Please Be Aware: We expect everyone to read the rules and guidelines of this thread. Mods will remove questions which we deem to be too involved for the theme in place here. We will remove answers which don't include a source. These removals will be without notice. Please follow the rules.
Some questions people have just don't require depth. This thread is a recurring feature intended to provide a space for those simple, straight forward questions that are otherwise unsuited for the format of the subreddit.
Here are the ground rules:
Questions should be clear and specific in the information that they are asking for.
Questions which ask about broader concepts may be removed at the discretion of the Mod Team and redirected to post as a standalone question.
We realize that in some cases, users may pose questions that they don't realize are more complicated than they think. In these cases, we will suggest reposting as a stand-alone question.
Answers MUST be properly sourced to respectable literature. Unlike regular questions in the sub where sources are only required upon request, the lack of a source will result in removal of the answer.
Academic secondary sources are prefered. Tertiary sources are acceptable if they are of academic rigor (such as a book from the 'Oxford Companion' series, or a reference work from an academic press).
The only rule being relaxed here is with regard to depth, insofar as the anticipated questions are ones which do not require it. All other rules of the subreddit are in force.
39 Answers 2018-05-16
I remember being taught that geocentric models of the solar system had the other planets simply move in very strange-looking paths around the Earth. This model, while messy, I would think isn't actually inaccurate - the models accurately showed the movement of the cosmos if you treat Earth as stationary. While Galileo proposed a cleaner model, with everything in nice elliptical orbits around the sun, why did the church react so dramatically against the idea?
1 Answers 2018-05-16
2 Answers 2018-05-16
In the book "The Irish (and Other Foreigners)" Shane Hegarty argues that the Irish are not Celtic
According to his arguament, the archaeological evidence shows Irish artifacts are not similar to Gaulish artifacts, or Hallstatt culture artifacts. In fact, he claims Ireland is actually comparatively less Celtic than most western European countries, in its artifacts. He also said there is no genetic evidence of the Irish being Celtic.
Hegarty claims the Irish are not Celtic, but does not suggest another greater racial/linguistic group to classify the Irish. If we are not Celtic, then what are we? In what way are we related to the Scottish linguistically (If we dont have a shared Celtic heritage than why are we similar?)
It must also be said that the paper that Hegarty writes for (Irish Times) does have a left liberal bias, perhaps his conclusions are motivated by multicultural ideology.
I am agnostic on the issue now, but I understand that the mainstream belief is that the Irish are Celtic. What does r/AskHistorians think?
1 Answers 2018-05-16
The question is in the title, but to expand on that, it seems to me like opening such a vast, and previously unaccounted for, demographic after all the wheels of an election had started turning, could really throw a wrench in how a presidential candidate might operate for the rest of the campaign, how did the candidates at the time handle that?
1 Answers 2018-05-16
Since the oldest extant sources of classical writers were compied by monks centuries later, I suppose it's impossible to say either way with absolute certainty
1 Answers 2018-05-16
[deleted]
1 Answers 2018-05-16
Hey all - hope my question is OK
I'm reading the White Goddess by Robert Graves at the moment, which leans VERY heavily on the belief that Celtic deities were brought over from Greece, and ultimately Sumeria. Graves wasn't a neo-Pagan, but all the founder Pagans read him and this "all ancient gods are linked to one another" approach is everywhere.
I don't think Graves is reliable in the slightest - but I do know that gods and beliefs migrate with peoples.
Can you recommend me some books? Or give some answers about myths travelling and overlapping that are more based in fact (than poetry and wishing, which seems to be Graves' main sources)?
Would you say that Celtic myths being Greek in origin is a) bollocks, b) possible although not likely, c) something we have some evidence for maybe, or d) actual fact? how far is that a thing for other ancient people's and pantheons?
Cheers for any ideas
5 Answers 2018-05-16
1 Answers 2018-05-16
Much of the news in the UK, including the BBC, are talking about how Prince Harry and Meghan Markles wedding is a milestone for the royal family as she represents the "first mixed-race member of the royal family". Now, I don't want to take anything away from this, nor so I want to get political or into a discussion about race, but it did get me thinking.
Surely throughout history, when members of the royal family were married off for political reasons, there must be many examples of mixed-race weddings. I'm thinking particularly of the English royal families in relation to, say, the Moors or the Ottomans or even India, but don't want to limit it to just this.
So any historians know of any good examples?
1 Answers 2018-05-16
3 Answers 2018-05-16
Edit: when did this practice actually begin?
1 Answers 2018-05-16
I am massively into US politics. Like many, I have managed to completely ignore the history of things that have happened outside my country. As much as I understand that the Israel--Palestine conflict is a complex geopolitical quagmire, I know very little about its history and current state. Given the recent activity in the region, I have committed to learning enough about the conflict to be informed and in charge of my own opinion.
There are many resources available to research this topic, but many are biased and it is tough to sift through them. My goal is to become informed of the hitsorical context that created the conflict, the history of the conflict itself, and the current implications of the conflict in regional and international politics.
Any resources would be greatly appreciated. Thanks!
1 Answers 2018-05-16
[deleted]
2 Answers 2018-05-16
1 Answers 2018-05-16
Not certain if this is the correct sub to be asking this question since it is all relatively recent history, but I was curious how North Korea was able to achieve their goal but Iran, which is less economically isolated, was not able to build one
1 Answers 2018-05-16
A few centuries later a thing as complex as the Terracotta army would be built, so It's safe to say urban society and life was already quite developed at that time.
1 Answers 2018-05-16
1 Answers 2018-05-16
I'm trying to learn more about the various post Mongol khanates (1200s - 1700s) but I'm having trouble finding basically any resources beyond basic Encyclopedia Britannica type information. Are there any good books, or is this just a poorly covered area?
1 Answers 2018-05-16
Matthew 10:38 (NET) And whoever does not take up his cross and follow me is not worthy of me.
Since Jesus was still alive why would he tell his disciples to take up their cross. Was this some sort of symbolism inserted into the gospels later? Was it the punishment that the Romans inflicted commonly on religious zealots and the like? Was crucifixion a threat to them at this point for upsetting the order that Romans held so dear?
1 Answers 2018-05-16