.

(thanks in advance!)

As the title says, I'm looking for literally anything about Iron Age Scandinavia. Books and essay recommendations would be fantastic. What I'm looking for specifically, if possible:

• How marriage was conducted. • What happens if someone of that time period was exiled and/or disowned • Scandinavian nomadic tribes • Scandinavian Islands and their culture • What was happening worldwide during that time • Folklore • How adoption was conducted, if at all

I know it’s a lot but ultimately anything would be appreciated. Any resources, facts, anything. The only thing I don't want is Vikings. Any help would be greatly appreciated.