Was there a different direction that was "up" at some point for certain civilizations?
1 Answers 2016-08-03
Hello,
This is my first post here but I've been a lurker. I have found some conflicting information regarding the beliefs of America's founders. Some say America was founded on Christian values, some say they were agnostic. Trying to get a straight forward answer. Insight on this? Thanks!
4 Answers 2016-08-03
this happens a lot in alternate history works, A LOT
1 Answers 2016-08-03
1 Answers 2016-08-03
I hear all the time about how Romans commonly drank wine, usually diluted, but did they drink exclusively wine? Would a Roman ever drink a cup of plain water?
On the same note, was the water coming from aqueducts potable and used for drinking, or was it used for other purposes? Did the idea of "potability" exist? Were certain sources of water known to be drinkable or not drinkable?
"Romans" of course being a wide spread of time period and location, would the answer to this question be any different early in the Roman Republic? During the time of Augustus? The era of the five good Emperors? In far-flung provinces versus Italy or Anatolia?
1 Answers 2016-08-03
I visited slovenia last week and i visited a cave in postojna with a "russian bridge" build by russian POW's in WW1. That made me wonder why they had them build that bridge. And made me wonder about the conflict in slovenia during WW1.
2 Answers 2016-08-03
I imagine that dogs throughout history tended to have a role which were more important than just keeping humans company? Why and when did that change?
1 Answers 2016-08-03
I can break down my question further if it helps.
A - Discovery
1: When was the Ming government sure that the America's existed?
2: Why was there no expedition east? The Chinese certainly had the naval history and resources to afford at least one.
B - Columbian Exchange
1: How did the new species of plants and animals affect Chinese cuisine/nutrition/agriculture?
2: Did the Ming government intervene or promote this exchange?
C - Precious metals
1: Was there a shortage of precious metals in China at the time?
2: Did the Ming recognise the origin of Spanish silver?
3: If so, why was there no attempt to find their own silver mountain or El Dorado? Or to annex the silver mountain themselves, considering their military strength?
4: If the answer is due to isolationism, how did the Ming attempt to restore their advantageous trading position to the Europeans?
D - Further reading
Can you recommend me further reading on this topic (in English if at all possible)? Or any of the topics I touched on in this question?
I would like to thank in advance for any answers that are sent my way. This topic has been boggling my mind for a long while. I hope I can better understand the Chinese perspective on the discovery of the america's after this.
1 Answers 2016-08-03
1 Answers 2016-08-03
I always hear Americans talk about how we beat the Nazis in the 1936 Olympic Games with Jesse Owens winning a gold medal. But this seems odd as Nazi Germany won the most gold medals of any country, with a smaller population then the U.S. as well.
1 Answers 2016-08-03
It seems like they happened pretty frequently (at least compared to the political stability of modern Europe) and presumably in most societies the peasants (or peasants and slaves together) outnumbered the aristocracy by a large margin. So why didn't they ever win?
1 Answers 2016-08-03
Or thirteen colonies, if that is also known. Most history classes first bring up Asian immagrants in regards to california and the gold rush. However, I was curious about who is the first know Asian citizen of the United States? What country were they from? Do we know why he or she moved to the United States/Thirteen colonies?
1 Answers 2016-08-03
The votes are in, and the winners for the 'Best of July' award are decided.
Taking the "User's Choice" Award is /u/freedmenspatrol for the response to "Why was the South so worried about Abraham Lincoln's election, and how was this concern expressed before secession?"
The "Flair's Choice" Award goes to /u/The_Alaskan for the answer to "Some 50,000 amputations were performed in the American Civil War. What was life like for amputees when they returned home? How did post-war society treat them?"
As always, a big congratulations to the winners, and a big thanks to everyone who contributed to the subreddit in the past month! Also a reminder, if you want to nominate answers for the monthly awards, the best way to do so is to submit your favorite posts every week to the Sunday Digest!
For a list of past winners, check out this Wiki page!
3 Answers 2016-08-03
I've just re-read Carnage and Culture - and though it is unabashedly ethnocentric, it seems to make good points about the value of discipline and decisive battle in the history of the spread of Western civilization. Are there any major criticisms out there?
