I want to learn more about world history but don't know where to start. I'm guessing that great empires and individuals are a good place.
1 Answers 2016-02-23
Supplemental question: What were major events that contributed to the fall of the USSR?
1 Answers 2016-02-23
I've been reading a lot about this fascinating lady recently and have a few questions.
Can anyone tell me more, or direct me to resources about, Catherine's infamous "flying squadron" (L'escadron volant) of court ladies? I know rumors existed at the time about them being spies who would seduce men for the Queen, but how true are these stories? Is there any actual evidence of it beyond court gossip? I'm also interested in resources for learning more about the original influential and exclusive set of Francis I's ladies, of which Catherine was a part of.
I've seen a lot mentioned about Catherine de' Medici's virtual obsession with the dwarves she "collected" and maintained. Do historians have any idea as to why she liked them so much? Was keeping them a kind gesture meant to help them, or were they more like human pets that entertained her? Or was it a mix of both? I'm very interested in the psychology behind why so many Renaissance ladies, in particular, kept dwarves.
Why do you, personally, think Catherine showed such favoritism and dislike for certain children of hers? Why did she never seem to bond with or approve of Margaret, in particular? The historians I've read suggested that it was a mixture of jealousy and resentment of her daughter's beauty/health, but that seems like too simple an explanation. Do you have any other theories or insights?
Thank you in advance for your answers. :)
2 Answers 2016-02-23
The New Deal Coalition--liberals, urban workers, Southern whites, ethnic minorities--remade American politics.
Similarly, the late 1960's and 70's remade American politics. Civil rights brought racial minorities and white liberals more firmly into the Democrat camp, while it also set the stage for the Republican "Southern Strategy" in which alienated Dixiecrat Southerners shifted from being the Democratic Solid South for generations to, by the time of Newt Gringrich's 1994 Republican Revolution, being solidly Republican. "Movement" Conservativism beginning with Goldwater and culminating with Reagan was an attempt to bring ideological purity to the Republican Party, and one can see similar attempts by the New Left to bring ideological purity to the Democratic Party, especially around issues of the Vietnam War and minority (including women's) rights. This resulted in the present polarization of partisan identity, such that most Republicans are conservative and most Democrats are liberal, whereas before the 1970's you had liberal Rockefeller Republicans, mainly urban and Northern, and, mainly Southern, conservative Democrats. Issues like Evangelical Christianity, especially Falwell's Moral Majority, didn't really come into the mainstream until the late 1970's and early 1980's.
In the 1950's, there was a tremendous amount of political consensus. Famously, both parties sent out feelers to Eisenhower to see if he'd run on their ticket for president. Both parties were anti-Communist, the Republicans were just a bit more aggressively anti-Communist. The New Deal seemed like a mostly settled issue, and while there was still the anti-New Deal core of the "Old Right", someone like Eisenhower spoke firmly of creating a "progressive Republic Party" (I take that to mean pro-New Deal). The Republicans were more bro-business (Eisenhower got rid of the last Wartime price and wage controls) and the Democrats were a bit more pro-union, but no one was socialist by contemporary European standards and no one was strongly union busting.
I read on Ethel Merman's Wikipedia page that "Merman, a lifelong Republican, was a frequent guest at the Eisenhower White House." I'm just curious what made someone in that era lifelong Republican. Was it most likely the issues around Communism? Or was it related to economic policies? Kennedy's New Frontier and Johnson's Great Society of course sought to extend the New Deal. Adlai Stevenson, the Democratic nominee in 1952 and 1956, only carried the South (despite being a northern liberal "egghead"). Stevenson's ran on a very economic message and Eisenhower's main message seems to have been personal charisma ("I Like Ike"), with what Wikipedia tells me was a message emphasizing "Korea, Communism and corruption" layered on top of that. I get the sense that more Catholics, Jews, and ethnic Whites in general voted Democrat and so more WASPs supported Republicans, but non-WASPs were well represented in the incipient Conservative Movment (William F. Buckley and his brother-in-law L. Brent Bozell, the ghostwriter of Goldwater's Conscience of a Conservative, were both Catholics, and William Safire, may his memory be a blessing, was Jewish).
I'm just curious about what issues voters cared about in the 1950's and early 1960's, and what would lead them to pick one party so strongly over the other when they seem--at least to me--to be fairly similar. Were American politics really so focused on the degree of anti-communism and the relative belligerence of foreign policy, with a quiet consensus on domestic issues and an intraparty split on things like civil rights? Why do we see such a growing Republcian party in the 1940's and 1950's?
2 Answers 2016-02-23
1 Answers 2016-02-23
What is a working definition of Nation as understood in the modern era?
