The only specific example I've seen mentioned is that during his reign, people were legally obligated to kneel in his presence.

The first question might sound obvious.. the second one, I wish to know a definite answer.

EDIT: Thanks for all the answers. I appreciate it.

There's no shortage of historical incidents that at least a few people have tried to pin on ergot, some of which seem somewhat plausible (like when people ran around seeing angels for a few hours during the Munster Anabaptist rebellion) and some of which are rather less so (like the Salem Witch Trials, which lasted for months). Is there a historical consensus on the truth of the matter? Has the influence of ergot been overblown?

The Smithsonian just put a few more documentaries on Netflix. There is one in particular that is about the training of the first US spies, trained by Britain, in Canada.

In short, one segment speaks on how an American spy named Frankie Gleason, in the OSS, trained at Camp X. It says he helped Chinese Nationalists retake large swathes of their homeland back from an enormous push by Japan.

If this is true, how come it's not commonly known like other things Allies did in WW2?

Why is our [US] relationship so rough with China these days?

Please note - I'm guessing the banner saying "South America" that is attached to this post is part of the theme in this subreddit this week, but this is not a question about South America. My apologies for any confusion.

Hello all, I am brand new to this sub but I have a question/discussion point I hope you all can answer for me.

A bit of backstory - I have a friend from Austria that I met when she was an exchange student at my high school (I am an American). I was speaking with her about the recent attacks in Paris when she claimed that "America was behind all of it". At first I thought she was just referring to the Islamic State (ISIS), which I know did spawn from US military action in the Middle East, but she went on to claim that the US aimed to profit off of all the wars in Europe and that the US was even responsible for World War II.

Here is how the conversation went:

Her: "Its horrible over here..."

Me: "What is horrible?" (Since she lives in Austria, I wasn't sure exactly what she meant.)

Her: "And did you know? Amerika is behind all of that

All the terror

Terrorists

And bombs

The war in syrien"

(Please excuse her spelling, English isn't her first language.)

Me: "Indirectly, yes"

Her: "Yes"

Me: "Isis started as a result of the war on terror after 9/11"

Her: "Just that usa can make profits of all the wars in europe"

Me: "I've heard that theory but I don't know that it's completely true

I know that one of the main reasons for US involvement in Iraq was for oil, but so far as Europe goes idk"

Her: "Did you know that the usa is fault of the world war 2? Usa sent hitler some letters and told him what to do. Just that they make peofits cause of our war. Lending us money to rebuild all the cities and stuff. And then they making profits again and blablabla"

Me: "Where did you hear that? I don't believe that"

Her: "Sure they dont tell anybody in usa But they find out"

Me: "Did you know that Nazi Germany tried to make an alliance with Mexico?"

Her: "Its detected"

Me: "The British intercepted the message and notified the US And the other allies, of course"

Her: "Yes But behind all of that, usa is fault of that Of all of the wars in europe nearly"

Me: "I would have to see definitive proof from reputable sources before I believed that"

Her: "There arr reputable cources!!"

Me: "What are they?

Actually, that message to Mexico from Germany was part of WWI, not WWII. I got mixed up a little, haha

It was called the 'Zimmerman telegram'"

I think you all can see my doubt. I'm not saying it couldn't have happened, but that I've never heard anything that would prove it. The whole thing sounds a lot like a conspiracy theory to me, but I thought it would help clarify things for my friend and I if I asked and got some evidence one way or the other.

I asked my friend for evidence of her claims but she has yet to respond, and I'll update the post if she does.

Basically my question to you all is this: Is there any evidence that the US was responsible for all the European wars and telling Hitler what to do as my friend claims, or is she dead wrong, as I have been assuming? Please back up any claims with reputable sources.

Thank you.

• First Edit - Clarity

• Second Edit - Added entire conversation between her and I

I'm looking for a text transcription of the George Washington papers in order to search. If there is a resource online that includes a search option that's great, but even just a text version would be great. Any help is appreciated.

