I've been reading Max Weber's 'The City,' and in its sections concerning the relationship of the city to rural life, he makes a few mentions of 'agrarian mysticism,' and even implicates it in the rise of fascist movements prior to World War 2. I'm studying ethnic conflict and genocide in school but I've never come across this particular term before. Is it still in use? What does it mean, historically?

Countries like Afghanistan speak Dari/Farsi and Iran as well. How does the religion become so heavily entrenched in their culture but the language it's written in remains secondary?

Exactly, why are Eastern martial arts so popular in Western Culture?

I was just curious whether there are any historical texts which mention the ideology of fascism as a positive. Or has it always been a purely negative term?

Takinf for example the Middle Age, my question concerns the case in which horsemen were already deployed on the battlefield and the horses had figured out what was going on (war). I mean, didn't the horses have fear? How could horsemen persuade the horses to charge despite the caos and fear around them? And how could horses survive a battle without going crazy?

I was wondering the other day how much wood a temporary Roman encampment would need. Where would they get this? Do they set up camp always close by a forest to do so? Also, what if there is no/not enough wood available nearby, what would they do then?

How much time would it take for a Roman encampment to be build from scratch? Collecting all the wood, digging the ditch etc?

Final question, how long is a Roman legion on the march and when the first stop, when will the last one arrive and will the camp be nearly completed? Which people march in front and at the back?

Thanks for answering all my question (somewhat more than I expected to ask but they kept popping up)

Does the name Tixclupac sound Aztecky-enough? I know it's not a known name but it's been stuck in my creative cloud for more than a decade now and I really like it, but i'm worried it might mean something stupid or worse, nothing at all since I'm neither a linguist nor a historian.

Members of my family and friends families who fought during the war either as partisans or as part of the national army (or in the case of my Estonian friends either side of the Soviet-German occupation), and lived under the Soviet occupation strongly believe that outside of the horrors of the Holocaust, Soviet occupation was much worse. Please know that I do not agree with this view, I am of the opinion that they are equally as horrific.

I believe this is due to the perception that it not only primarily targeted one single group (although Romani and LGBT people were also targeted) but literally anyone who had even an inch of doubt in the validity of Communism, of Stalin, of their national puppet government. A common phrase I heard growing up was that the Germans came to drink, the Russians came to rape.

I have provided anecdotal evidence but I would like to know if there is any consensus among academics for the perception of the two occupation periods among the local populace's, if this is something that has even been studied before.

So I've stumbled upon couple of post here and there on history sub reedits, claiming that no matter, what the disadvantage in resources was so much, that Germany would always lose a drawn out battle. Was the situation really as dire ? Before this point i believed that the reason Germans were outnumbered in tanks for example was that German tanks were of higher quality and production took considerable more time in addition to this repairs needed a lot more expertise. So in short what was the situation in the resources for the period of 39-45.

In my experience I have never seen much to do with punishment for officers on 18th century warships. Crew obviously faced flogging and such for all sorts of offenses but I have never seen officers being depicted as having public punishments aside from a scene in a Hornblower episode where as a recently enlisted Midshipman he was tied to the rigging, though I forget the circumstances. Were officers given leniency for their behaviour while onboard? Could Captains face punishment aboard their own ships?

Also as a side note if officers were either seen as unfit for their job or wounded or killed in action were the regular crew ever allowed up the ranks to fill empty roles in the chain of command?

The sea people are a group that appear in accounts about the ancient Middle East but always in very vague terms. I believe they contributed to the downfall of several middle eastern states, Ancient Egypt in particular. I’ve done some cursory research on the topic and found almost nothing on them. I know there was a book written on them recently (1188: the year civilization collapsed), but I’m wondering if there’s been new findings, first hand accounts or archeological sources?

A large part of the Lost Cause's mythology is that the CSA was only defeated by the Union because of the Union's overwhelming advantages in population, technological advancement, and productive capacity, while the Confederacy had much better leaders and braver soldiers. Given how much of the Lost Cause is inaccurate, I have trouble believing this point. However, I have not read any evidence to the contrary so I would like to hear from the experts on this topic.

I find it odd that it's so accepting that television and radio take advertisement breaks every 15 minutes or so. Was this always the case?

Hi, I am writing a medieval film, and a character in the story is a gold digger. One of the other characters describes her that way.

This film historian portrayal doesn't take itself too seriously. (Think style of 'A knights tale') but I want to hear your thoughts.

[deleted]

Title says it all. Why is it romance languages only developed in those specific areas? Or did some languages do develop but then died? It would be super interesting to hear what those languages might have sounded like! Apologies if a similar question has already asked, I am on mobile and the search function super sucks. Or if this would have been better placed in a different subreddit

Yeh it's over 20 years old, computers aren't new, guys.

Or was it discovered in one and then diffused?

Note - I am not sure why my questions are being considered open ended as i have already tried posting the question regarding 'caste identity' before & both times it was considered as open ended or 'Homework' question.

I just want to have a conversation about Identities & how their description from dominant forces changes them.

I know it's a TV show and not a documentary, so artistic liberties are taken, but I imagine they want to be as faithful to history as possible, so is this true?

I am currently worldbuilding with a friend for a potential roleplay and I decided to have the setting of a city-state. However, I need to know how inner politics of such states worked. How did noble families compete with each other and how would the rulers deal with the people below them?