Recently I've spent a bit of time researching the "tropes" related to the Nazi (ab)use of their victims' bodies, specifically the ever popular lampshades and soap, but also the shrunken heads. This was done for two reasons: 1. deniers always bring up these tropes, saying they were "debunked" or "lies" and therefore allegedly discredit this or that. Second - it was simply interesting to get to the truth of the matter and learn more details. In the process I changed my mind on some things.

For the (Danzig) soap I poured over the Soviet and German archival evidence available to me, discussions with the expert on the topic, Dr. Joachim Neander, also helped immensely. For the rest I examined the available relevant court documents.

I've summarized my conclusions in the article Nazi shrunken heads, human skin lampshades, human soap, textiles from human hair? Sorting out the truth from the legends. Not claiming that this is the "last word" on the topic, but this information may be useful to someone here.

An excellent Korean love poem, dating from the later years of the Koryŏ dynasty (918-1392). My translation.

Oh gong, oh stone, be here with me now –

Oh gong, oh stone, be here with me now –

I dream of enjoying perfect peace.

On sandy bluffs that whisper sak-sak –

On sandy bluffs that whisper sak-sak –

I plant five boxes of roasted chestnuts.

Only when these chestnuts spring up and sprout,

Only when these chestnuts spring up and sprout,

Shall I dream of departing from my virtuous beloved.

Out of jade, I carve a lotus blossom –

Out of jade, I carve a lotus blossom –

And I graft that lotus upon the bare rock.

Only when this flower blossoms in midwinter,

Only when this flower blossoms in midwinter,

Shall I dream of departing from my virtuous beloved.

With cast iron, I trim the soldier's armor –

With cast iron, I trim the soldier's armor –

And I sew it together with wires of steel.

Only when that cloth falls apart,

Only when that cloth falls apart,

Shall I dream of departing from my virtuous beloved.

With cast iron, I build a great ox –

With cast iron, I build a great ox –

And I set it loose on a hill with iron trees.

Only when it grazes on the iron grass,

Only when it grazes on the iron grass,

Shall I dream of departing from my virtuous beloved.

Even when the beads fall upon the rocks –

Even when the beads fall upon the rocks –

Does ever the string between them break?

Even if we live alone a thousand years,

Even if we live alone a thousand years,

Shall ever the love between us break?

Hello! On a previous free-for-all thread, I asked this group for ideas for Black History month topics that are often overlooked and got some great ideas. I just wanted to pass along some of the finished pieces that we've published thanks to those ideas. We are working on putting these together, along with other topics, in a Black History hub in time for February. Thanks so much! (And please let me know if you have feedback on these... or more ideas)

Maroon communities

Black women writers

Madame CJ Walker

Black religion

National Association of Colored Women

Black Seminoles

Black Power

HBCUs

Week 7

By the end of 1917, the Italian political ground was covered with a growth of smaller or bigger interventionist organization; often operating with the purpose of mobilizing citizenry towards the war effort and vigilance over defeatist activities. They also attempted to cover those areas – of social integration, assistance to families, etc. - where the central government initiative was or appeared lacking. Many of these had chosen to call themselves fasci - the word, deriving from the tradition of the Roman Republic had never entirely lost popularity, and returned to the forefront with the Sicilian riots of 1889-94. Its meaning here was simpler though: a bundle of sticks tied together: it implied strength out of union of equals and had by the time become a favorite for any organization that wanted to stress its “non-socialist” nature; being alternative to the socialist “league”.

All these organizations had to face a major issue: that despite feeling entitled to represent the majority of the nation – or in other words, the good, active part of the nation, rhetorically deemed the “true” nation – they found (or felt) themselves under represented in the Chamber. The Parliament, elected in 1913, was “full” of socialists, old liberal politicians, relics of the Giolitti years: neutralists, defeatists, all men who had no personal investment in the war^1 , who were either unwilling to commit fully to the nation's effort, or even worse actively sabotaging it. The theme of the two nations, the productive one and the parliamentary one; was an old core of the nationalist propaganda and anti establishment polemics. Here thought, under the extreme need of war times, it took a new character of urgency.

