I'm curious as to why exactly we structure our historical timeline based on before Christ and after death. I'm also aware AD actually stands for Anno Domini, which is latin for "In the year of the/our lord." I'm going to assume this basis has mostly to do with the influence of the church during the classical period of world history; however, I figured posting here in r/AskHistorians would allow me to find a little more information on the topic. Thanks!

How did the warring nations end or terminate their trench lines when they ran into the ocean, an international border (like Switzerland) or into the mountains? We see many pictures of the actual trench lines but how did they end and stop the enemy from getting around them?

I'm curious on how coinage was used on the silkroad. Was a currency from one country accepted at another? Was it worth less or more depending on place? How was currency verified from a place a 1000 miles away? Was inflation and counterfeit a common thing? Any sources to more in depth information on this subject would be greatly appreciated. I've done some research and have found very little information about coinage on the silk road from 500-1500ce.

[deleted]

Been doing some thinking about the U.S. ...

I read Laura Ingalls Wilder's "Little House" series as a child and am reading it to my daughter currently. As homesteaders in the 1800's, Pa plays his fiddle frequently in the series, but they seem to rarely encounter anyone else who owns an instrument.

I also recently read Orson Scott Card's "Saints", a fictional account of Joseph Smith and Brigham Young as they settle in Nauvoo, Illinois. During celebrations, such as a marriage, no one had any instruments as they were a poor community, and they danced to hand-clapping.

Lastly, I'm a fan of Apollo's Fire, an offshoot of the Cleveland Orchestra, who are known for performing "early music" on period instruments. And they definitely have instruments - flutes, dulcimers, harps, violins, cellos, a harpsichord, etc. They play music from many many time periods. But when they perform the music of, say, immigrants who have settled in Appalachia in the 1700's, they still use a large ensemble.

I just find it hard to believe that the average settler would have even one of these instruments in his/her home, much less the means to gather or be a spectator to a large group with such instruments.

So, who's right? Laura and Orson, showing that musical instruments were rare when people were settling, moving away from tightly-knit communities ... or Apollo's Fire with their complex groups?

Hi, I'm an English student writing an essay on Kazuo Ishiguro's An Artist of the Floating World, which takes place in post-war Japan, October 1948 to June 1950. I was shocked to see no real discussion of Japanese war crimes between the characters, considering the protagonist was a propagandist. There are mentions of "war criminals" and the "China Crisis", but nothing concrete like the Nanking Massacre, Unit 731, the Bataan Death March, Three Alls Policy, etc.

So, my question is, would these people have been genuinely ignorant about the actions of the Imperial Japanese Army, or are they deliberately choosing not to talk about it?

In the interpretation I heard: - Dorothy is the regular naïeve American - the yellow brick road is the gold standard - Dorothy's silver shoes (ruby on the movie because it looked better) are a metaphor for the usefulness of the silver standard, - "Oz" is a reference to the symbol for the ounces of gold favoured by the industrialists - the cowardly lion who has a great roar but doesn't actually do anything, is populist 3 time predidential candindate William Jennings Bryant

Additionally Wikipedia says that: "The Scarecrow as a representation of American farmers and their troubles in the late 19th century The Tin Man representing the industrial workers, especially those of American steel workers"

Is there any truth to this, or just some creative interpretation of a story that came out in the populist era?

I trust that historians and literate people were aware of Pompeii's existance but it seems baffling that the local population would've simply forgotten about the existance of two very important cities in the region.

They weren't exactly small. Pompeii at the time of the eruption had a part of the Roman fleet there. It seems hard to believe the local population simply forgot and it seems more likely to me that they didn't really have a reason to care.

But this was such a cataclysmic event, how do local populations simply decide not to care that two large cities fot wiped off the map in a single day.

I see guides online but that doesn't necessarily mean the Romans used this system.

I have recently begun a project collecting Wikipedia articles on Japanese women before the Meiji period, and reading through some of them, in the warrior class it seemed to be common to get married between the ages of 7-15. There were both marriages where the wife and the husband were of a similar age (with the main wife) and ones where the husband was a lot older (with concubines).

My question is, what did these marriages actually look like in practice? What would have been expected from two children married to each other, and likewise what would have been expected from a very young concubine? Was marriage between young children mostly informal, with them mostly getting to know each other, or were there properly defined roles?

Also, are there any sources on what the children themselves thought about this situation - or what others thought about them? Are there writings where a samurai describes his young concubine, or the other way around?

I am very interested in the plurality of experiences these people had, and will read any sources in English, German or Japanese.

And why, then, did subsequent settlers continue to call natives Indians?

I am writing a story and one of the cultures is heavily based on Roman culture. What sort of stone and mortar did they use to make their more monumental achievements?