Hello Ask History!
I am looking to write an article, however, i need sources and texts. Does anybody know a webpage filled with sources from especially the 19th and 20th century? Thanks in advance.
6 Answers 2014-09-08
Other areas/time periods in history are fine too.
1 Answers 2014-09-08
Look at this map - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lithuania#mediaviewer/File:LithuaniaHistory.png .
What events led to such drastic changes in territory?
3 Answers 2014-09-08
What caused the decline of the British aristocracy? What are they doing now?
3 Answers 2014-09-08
Didn't they worry even during the sengoku jiddai of a western nation invasion?
A sub question is there a link to Tokugawa Ieyasu's rules or guidelines on how his heirs should rule?
1 Answers 2014-09-08
1 Answers 2014-09-08
I understand factory workers weren't paid well, so let's say we're talking about upper low/lower middle class workers who had the capacity to save up a bit. What's the best investment he could have made to provide for his family with 1,000 rubles, 5,000 rubles and 10,000 rubles? Property, certain machines? Bonds or shares?
2 Answers 2014-09-08
Historians often comment on the over-hyping of the middle-ness of the Middle Ages, saying that they were not simply an interlude in the history of civilization between Rome and the modern era. Is this popular perception due to Renaissance historians who argued for their own exceptionalism in the revival of Western Civilization?
2 Answers 2014-09-08
1 Answers 2014-09-08
I've been reading up on the Roman Empire recently and was wondering, what exactly made them the Mediterranean super power they were at their zenith? so much so that the Ottoman Empire, Holy Roman Empire and Nazi Germany (Third Reich?) all styled themselves as the inheritors to the Roman throne? As it seems they seemed to get defeated a lot from my perspective (in wars such as the various ones with the Samnites, Carthage in the early punic wars and the Germanic peoples in battles such as the one at Tuetoberg forest)
2 Answers 2014-09-08
4 Answers 2014-09-08
Developing a board game set in Amsterdam during the Dutch Golden Age. Everything is coming together - trade, world events, state and provincial politics, but I'm having trouble finding much about politics at the city level.
I've been looking around online, and the most I can find is that Amsterdam in the first half of the 17th century was governed by a merchant oligarchy of "regents". This article from UNCP names the offices of sheriff, burgomaster, alderman, and city councilor, but doesn't go into much more detail than that.
I'm curious to know what the structure of the oligarchy was like. Who was in charge? Was there a city charter or official document which laid out how everything was to be organized and conducted, or was it more informal and ad-hoc? What was a burgomaster or alderman, and what were they responsible for? How did the city government answer to the States of Holland or the States-General?
Any books you might recommend?
Thanks!
EDIT: Just in case anyone finds this thread someday and is interested, I found a source of information in this digitized copy of Modern History Vol. II by Thomas Salmon, 1745. I'm not sure how much had changed in Amsterdam by the time this was written, but it seems to match up with the UNCP article.
Page 164 is particularly helpful:
Senate:
The sovereign power of this city is lodged in six and thirty Senators who continue members of this assembly for life and when one or more of them dies the remaining Senators elect others in their room the people having no share in the nomination or choice so that as Sir W Temple observes this is far from being a popular government at this day though it might be so esteemed an hundred and fifty years ago when the Senators were chosen by a majority of the principal Burghers who were about that time wheedled to transfer their right of election to the Senate and their example was followed by the rest of the towns of the province who differ in little else but the number of their Senators
Burgomasters:
The Senate elects the deputies to be sent to the States of Holland and appoints the chief Magistrates of the city namely the Burgomasters and Eschevins who are said to resemble the Lord Mayor and Aldermen of London The Burgomaster's are four in number of which three are chosen annually one of them always remaining in office two years but the three last chosen are stiled the reigning Burgomasters for the year and preside by turns after the first three months for so long after a new election the Burgomaster of the preceding year presides in which time the new ones have an opportunity of being instructed in the forms and duties of their office It is by a majority of such persons in the Senate as have been Burgomasters or Eschevins that the new Burgomasters are chosen and these represent the government of the city on all occasions and dispose of all inferior offices that fall during their administration they issue all money also out of the treasury for the publick service and may properly be looked upon to have the executive power as the whole senate have the legislative They have the inspection also of all the publick buildings and fortifications about the city and direct them to be repaired or improved as they fee occasion.
