I hear the argument made a lot (usually by Confederate apologists on the internet) that had the Civil War been avoided somehow, slavery would eventually become economically unviable and go away on its own soon enough. I've always found it hard to believe that forcing slaves to work for you could ever not make money, but is there any truth to this idea?

This questions is a bit of a doozy and I do apologize. However I've seen "The Troubles" brought up in different threads from time to time and as an American I never understood what was involved. I recently decided to look up the Wikipedia article about it and was shocked to see how in depth and LONG the article was. In American education we've never been taught anything about it and I'm confused as it seems to me it must have been an awfully terrifying and drawn out time.

​

Is there context that can be given about it to give Americans a better understanding?

​

[deleted]

[deleted]

I do't know if I have some kind of bias on this, but while researching Chinese myths and legends I found stories that seemed surprisingly modern, for example there are stories of people going to law school, like the Butterfly Lovers, or the happy ending is the main couple opening a Pharmacy together.

One story (I can't find it's name right now) begins with a dude dropping out of law school and ends up becoming a sort of "Zen saint" or some kind of deity in the Zen religion.

This is very weird to me because you never hear of Sigurd nor King Arthur dealing with doctors or lawyers, much less those people being the main characters in those legends.

And in general chinese myths and legend seem to focus more on "regular people", or rather, their stories seem to be about regular people that became exceptional, instead of being about people that begin being exceptional or destined to be so.

Why is this?, what influenced both of this cultures to have mythical traditions that differ so much in this particular aspect?

I know in the past, after the fall of rome, Italy consisted of multiple independent city states, republics, and whatever else. But I've honestly never heard of how those individual constantly bickering kingdoms came to be united as the country we know today as italy.

When did it happen? Who was responsible? Did it all happen reletively at the same time or was it spread out over many years? What were the reactions of the citizens of the individual states to their former state being dissolved?

Volksgemeinshacft, German art, music and architecture, German race, German state, German Church, German living space, sonderweg, Neuordnung. At its core, and according to Hitler himself, nazism is inherently German.

I have the impression of Hitler being quite vague and very overarching in the vision he was promoting, and for implementation to be interpretive and varied; national socialism also lacks an intellectual tradition mirroring that of communism or socialism. All this, together with the often very back and forth nature of Nazi policy and enforcement through the rise and fall of differing agencies, begs the question of what remains that can be said to be unconditional (that is, not contingent on Germany) Nazism.

I came across the allegation in an English Protestant tract agitating for the castration of priests in England that "in Sweden", "castration was enacted into a law, and practiced upon a few of them". Cursory googling shows some other references, but mostly English.

Was this law actually enacted, and if so, how and how often? Any information on what seems a bizarre and fascinating practice is welcome.

When Nazi Germany declared war on Poland in 1939 the UK and France joind the war in defense of Poland. Days later the USSR Declared war aswell. That raises the question in the title.

Hello, I am writing a paper on how the Democratic Party effected the course of civil rights and was interested in what people likely more qualified than I am think about the topic. I know a lot of the basics such as LBJ legislation but also how democrats effectively thwarted Eisenhower’s civil rights attempts by watering down his bill, however I was interested in historian opinions overall whether they help or hindered the advancement of civil rights overall and any historians books they have on the topic as I am struggling to find many Thanks, PCN10

Hi, I'm looking for books with the greatest amount of detail on the 2nd World War. I want minutiae, specific manoeuvres, etc. George Herring's 'From Colony to Superpower: U.S. Foreign Relations since 1776' is comparable to what I'm looking for.

(If this is not the appropriate place to ask for book recommendations, you have my sincere apologies)

As I read Sherlock Holmes and Dracula, there's a lot of talk of sending wires, the post, and evening papers. This makes me ask, what exactly are they talking about? How long would it take to send and receive "a wire"? Did I first have to take a hansom to an office? And how would the wire be delivered to the recipient?

I recently read of the Two Power Standard were the Royal Navy had to be as large as the second largest and third largest navies combined. Why? Didn’t Britain already possess the largest navy at that time? And how on Earth did they finance such a costly endeavor?

Edit- Made the question more clearer and more specific

Hello!

Im trying to research why Scotland had a change of legal system in the seventeenth century but I cant find many sources. Anyone know any books or where to aim my research?

Thank you!

Since the establishment of the US government was deeply rooted in the enlightenment ideal of rational thought is there a clear rationale for why the states required voters to own property in order to vote?

I'm aware of the Vestal Virgins as a female-only, chaste religious organization that predates Christianity - but I'm a little weak on the details of how nuns themselves arose. Was it inspired by the Vestals, or just a female counterpart to the monastic movement, or what?