I've been reading Autumn in the Heavenly Kingdom as my introduction to the Taiping Rebellion. It hints at the civil war being as much a revolution of the Han over the Manchu. How segregated was this time period in China? Was the Qing administration all Manchu?

Were Han and Hakka viewed as distinct people?

[deleted]

While all 3 were generally unkind to their African subjects, how did the Germans act? Were they kinder or harsher?

I just redeemed the €500 "cultural bonus" the Italian government gave me for turning 18 and I can spend it on a variety of book websites but the most inviting is Amazon, because of its huge selection of books. My bonus ends on the 31st of December 2017 so if I don't spend the money by then it's gone, so ideally I want to get the most expensive books out the way I perhaps wouldn't have bought and read without this opportunity. Even if the books cost quite a bit I don't mind at all. I can buy either the physical book or the ebook so even if it has to go through shipping I don't mind!

I'm interested in anything you might also find interesting!

^^also ^^sorry ^^for ^^butchering ^^the ^^title ^^I ^^rewrote ^^it ^^like ^^5 ^^times ^^over

What makes some wars create hundreds of thousands of refugees while other wars create few or none? I am not asking if anyone was displaced from their home, but rather what factors make some wars affect the civilian population more than other wars?

I realize clips and enblocs for some rifles were discarded, but if a soldier shot all the rounds from his M1 Carbine, would he drop the magazine on the ground or save it? Did this change in later conflicts?

I've always wondered how much chainmail, metal helmets, full suits of plate armor, and the different weapons such as longswords, maces, pikes, longbows and shields would've weighed?

Is there any kind of manual or guide that would've been made up for smiths or armorers or soldiers to follow?

While Urban centres contain the industrial might and high concentrations of population which are vital for winning a civil war, they do all have to be fed. How did the Reds ensure they got regular food shipments from the outlying farms, and were partisans and resistance a problem in getting food sent to Leningrad or Moscow?

More generally: How do resource flows work in modern-era civil wars anyways? Does the rebelling side usually manufacture their own arms or at least try to, and how do they get the resources to do so? How do you get food to the population if your country is a food importer?

Were doctors during the American Civil War even remotely as knowledgeable as what we know today as doctors/medicine? Did they understand infection? Did they have any kinds of medications? Pain relievers? Fever reducers?

[EDIT] Did they even have what we would call "medical school?"

This question has always confused me and here’s why. Napoleon’s greatest threat was by far the Kingdom of Great Britain (and later the United Kingdom). While he may have had superiority on land, Napoleon knew that he would be defeated at sea if he tried to cross the English Channel but he may have had an advantage.

First off- Ireland. While France may have intervened in the 1798 Irish Rebellion, they never made an impact like they did in the American Revolution. However if Napoleon was smart he could’ve instigated a new revolt in Ireland to steer as many British troops away from southern England as he could. Another, and in my opinion the best, option for Napoleon could’ve been Scotland. Years prior the Glorious Revolution occurred in which the House of Stuart was overthrown as the rulers of Scotland & England and eventually the throne fell to the House of Hanover (which ruled during the Napoleonic Wars). If I recall correctly, Scotland was especially loyal to the House of Stuart even after their fall.

Napoleon must’ve known that if he was to conquer Britain he couldn’t rule as its king so he could’ve simply used the last member of the House of Stuart at the time- Henry Benedict Stuart a cardinal from Rome who was also the brother of Charles Edward Stuart who led the unsuccessful Jacobite Rising of 1745. If Napoleon had backed Henry then many in Scotland and in Ireland would’ve supported his claim to the throne.

Would this have been a feasible plan? If so, why did Napoleon not attempt this? Even if the only threat to him was the English navy, England would’ve been surrounded by enemies.

I know that some plebeians could gain political offices traditionally bestowed to the patricians, and become new men, and that Caesar put on lavish displays for the public, and eventually paid it off with with the help of Crassus and his governorship of Gaul.

But I can't imagine that in a society as competitive as ancient Rome a politician could only rely on the funds of his family and friends.

[deleted]

[deleted]

Julius Caesar was famously murdered in the Senate. But it always struck me as odd that public murder was treated so cavalierly. Then I came across this passage from Plutarch regarding Caius Gracchus:

Quintus Antyllius, an attendant on the consul, spoke to Fulvius, and his friends who stood about him, "Ye factious citizens, make way for honest men." Some report that, besides this provoking language, he extended his naked arm towards them, as a piece of scorn and contempt. Upon this he was presently killed with the strong stiles which are commonly used in writing, though some say that on this occasion they had been manufactured for this purpose only. This murder caused a sudden consternation in the whole assembly, and the heads of each faction had their different sentiments about it. As for Caius, he was much grieved, and severely reprimanded his own party, because they had given their adversaries a reasonable pretense to proceed against them, which they had so long hoped for. Opimius, immediately seizing the occasion thus offered, was in great delight, and urged the people to revenge; but there happening a great shower of rain on a sudden, it put an end to the business of that day.

This seems positively bizarre. Dude was just murdered in public forum and people just carry on proceedings. And then adjourn for the day because it starts raining! How did Romans of the day view this sort of behaviour?

I was wondering after watching an episode of History Buff on YouTube, where he studied the history accuracy of the 1964 film, Zulu, which depicts the Battle of Rorke's Drift.

Did the Zulus understand the weapons? Had they seen them before? Had they used them? What were their thoughts?

Timeframe 15th century

My country was at war and we lost (I was not drafted nor was the village raided), during the peace deal the land my village is on is ceded to the other country. How does this impact me and my village at 6 months, a year, 5 years and 10+ years. My original country still exists.

Do we simply pay taxes to a new lord? Do we move to some land our country does own? Are we forcibly removed? Are we forced to learn and speak the new language and embrace their culture?

Do tell!