We have a book list here, but we don't have a list of must read journal articles. While a book will clearly give more depth journal articles are shorter and more available to people who have less free time or access to a quality library. I live in a small town and don't have convenient access to a good public library, but I can still access websites that provide journal articles through the university I attend. Please provide a list of must-read journal articles that are available to the public or people who have access to university subscriptions below.

What was the state and nature of Chinese military forces during the 17th and 18th centuries, during the early to middle periods of the Qing Dynasty?

Were Chinese soliders in this period mostly tribal Manchu levies, or were these professionals paid a salary?

How common were firearms and what kinds of firearms were in use? How about artillery?

Were the armies of the period mostly non-Han, or were there large numbers of Han serving under Manchu overlords? Can a comparison be drawn to the armies of the 30 Year War in Europe, where the "Swedish" or "Austrian" armies would have a few native commanders and be filled out by massive levies of Germans, Finns, Croats, and Czechs?

I know there's probably too many questions here, but I'm trying to find some decent sources for understanding the Chinese military forces in use during the Qing conquest and the various subsequent frontier wars of the 18th century. These questions were triggered by watching some modern Chinese "historical dramas" on Netflix and being struck by how anachronistic the technology and social systems seemed to my modern eyes. I'm not sure how much of that is just my unfamiliarity with this period, and how much of it is "Hollywood History", Beijing-style.

talking about arrow heads like the log bodkin which wraps around the outside of the shaft, not heads like the saxon heads that have a tang. i can't see any indication of nails having been used and surely they weren't simply glued on, but i can't seem to find anything on what keeps the friken arrow head from just falling off the shaft.

I'm curious since fighting with a spear one-handed seems to be rather awkward, especially if it has a heavy head (as I understand it, heavy counter-weights like the ancient Greeks used were not very common). Conversely, a heavy throwing spear would theoretically have far more penetration potential than either an arrow or a sword thrust, and if used as a shock weapon during a charge it wouldn't particularly need much range or accuracy.

Unfortunately I don't have that interesting of a motive. This really came up from reading Will and Ariel Durant's Dual Autobiography. Durant has been a mild idol of mine for a while, and is one of the few writers/historians I enjoy returning to again and again - but I was relatively shocked when I found out that he, 27, fell in love with Ariel when she was a student of his - at 14. That sort of thing struck me as insane, but the last thing I want to do is to go into the absurdity I felt.

Of course, certainly this is still a custom in parts of the world, and, naturally, they were different times - but I'd like to understand it better to try and understand Durant a little better - I suppose that could be my thesis - I'd just like a bit more perspective.

I apologize that this was such a difficult thing to phrase. I'm not trying to point the fact out as some terrible thing - again, I'd just like to understand the customs better. This post may even be a knee-jerk response, that there might not be much more perspective to gain than "different times, different cultures." Still, I'd be curious if anyone has something to offer. Thanks in advance!

I'd imagine that conversation/speech would have pretty awkward...

I want to know when and how Jews came to be seen as "white" by American society. I know this has been asked before here, but I'm unsatisfied by answers such as "ultimately they were accepted by other whites." There is clearly something more complicated going on here. If you asked anyone in my (Jewish) family if they are white, they would say yes, they are "white," as in, "not black, hispanic or asian." But they still have a strong sense of Jewish identity as distinct from mainstream white American culture. I often find myself in a situation where someone with a surname like Taylor or Thompson says I'm white, and I say, "Yeah, but not the way that you're white."

On the other hand, it seems Jews do observe some of the same race taboos in regards to blackness as do other whites. As an example, intermarriage between Jews and non-Jews is more acceptable these days, but between Jews and blacks, it would be far more controversial (at least among the older generation). This from the same group of people who understands that when conservative pundits talk about "the white race," they aren't talking about us.

This question has also been asked here about Italians and Irish, but there's the same problem. Most Italian and Irish Americans, even if they have been assimilated for generations, recognize themselves as white but still have a sense of their heritage as unique, whereas for the descendants of English, German, and Scots-Irish immigrants they self-describe as "white" and "American." It's like "whiteness" is a label that any upwardly mobile middle class ethnic group can claim, but "white culture" really only refers to English Americans, Scots-Irish Americans, German Americans, and may refer to Jews, Italians, Irish, Greeks, Armenians, etc as the situation demands.

So why do Jews self-identify as white, why do other whites recognize Jews as white, and does any of this have anything to do with ethnic identity or just class?

I am looking for sources that touch on the quality of life of peoples in Western Europe as Roman influence receded in the 5th and 6th centuries both before and after these areas were independent of Roman control, as well as how they were effected by the Roman bureaucracy while it existed.

I am looking to discover how exactly quality of life was altered as Roman territory gradually receded around the age of Justinian.

I know there was only one large battle fought within Scotland between the Bonnie Prince's troops and English troops before Charlie took his forces over the drink, as well as some bloodless or small casualty conflict between Scottish clans over various castles, and a few skirmishes while Charlie assembled his forces, plus some posturing around Edinburgh, but were there any forts or outposts held by the British within the Highlands? If so, did the English abandon them or were there scuffles concerning these outposts?

Did the British make any concerted effort to police the Highlands by England personal in the years before the Bonnie Prince landed, or in the months between Charlie landing at Eriskay and the battle at Prestonpans? It is my understanding that the Independent Highland Companies were made up entirely of Loyalist Scots. Were they commanded by Englishman or were English soldiers within their ranks?

Thanks much.

Hi all. I'm sorry if this is a silly question but I am currently reading Alastair Horne's The Fall of Paris, and am slightly confused as to the purpose of Trochu's siege preparations. I feel like I'm missing something obvious, but hadn't the war been lost decisively by France by Sedan at the latest? Was this not as clear to the French government in 1870 as it is today? Given the military situation following the first six weeks of the war, preparing for a siege seems like an exercise in futility, only serving to prolong the war and cause unnecessary suffering for the population of the city.

The use of low temperature, top fermentation brewing techniques that make lager weren't developed until the 19th century. Obviously, however, places like Bavaria and Bohemia had been brewing beer for centuries before that. What would that beer have tasted like?

I recently listened to two songs, "The Fighting 69th" and "We'll Fight for Uncle Sam" both of which describe Irish heritage regiments/soldiers in the American Civil War. Considering that many Irish immigrated to the United States less that 25 years before the start of the war, what rhetoric was used to inspire them to take up the cause of a country that was new to them? And what where the thoughts of the Irish soldiers themselves?

This might be going into the realm of what if, but hopefully not.

Was the fall of South Vietnam primarily a result of overwhelming North Vietnamese military power or strategic mismanagement by leadership in the South?

Or to put it a different way. Did the ARVN have any chance of holding back the North Vietnamese attacks in 75?

In the year of our Lord 2015 the Grand Council of /r/AskHistorians Moderators, beset on all sides by the powers of plagiarism, soapboxing, and joke comments, rallied the banners for a Mod Congress. Each spoke, with eloquent prose and verse, in speeches too stirring and verbose to detail here. After measured deliberation, the esteemed Grand Council of Moderators determined to bestow the honor of modship on three proven defenders of the realm.

• /u/jschooltiger, Master Shipbuilder and Warrior Poet of the British Navy

• /u/The_Alaskan, Gatekeeper to America’s Last Frontier and Redeemer of Seward’s Folly

• /u/Polybios, Magistratus of Roman Imperium and Sovereign Defender of the Dutch Republic

These wise scholars now devote themselves to the service of /r/AskHistorians, the deletion of sub-par comments, and the banning of trolls.

Long may they reign!

Come, let us honor them!