A brief reminder to keep discussion limited to 20+ years ago.

If you were paid in silver coins for some job, how did people go ahead if they only wanted to buy something small like some bread or some fruit or wine. Or did they have coins worth as little as a loaf of bread?

[deleted]

What happened to them?

First time posting here so sorry if this isn't the right way to ask a question. My title doesn't properly reflect my question sorry.

My question is who are the Anglo-Saxons. I'm currently watching a fictional show The Last Kingdom on Netflix. As I watched they have repeatedly refereed to themselves as the Saxons. They were fighting the Danes who was during this time fighting against the Kingdom of Wessex.

Why I'm confused is because I always thought the British were native Britons. I understand at a time Rome had invaded and conquered Southern England. Which eventually fell if I'm correct. Were these people that were left not Celts? As I understood the Vikings did invade western England but I did not know that they have settled there and managed to control large parts of England.

Did the vikings really conquer all of England? Are Anglo-Saxons vikings? I'm very confused of English history post Roman occupation.

This is, of course, barring live performances. I'd have to imagine that access to paintings or drawings would be limited to the upper classes, but that's just an assumption.

Would there be something similar to an art gallery or museum before the age of reproducible images?

Edit: I suppose if I had to narrow down a time period and location, I am asking about Europe, no later than the 1200s.

Through out the "Old World" writing systems were adopted by those without writing systems and adapted to their own purpose. The most famous is the Phoenician writing system adopted by the Greeks.

However, through out the Mesoamerican world the most predominant and probably functional writing system was scarcely adopted at all. Wouldn't autocrats and dynasties want a written language to record all their doings?

Didn't the powerful nobility see the power in a written language? Wouldn't exchange between others and the Maya cause the others to question the genius and "magic" of a written system that could convey idea, thought, images into your head from hundreds if not thousands of years ago?

What were the differences between the cultural groups that were so great that some saw no need to adapt a fully functional writing system to their own needs?

Were the Maya jealous of their level of "magic"? I call it magic because historically in other cultures writing was seen as magical and gifted by Gods, I don't know if the Maya shared this, but it is possible that the Maya were too jealous of their writing to share it?

After all, it reinforces the caste-system if the priestly-scribe cast is needed because only they can read and write.

I saw an idea that other cultures were too diverse and so they didn't see the need for a writing system that had no use in their exchanges with neighboring languages, but I disagree with this assessment, for instance in China a near universal origination of writing systems was adopted but in a region equally as linguistically diverse as in Mesoamerica with hundreds of different languages in the Middle Kingdom before it became more unified, not to mention the more distant kingdoms completely unrelated to the Sinic civilization.

Also, a civilization would see the usefulness of writing for its own internal purposes before caring whether or not it could be used in trade or etc.

I'd assume that Shakespeare is learned man, but is there anything alarmingly wrong about how he portrays Venetian culture?

Did the greek poet Homer really exist? Do we have any proof of his existence? If he didn't exist, do we know who wrote the Illiad and the Odissey, and when they were written?

I've just finished reading Machiavelli's The Prince and now I'd like to watch some nice documentaries (or any media really) about Italy around the time the book is concerned with. Things about the Borgias or the Medicis would be good.

Cheers!

I am looking at a series of newspaper articles that discuss crimes against German-Americans and their property. Almost all of these events happen exactly in the year 1933, for some reason. I considered backlash against the German American Bund, but that was only established in 1936. I also considered Hitler becoming chancellor in 1933, but cannot imagine that many Americans knew about what he was doing over in Europe enough to take it out against German-Americans. Does anybody know why 1933 was such a significant year for violence against German-Americans?

I know enough about the practice itself, but for it to crop up in such different periods in Roman history, against different enemies, I'm confused as to how such a specific practice could have become so widespread.

Was "passing under the yoke" actually as common a practice as the histories make it seem? If so, how did it become so prolific, and if not, how does it crop up in so many places?

Japanese food is considerably less spicy and 'hot' than the food that most Koreans and Chinese eat. Obviously there are a number of dishes that are spicy in Japanese cuisine, but as a whole and compared to other East Asian cuisines there are only a few dishes that are spicy. Why is that so?

I was thinking about this and diacritical marks aren't really used in English unless it's a borrowed word. Spanish, French, German, Polish etc all have diacritical marks and they are used quite a lot. Is there are historic reason for this?

History tends to focus on the failures of the Articles of Confederation in early America, which caused the Constitution to eventually be written to replace them.

However, they still were in place and governed for around 10 years, which is still pretty impressive considering the size of the United States as well.

So something had to have been done right during that time...what were the successes of the Articles of Confederation during the very beginning of the United States?

I am aware that there several theories about Hitler surviving after World War 2, the most popular being that he escaped to argentina on a submarine. I saw a website saying DNA samples were taken from what was thought to be Hitler's remains, and the samples did not match him or his wife, Eva Braun. There are also several claims about the intelligence community being aware of this. Are these claims valid or just an attempt to stir up drama? Thanks guys

Wanted to throw this out there to my fellow naval historians and ask if anyone has any recommendations on works regarding the technological and theoretical developments of shipbuilding industries, shipyards, and maritime infrastructure through history. Thanks!

Were they confined to France? Did they not have strongholds elsewhere?

This is something I've been wondering for a while. It seems like Madison had strong federalist beliefs but he would eventually go on to co-found the Democratic-Republican Party with Thomas Jefferson. What was the reason for this?

I fully appreciate why it takes time for an acceptable answer to get posted by a flared user. And I think what would really be helpful to us non-historian users is if there was a way to see if a thread had a qualified answer while browsing. Maybe have OPs mark their thread as answered like other request based subs.

Just a thought.

[deleted]