I haven't done actual academic library research since college, going on 30 years ago now. So my question is, these days, how would I check to see what editions of a primary document may have been published (besides Amazon!) and what, if any, scholarship has been done on it? Not asking anyone to do my research, just asking what resources you would go to these days to look for something like that?
Additional info: I've been reading a relatively short book that was published in the 17th century, so it's written in early modern English, with all of the strange (to modern eyes) spellings, capitalizations, punctuation, etc. It's of historical interest and is sometimes assigned in classes (which is how I found it, as it was discussed in a free online class). The only e-book versions I found were bad scans with no correction of artifacts and misreadings by the scanner. So as I read, I found myself "translating" it into modern English and started a document with this "translation".
It occurs to me that this could be useful to others trying to read this document, particularly when reading for content. It would not take much work to finish my "translation" and turn it into a reasonably priced e-book uploaded to Amazon.
I'm debating adding some background material and footnotes as certain references have sent me down fascinating Google holes, but that would be a lot more work and not necessarily worth the time and effort for a little labor-of-love project.
At this point I would like to find out if anything like this has been done (it doesn't look like it based on what I've found through Amazon and basic Googling) but I want to make sure I'm covering all my bases, as well as see what scholars have had to say about this particular work.
Thanks for any help/advice, and apologies in advance if I'm not doing this right, I'm pretty new to reddit and have mostly been posting/commenting in the "fluffier" subreddits!
1 Answers 2016-05-23
"Clark, who led last year's expedition to the Afar region of northern Ethiopia, and UC Berkeley colleague Tim D. White, also said that a re-examination of a 300,000-year-old fossil skull found in the same region earlier showed evidence of having been scalped."
The passage above was apparently taken from the Yuma Daily Sun, June 13th, 1982. I've been driving myself crazy trying to find the articles original author.
I'm not sure if this is the right place to ask, but are there any archivists here that can lend me a hand?
1 Answers 2016-05-23
France has gained and lost territories for centuries, at times owning parts of modern day Spain and the low countries for instance. Alsace-Lorraine had been gained relatively recently. It was a fair distance from Paris, and the residents overwhelmingly spoke german dialects.
Why then was this territory such a sticking point in politics? I've read historians claim alliance between France and Germany was impossible because of Alsace Lorraine, and war inevitable.
Why was this region so much more important than Catalonia, Wallonia, or Quebec?
3 Answers 2016-05-23
So i want to know more about nuclear weapon tests, mostly because the whole topic of nuclear weapons fascinates me.
Wasn't building nuclear explosive devices really expensive? If so, why were so many tests carried out? Who had the authority to:
propose those tests
approve them
carry out those tests
How did the process look like from start -planning the test - to finish - cleanup etc. -
Where the bombs used in those test specifically designed/ordered to built or did they sometimes just pick one that was in their arsenal?
Regarding to the question before: I've read that in the USA e.g. missle Silos had not only the task of delivering the retaliation strike, storage of weapons and so on but ofcourse also to make sure the weapons weren't manipulated. How was it made sure that nuclear weapons weren't manipulated in production? How would the military know that brand new nuclear weapons delivered to them would really well explode? Did they sometimest just pick one weapon from their arsenal to test if they were working?
1 Answers 2016-05-23
I recently went to the Miho Museum in Japan, where two sets of painted mosaic panels. Both sets, titled Flowers, Trees, Animals: Life, are supposedly painted by the same Japanese artist, Itō Jakuchū (1716-1800), yet one set looks distinctly suspicious when compared to the other, like Ecce Homo suspicious.
The first set contains common animals such as ducks, deer, etc. as well as classically mythical animals such as kirins and phoenixes. The artist paints the mosaics in a gradated style to create texture, depth and well rounded forms. Overall, it seemed legitimate.
The second set was exhibited opposite the original. It's painted in a completely different style yet bears similar composition to the first set. At first glance, the colours are completely flat, lacking the same gradients and texture - it looks like a bad imitation of the first set. On closer inspection the animal forms appear crude and inconsistent when compared to the level of care and detail in the first set.