Aldermen:
The Eschevins or Aldermen constitute a court justice in every town There are nine in of Amsterdam of whom seven are chosen an J c two of the preceding year remaining in a double number of candidates being no by the Senate the Burgomasters have of those that hall serve and they are sole in all criminal cases but in civil there lies appeal to the court of Justice of the province the thing in dispute be of a considerable value they never pronounce sentence of death first communicating the matter to the but when they have complied this form they proceed to give judgment and are not obliged to be determined the Burgomasters opinion.
Others:
The Officers subordinate to these supreme Magistrates are 1: The Treasurer who receives and issues all money arising from the revenues of the city The Scout or Sheriff who is conservator of the peace apprehends criminals and sees sentences of the courts of Justice put in execution 2: The pensioner who is a person well versed in the civil law and the customs of the city whom the magistracy advise with in cases intricacy and rely upon to defend their rights and privileges in disputes with other cities and powers He delivers messages also from the Burgomasters and Senate and makes speeches and replies on all solemn occasions and is therefore said to resemble the Recorder of an English corporation.
2 Answers 2014-09-08
And I preface this by acknowledging that it's a gross mistake to characterize Arabs in such a monolithic manner but you can't escape the fact that the Western media does by and large treat them that way.
Anyway you often hear, in the news, when discussing conflicts in Iraq or Libya, about the various conflicts between so-called 'tribes' or 'clans' which seem to take precedence over other forms of political allegiance. It's never clarified what that actually means. Is tribe or clan allegiance based on familial connections? Geographic proximity? A relic of past nomadic groupings? What are they and what makes them such a prominent feature of Arab politics? Why have they not been wholly subsumed by other political identities based on concepts of religion or nationhood or ethnicity or civic ideologies like in other parts of the world?
1 Answers 2014-09-08
Both in terms of their technology and in the way they were used and deployed in battle?
2 Answers 2014-09-08
1 Answers 2014-09-08
1 Answers 2014-09-08
Title says it all. From my understanding NATO was created as a response to the Soviet Union and Warsaw Pact. The Soviet Union and Warsaw Pact, which was a military alliance similar to NATO, obviously ceased to exist. In effect, the de facto enemy of NATO and reason for existence was gone. Why wasn't NATO disbanded?
2 Answers 2014-09-08
There's a post on /r/TodayIlearned about "the Dust Veil of AD 536", linking to the following page. The numbers cited seem to be a bit wonky, and I wanted to hear /r/askhistorians opinion on the topic.
1 Answers 2014-09-08
1 Answers 2014-09-08
I have done some basic reading on Khalkhin Gol and the Battle of Lake Khasan(wikipedia), but there was little elaboration other than "after several engagements during August 2–9 the Japanese forces were disastrously defeated and thrown out of the Soviet territory".
I am also curious as to how Japan in 1905 is described as a "modern force" using the latest technology but in 1938-39 is described as inferior to the Soviet Union.
1 Answers 2014-09-08
1 Answers 2014-09-08
Also, what would it be like for the upper class?
2 Answers 2014-09-08
I find it very difficult to find much difference between these two revolutions. Weren't they both socialist since they rose up againt the ruling class and established a socialist society? If the two revolutions were so similar, why did France continue to have a class system of poor and rich individuals? At least in the Bolshevik revolution they eliminated the profit motive (before revisionists brought it back), offered the people a roof over their head and food on their plate and offered universal education and health care, so I guess the Bolshevik revolution can be said that it was collectively more compassionate than the French Revolution, or is that wrong?
1 Answers 2014-09-08
With the ColdWar in full swing and the missile gap to make up - there must have been a lot of nuclear material being moved around New Mexico for weapons manufacture. How was this stuff brought to Los Alamos and how was it guarded?
Could it be flown or would it rely on a convoy of armoured trucks or something?
1 Answers 2014-09-08
