1 Answers 2014-10-21
Or was it? Certainly the age of imperialism wasn't the only time European powers were keen to expand their influence. The New World colonized and fought over shortly after discover - why not Africa?
1 Answers 2014-10-21
I need to interview a historian by computer, or through e-mail, about Cleopatra for a History Fair Project. Can I do this here?
1 Answers 2014-10-21
1 Answers 2014-10-21
1 Answers 2014-10-21
I was casually glancing over the Group of Soviet Forces in Germany wiki and read that some Soviet/Russian forces remained until 1994. This is obviously years after both German unification and the collapse of the USSR.
In what capacity did Soviet/Russian forces remain after German unification and the collapse of the USSR?
1 Answers 2014-10-21
Previous weeks' Tuesday Trivias and the complete upcoming schedule.
October is American Archives Month! And what better way to celebrate than though a Tuesday Trivia theme. While I am an American Archivist, of course this theme is not limited to just American archives, because that would be pretty boring.
So please share:
Next week on Tuesday Trivia: The archival fun continues with a primary source theme, which I haven’t done in a looong time but these are usually fun. The primary source of choice is Official Records! Blow the dust off your favorite snippets from a census, parish registers, or Assyrian archives, because it’s time to show the people there’s gold in these seemingly-boring records.
7 Answers 2014-10-21
I was browsing through the Wikipedia pages of a few English monarchs and I found this on the page of Henry IV:
Henry's coronation, on 13 October 1399, may have marked the first time following the Norman Conquest when the monarch made an address in English.
What language were the addresses made in before that? Does the language still exist? Are there any modern languages that sound similar/what modern language/s is it closest to?
Thank you.
Edit: I did some more digging. Did they speak this language?
2 Answers 2014-10-21
So, if you participated in the AH user census, there's a chance you left a comment or a request on the free comment box. Yes, we did read all of those, and while we're going to collate the data and come up with a statistical report for you soon, I wanted to post something responding to the most common feedback from users.
The last thing I want is to be too self-congratulatory here - there is always room for improvement and reform, and areas that need to be addressed. And we have to be aware of the bias and self-selection in the survey.
Still: Variations on “the mod team is doing a great job, keep it up” are, by far, the overwhelming majority of comments on the survey. My informal count suggests that comments saying “don’t listen to all those people telling you the rules are too strict” outnumber comments saying “the rules are too strict” at least 10 to 1.
While we try to curate the system and maintain high standards of content, we don’t dictate what content gets posted, for the most part! If you want to see some neglected topics get more love, you can always post your own questions, browse the new queue and upvote posts that interest you, or answer questions on those subjects that you’re qualified to answer. If you know an expert in that field, nag them until they agree to participate in our community, then make them message us about an AMA.
We got a lot of requests asking to see more of virtually all subjects. We’ll be tallying them up to identify areas that people feel are underserved and try to do more AMAs and such, but remember that the bulk of the content is made by you, the community.
We agree, but sadly the link flair system on reddit is woefully limiting and it wouldn’t really help. If it was designed as a tagging system, we would be all over it, but since each link must have only one flair, it’s difficult to apply consistently, especially for users tagging their own questions. For example, if someone were to ask, “Who were the political backers of the Slave Trade Act? What was their reputation in the colonies?”, is this a question about European history or North American history? Is “Why did the American film industry relocate to Hollywood?” about North American history or Art History?
Even AskScience runs into this problem, and here our different specialisations overlap even more than theirs do. We're going to investigate better ways of doing this, and we're always hopeful for better organisational features on reddit, but we can't really promise anything.
Reddit does a bad job of explaining it, but when you report a comment or link, that gets put on the mod queue. Moderators on the subreddit the link/post was on can see it, and then choose whether to approve it or remove it. It doesn’t remove the comment, it’s not a “super-downvote,” and it doesn’t call the reddit admins. So don’t be afraid to report things; at worse, it takes us a second to approve something, and ideally we try to look at all the comments and links posted to the sub anyway.