1 Answers 2016-02-23
I saw this image claiming exactly that, and I saw only vague references to the practice being "well documented" without any supporting documentation, so I'm really curious if this is true.
2 Answers 2016-02-23
I believe there was a TIL about the Battle of Alesia a few days ago and it caused me to delve into the world of Caesar and Vercingetorix. I found myself hinging on the existential threat to the culture and history of those defeated by Rome and it appears most of their history, language, and culture were in fact destroyed. I had always assumed all barbaric peoples were involved in the Roman conflict.
Can you tell me what other parts of Europe not affected by the Roman threat were doing during the Gallic Wars, and also, why Caesar did not press to conquer more of Europe?
1 Answers 2016-02-23
These are my grandfather's medals and the only ones I haven't been able to identify. I know he was in the Army: Korean War, WWI and WWII. Any help with these last four medals is greatly appreciated!! http://vibatorium.com/rex/medals.jpg
5 Answers 2016-02-23
To refine the question: When Sulla marched on Rome, was he the first to cross the Rubicon and to March on Rome? Or was Caesar the first to cross the Rubicon and Sulla set the precedent to march on Rome?
Thanks in advance!
1 Answers 2016-02-23
2 Answers 2016-02-23
The episode in question is "Broken Souls", set in October 1944.
2 Answers 2016-02-23
Were they predominantly recruited from small land holding farmers similar to how it was in the republic, city dwelling peasants such as the type of men Marius recruited from, etc? Additionally, is Vegetius' claim that young men of his day were no longer eager to serve in the military true? I.e had it become more difficult for the empire to attract new recruits than in previous centuries based purely upon the eagerness of Roman citizens to serve?
1 Answers 2016-02-23
What in their view made them so distinct or potentially, "Superior" to their fellow German speakers prior to a unified German state?
4 Answers 2016-02-23
It's been fairly well reported that Soviet/Russian cosmonauts did carry firearms, but I can't find anything to confirm whether or not US astronauts did at any point in the past, or do currently. I've heard that some Apollo program astronauts have been asked the question and denied that they were issued any firearms, but the Militarization of Space article on Wikipedia mentions that "United States Astronauts are also provided a firearm for similar use." However, there is no citation with the statement.
1 Answers 2016-02-23
3 Answers 2016-02-23
Not sure if I should save this for Theory Thursday, but here goes.
When I was studying the broader movement towards independence among Hispanic American creoles during the first third of the 19th century, I came across at least three major theories.
The wars in America were part of a larger revolution of Spain overall, triggered by Napoleon's invasion (Spanish historian Miguel Artola takes this position in his book on Spain under Fernando VII).
The war in Spain triggered a series of distinct Revolutions in Hispanic America (I've seen this used by several scholars of Latin Amerca, including one of my professors in Cuba).
That this was all just a Spanish Civil War triggered by Napoleon, nope, no Revolution to be found, nothing to see here (supposedly the position of several Spanish historians, though I haven't read a serious book taking this position).
I've lately begun agreeing more with Miguel Artola's position (as I understood it) but since I don't wade too far into theory I'm sure there is a lot I could learn.
3 Answers 2016-02-23
Title says it all!
2 Answers 2016-02-23
How much rhetoric centered around this point from the Democrats? Were Republicans concerned about his inexperience, especially given the hostile climate with the Soviets? And lastly, what parallels can we draw to Trump's campaign?
1 Answers 2016-02-23
I was doing some research on the Great Seal of the Realm, and noticed that until the Acts of Union under George III, the English or British monarchs had been styled 'of France'. George III was, for example, George III, by the grace of God, of Great Britain, France, and Ireland, King, Defender of the Faith.
After the Acts of Union, he adopted the style we commonly associate with popular monarchies: George the Third, by the grace of God, King of the Britons, Defender of the Faith.
So, why was this claim dropped? I thought any practical claim would have ended after the loss of Calais (even that being tenuous). I know the Jacobites sheltered in France, and I can't imagine the French king being too happy about putting up a pretender to his throne.
1 Answers 2016-02-23
I can find plenty of two player games, but I was wondering if there were any strategy-based games (excluding card games) that existed during the middle ages?
1 Answers 2016-02-23
Previous weeks' Tuesday Trivias and the complete upcoming schedule.
Today’s trivia theme comes to us from /u/cordis_melum!
REPOAST. Today’s a re-run of one of my favorite themes, which is to please share an interesting letter from history. Happy letters, sad letters, sexy letters, mean letters, whatever you like!
Next week on Tuesday Trivia: This one’s a little more esoteric… We’ll be looking for interesting historical examples of Lies to Children.
12 Answers 2016-02-23
