[deleted]

Hi everybody! How are you?

I would want to know if any of you are aware of good books on the subject of the Haitian Revolution. On one side, I wanted a synthetic and well narrated one focusing merely on the facts of the revolution (beginning, conflicts, aftermath). On the other side, more precise and complex analysis of the causes and effects.

Thank you very much!

PS: If you can clarify the author's perspective, great (e.g.: marxist, liberal, historical revisionist of a certain common thought about smth, etc)

In the Asterix comic books, it seems that just about anything could get you thrown to the lions, in particular incompetence/lazyness/dereliction of duty. But what kind of crimes would really have carried this penalty in the 1st century BC? And would Roman citizens, such as the soldiers that are usually threatened with this, have had to face the lions, or only outsiders?

The History of Byzantium mentions how the fertile areas of roman owned africa and other areas near the deserts shrank over time. (I think it's his questions episode around #40) He mentions how there are now former roman farming estates/towns in the desert and some type of plant that can no longer be found in the region. Could anyone explain why this happened?

[deleted]

[deleted]

Where did the concept of landownership come from? It is clearly not universal, given the fame of the indigenous Americans famously lacked the idea. Did it develop from a common root or was it spawned in parallel, by many communities? Furthermore, how did societies manage land use rights in the absence of codified land ownership?

Hi there r/askhistorians! I'm on a reading binge on the history of horses in Africa, and I'd like to know why there didn't seem to be a widespread adoption of horses by the Bantu/Swahili people of southern Africa.

As I understand it, horses were widespread among the North African civilisations, which were firmly in the Mediterranean sphere and therefore shared a lot of geographic and cultural similarities with southern Europe and the Middle East. Further to the south, horses also played a part in the military and cultural traditions of Sahel cultures like the Mali and Songhai empires, as well as some medieval Nigerian states. Looking at the map, it seems that the Congo Basin was the main barrier to the widespread adoption of horses: the jungle terrain appears to be thoroughly unsuitable for the animals, and I imagine that tropical diseases would've taken a grisly toll as well.

However, the terrain of southern Africa seems to be dominated by open, low-lying savanna - ideal ground for travel on horseback. It looks like there were a lot of opportunities to introduce horses to the region, too: the Swahili coast was historically an important trading hub with tons of exposure to the greater Indian Ocean sphere, and the Portuguese and Dutch surely must've brought some horses along when they colonised Angola and South Africa in the 16th-17th centuries. And finally, many groups in the region seem to have subsisted on cattle and goat-herding, like the Zulu, Xhosa and Khoisan. Looking through history, pastoral cultures across Europe and Asia were practically synonymous with horsemanship. Why didn't these groups integrate the horse into their lifestyle? This seems particularly jarring when contrasted with Plains Indians like the Comanche, who adopted the horse with great enthusiasm and went on to use them to dominate the Great Plains in the same time period.

I'd like to apologise if I've gotten any of the facts wrong, and would greatly appreciate any recommendation for reading materials re:horse cultures around the world. Thank you very much!

and their ability to militarize and arm themselves under the watchful eye of the US government.

Does anyone have any knowledge of other attempts in US history to oppose the US government in a militant fashion such as The Panthers?

Heya folks,

I've started reading corroners rolls from old England and I'm not sure I understand everything correctly. First off, I'm not a native English speaker or reader and I haven't studied legal jargon.

Here is an example of the difficulties I have:

...Alice, his wife, went forth from the house and raised the hue; the hue was pursued, and the neighbours came

What is this hue they talk about, is this just a commotion?

Another part of the same text:

Inquest was made before Simon Read, the coroner, by four neighbouring townships, Renhold, Goldington, Wilden, Barford; they say that they know nothing except as is aforesaid. Alice, Henry's wife, found pledges: Roger Reaper and Simon Rivers, both of Renhold

Ok, a lot happening here. I suppose inquest is just that they requested the coroner to have a look at the case but what's up with the 4 neighbouring townships? Was it common to have other towns request this on behalf of the town afflicted?

Also, Alice found pledges... What do they mean by this? Do they mean witnesses?

And finaly, as almost all the dates are made with references to holidays, would someone have a calendar at hand of English holidays in the 13th century?

Many thanks in advance ;)

In Neal Stephenson's novel Cryptonomicon, there's a long dialogue about how societies adopt technology, and what they do with it. Vikings are used as one example of a society which would have been dismissive of technological progress. Is this accurate? What role in Viking society would most have involved the mastery of technological minutiae (and/or their refinement)?

e.g Stickers with manufacturer on things such as mirrors, or tables.

[deleted]