Hello,

It has been a while since I read Homage to Catalonia but I am interested in knowing how the various anarchist and POUM-related groups in Spain during the 1936-39 Civil War recruited international volunteers and organised themselves cf. the Communist Party-dominated International Brigades. The I.B. appears to have been predominantly led by pro-USSR organisations and individuals so how would an anarchist living in England or Italy or America have got to Spain to fight for the 'right' people?

Thanks!

This magician was a Samaritan who apparently brought his religion successfully to Rome. I'd like to hear more about him. Thank you

After Italy was taken by the Allies, what then happened to the Allied troops? Did they cross the alps? Did they board ships and go around? Did they follow the coast into France?

How did Sparta form and administer the Peloponnesian League? What were the economic, geographic, and religious underpinnings that held it together. Lastly can anyone recommend any good books on the Archaic period and the lead up to the Peloponnesian War?

I know that it provably has to be away in other territories, but what are some other factors and examples?

E.g WWII was a net benefit to the US economy and pulled us out of depression. Vietnam was a huge loss and didn't really gain much (besides scientific research?)

I remember reading somewhere on this sub a while back that with Roman and Greek Paganism, scripture and canon is not so much a concept as it is in the common religions of today, e.g. The Bible is the word of god, and instead it was the traditions and rituals that they held sacred, but otherwise mythological literature was not held to such a standard.

So in the case of Vergil's Aeneid, how did the Roman people (Under Augustus) view the epic poem? Was it just a good piece fiction with a healthy splash of Roman ideals? Was the story of Aeneas after the fall of Troy already well known to the common Roman before its completion? Livy also wrote about this Genesis story in his Ab Urbe Conditum which was ostensibly history to them, wasn't it?

For a genesis story it certainly seems to have its focus on Roman Identity and Rome's supposed ancestry, but at the same time isn't it really a nod off to the Odyssey, which seems somewhat conflicting to the whole Roman Identity theme with its hands in Greek story structure.

Hi, Reddit. Was just wondering as i know a lot about the negatives of colonialism such as torture exploitation, and the consequences of its legacy, if they were any benefits for the average colonised citizen during the colonial period?

I am mainly asking this out of curiosity and lack of understanding, and I chose Rome in particular as it is a good model, but anyone with knowledge on how this was done in other areas please share as well.

An author writes a codex / scroll / etc. For example, Caesar wrote many works including his war commentaries. Once he finished this, how did he go about "releasing" his work? I am aware that in Medieval Europe, the Bible was frequently copied by monks, but how would newly "published" works get distributed or even known about?

Most Romans were not literate, so only the Upper Class would have been able to read, but where would they go to get books? How many books would the average elite Roman have in their own possession? The Great Library of Alexandria existed during Roman times. Was it common for cities to have large collections of written works in public libraries?

Thanks for any info or sources!

*both are land owned by the british *both had a movement to create a country for a particular religious group *both were seperated *both caused significant political and social problems

What are the major differences? Why do some people believe that Israel is an unjust state but we rarely hear about Pakistan?

I thought it was one of the original 13 colonies, no?

Obviously they didn't find any real grapes...

I was reading that the average life expectancy in early modern agrarian countries in Eurasia was around 25-30, but clearly for anyone that has children, unless they have them really young this is going to mean there were a lot of orphans. How did communities or individuals usually cope with this?

Which is to say, were all religions not officially sanctioned by the state treated as badly as Christianity was? And follow-up question, was Christianity treated as badly as is commonly assumed for the 300 some-odd years it remained a minority religion in Rome?

It seems to me that these two elements must be tied together somehow, since it seems logical that a culture founded on the need to consume would lead to different social statuses depending on the level to which you could afford to consume.

Yet I can't seem to find any solid evidence to back this up. Am I wrong in thinking this or am I just not looking in the right direction?