AskHistorians

This is an automated archive.

The original was posted on /r/askhistorians by /u/TheHondoGod on 2024-01-24 15:29:12+00:00.

This is an automated archive.

The original was posted on /r/askhistorians by /u/MiloKleftis on 2024-01-24 15:08:39+00:00.

Original Title: How exactly did the German colonial administration in 1884 - 1919 of (for example) Deutsch-Südwestafrika work? (Authorities, Gouvernors, etc.) I want to depict it with a diagram as clear as possible, but I cant seem to find an article about it.

This is an automated archive.

The original was posted on /r/askhistorians by /u/coffeelover12345_ on 2024-01-24 15:05:00+00:00.

This is an automated archive.

The original was posted on /r/askhistorians by /u/gorge_orwoll on 2024-01-24 15:00:54+00:00.

I have been watching the oversimplified video on it, and I know he was expecting reinforcements from Celts so he wasn't too worried about casualties. But Surely it would of been easier for his army (and especially his elephants) to move along the coast since its much less mountainous.

This is an automated archive.

The original was posted on /r/askhistorians by /u/hellohahahahu on 2024-01-24 14:58:01+00:00.

I understand keeping cows or chickens as they produce milk and eggs throughout their lifespan, that way they are useful for the years they’re alive for until the day they’re used for their meat.

But what about pigs? They take years to grow and don’t produce anything in the meantime. Early farmers would have to take care of them for years, feeding them, keeping an eye on them, cleaning the enclosure… a lot of work. Just for a few meals once the pig is slaughtered.

It doesn’t seem very worth it from the point of view of a poor ancient farming family.

This is an automated archive.

The original was posted on /r/askhistorians by /u/CaptainHoy1750 on 2024-01-24 14:41:45+00:00.

This is an automated archive.

The original was posted on /r/askhistorians by /u/mottledmussel on 2024-01-24 14:34:48+00:00.

This is an automated archive.

The original was posted on /r/askhistorians by /u/mamil2608 on 2024-01-24 14:29:27+00:00.

Hello, I’m a PhD student and am working with the THOR data released by the US Department of Defence. It’s quite detailed, giving me the geolocation of the bombs dropped on Vietnam by the US between 1965 and 1975. It also has details of the date of mission, among many other information. However, it does not have casualties data. I was wondering if there was a publicly available dataset where I can link casualties (both Vietnamese and US) to the missions. Thank you!

This is an automated archive.

The original was posted on /r/askhistorians by /u/sgarrido85 on 2024-01-24 14:26:43+00:00.

This is an automated archive.

The original was posted on /r/askhistorians by /u/KawaiiImoutu on 2024-01-24 14:04:57+00:00.

I've read text that says they're made of concrete? And some that say they were made of stones?? Like really how? I've been trying to find reliable sources but cant

This is an automated archive.

The original was posted on /r/askhistorians by /u/RusticBohemian on 2024-01-24 13:52:17+00:00.

This is an automated archive.

The original was posted on /r/askhistorians by /u/Dachi-kun on 2024-01-24 13:48:54+00:00.

Pretty much what the question says; I'm a student of visual communication (graphic design) and I'm draw a bit of inspiration from the renaissance italian festival masks. Did different shapes meant different meanings? Did they have colors, if so what did each color mean?

Any more info you wish to let me know of would be greatly appreciated, thank you very much :)

This is an automated archive.

The original was posted on /r/askhistorians by /u/Dangerous_Study6811 on 2024-01-24 13:47:35+00:00.

At its height, how did the Angevin empire compare in land area/wealth/power to such contemporaries or contemporary-ish powers like HRE, Byzantine empire or Ayyubid Sultanate?

This is an automated archive.

The original was posted on /r/askhistorians by /u/Vir-victus on 2024-01-24 13:32:33+00:00.

I hope the question is straight forward enough. But just for further clarity, when people of 'higher standing' were buried (or burned?), were there any funeral rituals or parts of the ceremony that set them apart from funerals of common people? It may be for financial reasons, or because a person of noble birth requires other rituals to be performed or included in the funeral.

And similarly, were there any basic traditions that were performed regardless of social hierarchy?

This is an automated archive.

The original was posted on /r/askhistorians by /u/infraredit on 2024-01-24 13:30:41+00:00.

Significant parts of Siberia regularly reach -40 in winter, temperatures which can cause frostbite in just minutes.

Prior to the invention of central heating, how were homes designed to deal with this? Where were toilets located? What kept them warm enough to avoid frostbite? What did Siberians wear?

This is an automated archive.

The original was posted on /r/askhistorians by /u/-yes-yes-yes-yes- on 2024-01-24 13:27:25+00:00.

Did people back in the day have papers that proved that the horse they're riding on is infact theirs?

This is an automated archive.

The original was posted on /r/askhistorians by /u/Mahmoud1045 on 2024-01-24 13:21:04+00:00.

It's the 16th century and pirates roamed the seas. How did they manage to keep their ships waterproof, as in, afloat and fungus-repelled?

This is an automated archive.

The original was posted on /r/askhistorians by /u/SteffonTheBaratheon on 2024-01-24 13:19:45+00:00.

So I watched a german documentary about Maria Stuart and it said that Henry Stuart, Lord Darnley slept with other MEN (plural!) and had a sexual relationship with David rizzio.