But most strikingly, here, we can see animals like the cassowary and what appears to be a sulphur-crested cockatoo, both of which are native to Australia and New Guinea. This one puts me off the most as the period this was supposedly painted was in the early years, if not entirely before, the European colonisation of Australia and New Guinea. It's also at least 50 years before the ending of Japan's isolationism. The only exception to this may be Dutch traders who might have introduced these animals to Japan but I find that dubious.
Could these animals have really existed in 18th Century Japan for Jakuchu to paint? Or is it just a fake?
According to this article, the owner Joe Price is convinced they're legitimate, but others think they may have been painted in the 19th Century to simulate Jakuchu's style.
EDIT: formatting
1 Answers 2016-05-23
So, this crossed my mind while watching the recent Game of Thrones episodes. (Note: this post does not contain spoilers.)
How familiar were knights supposed to be with coats of arms and names of noble families? Specifically, I'm asking in the context of wars and battles. Was a knight supposed to know all the coats of arms and banners of all the other knights in his army, so that he didn't strike down an ally by accident? Or maybe there were some noted cases of 'friendly sword stabs' and 'friendly axe chops' (sorry) during battles because someone didn't know that 'Two Longaxes Beneath a Black Crown' fought on the same side?
Also, would a noble family's child be expected to learn by rote memorization all the names and coats of arms of families they might come across on a regular basis?
1 Answers 2016-05-23
I am tasked with putting on a dining in Dinner for my command and the celebration is VE Day. As we are in the US Navy the focus will be on our contributions to the victory in Europe. I am looking for the major points that were accomplished to allow a victory in Europe... more than we just dropped some soldiers off at the beach (which was a major one!).
Additionally we are tasked to put on a fun skit so any suggestions to focus on would be much appreciated.
Thanks in Advance!
1 Answers 2016-05-23
When living in Ireland I noticed how Irish Folk songs would often recount hardships experienced in pre-independent Ireland, or even directly criticize British rule. A well-known example is 'Fields of Athenry' (lyrics) with its comment on the Irish Famine and lines like "Against the famine and the crown, I rebelled, they ran me down".
This led med to wonder if music or literature were used not only to criticize, but also as a means of initiating or organizing resistance, possibly through writings in Gaelic. I suppose the time-frame would be the late 19th to early 20th centuries.
The 2nd question goes a bit further back in time. It relates to the Celtic Revival, and to the transmission and possible modification of Celtic folklore/traditions through later cultural works in Ireland, as well as their relation to Republicanism.
Any input or reading recommendations would be highly appreciated.
1 Answers 2016-05-23
I have a question. My grandfather says that during Japanese rule of Korea, we planted more than 600 million trees, helped teach them farming techniques to prevent soil erosion, and revived the ecology of many barren mountains. I've read that this is true in various history books, too.
But I also speak Korean now and I've recently found out that many Korean books say that Japanese military deforested the mountains through industry and Korea revived them after being independent. I've just looked on the internet for English sources, but all I've found are Korean accounts that support this interpretation.
Did Korea used to have many barren mountains? If so, was it Japanese policy during the colonial period that made them lush as they are now? Or was it the opposite?
3 Answers 2016-05-23
Hello and welcome to the eleventh edition of our ongoing series of Rules Roundtables! This project is an effort to demystify what the rules of the Subreddit are, to explain the reasoning behind why each rule came into being, provide examples and explanation why a rule will be applicable in one case and not in another. Finally, this project is here to get your feedback, so that we can hear from the community what rules are working, what ones aren't, and what ones are unclear.
Today, the topic for discussion is our rule against speculation in answers! This rule, like most of our others, exists to ensure that people asking questions here get high-quality answers.
The rule reads:
##No speculation
Suppositions and personal opinions are not a suitable basis for an answer in r/AskHistorians. Warning phrases for speculation include:
*"I guess..." or "My guess is..."
*"I believe..."
*"I think..."
*"... to my understanding."
*"It makes sense to me that..."
*"It's only common sense."
