How did various past Western European cultures utilize these spices? Did they combine immeasurably valuable concoctions of spices into dishes resembling Indian curry? Conversely, did common Indian peoples regularly make use of these spices in daily cooking where their prices did not skyrocket due to long-distance trading markups?

So I am reading “History of the ancient world” by Susan Bauer

In it she talks about the first Sumerian cities and towns. So it got me thinking about the night time in those early towns and cities … were the streets lit ?

I am assuming that there would be some sort of lighting in the house but what about the city/town streets ?

For these sorts of small American western towns - ones with a saloon, livery, etc - what kind of hours would the general store have? Was it open basically all day, only for a short amount of time, or did it change depending on each individual store?

Hello all! I hope this question is appropriate to this space. I'm writing a literary piece on three landmarks in American history and have come as far as my layman research will get me. I was hoping for some further insight and some source recommendations for three specific times and events:

One, the relationship between immigrants and the original population around Plymouth. As far as I understand, a recent plague (caused by other European immigrants) had wiped out a village that the newcomers settled into. I've also come to understand that the very religious settlers saw it as an act of God that the population of the new world was wiped out so they could take their place. Is there any more information on this place and time? How did people live? Were the living conditions roughly the same in the old and the new settlements? Were relations cordial? Was there trade? Charity? Did one, so to speak, attend each other's parties? How far away from each other were the settlements? Would it be fair to call them villages? Does one know if the architecture was similar in original vs. immigrant villages?

Two, the Compromise of 1877. In 1877 in Wormely’s Hotel, elected president Rutherford B. Hayes met up with industrialists and politicians and negotiated the withdrawal of all troops and all northern intervention from the Southern states, resulting in the first of a long line of violent and terrible backlashes for the black American population in the South. Hayes, an outspoken humanist and advocate of black rights and a good friend of the black owner of Wormely's hotel, James Wormely, kept his gentleman’s agreement to withdraw all federal military intervention from the South, in spite of 2000 (known) murders and lynchings between the end of the Civil War and 1877. Needless to say, the other end of the bargain was not kept. Another 4000 lives would be taken in the next few years. Who was in this room? What were their relationships? What would have been the core themes of the discussions? What was Hayes' relationship with James Wormely? Did Hayes ever express regret or remorse over this bargain? What was the public reaction? Any telling cartoons from the era?

Three, the scrapping of the interest cap in South Dakota in 1978. In 1978, Governor Bill Janklow of South Dakota singlehandedly in one afternoon scrapped the interest cap in South Dakota. Soon after, the banks moved in. Bill Janklow's chief-of-staff left to become president and CEO of Citibank South Dakota. Citibank committed to expanding its workforce in Sioux Falls and recruiting locals for its financial-management training programs. Is it known how this deal took place? Are there records of meetings between Janklow, his chief of staff, and Citibank? Who was this chief of staff anyway? And on a side note, why was Janklow never charged with the murders of Jancita Eagle Deer and Delphine Eagle Deer?

I hope this is not too out of format! Thankful for any expansions or directions to further sources!

It seems from that time period open carry of a firearm was a common thing for many regular people. Lots of people carried their weapons almost everywhere but nobody cared. Obviously today if you did this, you’d get some scared looks and the police called on you. So what kind of laws and movements led to the current status we have today? Maybe I’ve just seen too many western movies but I interested in how we got here today.

My knowledge of the Cold War and things like the Red scare basically goes to the point of the soviets are communists and we can't have that. Is there any specific reasons why westerners were so scared of communism and the Soviets.?

I have vague ideas about the living conditions in the soviet union and that there was some major atrocities but I do not know the specifics. Were soviet atrocities what started this fear of communism?

I also have a basic idea that roughly pre WWII some western countries had some form of a communist political party, what exactly happened to them?

Is there any books/movies/podcasts/etc. that go more in depth into this question?

Thanks in advance!

I'm thinking of the families, in North America, where men were working hard labor and coming home late covered in dirt during the week and only had one day off which was presumably Sunday, and women were home but didn't travel alone. Given that shops being open on Sundays is relatively recent, how did they manage to go out to larger towns to get things they needed, or even just visit someplace? Did they not do it? Did the men have to take off from work? What about even just taking advantage of the business in their town to go out to eat once in a while, or go to a barber shop? Were certain businesses, like those that sold food, open on Sundays? I'm sure there's something mistaken in my premise that will explain it, but at the moment I'm unclear how men working six days would manage to do anything else.

For reference, the four passages are:

The Two Towers, The King of the Golden Hall:

‘If this is bewitchment,’ said Théoden, ‘it seems to me more wholesome than your whisperings. Your leechcraft ere long would have had me walking on all fours like a beast. No, not one shall be left, not even Gríma. Gríma shall ride too. Go! You have yet time to clean the rust from your sword.’

The Two Towers, The Road to Isengard:

‘My men are weary with battle,’ said the King; ‘and I am weary also. For I have ridden far and slept little. Alas! My old age is not feigned nor due only to the whisperings of Wormtongue. It is an ill that no leech can wholly cure, not even Gandalf.’