Have you read our rules? Then congratulations, you’re more than qualified to report things. Here’s your reporting stick. Use it liberally! As long as you're reporting in good faith, there's no harm in reporting something that we end up choosing to approve.
That's just a sign you're not browsing the new queue enough.
So do we, and we understand it’s disappointing for the original poster. But our assumption here is that you posted on AskHistorians because you wanted an expert to weigh in. We’re don’t think things are improved by giving people the “consolation prize” of a low-effort answer. If you’d like to see more answered threads - browse the new queue, upvote threads that interest you, and try to convince experts you know to join us!
So do we! We’ve asked the admins to fix the way reddit displays the number of comments in a thread so it no longer counts deleted comments, but apparently it’s difficult and will take time to implement.
Uh, yeah. So as it turns out we never became a default, and we don’t plan on ever becoming one. We were asked, yes, but turned it down. It seems a lot of you guys thought we did, though.
We don't want to be a default subreddit. We're commited to growing this community organically by adding users who are interested in us, specifically; we feel like the massive influx of contextless posting caused by being a default would be detrimental to the quality of the subreddit.
Reddit has no way of doing that, other than maybe replying to those answers pointing out they break the rules. And ultimately, we wouldn’t even if we could; the last thing we want is to see people get highly upvoted or linked to for posting subpar content. We don’t want people to break the rules to start with, and not deleting those posts would encourage them to do so.
That empty box on the "Submit a New Post" page can be daunting. The important thing to remember is that this sub is about answering the questions from out community no matter what their level of knowledge about a subject. Sometimes what seems like a very basic question can actually turn out to be the start of an in-depth discussion. Remember that the few rules we have about questions are not there to punish anyone for asking stupid questions (No such thing) but to encourage good content.
Sometimes not, though. So if you find your posts are routinely going unanswered, or even getting downvoted (despite that fact that we disabled the downvote button ಠ_ಠ), you can always send us a modmail. Collectively and individually, we've looked at a lot of questions. We can probably give you at least a few pointers on how to narrow down a broad question or broaden up a very narrow one.
We do reserve top-level comments for the use of people who are confident in their expertise, so don't feel bad if you don't feel up to it - I and many flaired users/members of the mod team make very few top level comments ourselves; even those of us who are historians or experts are only able to comment on a minority of threads.
Keep in mind, you're always free to ask ancillary/follow-up questions, or make more general (Serious) comments. And of course we have threads such as Friday Free-for-All which aren't subject to those controls.
So do we. Sadly, we have no control over it, but you’re always free to ask the admins for better search features. Meanwhile, I will direct you to our FAQ. Also, some tips for getting better searches:
We are! It's going to take some time, as updating such a huge bibliography is a mammoth undertaking, but we are going over it and reviewing everything.
I can read the deleted comments. Trust me, you’re not missing anything. And while this was a common request, it's still a minority view among our user base by a significant margin.
If you actually believe that I would kindly direct you to check out the rest of reddit first, then get back to us. /r/AskReddit, /r/History, and /r/AskHistory all have different moderation styles you could check out. Among survey respondents, this is an extreme minority view.
Zhukov, please stop replying to our own surveys.
We’re actually working on developing our own cryptocurrency, backed by a combination of well-written answers and Yishan-FunBux.
7 Answers 2014-10-21
I've always wanted to know this. If they had a likely spot, but it was too shallow would they try and dredge it? How? What was done to create ports and harbors before the advent of modern technology?
2 Answers 2014-10-21
and when was the last time the challenge was accepted? hard to believe any would actually ever be accepted. i was listening to a lecture on youtube about the paris peace conference and the professor mentioned that someone challenged someone to a duel during the conference. any truth to that?
1 Answers 2014-10-21
In the game Crusader Kings 2, Norse characters are able to sacrifice prisoners and slaves in a blót. Did this happen in real life, or was it only animals that were sacrificed?