To ensure that the active forces of the nation could have some weight inside the parliament, a group of interventionist representatives, together with various members of the interventionist civil society, in between the days 2^nd and 12^th of December, created what was to become a semi-official influence group: the Fascio Parlamentare di Difesa Nazionale (Parliamentary Fascio of National Defense). The main architect and originator of this formation was the liberal economist Maffeo Pantaleoni; the former priest and publicist Giovanni Preziosi (who will become the infamous face of the Italian persecution of the Jews in the 1940s) hosted the first meetings in the offices of his periodical La vita italiana. In those early days Pantaleoni was able to gain the support of former Prime Minister Antonio Salandra, liberal economist Antonio De Viti De Marco^3 , Ettore Ciccotti (who was authoring a law project for a land reform in favor of the veterans), former moderate socialist and interventionist Ivanoe Bonomi, nationalist Luigi Federzoni (future minister in various fascist governments) and Enrico Corradini, Giovanni Antonio Colonna di Cesarò (minister in the first Mussolini Government) and, with various others, the parliament veteran and influential interventionist Ferdinando Martini.

Despite the large number of adherents (soon reaching 250) the actual lasting contribution of the Fascio to the Italian political life was minimal^2 . For the meantime though it was an influential point of reference for the other various interventionist organizations (they were able to arrange a large National Assembly on February 4^th 1918 in Milan, which included representatives of the allied powers, the municipality of Milan, the Government, local administrations numbering over 200). Still the Fascio lacked a proper political leader or a party-like organization, despite the original suggestion by Pantaleoni himself to appoint Mussolini (who instead choose to remain out of it, despite praising its initiatives) – as president acted Senator Vittorio Scialoja – and worked throughout the following year mostly as an instrument of the nationalist portion of the interventionist forces: denouncing socialist defeatism, petitioning with the Government and offering their good offices for any authoritarian motion of the Executive.

According to R. De Felice on a general political ground, the institution of the Parliamentary Fascio left a score of negative consequences. It […] became a powerful influence instrument in the hands of the nationalists and of the “national” right. The remarks of the promoters of the Fascio that it did not mean to be a party and that it was composed of both […] “imperialists and democrats”, united by the will to reach a full victory […] fell into nothing. In reality the steering wheel […] was almost entirely in the hands of the nationalist right. [The result was] that the left wing interventionism reached November 1918, date of the victory, remarkably weakened, isolated, disconnected and dangerously poisoned by a series of involutive seeds that would in the immediate aftermath of the war determine its transformation and, as a matter of fact, its death.

1 – A feeling well summarized in Mussolini's letter to S. Fasulo that we already discussed in week two: Our most severe and unforgivable mistake was to leave our war to the care of people who had no feeling for it, who did not want it, did not accept it, and suffered it as a corvee fraught and heavier than others. We were foolish. I agree with you that, as soon as this tragic time has passed, it is necessary to put firmly under scrutiny the way we have conducted the war and the men, none excluded, even the highest.

2 – So that in fact there are few sources to be found on their activities and those few [F.L. Pullè Memorie del Fascio parlamentare di difesa nazionale ; 1932] have eluded me so far.

3 – I insist on the group of the new liberals because, at its core, there is a possible explanation on why an influential part of the Italian progressive establishment looked with favor to a political experience that was both outside the old liberal establishment and outside the institutions of organized socialism. Their attack on the system came from a coherent – if excessively dogmatic at times – analysis of the evolution of the Italian social, political and economical system since the unification. The choice of developing a protectionist legislation had created a dangerous alignment between the interests of the heavy industry and those of the large land owners (grain tariffs and state subsided industries) that hampered the natural development of the national economy. Giolitti's choice of renewing the tariffs system, while opening to the socialist movement, had meant to them not a liberalization of the political system but a preservation of the status quo, through sharing of the profits with the more advanced and politically influential portions of the working class (represented by the socialist leadership and the trade unions). This connection was the chain that the liberals wanted to break. As De Viti de Marco, on the periodical “Il Giornale degli Economisti” wrote in July 1898: The ministry neither has nor shows any sentiment of freedom. On political ground it does not attempt any deliberation to define somehow – even on the smallest scale – the rights of the citizens, and thus to circumscribe the range of action left to the arbitrary evaluation of the executive power. In this legislative determination is the real issue of our time; and there is no parliamentary craftsmanship that can change it. In the field of economical and finance reforms the policy of the ministry will be the same of the previous ministry, because it is the policy of the interests that are represented in the Chamber. It is the policy of the agrarian and industrial protectionism and of the indirect taxes on the people's consumes, on which, then, is based the grandiose policy of military expenses and public works, to which the parliamentary left, faithful to its predecessors, will give new impulse. Meanwhile the Italian Parliament already deliberated the reintroduction of the granary tariff. This is the first legislative motion of the Italian Parliament; this is the only economical provision to oppose misery and social unrest in Italy. … The Italian Parliament made clear one more time that it is nothing but an assembly of shareholders.

