Something a little funny... Weird Tales, like other pulps, was willing to go the extra mile to try and make a sale, and in the 1930s this extended to featuring nude and near-nude women on the covers, often pastels created by Margaret Brundage. H. P. Lovecraft was less than amused at the salaciousness of the covers:

I have no objection to the nude in art—in fact, the human figure is as worthy a type of subject matter as any other object of beauty in the visible world. But I don’t see what the hell Mrs. Brundage’s undressed ladies have to do with weird fiction!

• H. P. Lovecraft to Willis Conover, 1 Sep 1936, Selected Letters of H. P. Lovecraft 5.304

Lovecraft wasn't the only one to comment:

Query: why does Brundage try to make all her women look like wet-nurses? It's a funny, not to say tiresome, complex.

• Clark Ashton Smith to R. H. Barlow, 9 Sep 1937, Selected Letters of Clark Ashton Smith 313

This is actually funny because it refers to a specific trend in the cover art which Margaret Brundage commented on in an interview in 1973:

One funny thing did happen. One of the authors - well, Weird Tales asked me to make larger and larger breasts - larger than I would have liked to - well, one cover, one of the authors wrote in and said that things were getting a little bit out of line. And even for an old expert like him, the size of the breastwork was getting a little too large.

It's an odd point because to contemporary sensibilities none of the female figures in Brundage's cover paintings are notably well-endowed - although if you do a side-by-side, you can see the rather petite breasts become generally fully, though still perky.

Some of you might have seen it over at /r/History, but if you didn't, I wrote a piece for History Today about the experiences of Chilean soldiers in the Atacama Desert during the War of the Pacific (1879-1884). Check it out here!

What’s everyone’s favorite historically set movies, regardless of inaccuracies?

I love Kingdom of Heaven, Robin Hood, and Braveheart. KoH and RH have especially fantastic set and production designs

And Robin Hood, I’ve had a crush on Cate Blanchett ever since Lord of the Rings. I also have a man crush on Mark Addy

Short random question:

Do we know why Switzerland became so famous for chocolate? They had no oversea colonies to be right at the source for cocoa, and are land-locked so not exactly the place where loads of exotic goods would come through.

Did you guys stop doing the What's New in History thread? Was it because it was only /u/ michtuipochtotltlti whose name I can't spell posting in it?

If you could go out for a night of drinks anywhen in history, where would you like to go and why?

Akala is a tv personality who commentates on politics and culture. Generally, I can ignore him, but he makes factually inaccurate claims to his massive audience. He's quite the afro-centrist, but I believe he describes himself as a political scientist (absent of any qualifications).

He seems like a charming, fast-talking guy, however, I feel that people lap it up because they don't have the tools and time to assess him. He makes so many claims in short periods that you can't sit down and deconstruct what he's saying.

I'm wondering, has anyone had the chance to read his new book? What are your general thoughts on Akala?

What is a historical footnote that seems so unlikely that you'd pay to actually go back to either witness or debunk if it were possible?

How did TIGHAR get to be the Earhart historians. Back when I was a kid I loved reading about this mystery. But, when I got to school and started reading papers from actual historians. TIGHAR stood out as a group of amateurs working backwards trying to get evidence to fit a theory. I've seen other groups do this for example: Christian groups attempting to prove the bible historically accurate or NeoPagans attempting to connect themselves to ancient Celts. But, TIGHAR is treated as authoritative by the popular press in a way these misguided missionaries are not. Why? Is TIGHAR as bad as I'm thinking or is there scholarship I don't have access to? I suspect money, but I'd like to hear your thoughts.

Is there any article or source about the use of Death Cards and the like in Vietnam as a form of psyop? I'm very interested in the subject of psyop in the vietnam war and I can't seem to find too many sources on them other than the standard loudspeaker and leaflet drops. Is most of this still classified?

Do any translators/historians use innovative visual cues etc. to help make it easier to follow accounts that are complex or where readers may lack the context that the writer assumes?

What I'm thinking of here in particular is inspired by reading Polybius and Thucydides, who mention people and towns where we're clearly meant to know if they're aligned to Rome/Carthage or Athens/Sparta respectively.

It feels to me like rather than footnotes or references at the back to which city was inclined each way, it would be incredibly helpful to just colour-code e.g. names of Athenian-aligned individuals or states blue and Spartan ones red (with some system to deal with neutrals or those who are in the process of switching sides). While this is partially just me being lazy, in a sense it feels like it's nearer to the experience of the reader. Has anyone done this kind of thing?

I am also reliably informed that similar colour-coding (by House) would make it far easier to follow the Game of Thrones books...

I have a bit of a suggestion for this subreddit and I would like to hear some opinions about this. I think people who post questions should also add a flair to their posts based on the era or state their question is about.

For example, If I were to post a question "Why wasn't Mongolia incorporated into the Soviet Union?", I should add a flair "20th Century" or "Soviet Union" something along those lines.

The advantage of this would be a possibility to filter out questions that readers find uninteresting. I am really not interested in ancient times, so I could just filter out questions that are about that era.

I picked up a six volume set of Dumas Malone's "Jefferson and His Time" at a garage sale recently. I mainly bought it as filler for one of my book cases, but I am also interested in the period and the subject matter, and am thinking of diving into it...

My question is, what is the current scholarly opinion on this Dumas guy, and is there anything I should know about criticism of his work?