By the early 1980s, Costa Rica had devastated its natural rainforest with an incredible rate of ongoing deforestation. But by the end of the decade, it had cut the deforestation rate by more than half, and would drop it a whopping 80% in the next five years.

What political/economic and cultural changes made this possible?

I was studying International Relations since August in college, and although I thought I would love the course, I didn't like it. Because of various reasons, I left the course this month. I love history, politics and geopolitics. I was studying International Relations in order to work in another country someday doing something related to conflict analysis and perhaps specialize myself as a terrorism analyst. My question is: getting my history degree, what are my chances to find a job outside my country and to specialize myself in conflict/terrorism analysis (is that possible)? Maybe I have a wrong perception that if you have a History degree your future is to be a professor (my mom is graduated in history and she lives now as a secretary), at least here in Brazil, but I have another plans, and I don't know what to do. I'm sorry if these are stupid questions, but I really want to know this, please. Thanks!

Hello history buffs,

I'm a German, living in Germany and my new room mate is the German born son of Turkish immigrants (he strongly identifies with Turkey I think and is a moderately devout muslim). We made friends quickly and recently the topic fell upon the Armenian genocide. I came to learn that he doesn't believe there had been a genocide.

How would you recommend me convincing him otherwise? Where to start?

Prior to our conversation the only thing I knew was that it is a controversial topic. I had read some sources on WWI before which mentioned the controversy in passing, but never anything with this as a main topic. What I remember from that is that the Armenian had been forcibly relocated for fear of revolt and during that relocation many/most died under not quite kosher circumstances.

Now his position is that there have been violent deaths in the area where the modern borders of Turkey to the south and east are, with the victims being Armenian women and children killed by people who could not have been Turkish men at arms since they were fighting the war on the coastal borders of the Ottoman Empire.

The Middle East during the Middle Ages seemed like a decent place during the Islamic Golden Age. What happened?

[deleted]

During my lifetime, the idea of a Martian population has been considered so unlikely as to be ruled out.

However, looking back at fictional works, such as early Twilight Zone episodes, or Ray Bradbury's "The Martian Chronicles", the idea seems to be treated as entirely plausible. At least, possible enough to support speculative fiction without relying on some "alternate universe" device.

At what point did the popular understanding of Mars rule out this sort of speculation? Were there particular exploration missions that led to a large shift in public consciousness?

I did see the thread entitled, "Why did Star Wars become such a cultural phenomenon in 1977?," but I really want to focus on things particular to U.S. culture and the Star Wars phenomenon.

Hey guys.

Quick question from anyone that knows the answer. To what extent was the agenda of the Nazi's religious?

This is probably a very vague question with a very nuanced answer. At the height of hitler is probably a good point to set as parameters.

People have said that history is written by the writers (ie. literate class), but now with a broad segment of the public literate and able to disseminate information broadly through the internet and mass media, will this make the work of future historians easier or more difficult? For instance, is the study of Mao-era china (when literacy was fairly common among the entire population) easier than studying republican or late-qing china? Obviously this is not an ideal example because of the vast cultural and political differences, but it's an example that came easily to me.

I'm pretty ignorant on the subject of the Iraqi army, and I'd love to know more about how it was under Saddam's rule. How effective was it compared to other armies of the Middle East, and how did it compare in size and/or strength?

I'll ask this part separately, since it might break the 20 year rule (feel free to ignore this if it does), but how does the Gulf War-era Iraqi army compare to the new Iraqi army prior to ISIS?

I know that Syrian history is full of war and atrocity- Crusades, Assyrians, etc. As a matter of demographics per capita, when was the last time that Syria experienced a level of warfare, death, and human displacement that is comparable to this? As a related question, was there ever a part of the French or Ottoman periods of dominion over Syria that was as bloody or as terrible as the current war?

I've been told by Arabic speakers that someone from Egypt would have difficulty communicating with someone in Syria. Is there a historical reason why his has happened to the Arabic language?