If your answer includes any of these phrases, it is likely that you are merely sharing your opinion or speculating, and not posting a proper answer.
##Why do you need a rule against speculation?
One of the primary goals of AskHistorians is to ensure that questions are answered at the level of knowledge that someone who is a professional historian would offer. (Note that this does not preclude answers from interested amateurs, those without formal history degrees or who don't work in a historical field -- the bar is simply that we want answers that are correct.) There's a reason why this is called AskHistorians, after all, and not AskPeopleToSpeculateAboutThePast.
The problem with answers that guess, speculate, or say "it's only common sense" is that they're generally not grounded in a sound understanding of the past. There's a major difference between answering a question with a statement that's based in fact and backed up by reputable, academic-level sources; and posting a half-baked theory that you may have heard in a history class back in high school.
##What do you mean by speculation, anyhow?
Here are some examples of comments removed for speculation (without including the poster's identifying information):
There is a dialect divide between North and South Wales, I'm going out on a limb to say that the first settlers were from South Wales and so the name. I have zero evidence though.
I'm not a historian but as far as I knew royalty used to talk around peasants and servants as if they were not even there. I would guess someone in direct service of the lord would overhear it and gossip would spread throughout the population as very little worth talking about happened compared to today.
Uh. Not a historian but I would guess about 10000 BC In a very primitive form. Step 1) get dagger Step 2) Shave Step 3) Swear loudly as you cut yourself a bunch Step 4) Wait a week for your face to heal Step 5) Observer your glorious clean(ish) shaven face
Probably after Charles II. The monarchy was never quite the same after Charles I lost his head. CRII often bent to the will of parliament (though occasionally over rode them and disbanded them)
As you can tell, besides being short and not citing sources, all of those answers basically have some sort of disclaimer that the user doesn't know what they're talking about. As the rule above states, if you're having to hedge your answer with that sort of language, you're probably not the best person to answer that question.
##But isn't speculation and hypothesis part of the historical process?
As a guide to research, absolutely! Just about any historical inquiry can start out with "I wonder why ..." followed by "It might have been this..." followed by many joyful hours in the archives. The more dramatic version of this are the fun times people such as experimental architects get to have, by making ships or trebuchets or other items from the past and testing them experimentally. But the lesson that we often learn from those research paths is that "common sense" doesn't necessarily apply to the past! It is a different country, after all, and they do things differently there.
And with that in mind, this rule shouldn't be taken as disallowing any and all speculation. As shown with the examples provided above, we're speaking to users who are making guesses based only on a vague understanding of the topic, or worse, simple "common sense". There are real gaps in our historical knowledge out there, and it can take guess work to try and fill them. But in doing so, historians are relying heavily on their accumulated knowledge regarding the topic, and take care to carefully present their argument and back it with sources that have helped them reach the conclusion that they did. The same is true here. Simply taking a stab at a response won't fly, but presenting a carefully constructed and well supported argument will.
##So what are some examples of speculation that fits within the rules, and how do they differ from your earlier examples?
It's really a matter of degree, and the extent to which a speculative conclusion comes from a well-sourced answer, versus people just talking off the cuff. We can't draw a line in the sand and point to it, but rather speculative answers, when they arise, are evaluated against the historical method by the mod-team. It's also important to note that an answer may include the disclaimer that some of it is speculative or hypothetical, or that the "common sense" answer is speculative. Some examples of this are:
This answer on the myth of the Cyclops, which mentions the "common sense" answer that the myth started with elephant skulls but that it can't be proven;
This answer about the atomic balance in postwar Europe, where the historian doing an AMA lays out facts and then builds a hypothetical scenario, while admitting it's speculative.
This answer about rape in the Middle Ages, where the historian answering constructs a likely scenario after going over the facts surrounding the question.
In all of those cases, we see historians engaging in speculation as a part of their answers. But if you do that, it should be because there is or you believe there to be a gap in our historical knowledge - not because you, personally don't know the answer.
##I have some thoughts about this rule, where do I share them?
We welcome thoughts about the speculation rule, and invite you to share them in the comments below. The point of the Rules Roundtable series is to get feedback from the community on our rules and policies, after all.