And thirty five years later L. Einaudi would describe a situation that – despite any hopes – had not improved with the war; rather: Army, safety, justice, education, public works not for the living but for the posterity, safeguarding the new generations; all were paid lip service. But the government members elected to turn themselves into railroad barons, to build, equip and insure ships, wares providers, rulers of the markets, of banks, of stocks, promoters of the industrial world through tariffs and prizes. Thus the immoral state was born, the state that does not make good to its natural duties and becomes a center of intrigue, favors, wealth trade. The immoral state is a weak state, a corrupt state … What matters the electoral system, when the representatives are not called upon to safeguard the general interests of the country, but are the solicitors of the private interests of those servants that gave them their mandate; and when they are no longer allowed to refuse this pandering role because the life and wealth of their enabler are tied to their decisions in Rome? This is the shirt of Nessus that smothered all the past governments, it is the reason why the state, forgetful of his proper duties, became a ghost that looked still like an individual but was made of thin air, because its intimate immorality devoured it.

Sources:

R. De Felice: Mussolini, vol. 1

P. Melograni – Storia politica della Grande Guerra

L. Einaudi – La condotta economica e le conseguenze sociali della guerra

R. Vivarelli – Il fallimento del liberalismo

Advised to post this here, since it's not allowed as it's own thread: anyone know some interesting examples of jobs now regarded as "male" or "female" being seen as the opposite in other cultures/periods?

I noticed your sinister insinuation regarding my whiskers. Shave, in this weather? Do you want to expose me in a practically nude condition to the icy blasts of the Arctic blizzards? They say the Lord tempers the wind to the shorn lamb, but they don’t say anything about Him tempering the wind to the shorn jackass. Perhaps when the gentle heifers — or maybe it’s zephyrs — of summer gambol and frolic lightly through the post oaks I may employ the shears on my rugged countenance, but not in this weather.

• Robert E. Howard to Novalyne Price, 14 Feb 1936, Collected Letters of Robert E. Howard 3.418

It's snowing in Texas, which brought this to mind - a small dispute-in-letters between pulp writer Robert E. Howard and his girlfriend over the mustache he'd grown (and which he did shave). The matter of his mustache also came up in the correspondence of H. P. Lovecraft - Howard had sent Lovecraft a photograph of himself, mustachio'd, and HPL had lent it out to friends, one of whom lost it.

Two-Gun sent me a new snapshot of himself last month. He’s grown a drooping moustache, & in a 10-gallon hat looks exactly like a western cinema sheriff.

• H. P. Lovecraft to August Derleth, 7 May 1936, Essential Solitude 2.732

I always thought Robert E Lee was overrated as a tactician

I've been listening to accounts from US soldiers during WWII preserved online in the Veterans History Project of the Library of Congress. I've only listened to a few so far and I've found them all very interesting but one really stood out to me. This private who was 18-19 years old at the time describes people dying and rescuing a wounded soldier in a hail of bullets for which he received a bronze star, but what brought up the strongest emotions and made him cry on the recording over 60 years later remembering it was when he was accidentally separated from his unit in France, and after running around trying to find them for a while he just sat down under a tree and cried. That just struck me as really interesting and human. You can find it here.

I hope that I may be allowed to post this, and that we can appreciate these words and the gravity of their context on our history, on the 76th anniversary of Roosevelt's address to Congress.

