Would they be left to die? Or would the community band together to help them or something along those lines?

I've been looking into it for a research assignment and a lot of the stuff's pretty sketchy. I just was interested in some information about it.

Why are noon and midnight 12'oclock? I know the Romans for instance started counting the hours at dawn. Is there another culture that we adopted the noon =12 from? Or was this decided sometime? If so when, where, who? Thanks!

In order to give some appropriate context, I will explain why my teacher said this by rewording his reasoning from memory.

With the Edict of Caracalla, Roman citizenship is extended to include everybody under emperor rule. While this is good for increasing the income of the empire by having more citizens to tax, it destroyed the legitimacy of original citizens and of Rome, the city, itself. Rome may have adopted cultural aspects from those it conquered, but there was still a distinct dominant Roman culture that was higher than all others. Only citizens were fit to serve in the army and the Italian peninsula is the major source of Roman culture and citizens. It is the capital region of the empire and shadows all others.

Once Caracalla enacts his edict, suddenly Roman citizenship is no longer a privilege or even something special. Everybody is equal, from the relatively recently "civilized" Dacians to the true-blooded Romans of noble houses. The Italian peninsula loses its legitimacy as the dominant region of the empire because now every corner of the empire provides citizens, soldiers, etc. With everybody on an equal playing surface, peoples of different regions have just as much legitimacy to have power and wealth as the next group. So why should Rome, and the emperor, Princeps/First-Citizen have all the glory? To serve the Empire used to mean giving your life to Rome. Now it can include, Gaul, Iberia, Anatolia. This edict decentralized the authority of Rome, its emperor, the original citizens, and their culture. The effects of this can be seen in the crisis of the 3rd century where the empire fractures regionally and privatized armies emerge again (the comitatus of Gallienus). Even after reunification, the empire is never really the same again and the writing is on the walls for the end of Roman hegemony.

My teacher is big on the terms hegemony and legitimacy. In his definition, hegemony is the forceful ability to rule over others through conquest. Legitimacy is the ability to maintain that authority through being accepted as the rightful leader by those being ruled.

Of course, he attributed other reasons for why the empire fell, but he was assured that the Edict of Caracalla was as major as any other factor contributing to the end of Rome.

I kind of assumed the clergy dominated universities in the 19th century and were the only people who really bothered with it, and I was kind of surprised to find out King Edward VII went. Was he a rarity?

As the title states. How did native Americans in what is now Florida deal with hurricanes? Also how did the island natives handle them? I would venture a guess they knew that during certain parts of the year the weather was going to get pretty bad.

To what social needs did they appeal and what did they promise to deliver? Thanks reddit.

How much were they really producing? Can anyone give me some statistics on how much value they made and exported? Were they really the industrial giant that outproduced the rest of the world?

I am a Masters student in history with an emphasis in American but specifically women's history. My problem is historical theory. I've taken a theory course and read all the books written by the greats. Foucault, Braudel, Wallerstein and the like. But honestly I have a hard time understanding them. Is there any book or resource or even a "historical theory for dummies" book out there that could help me understand what I am missing? Anything would be helpful.

Just a question that popped up in History class

This question is pretty broad, since I know next to nothing on the subject, so I apologize for that. Can anyone tell me who wrote what in the New Testament and how if was eventually put together? I was raised Baptist, and we were taught that the New Testament was written by eyewitnesses and we know the translations were legitimate blablbla and the other side said they were written almost half a century after the fact, with a lot of corruption involved regarding translations. Again, I know this is a question that requires much more than a couple paragraphs to answer adequately, but if anyone could give me some insight on the subject, or point me to a book that could do the same, I would be grateful. Thank you.

I am at awe at how deeply the ancient greeks explored the human psyche, e.g. cognitive dissonance, oedipus complex, anger (menes), narcissism etc.

Is this because Classical Greek culture's eminent position in the Western World's history and development? Or rather, do many other myths/literature also explore the human psyche to the same degree as, say oedipus rex? If so, what are some examples?

Or am I wording the question wrong to begin with? i.e. is it because I am looking at myths with a Western Worldview that is biased to ancient greek culture?

What are some layman reading material on this and relevant subject matter?

For example, did an ancient roman have an Italian accent? Or a Germanic tribesman have a German accent?

Or are things like that nearly impossible to be sure of since there are no audio records.

Were the Italians and Spanish more fascist dictatorships or did they have their own versions of death camps? I haven't heard a whole lot about them and I know those had similar ideology to Nazism.

Hi everybody! I am writing a research paper and having trouble finding viable sources outside of my school provided database and was wondering if anybody wished to share their area of expertise, thanks!

Edit: thank you everyone for such excellent responses! You have provided excellent sources to further my research!

Not sure if this is the right subreddit, but does anyone know why it was a good idea for the US to drop atomic bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki, from a scientists point of view? The only reason I have thus far is that it would allow us to test the bomb. I would greatly appreciate anyone's help!