How were these wars financed and how was this money used? Where did the initial funds/resources come from? How were they paid off in a system where many didn't even earn a wage in any modern sense?

Saw something that said they were pretty influential, but from a not great source. Either way it got me interested. Were they pretty involved? Or no?

Hi, I know this is a bit of a strange set of questions as it is not actually related to a specific bit of history. Full disclosure, I am a PhD student looking into how uncertainty in historical data can be better represented in visualisations (particularly timelines). One thing that I am trying to do is understand a bit more about the terms that come up when dates are described.

When applied to dates what does circa mean to historians?

How does it compare to other terms (e.g. approximately, about)?

Are there any academic guidelines or documentation on when or how to use or interpret it? Or is it like an unwritten rule?

What do you think affects how the overall range of a date with circa is perceived?

I feel that The Ottoman Navy performance becoming worse during the 17th Century onwards despite multiple successful reforms like introducing modern sailing ships and the reform of Selim III, the navy still performed overall badly and rather get defeated easily by its rival's navy like in Çeşme, Sinop, and Navarino Bay. While there's a clear reason on why the army performed poorly at the later 18th century to the reforms of Mahmud II like the civilianization of the Janissaries and the decentralization of the military, i haven't got a clear answer on the navy yet. So why is this?

I am a Type 1 Diabetic and it got me thinking about how hard it can be to live with, even with the modern medical benefits of insulin, exercise, and a proper diet. I looked into the history and found that around the 1880s, it was discovered what role the pancreas plays and, in 1910 it was discovered it was a lack of insulin that caused it... The interesting info I found was that the original term for diabetes was coined around 250 BCE. Even in the 17th century it was known as "pissing evil" so they knew something was wrong. Also, the ancient Greeks, Chinese, Egyptians, Indians, and Persians knew something was going on because of the "sweet taste of urine" (lol don't even wanna know) which has been found in ancient texts. They knew something was happening and Type 1 diabetes has obviously been around for a long time. My question is this: If a person in those times developed it, was it basically a poor quality of life leading to an eventual death sentence or did they have any way of dealing with it? I know their diets weren't filled with sugar and processed food like today, but from personal experience, I even have to watch eating too much fruit and especially drinking alcohol, which I know they had. When my blood sugar gets too high, I get nauseous, sluggish, my eyes go bad, my body hurts; I can't imagine not having insulin... Lastly, if anyone wants a source I can provide it.

I'm knew to this subreddit so if this is the wrong place I apologize and I'll take it down; I read the posting rules but could have missed something. Im really trying to understand my disease so thanks to anyone who can help me out!

What I'm asking isn't whether or not the Holocaust happened, nor if the numbers are accurate, or why the concept of a Holocaust exists in the first place. The Holocaust obviously happened, the numbers are obviously accurate, and the Holocaust is a valid term for such an event. What I'm asking is what kind of criteria designated victims of Nazi killings as deaths from the Holocaust rather than regular Nazi violence. For example, why are the killings of Jews in extermination camps considered 'Holocaust' while the killings of Soviet POW's in extermination camps are not?

[deleted]

Did Nazi Germany's tanks hold a technological upper hand on the Soviet tanks at the time? It is to my understanding that the Tigers had a very high kill ratio, despite the T-34's sloped armor, and were more effective despite the mechanical problems. Were the Panzer divisions defeated by sheer numbers, or were Russian Tanks better?

Before Homo Sapiens left Africa and spread across the world, there were several other generations of ancient Homo subspecies who had already spread across Afroeurasia, and allegedly existed for a long time along with Homo Sapiens.

I was wondering if there are any historical accounts or even mentions/legends that give any slight reference to these Archaic Humans from ancient civilizations?

So I want to learn more about the history of science and how we got to where we are. But I find the popular books are all whiggish and makes it seem like ideas of Einstein and Newton and the like came from the ether. And also, seems it's great man after great man.

I have studied up to Physics II (electricity and magnetism) at university and I have really enjoyed Kuhn's Revolutions.

They're pretty dark compared too their Disney counterparts.

Were people disturbed by them? Was it their version of Saw or did people think Sleeping beauty was a rom-com?

I hope this question gets answered even if it's (most likely)a silly one. Let's say I'm interested in Mayan history, there's plenty of information written about them in English, but must likely there would be much more data in Spanish, the language spoken currently in Mexico and Central America.

If I Wanted to make an extensive review on a particular subject (for example: Classical period Mayans and their relationship with Teotihuacan) should I use Spanish language sources as well or I could manage with only sources in English?

Is it common for historians to inmerse themselves in secondary sources written in other languages (and if they do, do they use a translator?) or historians usually stick to thier native languages.?

In every general world history book I've read, China is listed as one of the first "cradles" of civilization. Specifically in one of the river valleys (Yellow River)? But this is seldom explored, the texts instead focusing on Egypt or Sumer. Even the Indus River Valley civilization is discussed more.

So I want to know, what do we know about early Chinese civilization (way before the first dynasty). Did they leave behind any texts or intriguing art? What was the religion or social organization?

I realize this is a very broad question, but I'm eager for any good answers. Additionally, why is the history of early China covered so little?

What would have motivated these attempts? How would they have been financed? Who would have been in charge when they arrived? How would they have interacted with any local populations?

I know information on early Greek settlement might be lacking, but I am interested in later attempts through the Hellenistic Age. For example, I know colonization was crucial for the Successor states, but I don't know how they went about colonizing.

Thank you!

[deleted]