I want to try to grow a small garden with plants grown and used by ancient Romans/other ancient Italic peoples. What sort of plants should I include? And how was each type of plant used in ancient times?

Forgive me if I am being ignorant, but wasn't the American Revolution fought over liberty? Or was that more from a state perspective than a human one?

I was reading a thread in CMV about the duty of the EU to accept migrants, and a lot of points were made about colonisation and how europeans have a debt to many african nations due to the benefits we receive(d) from colonisation at the seeming disadvantage of those colonies. I'm asking this because i'm unsure to what degree Angola, for example (because I have a little more knowledge on its decolonisation that most other african nations), benifitted from Portuguese rule. I'd assume that an Angola in the modern day that was never colonised would most likely not be comparable to the relative civility of Europe.

So, I recently picked up Icon and Minaret: Sources of Byzantine and Islamic Civilization, which has a bunch of translations of Eastern Roman laws, but no corresponding documents for the Ottomans. What were the differences between life among these two empires for the poor folk?

Can you still find them in Egypt? Where have they ended up?

As part of my research for my degree I'm analysing 'guides for dying' from Early Modern England. Two of these are William Perkins, 'Salve for a Sick Man', and Richard Baxter, 'Directions for a Peaceful Death'. Does anyone know of any other similar articles?

EDIT: By Early Modern I mean 15/16/17th centuries, Tudor and Stuart period, English Reformation etc

I understand that it may be quite unsettling to see a silent army when all armies were always trying to make as much noise as possible.

Has there been any records, preferably but not exclusively, from non-Romans? I'm just really curious what their reactions would be. Although if there is a lack of non-Roman sources, if there is any information on what the thinking was behind this tactic would be good too.

I'm reading Patterns in Prehistory by Robert Wenke and Deborah Olszewski, and at one point they mention that by 10,000 years ago human societies were tied together by trade networks. Mainly I'd interested to know what kind of evidence do we have of trading between different groups of people at that time, but more specifically:

• How far back can we find evidence of trade between different groups of people?
• If a settlement is found with items that are not present in the local area, how can it be inferred that they got there as the result of trade as opposed to be carried there by people who may have been nomadic?
• Can any preferences be seen in the kinds of items that were traded? For example ornamental items over practical ones.
• Is there any way to infer how much things were traded for? I mean, 10 of item X were traded for 5 of item y.

German technology in ww2 is commonly seen as this rapid sweep of insane technological achievements and sometimes disastrous failures which caused the state precious resources. Why didn't nazi german stick to what was working and funnel this money mainly into the war effort and not into these new designs which were unproven?

With my first year in a PhD program coming to an end, my advisor and I have determined that I need to do some major catching up on theory over the summer. She gave me a partial list of her favorites and what she thinks I should know, but I'm looking to fill in some of the blanks. I'm hoping you guys can help me out!

Here's my list so far:

• Thomas Kuhn: The Structure of Scientific Revolutions
• Dipesh Chakrabarty: Provincializing Europe
• Morris, ed. Can the Subaltern Speak?
• Max Weber: Economy and Society (recommendations on how to get through this one??)
• Janet Abu-Lughod: Before European Hegemony: The World System AD 1250-1350
• Engels: Origin of the Family
• Michel Foucault: Discipline and Punish (can only find an abridged copy... does that matter?); The Archaeology of Knowledge
• Marshal Sahlins: Historical Metaphors
• Richard White: The Middle Ground

In historiography I have:

• Marc Bloch: The Historian's Craft
• Fernand Braudel: On History

I've checked the book lists for more historiography ones - these were the two most important my advisor recommended, but I'm open to suggestions of really important books.

I'm trying to figure out in which of Bourdeau's books he covers habitas. I found it at one point and can't seem to find it again. Does anyone know which that is?

I'd also like to read up on Wallerstein's version of world-system's theory, but if I'm only going to read one of his books, which one would be best? There are seven with "World Systems" in the title.

Thanks for your help!

I was reading 1776, in which several mentions are made of the success of American privateers, and how some of the strategically questionable decisions made by the British may have been caused by a lack of supplies because of this. How accurate is this view? Were most privateers just American ships outfitted for raiding?

Why did public opinion turn? What were the political processes that repealed prohibition?

I just found out that neither country claims Bir Tawil, and was wondering why that is.

The obvious reasons are that there's nothing and nobody there, and that the borders are a British construct, but is there more to it than that?

1. Which dictators has America supported?
2. In what way has America supported them?
3. What qualifies them as being dictators?

I know its a broad question so let me narrow it down some.

• Was the original premise of U.S. involvement wrong? Primarily that policy makers interpreted a civil war as theater of a wider anti-communist struggle.

• How did military strategists approach the conlict and what were the principal aspects of its failure (or not as the case may be)/

• What lessons were learnt by the military and policy makers?

(hope it isn't too broad)

As I learn about the Soviet Union, I read about several things that seem to contradict the traditional ideals of communism. Mainly the inequality of the civilians. In what other ways did the USSR stray from the traditional communist roots?

As I understand it, a lot of the scientific racism during the 19th centuries and early 20th centuries sought to justify European colonization of places like Africa, the "White Man's Burden" and whatnot. One of the things (if I remember correctly) that a lot of these scholars and "scientists" did was to try to prove that Africans were inferior to white Europeans, incapable of creating "civilization," and ultimately deserving of slavery because of said inferiority.

How did they deal with the archaeological findings of Ancient Egyptian civilization then? After all, if they thought that Africans were inferior and incapable of civilization, how did they explain how these civilizations appeared on the African continent?