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.
In the spirit for a particularly infuriating argument about biology I was dragged into a while ago, I would like to ask the fine people here this:
If the Puritans left England to settle Boston, why does England still exist? Huh? Think about it! It doesn't make any sense!
I recently inherited some items from my grandmother and I'd like advice on what to do with them. (If there's a better place to ask this, please redirect me! I'm stumped.) The items range in date from ~1900-1950. None of the items are valuable, these are all just little things that no one else in my family wanted and weren't valuable enough to be part of the estate. There are two categories of things I would like advice for:
I've been keeping a blog going for just over a month or so now. It's mostly focused on topics that come up in the manga Golden Kamuy. It's a pretty well-researched story set in Hokkaido after the Russo-Japanese War that is chock full of small historical details that have been to unpack. Kind of niche but figured I'd share it:
fromthenortherntavern.wordpress.com
Henry VII was the greatest post-Norman Conquest Monach of England. Try to change my mind.
From what I’ve read, Pliny the Elder’s how-to manual for the creation of papyrus sheets doesn’t stand up to historians in real time recreation. Opinions on why this is?
Your Weekly /r/askhistorians Recap
Friday, September 24 - Thursday, September 30
###Top 10 Posts
| score | comments | title & link |
|---|---|---|
| 4,204 | 50 comments | When Hitler and his entourage visited Paris in 1940 they drove around in open top cars, Hitler sat in the front seat, they didn’t block off the streets, and there was only a small group bodyguards. We’re they not worried about security, sabotage, or even a Franz Ferdinand type situation? |
| 3,195 | 9 comments | Chiang Kai-shek wanted to invade mainland China in the early 1960, but was stopped by the US who wanted to maintain the cold war balance. Were the ROC's forces in a state that would have allowed them to compete with the PRC? And would the invasion have found support from those living in the PRC? |
| 3,028 | 77 comments | Scooby Doo has an episode where Scooby wins 1 million dollars except it turns out it’s old “worthless” confederate cash. Kids and I are curious now about its worth and history |
| 2,965 | 26 comments | In 1897 there were a quarter of a million US saloons, or 23 for every Starbucks franchise today. Every back alley and country crossroads had one, and they were the go-to option for socializing business meetings, and politics. What was the impact when the US made them illegal during prohibition? |
| 2,565 | 35 comments | why was Venice built in the first place? why did the early settlers build a city in the middle of a lagoon? |
| 1,942 | 112 comments | Why are New Hampshire and Vermont so different culturally and politically? |
| 1,932 | 12 comments | Paris' catacombs and sewer tunnels are famously labyrinthine. Did any French Resistance groups use these underground locations as bases of operation against their German occupiers during WWII? |
| 1,901 | 35 comments | What caused the Assyrians to (and I believe this is the historically accurate wording) lose they damn minds?! |
| 1,349 | 18 comments | 17 Romanovs (plus Catharine the Great) ruled Russian for 304 years. Despite their immense wealth and privilege, only 1 lived to see the age of 60. Was this sort of early death normal for ruling dynasties in Europe, or was there something up with the Romanovs? |
| 1,259 | 41 comments | Is the American attitude to drinking in modern days a hangover from the Prohibition era. |
###Top 10 Comments
If you would like this roundup sent to your reddit inbox every week send me a message with the subject 'askhistorians'. Or if you want a daily roundup, use the subject 'askhistorians daily'. Or send me a chat with either askhistorians or askhistorians daily.
####Please let me know if you have suggestions to make this roundup better for /r/askhistorians or if there are other subreddits that you think I should post in. I can search for posts based off keywords in the title, URL and flair. And I can also find the top comments overall or in specific threads.
The Holy Roman Empire and the Byzantines were at odds a lot over the title of Emperor of the Romans but never really went head to head over the issue, despite some skirmishes during the 3rd crusade.
Do you think Frederick Barbarossa could have conquered all of Byzantium if he wanted to? Maybe it would have been better if he did.
The 4th crusade did it and it was just a bunch of mercenaries at that point but the rabble did a terrible job dividing and ruling the former territories.
At least with Barbarossa, it would be one Emperor and one Empire conquering another. Not a rogue band of mercenaries in a civil war over the throne
Today, in a 50 year + untouched attic, I discovered a resin trophy which I firmly believe has a piece of wood cut from the tree in Operation Paul Bunyan. How do I go about discerning the value of such an item?
In case you managed to miss the initial announcement, don't forget to sign up for the live keynote address as part of the AHDC2021!
I'm thinking about posting a question about the 2nd Amendment being about standing armies. I looked over the FAQ and I don't think the answer is there. Essentially I heard about this idea on the Washington Post's Constitutional podcast from 4 years ago. Then I kinda went down a rabbit hole and read Hastings Consitutional Law Quarterly article about it, and then eventually the Heller decision where Steven's really argues hard that the historical context of 2A is about standing armies.
Obviously this has ramifications on gun control in the US which is hot button, but I was really interested in how the framers seemed pretty scared of standing armies, and how we sort of just decided not to care about standing armies in a really short timeframe despite it being in the Bill of Rights.
So I guess my question is, is this an interesting question, or has this been answered multiple times and I just need to search a little harder?
I am new in this sub (in reddit too) and I like it a lot. I started getting a lot of interest in history and starting to not being able to enjoy stuff if it's not history related. But at the same time, being so ignorant, I am concerned of not being able to know if what's happening in the movie is indeed historical or not. Any thoughts?