##What should I do if I see people posting unsourced or speculative answers in a thread?
Let the moderators know, and we'll sort it out. Either use the handy "report" button below the offending post or comment, or send us a modmail. We want you to hit the report button!
##I think that a comment of mine was removed unfairly, what do I do?
As we've said in previous roundtables, we on the moderator team are the first to admit that we won't always be right, but we will make every effort to be fair. If you think that we misinterpreted a question or comment of yours and removed it unfairly, you are always welcome to send us a modmail to politely state your case.
5 Answers 2016-05-23
As title says can anyone help, The period I want to look at is 1600-1660
I would like to look specifically at differences with the Anglican Church, extent of integration with the Church, views on Laud. I would prefer articles and books written in English. So far I have the english translation of Bernard Cotteret's work 'The Huguenots in England' but I am searching for more works and ones more focussed on their religious beliefs compared to Anglicans and how/if this came into play during the Wars of the Three Kingdoms (preferably in english language)
there are several issues I would like to learn more about
position on altars and communion
differences in liturgy (if any)
reactions to William Laud's church reform
attendence of English language Anglican church services
did they have their own prayer book/reactions to Anglican prayer book (the BCP was translated into French, however did the Huguenot at any point in the 17th century have their own book)
1 Answers 2016-05-23
2 Answers 2016-05-23
In the fantasy genre, there is a recurring trope that the "civilized" folk - often white, male dominated - are dishonest, politicking, backstabbers, while the "savage barbarian" is blunt, honest, and thoroughly confused by the strsnge behaviours of the civilized folk and lies. Does this have any basis in history, or is it just authors using common themes? When did this trend first occur?
1 Answers 2016-05-23
1 Answers 2016-05-23
I thought I heard something once about a massive loss of lives in the native populations before the wars between natives and whites. But, I remember them saying it wasn't on purpose, i.e not the blankets. (Sorry if this is confusing, wrote this on 4 hours of sleep)
2 Answers 2016-05-23
The crux of the question I feel is this; could the US Army have afforded to simply force the Sioux to keep moving, starve them out, or was it necessary to defeat their fighting forces in order to force them onto the reservation?
I would also like any information on how the tribes centred around Crazy Horse and Sitting Bull were faring logistically.
1 Answers 2016-05-23
I seem to recall an account where a Greek city state in Magna Gracia sent a delegation to Alexander asking for help because they accused the Romans of supporting a group of pirates that were raiding the Greeks. Alexander sent a letter to Rome telling them to cease their support of the pirates. Is there any historical evidence to support this?
1 Answers 2016-05-23
Were there instances where it could have gone the other way?
1 Answers 2016-05-23
I know the start times are different but considering they essentially occurred concurrently and involved belligerents who were engaged in WW2. why is this war not viewed as an extension or part of WW2?
1 Answers 2016-05-23
1 Answers 2016-05-23
To me, USSR seems like a very conservative name for a nation that, from what I know of history, basically wanted to be the antithesis of Western Capitalism.
Yet they decide to name their country in a similar manner as the U.S., who would ultimately be their greatest rival.
Is there a reason that they decided to use "socialist" rather than "communist" or "Marxist"? Why call it a Republic if that's not really what they had? Etc.
2 Answers 2016-05-23
1 Answers 2016-05-23
1 Answers 2016-05-23
Hi guys! I'm reading up on nationalism and Quebec was brought up - specifically the 1995 referendum that was reject.
My question is why did they want to separate from Canada then and since I can't really get up and go there right now, if that sentiment still is carried on today?
1 Answers 2016-05-23
I am doing (or my girlfriend is, really) a project in The Sims modeling the middle ages. Western Europe is a cinch, but I'd also love to try to recreate the Islamic Golden Age and the most advanced medieval civilization :) However, I'm having a hard time finding any info on what would have been prominent in Arab civilization in the Middle Ages. What buildings and structures were prominent and, moreover, what played a major role in people's lives other than religion?
2 Answers 2016-05-23