“Mr. Vice President, Mr. Speaker, Members of the Senate, and of the House of Representatives: Yesterday, December 7th, 1941—a date which will live in infamy—the United States of America was suddenly and deliberately attacked by naval and air forces of the Empire of Japan. The United States was at peace with that nation and, at the solicitation of Japan, was still in conversation with its government and its emperor looking toward the maintenance of peace in the Pacific. Indeed, one hour after Japanese air squadrons had commenced bombing in the American island of Oahu, the Japanese ambassador to the United States and his colleague delivered to our Secretary of State a formal reply to a recent American message. And while this reply stated that it seemed useless to continue the existing diplomatic negotiations, it contained no threat or hint of war or of armed attack. It will be recorded that the distance of Hawaii from Japan makes it obvious that the attack was deliberately planned many days or even weeks ago. During the intervening time, the Japanese government has deliberately sought to deceive the United States by false statements and expressions of hope for continued peace. The attack yesterday on the Hawaiian islands has caused severe damage to American naval and military forces. I regret to tell you that very many American lives have been lost. In addition, American ships have been reported torpedoed on the high seas between San Francisco and Honolulu. Yesterday, the Japanese government also launched an attack against Malaya. Last night, Japanese forces attacked Hong Kong. Last night, Japanese forces attacked Guam. Last night, Japanese forces attacked the Philippine Islands. Last night, the Japanese attacked Wake Island. And this morning, the Japanese attacked Midway Island. Japan has, therefore, undertaken a surprise offensive extending throughout the Pacific area. The facts of yesterday and today speak for themselves. The people of the United States have already formed their opinions and well understand the implications to the very life and safety of our nation. As Commander in Chief of the Army and Navy, I have directed that all measures be taken for our defense. But always will our whole nation remember the character of the onslaught against us. No matter how long it may take us to overcome this premeditated invasion, the American people in their righteous might will win through to absolute victory. I believe that I interpret the will of the Congress and of the people when I assert that we will not only defend ourselves to the uttermost, but will make it very certain that this form of treachery shall never again endanger us. Hostilities exist. There is no blinking at the fact that our people, our territory, and our interests are in grave danger. With confidence in our armed forces, with the unbounding determination of our people, we will gain the inevitable triumph—so help us God. I ask that the Congress declare that since the unprovoked and dastardly attack by Japan on Sunday, December 7th, 1941, a state of war has existed between the United States and the Japanese empire.”

Not sure if this is the right subreddit, but as historians, can anyome tell me about your work? I'm starting university next year and was thinking about studying History (along with either Law or Translation), but I'm kinda lost. What exactly do you learn in a history career? What are my professional options once I finish my studies? I know the classic ones; archeologist, teacher, narrator for the BBC or (gods forbid it) the History Channel... but what is there beyond that?

This weekend I'm finishing up my paper on US Submarines during WWI. The reasearch I've been able to do has been so much fun, but I wish I had more time and resources at my disposal as I'm sure there are a lot more sources in places other than the Sub Force Library (especially judging by some of the photocopies they have).

Still, I'm pretty happy with what I've been able to find. It's honestly shocking any of our submarines were able to even make it to Europe in the first place. A group of L-Class submarines had been in Halifax only days before the explosion, but had been ordered to Bantry Bay in Ireland. They were supposed to be towed/escorted by their tender, the USS Bushnell. But, this flotilla encountered an Atlantic storm on the way, and the Bushnell told them they were on their own. They made it to the Azores 26 days later, the 30 man crew (plus 3 officers) had been subsisting on crackers and ketchup by the end of that voyage.

Chaucer, in The Physician's Tale, on what kinds of women are hired to be governesses to young ladies:

Thenketh that ye been set in governynges

Of lordes doghtres, oonly for two thynges:

Outher for ye han kept youre honestee,

Or elles ye han falle in freletee,

And knowen wel ynough the olde daunce

And han forsaken fully swich meschaunce

For everemo;

In other words, either virgins or women so old and tired out that they don't fuck anymore.

Can anyone tell me how well regarded David Satter and his theory about Putin's involvement in the apartment bombings in the lead up to the war with Chechnya is?