Today:
You know the drill: this is the thread for all your history-related outpourings that are not necessarily questions. Minor questions that you feel don't need or merit their own threads are welcome too. Discovered a great new book, documentary, article or blog? Has your Ph.D. application been successful? Have you made an archaeological discovery in your back yard? Did you find an anecdote about the Doge of Venice telling a joke to Michel Foucault? Tell us all about it.
As usual, moderation in this thread will be relatively non-existent -- jokes, anecdotes and light-hearted banter are welcome.
So apparently there is a theory out there which makes the Phantom Time Hypothesis look downright rational. While the latter "only" claims that a few hundred years of history are fabricated and 614 AD to 911 AD never happened, Anatoly Fomenko's New Chronology dials it up to eleven, and states "most known historical events took place in AD 1000–1500." Jesus actually lived in the 12th Century AD and was probably Andronikos I Komnenos. Solomon is Sultan Suleiman I. The Trojan War is really the Crusades. No written history extends beyond 800 AD... It seems he has written seven volumes explaining all of this.
Two kinds of tobacco pipes are found archaeologically in the Chesapeake region, kaolin pipes that are made of fine white clay and were made in Europe and Colonoware pipes that are a little rougher and made of local red clay (a bit like a flowerpot), may of which have rilletted decorations including animal themes.
Theories abound about who was making the colonoware pipes, ranging from white colonists, African Americans and Native Americans. I've read the literature and the arguments for production solely or predominantly by African Americans seems extremely weak (not to say that some were not made by African Americans, but one thread of thinking is that they were essentially exclusively made by African Americans).
Does anyone have a solid understanding of the "made by African Americans" school of thinking that they can share?
This was the week the mainstream media bought into the Hitler-Trump comparison. I had to do a triple-header post to cover everything.
This week in /r/EarlyModernEurope, I did a live watch of Barry Lyndon and realized that I know the 18th century better than I realize and also how much I love it. Warning for spoilers and nerdiness.
I was wondering if anyone had any experience working for the US Government (or any other government) in any capacity as a historian. Here are [two] (https://www.usajobs.gov/GetJob/ViewDetails/440212900/) examples of what I mean. These are in education, but I've seen a variety of positions posted in the past.
And if anyone doesn't have the experience are those job postings something that would entice you (or a hypothetical academic professional) based on pay, workload, education/experience requirements? Just curious how these jobs compare to those outside the government.
So wanted to give this a bit of publicity here for my fellow nautically inclined flairs and other fine fellows.
/u/fourthmaninaboat is setting up a very promising wargame of Jutland.
Regarding Humfrey Barwick's statement that "the English love their bows like the Danish love their Hatchets". Was the Danish military still making heavy use of axes in the 16th century or is that just stereotyping?
Last weekend I went to Williamsburg and Jamestown--all in all, pretty sweet. I was most surprised at just how much was imported from England--you would think the silly colonists would have realized that you can grow cows in America. The most disappointing is that there were no hat shops for tourists, I really wanted a tricorn.
Does anyone have experience with Karl-Heinz Friesier's German casualty numbers? He got his data from German medical records, but it's been my impression that the Germans would often massage their loss numbers through a variety of methods.
Would anyone be able to help me out with a book suggestion? It's intended as a gift to someone who likes early US history. He's a particular fan of Alexander Hamilton, though direct biographies are probably out for that exact reason.
Pop history is preferred over academic, but obviously historical accuracy would be nice (one of the reasons I'm asking here).
Any suggestions?
The LSE had recent lecture entitled "The history of China's future" discussing part of China's past and how it related to the present.
It touches on all kinds of things, such as corruption, the July 4th movement, the idea of harmony to name just a few.
There are lots of cool little snippets, if you have the time its well worth listening to.
I feel like this is kind of a dumb question but I see "the long Xth century" turn up from time to time. Other than just sounding clever and being able to fudge centuries, is there any purpose to this kind of usage? Looking it up, apparently Hobsbawm helped popularize it for the "long 19th century". For the dates he proposes, 1789-1914, fair enough i guess but it seems sort of cliched?
Anything know what it would've taken for Argentina to win the Falklands War?
Is it bad that, as an enthusiast in Polish culture and history, I'm super excited that Poland is producing paramilitary divisions with NATO support to be organized in case (what they view as) Russian imperialism and aggression goes too far? This was just announced on BBC today and I'm actively wondering what will become of it.
Admittedly, I don't see the point. I don't think Russia can defeat NATO or the U.S. in direct or indirect warfare although I don't know any exact statistics on the matter. Regardless, it's an interesting proposition, especially considering how things have worked out in the past.
Edit: Russia is moving divisions towards their western border. This is amazing.