1 Answers 2016-08-03
Who, exactly, were the pioneers? Am I more likely to be someone with nothing to lose, or am I the son of a wealthy man who hopes to expand his reach out West? How would I actually go about assembling things for my journey? And, when I get there, how will I actually start a life for myself?
1 Answers 2016-08-03
I use the anachronistic term "international" to mean, between the various independent kingdoms, duchies, and other such feudal polities that were separate from each other.
Was trade coordinated and regulated at the monarch's level? Were there such things as "trade agreements" between rulers?
Were travelling merchants organised, operating in guilds and firms? Or was the bulk of trade done by small-scale operators?
1 Answers 2016-08-03
The level of partisan manipulation in the media cannot be new, I'll venture that it is only now that the veil is being pulled back so dramatically at least from my own perspective. Why should I trust a historic record any more than I do the muck that passes for objective journalism today?
2 Answers 2016-08-03
2 Answers 2016-08-03
I was going through the FAQ, and I came across this post. I was a little shocked to see this quote:
As for presentism,, for those who don't know, you need to be aware of it. Quit viewing the past through your modern eyes sometimes. Yes, what Columbus did to the Indians was terrible to us, but to really measure his worth you have to ask, "Was he a bad person by the standards of his time?" You can't really apply modern concepts to past events. Slavery in many parts of the world was morally justified in it's era. Yes, it's reprehensible to us now, but in the 16th Century it really wasn't. It's not fair to criticise someone using the morality of John Locke when they lived 200 years before Locke.
The reason this is shocking to me is coming from a philosophy background with an emphasis on meta-ethics, moral relativism seems to have a fairly bad reputation among moral philosophers. For example (incoming Godwin), it seems untrue that Nazi Germany was morally right in any sense regardless of historical perspective, culture, or any other attribute to which we'd like to attach moral relativity. This of course differs from Nazi Germany (or others) thinking they were right. It also differs from the notion that morality is merely a cultural, societal, or historical construct, and so it does not actually exist (a type of moral nihilism). Also, being philosophically honest, these objections of course don't mean that the Nazis weren't right and relativity stands. Though, it does seem unlikely.
The reason I think this is worth being mentioned is because this subreddit paints historians as people who try not to speak with authority outside of their areas of expertise (see the FAQ for opinions on Diamond and Zinn). But to discount "presentism" seems to not only embrace moral relativism, but to also take a minority position in an on-going debate in meta-ethics. That's not to say that either moral realism or moral nihilism are the one true way, but rejecting moral presentism seems to be saying that moral relativism is the one true way.
I worry many relativists mistake a type of moral nihilism - there is no morality, and so we judge things by their place in culture or history - for moral relativity - there is such a thing as morality and the US had it in the context of the US in 1942, but so to did Germany in the context of Germany in 1942.
I did a quick search for presentism, and nothing I say here is actually new, but I would love your opinions on it. I am also concerned that this might not be a great fit for this subreddit since it is much more philosophy than history, but I do think it directly applies to the "historical method".
Edited for grammar.
8 Answers 2016-08-03
I saw the book recommended in the rules & FAQ, but I wonder if it goes beyond the context of the original document and ratification to then explain the context and climate around each of the subsequent amendments?
I'd love to get a sense of what social, political, economic, etc. factors played into the adoption of each amendment. (Preferably in a writing style that is accessible and narrative-like, rather than pure academic text.)
Thanks in advance for any recommendations.
1 Answers 2016-08-03
1 Answers 2016-08-03
I mean, for example, today New York, Pennsylvania, New Jersey and New England are mainly Irish-Italian, the South is mainly English/Scotch-Irish, save for Louisiana, which is predominantly French, and Florida, which is more like Hispanic; yet especially the Midwest, the Great Plains and west of the GP are predominantly German. (OK, Minnesota, Iowa, and the Dakotas are more Scandinavian)
Bonus q: Why did more Poles move to the Midwestern large cities (Chicago, Milwaukee, Cleveland, etc), compared to Irish/Italians?
1 Answers 2016-08-03
I plan to move to Vietnam soon and stay there for a couple of years, so I'll hopefully have access to Vietnamese sources as well, I'm just looking for a general direction if possible.
2 Answers 2016-08-03