The documentary made it sound like this was a fact and not just a suggestive theory.

As a queer person myself, I got suspicious and interested, so I googled and can't find anything on this ?

the ONLY thing I found is a post about the maria stuart mvoie with margot robbie from "thewrap"

and here it says: Guy has said that Rizzio and Darnley having a sexual relationship is true to history, and in British historian Anna Whitelock's book "Elizabeth's Bedfellows: An Intimate History of the Queen's Court," she writes that Rizzio and "Darnley himself 'would sometime lie in one bed together.'" (a dispatch from thomas randolph?)

but which specific sources are Anna Whitelock even using?

I found a book called "Notorious Royal Marriages" in which it says that renley was called a "great cock chick" by the court (which is very striking)

I'm happy about any answer related to the topic:)

This is an automated archive.

The original was posted on /r/askhistorians by /u/hisholinessleoxiii on 2024-01-24 13:18:12+00:00.

When I got my bachelor's degree, I wrote my thesis on the famous "Person's Case" from 1929. To vastly oversimplify it, women had been appointed as judges and magistrates, and male lawyers challenged the courts on whether or not women were eligible for their positions: the basic argument is that the term "person" in the British North America Act of 1867 (later renamed the Constitution Act, 1867) was meant to only apply to men.

In my research, I kept coming across the same quote over and over: "Women are persons in matters of pains and penalties, but not rights and privileges" with the occasional note that it was from a 19th century ruling. I tried for months to track down the original source of this quote, but I kept running into the same problem where book A would cite book B, which cited book C, which cited book D, which cited book A. In all my research in law libraries and online, I could not find a single source citing the original ruling.

Where did this quote originally come from? What was the case involved?

This is an automated archive.

The original was posted on /r/askhistorians by /u/rymder on 2024-01-24 12:43:37+00:00.

When reading about historical battles, it seems that the winning side often aimed to maximize casualties among the defeated, as exemplified by the Carthaginians at the Battle of Cannae.

In instances where the defeated side wasn't surrounded and attempted to retreat, was it customary for the victors to pursue them? Was killing preferred over ransoming prisoners, and were there strategic advantages associated with this choice? Furthermore, did these practices undergo significant changes during the Middle Ages and beyond?

This is an automated archive.

The original was posted on /r/askhistorians by /u/rymder on 2024-01-24 13:08:36+00:00.

The European Middle Ages are often depicted as a period of intolerance towards viewpoints that might have been considered contrary to church dogma.

Were thinkers with controversial ideas persecuted and penalized for their works? If not legal persecution, what would the potential consequences have been? Were contentious interpretations of holy texts considered more serious than other controversial works, and were there variations in the treatment of different academic fields? Or is the viewpoint that the European Middle Ages were intolerant largely inaccurate?

This is an automated archive.

The original was posted on /r/askhistorians by /u/Leonardo-di-capriolo on 2024-01-24 12:54:40+00:00.

Hi my fellow historians,

This is a subject that has always fascinated me, but I’ve never gotten around to research. Honestly, the absence of a massive Black Communism movement baffles me.

Of all the oppressed peoples of the world, it was the African-American community that suffered the greatest and in the most direct way of capitalism and bourgeois-democracy.

This is not an attempt to write a political pamflet, but an attempt to reason why Communist theory would appeal to this demographic:

• it was capitalism (the economic incentives of slavery) that brought them to the American continent in the first place.
• being enslaved, they truly were the the exploited within this system, not the beneficiaries
• after slavery was abolished, their economic situation therefore was dire
• the ‘democratic governments’ of the south were white only, thus not representing the black population
• these states enacted the Jim Crow laws, thus continuing the oppression

To conclude, it would only make sense to rebel against a system that has been pitted against you from the start and is still oppression you in a country that prides itself the bastion of freedom.

This is an automated archive.

The original was posted on /r/askhistorians by /u/GitmoGrrl1 on 2024-01-24 12:49:02+00:00.

It's my understanding that when the colonies were new and rough, those who had large land holdings in the southern regions would often live in the cities in the north because of the terrible humidity and mosquitoes carrying diseases in the south. And in 1776, there was slavery in all thirteen colonies. The "frontier" was Ohio, Kentucky, Tennessee and Alabama - the west.

My question is: when did Americans begin to think of the United States as two distinct regions, north and south? More importantly, why? Was it because the population of the south had increased or because the northern states had gotten rid of slavery while the south depended on slave labor?

This is an automated archive.

The original was posted on /r/askhistorians by /u/Ceaser_Corporation on 2024-01-24 12:48:03+00:00.

Obviously there was a mass stigma to all the men in Britain at the time that could have fought but chose not to, even leading to incidents of real returning soliders being kicked for cowardice, but what about those already on the homeland that didn't want to fight?

This is an automated archive.

The original was posted on /r/askhistorians by /u/rymder on 2024-01-24 12:43:37+00:00.

When reading about historical battles, it seems that the winning side often aimed to maximize casualties among the defeated, as exemplified by the Carthaginians at the Battle of Cannae.

In instances where the defeated side wasn't surrounded and attempted to retreat, was it customary for the victors to pursue them? Was killing preferred over ransoming prisoners, and were there strategic advantages associated with this choice? Furthermore, did these practices undergo significant changes during the Middle Ages and beyond?