[deleted]

The argument, as I recall, is that Irish linen provided a suitable replacement for cotton in English textile manufacturing, and thus substantially reduced the market for cotton. Is this really accurate? Did this also significantly effect fashion and style as well?

I assume much of Polynesia, especially places like Hawaii, New Zealand and Easter Island, would have been populated by the descendants of just a handful of pioneer settlers who sailed there from faraway islands just over 1000 years ago, which would surely have resulted in a population of very low genetic diversity barely more than that of the inhabitants of, say, Tristan da Cunha or Pitcairn Island (or, at the very most, Iceland). If they do however have a relatively high genetic diversity, how would that have been maintained? On the flipside, if they do indeed have low genetic diversity, is there a high incidence of diseases related to inbreeding like those seen in places like Tristan da Cunha?

Apologies for the long post, I'm trying to ask several questions in one go in as concise a manner as possible.

The natural surroundings of Chicago obviously have played a large role in allowing it's Economy to thrive. (well maybe not recently) Are there any Natural reasons behind it's growth? Other than the obvious Chicago river, meatpacking industry, and grain.

I am currently writing a paper on the Reifenstahl/Sontag-defined Fascist aesthetic in Nazi state-sponsored and/or state-endorsed music for trumpet (and hopefully whatever counter-aesthetic that might have produced in, say, Hindemith, Stravinsky, Dahl, etc), and the link is, of course, Josef Goebbels' Symphony of Propaganda (I am using the rubric from Jowett & O'Donnell book "Propagation and Persuasion" to define, in rough terms, what this means). Of course, applying Sontag's Fascist aesthetic, which originated in film and photography, to music is a challenge, so my thought is to use Goebbels as a more concrete starting point. I'd really like to stick as close as possible to speaking about music in terms of fascist aesthetic, but it is important that fascist aesthetic and Goebbels are fairly well-connected. What problems might there be with this approach?

This research is important to me because of course artists (and everybody else) fled Nazi Germany in droves, and I think as time goes on we will start to see some clarity in style between refugee artists in the 30s and 40s and the ongoing Syrian refugee crisis. I think we can learn a lot about what it means to be a refugee and how to deal with this as a society with art from both eras.

For example, did Van Gough just sit down one night and paint Starry Night?

I know there are groups / organizations that "hunt" for Nazi war criminals, but these organizations mean to exact justice via the law.

I'm wondering if there have been any, many, famous or not cases that an individual or group hunted down specific Nazis, found them, and took their own revenge.

It seems like this must have happened, but I can't find any thing about it.

I'm in Kansas and they play the importance of bleeding Kansas so much that I believe it was too. However I'm wondering if civil war historians mention it as the beginning or just more proof of the hostilities leading up to the war.

It is commonly known that people tend to use history to legitimize their own interests and shape public opinion. I'm curious if anyone can recommend a good book where the author delves into how history has been used as an ideological and political weapon.

Thanks!

I'm curious what factors led to it.

I thought I heard that a random conventional bombing raid in northern Japan by usa aircraft was mistaken as Russian warplanes by the Japanese. And that the Japanese were terrified by the possibility of invasion by the Russians even more than the 2 nuclear bombs on hiroshima and nagasaki (which Japan was supposedly willing to weather/withstand).

Is this true? Did Japan fear Russia participating in the occupation of Japan so much that this made them surrender where nukes did not?

Thanks

So I've been rereading Bernard Cornwell's Sharpe series, and as a Canadian living in the U.S. for most of my life, my experiences with British history have been somewhat lacking due to the American school system. Essentially, I hear lots about the Horse Guards, and how they are supposedly in control of the army. But other times, it's the politicians, and when I went to Wikipedia to try and figure it out, I learn the Horse Guards were a noble cavalry regiment. So, what are the Horse Guards? Thanks for the help!

I just finished listening to the podcast about Mesoamerican sacrifice and was curious as to why the Mesoamericans have huge cities lined with gold and jewels everywhere, with huge populations and armies when the northern Native Americans acted more nomadic and had very small numbers.

I'm trying to educate myself about the situation in Europe from the 19th century up to the outbreak of WWI, mainly from a foreign policy perspective - the relations between the Great Powers and etc, but I can't seem to wrap my head around about what Austria-Hungary was trying to.

I'm specifically talking about something like 1870-1890, hopefully some of you understand more than I do...

The Qing required the assistance of the French and British to defeat the Heavenly Kingdom. Why didn't the west help the Heavenly Kingdom who were fellow Christians, and also pushed many more western/liberal ideas?

It's my understanding that the idea of a genie comes from the Islamic concept of the Jinn but where does the "three wishes" that's so pervasive in popular culture come from?

I remember my grade 10 history teacher telling me about how Britain entered into WWI by a late medieval agreement with Belgium, that triggered once Belgium was invaded by Germany. I find no such alliance, unless someone wants to interpret the Treaty of London in such a way.