The Return of the King, The Battle of the Pelennor Fields:

Then the prince seeing her beauty, though her face was pale and cold, touched her hand as he bent to look more closely on her. ‘Men of Rohan!’ he cried. ‘Are there no leeches among you? She is hurt, to the death maybe, but I deem that she yet lives.’ And he held the bright-burnished vambrace that was upon his arm before her cold lips, and behold! a little mist was laid on it hardly to be seen.

The Return of the King, The Houses of Healing:

So at last Faramir and Éowyn and Meriadoc were laid in beds in the Houses of Healing; and there they were tended well. For though all lore was in these latter days fallen from its fullness of old, the leechcraft of Gondor was still wise, and skilled in the healing of wound and hurt, and all such sickness as east of the Sea mortal men were subject to. Save old age only. For that they had found no cure; and indeed the span of their lives had now waned to little more than that of other men, and those among them who passed the tale of five score years with vigour were grown few, save in some houses of purer blood. But now their art and knowledge were baffled; for there were many sick of a malady that would not be healed; and they called it the Black Shadow, for it came from the Nazgûl.

Please, I want to highlight that I am not a denier here.

I like to look into different sides of the argument as people and I learned that how history is taught is also what it is written and interpreted.

Now the evidence that we have (from what I have gathered) of the existence of the Holocaust are plenty.

Firstly, Hitler's speeches and his Mein Kampf book show many hints of the hatred and scapegoating of Jews.

Next are the anti-Jewish acts that occurred in Germany before they are hunted and killed such as businesses that were owned by Jews were closed and declared illegal, homes and shops of Jewish people were vandalised, synapogues were closed, and Jewish people had to wear tags or labels or the Star of David as a clear indicator.

Then, there are the documents and the places that show the existence of the Holocaust. Auschwitz is the most obvious example and a powerful one. The conditions of the place show how the Jews were treated and the uniform that they wore, and the amount of shoes collected of the ones that were killed and gassed, numbers and tattoes in every one and so on.

The Nuremberg trials are also evidence of the existence of war criminals who used the war effort or had some influence in the Nazi party on the acts that were conducted against Jews and other people that were deemed inferior or the enemy of the Germans.

The sheer number, scale and intensity of it feels unbelievably unreal (I must admit, even I find it hard to swallow that people were and are go to such extreme lengths) but many evidence show that this genocide existed.

Now, I want to show a different side here.

When I hear a revisionists' argument or an argument of an Denialist who wants to question the evidence that was gathered, I also want to look into that argument as well.

Is the evidence actually valid and real? Do the Denialists' evidence and arguments also hold as much validity and merit? Can the science of psychology show that the human species is indeed capable of such extreme acts?

At the same time, I am also puzzled and curious as to why there is this level of confirmation bias about this topic, particularly towards the Holocaust.

What are the factors or the reasonings that explain why some people are inclined to deny the collected evidence or question the actuality of this era?

As there a common theme involved such as paranoia or a certain upbringing or anti-governmental attitudes or imperialistic values?

Why is there such focus on wanting to deny the actions that occurred that were made by those who took part of the Holocaust than for example in other genocides or controversial topics that existed, especially in recent memory such as the Armenian genocide or when Japanese-American citizens were put into concentration camps of their own by America when the latter entered the war?

(please correct me if I am wrong whether the concentration camps of the Japanese-Americans were of the same level of poor quality and poor conditions as those of Nazi Germany)

So, I did a quick Google and learned that stagecoaches traveled at around 10mph. His wife and son were somewhere in Michigan, to calculate I assumed they caught a ride in Chicago, since it's pretty close to the border of Illinois and Michigan and was the last major metropolitan hub before entering the wilderness of the west. So from Chicago to Deadwood is about 950 miles. So, traveling at full speed, it would be around 95 hours. Since the stage coach seemed small and pretty cramped (it was Bullock's wife, her son, and another woman on one bench and 3 other women on the other and they were all touching. It seemed like the seating was similar to the backseat of a sedan) I assume they took breaks for the night and, possibly meals.
How did that work? Did they all set up tents for the night? Was it one tent per person or did people have to share? If they shared, how'd they deal with the fact that the driver and the guy riding shotgun were both men with a coach full of women? How dangerous was this mode of travel? It seems very dangerous to me, 5 women, a little boy, in the wilderness, protected by just 2 men. Was assault/ rape/ murder/ robbery etc. As common as popular culture makes it out to be, and if so, did people accept the risk simply because it was their only option?

in the seems that the peoples described as barbrians by writers from more complexe civilisations had cultures were women we're granted a relatively high level of autonomy. we could cite as exemples the Celts, the Vikings or the first nations of north-america all of wich we're considered barbarians and all graanted more rights to women than their more ''Civilized'' neighbors. why is that so?

When England declared war on Germany for violating Polish sovereignty why was the declaration not extended to Russia when it evaded Poland from the east after the secret alliance with Hitler? Was it not even considered in Parliament?

I'm in a internet argument with someone about the Infantry size of Finland during the beginning of The Winter War. Please help I want to win this worthless argument with a stranger on the internet.

When and where did the age of 18 become a legal threshold to adulthood? And why that age? It just hit me, its sort of an arbitrary number

In the past before dental care and with awful personal hygiene, did people have sex in the same way they do now? Did they find it disgusting?

And (I’m assuming they’re pretty close if our ancestors could cross it) did Russia find the American continent before Columbus or Erickson?