I've read that J. R. R. Tolkien's mythos in The Lord of the Rings and The Silmarillion were designed as an "English mythos" - was this inspired by, or in counter to, the Celtic Renaissance which emphasized national myths for a rebellious Ireland and (to a lesser extant) Scotland?

Hi love this community. As a junior historian myself and an addict for the obscured asprcts of history, one thing that has always alluded me is the fate of the eunuchs. I know that almost universally during an empire's death rattle and just before the final death of an ild regime, the eunuchs are evicted from the palatial complexes that serve as the base of governance. From the Topkapi to the Forbidden City the eunuchs' exit preludes the death of the old regime. But what then? They seemingly dissappear from history, except for the last eunuch of imperial China who got to tell his tale and shed some light. But what becomes of them? Do they leave with just the clothes on their backs or with a severance package? Do the ones who attained wealth keep it or do they have to leave with a portion of their wealth hidden under their clothes? They were stigmatised by the rest of the country but could they return to the real world or even their families? And what becomes of them as citizens in this new world? Dying to know what answers you have.

Context: I'm writing a final paper for university about Martín Ramírez (1895-1963), a spectacular artist who spent the better part of his adult life in an institution in California after being found on the streets during the Depression. He was diagnosed as a catatonic schizophrenic and mute, although more recent investigations have called this into question.

I'm trying to make sense of him as the mastermind behind his great body of artwork... I think. We have no writing or statements of his AFAIK. We have his artwork, which I guess should speak for itself.

I'm looking at Foucault and his "Abnormal: Genealogy of the Monstrous," I'm looking at a few texts written specifically about Ramírez. But I'm looking for some more ways to frame my research here. Knowingness and not knowing. Him and us. Looking for overlap?

I've printed out a bunch of photos of his artwork and I'm trying to arrange them in order to make more sense of it. I see great stratification, literally and figuratively. I see what many have interpreted as a fantasy world of religious figures and Spanish knights on horses, but I'd argue he's using symbolism from his homeland (Mexico) to frame his own world in the Cali institution.

But I'm approaching a brick wall in terms of what to do next with my research. My advisor has suggested I "look within" the artwork itself for more answers, but I'm not sure that's getting me anywhere...

Questions for everyone (including myself):

What are standard ways of looking at outsider artists, and why should they be subverted?

I think it's fair to say Ramirez's work doesn't have to be simply designated as a part of his pathology, but what is it?

I'm struggling here and any help or thoughts would be endlessly appreciated. Thanks all.

I've always been interested in Jamaican culture, and I understand that Haile Selassie was somewhat of a remarkable leader, but it's seems kinda far fetched to claim that he is equal to god. So how did the Jamaicans come to think of him with such high regards? Also, any clarification on how the Rastafari movement began would also be greatly appreciated!

Before and after the defeat of the Ottoman empire Jews from Europe began moving to Israel. Not in such large numbers but it certainly picked up by the time WW2 came around.

There were lots of idea the Nazis had about what to do. One was even to send the Jewish people to Madagascar.

Was Israel ever considered and if so why wasn't it used. If not then why wasn't it?

I mean I know it was because it was also like not only in one place (Europe) but also in the colonies but are there other reasons?

I know that old academic data before the fall of the Soviet Union puts it around 20-25 million. But new data emerged after the Fall of the Soviet Union that the number was lower, around 6 to 9 million. But even this “revisionist” approach is disputed, with numbers varying from 11 million to again 20 million (including Eastern Europe). Why are these numbers different for different historians? And what methods they used to measure the deaths caused by Stalin’s actions both before and after the fall of the USSR?

How did the Roman postal system work? Did they have one or was it more you hire a messenger to send a letter to somebody you know?

I am curious, was the morale of Americans tankers in WW2 lower then that of other units?

I've heard many people cite complaints multiple claims that their morale was extremely low compared to their peers, especially in casual dramatic pop history books.

I'm curious if this is a more post war, pop culture construction, perhaps contributed by the prevalence of American pop media, or if it was really a thing.

​

I'm curious if the morale of the tankers was lower then that of other American units, like bomber crews, submarine crews, logistical units, infantry.

I'm also curious how the morale of American tankers compared with those of units from other nations, such as the British, Free France, Russians, Germans, Italians, Japanese, etc.

This will likely vary by individual unit trend and time period of the war, but I'm curious if a general trend can be found.

​

I have found definite records of at least a few crews complaining about their equipment, though that doesn't necessarily mean poor morale, and was common even in units that many considered to have relatively high morale, though almost all usually believed their equipment could be better in some way from what I've seen.

Were the chiefs/elders/leaders hereditary like a monarchy? Could someone be deposed? How were laws made and enforced ?

Did he approve of this conquest or his later Persianization? Did he have opinions on Alexander's political, strategic, or tactical decisions?

In red dead redemption 2 there is a quest where you give a letter to a rival family resembling Romeo and juliet how likely was it that a rich or even common man in the south during this time know about Shapespeare or read Romeo and Juliet

Let's say I live in the Carribean during the early 18th century. Blackbeard, Calico Jack, and all their friends are all out there. However I'm not a shipping merchant. I live in a port city, but I run a shop or farm or something. How frequently would pirates be a concern of mine? Do they play a part in my livelihood/day-to-day?

Edit: additionally, two questions. How was the response to previous expansions, and how were ties decided in a court with an even amount of members?

I'm reading "The Art of Warfare in the Age of Napoleon" by Gunther E. Rothberg.

​

In it he claims the following: "In most continental armies, therefore, the numerous Jäger units were simply light infantry and usually only partly equipped with rifles. In the British army there were two rifle-armed regiments, the 60th and the 95th, though the famous Light Brigade... in the Peninsula for the most part carried modified issue muskets."

​

I have looked at other internet sources and have been able to find no other information corroborating this. Is he simply incorrect here? What exactly is a "modified issue musket" in the first place?

Also, I read that he saw the electoral college as a threat to democracy. Given the controversy around the electoral college in the recent election, did Americans back then also feel the same way about the electoral college system? Did Andrew Jackson even try to get rid of it during his presidency?