1 Answers 2014-10-21
15 Answers 2014-10-21
There are a number of reasons why I believe that the elite who claim to have been extremely pious, were in fact pandering to the religious people.
Literacy rates at the time were particularly low in the poorer classes which meant that they were unable to read the Bible independently. This left the church with significant influence over religion. I believe that one of the causes for the reformation was the idea that people should have a more personal relationship with god; rather than the church, so this appears to be supported.
The concept of Heaven and Hell has clear uses as a political device to control the people, and was conceived in the middle ages by the church.
Before the printing press, the scribes at churches who rewrote manuscripts and tomes were not permitted free thinking and open debate in monasteries was prohibited.
The divine right of Kings relied on the fact the king was a pious man, so to assure a strong powerbase it was somewhat necessary to say you were religious. Henry of Navarre converted to Catholicism in ?1594? due to political pressure so this is an example of using religion for political gain.
The fact is that during these times the churches paid little tax and held incredible wealth. Combined with the fact we know that the popes of the times were not as pious as they claimed, iirc one of them contracted syphilis, complements the theory that they were pretending to be more religious than they were.
In ancient times you had philosophers such as Epicurus who 'saw through' religion, so it's not as if atheism was an entirely new invention. I suggest that these ideas were snuffed out by the church so that they could enjoy the power that they held.
There are countless examples of flattery and exaggeration when describing the actions or attributes of kings. Perhaps they exaggerated the religious fervor of Kings also.
Pluralism and Absenteeism are common grievances of bishops, see the French Revolution, and show how the church was not exactly, 'efficient'. Does anyone have any information on why exactly the Catholic Church was seen as corrupt?
The use of missionaries and religion itself were used as excuses for the conquest of the new world and unexplored territories. We can see here it is a political device and can therefore suggest it can be done for other purposes. The common folk saw it as the converting of the savages so that they might go to heaven rather than the murder and conquest of innocent people.
I'm not really very knowledgeable in the subject and would love to learn more about it. Even if anyone has some further reading I could do to learn about this I would highly appreciate it.
3 Answers 2014-10-21
3 Answers 2014-10-21
Is there a secret service counterpart to Clausewitz?
Let's say you've got to caluminate some notorious nay-sayer or to render the mom of some bomb-throwing anarchist more coöperative - do you rely on the local, autochtonous, tradition? Are your measures invented anew every time? Would your foreign colleagues understand your jargon? Do you even have your special literature or do you rely on militaria and on criminology classics instead?
1 Answers 2014-10-21
i saw this study. As I have an ecological viewpoint, the disappearance of jobs like mailman and telemarketeer sounds like a succession phenomenon (other jobs will arise). Has there been similar unrest in the past? Have there been similar scientific studies?
1 Answers 2014-10-21
I'm referring to the period after the land bridge disappeared, of course.
1 Answers 2014-10-21
1 Answers 2014-10-21
Before someone asks, yes, I have been playing a lot of Dynasty Warriors lately.
Anyway, I get the impression Lu Bu is a sort of semi-mythical character, in that we're pretty sure he actually existed, but also pretty sure he wasn't some godlike berserker who slew men by the thousands.
What is actually known about him? What is myth and what is true?
As a related question, how accurate is The Romance of the Three Kingdoms considered as an actual historical work? I understand that it was written well after the fact and is somewhat mythologized, but to what extent?
3 Answers 2014-10-21
Hi, AskHistorians. The other day I stumbled upon this article titled "Why History Should Replace Economics in the 21st Century".
Here are some statements from the article. (Some quoted from the book that the article is about.)
I'm curious about how correct are the factual parts presented here. Were historians really advisers to policy makers. Were they really "replaced" by economists in that time period, coinciding with that shift in the field of history?
Also, I'm wondering if that view about economics (/economists) is prevalent in historians. I must admit that I'm a bit annoyed by that view. (I'm not an economist in the academic sense, but it was my field of education.)
2 Answers 2014-10-21