I've just been looking at pictures and illustrations of old clothes and noticed that there were ruffs in the 1500s, then those frilly neck things in the 16/1700s, then neckties and bow ties in the 1800s and finally what is essentially the modern tie in the twentieth century. I was just wondering if there was a smooth transition over the centuries from ruff to tie. Could you say it is a direct descendant? Does the evolution go further back than this?

I think popular depictions of medieval Europe seem to suggest that many commoners had swords, often passed down through families. Is this likely? Is it safe to assume swords were affordable? Also, was it uncommon for someone to walk about with a sheathed sword on their belt?

The Wikipedia article on the UK Conservative Party mentions that under Andrew Bonar Law's leadership, the Radical Right of the party was contained. What were the main characteristics of pre-20th Century right wing radicalism?

Apologies for the word "Viking" - I know it's not the preferred term but the only other word I was aware of was "heathen" and I wasn't sure if it would be clear enough what I was asking, while "Viking" is hopefully 100% understandable, if not 100% accurate. If there's a better way I could have phrased this question please let me know so that I can be better informed for next time!

With that out of the way, onto the question: I'm aware that Christian kings often wanted to convert captured or defeated Norsemen, but did this ever happen the other way around? Did Norse raiders ever attempt to convert captured slaves to their religion? Or did they ever try to enforce their religion on defeated Christian rulers or populations? Were there any notable voluntary conversions from Christians to the Norse religion - an Anglo-Saxon king or nobleman perhaps?

When studying music history, a large amount of time is spent on Arnold Schoenberg and his crisis of tonality. To my mind, Schoenberg envisioned his work as advancing music beyond the bounds of tonality, and that he viewed his style as the future of music. I.e. his style would become the dominant type of music in the future. Additionally, Schoenberg believed that one just had to listen enough to atonal works before it became more “pleasant”. One source for this is in an essay (I can not seem to find it now) by Schoenberg he remarked that children would be singing 12 tone music in the future on the streets.

Modern listeners still struggle to appreciate much of Schoenberg’s music, did it ever reach the public favorably? If his music did not become the new norm, why do we hold it as revolutionary? Thank you, I realize there are many questions listen but I’m interested in contextualizing Schoenberg with the culture at the time and his contemporaries

I've heard that it started off with Seleucid prisoners but why did more Greeks end up coming?

Also, how many Greeks ended up going to Bactria instead of the other Diadochi during it's lifespan?

I'm looking for good books that give college or graduate students an overview on how to do history, but which are specifically oriented toward writing ancient history.

​

The only ones I've found are Morley's Theories, Models, and Concepts in Ancient History, Morley's Writing Ancient History, and perhaps Organ's Is The Bible Fact or Fiction: An Introduction to Biblical Historiography.

​

Have I missed any important or useful ones?

Thanks.

So I argue alot with my history teacher on alot of things involving politics and history. Most in people in the US compare Nazism to the political right while comparing communists to the left. But my teacher doesn’t seem to think so. He has often said that he would compare Hitler to the left wing of the US, specifically Bernie Sanders and his policies. He has made the claim that “Hitler policies are the incredibly similar to Sanders policies” based on things like healthcare, economics and welfare. I just wanted to know if there is any validity to those statements or if the general consensus of Hitler being more comparable to the American far right is true.

As Russia expanded into Siberia and northern Eurasia, they took over/incorporated/colonized lands of peoples that the various Chinese, Japanese and Korean kingdoms - and those in central Asia - of the time must've had some form of contact with.

So I wonder, what was the sentiment of these kingdoms bordering what would become Russia, at its eastward-expansion? Is it mentioned in contemporary sources, and if so what is said about it? And what was the relationship between these places and Russia as it happened?

I hope the question makes sense; I have no real knowledge whatsoever on this subject, so it may be clumsily asked.

Thank you for your time!

In other words, who is the first person that is written about that we KNOW existed? I.e. Cleopatra, Julius Cesear

As I understand it, women in Medieval Europe were thought of as the more problematic sex when it came to sexual sins and there was intense pressure on them not to seduce and corrupt men. Today the stereotype is that men are the ones obsessed with sex, and there are a lot of notions attached to relationships that emphasise that. Tropes like women not keeping up with their partners sexual appetite or withholding sex, and the man generally being the 'getter' of sex and the woman being the 'giver.'

Would these notions have been reverses in the middle ages? Were women seen as the proactive party, trying to constantly get laid, and men being the ones constantly being propositioned?

I plan on purchasing a copy but I was wondering if there are major differences if any between different editions/translations of the book. My understanding is that the two most common editions are the Landmark Edition and the more Recent Tom Holland translation.

In a conversation with french multinationals about Chinese influence in french speaking Africa, a Chinese official said

‘We have been here much longer than you - we were gone for a few centuries - but were happy to work with you’

I don’t know how true the story is, but it got me thinking what does ancient Chinese writing say about ancient Africa?

Trade, stories about their culture, wars etc....

I know there was contact between ancient east Africa and China, but what about West & Southern Africa?

[deleted]

Hello historians,
I'm a developer working on a concept for a game where the main themes are influence, scheming and intrigue. Think influencing a parliament, corrupting officials and working your way up to ruler. I'm looking for interesting political systems of the past that could fit well with the theme or that I could use as a source of inspiration. I am more or less uninterested in systems where assassination is key (it's really not exciting if you can just kill your opponents) but rather where influence is key and where you can climb your way through the ranks. I was looking at Sparta, since it has the perfect "scope" (it's a city state) and an interesting system. I've done some research but wasn't able to exactly find out if intrigue was really a part of the political life. Do you have anything to recommend on the topic of Sparta or any other examples of systems that could fit my needs?
Many thanks!

I know they weren't precise at all, but without any electronic computer to take care of the post ignition manoeuvers, how did they manage to direct the rocket towards London or any other objective?

Whether it's ramming in the antiquity or canons later why not fight wooden ships just with fire? Wouldn't be some arrows or whatever to ignite the ships pretty effective against ships made only out of wood?