Based on my understanding the east was wealthier and more powerful than the west. it seems that the east had the capability to assist the west and yet did nothing. Wouldn't it be in the best interest of the east to prevent chaos in the west?
Was there any racism or discrimination in the Red Army? I know that there were some Nazi collaborators among Ukrainians and Chechens, and this led to harsh reprisals by the Red Army. But I mean specifically inside the actual Red Army. Were divisions segregated? Did ethnic Russians get any special or advantageous treatment or privileges compared to minorities? Did different ethnic groups get along?
How were great amounts of wealth transferred from one country to another before there was any kind of international banking system? For instance - the Louisiana Purchase. We couldn't just write Napoleon a check and pop it in the mail. Yet millions of dollars needed to change hands in a somewhat secure way. What did they do? Slow ships full of gold that could easily sink in the new storm? Even earlier, nations needed to swap huge amounts of wealth without banks. I have always wondered how they did this securely.
I tend to think of history by events instead of time periods. Thus the time of the Egyptian pyramids was exclusive to them... but who else was doing things then?.. The time of the Roman Empire, who else was making a name for themselves at that time?
Hello, not sure if you guys have seen this but I feel as though this sub is appropriate. A pretty beautiful song and a great source on the state of mind old civil war veterans had in the early 20th century.
I do not own the video, I just do a lot of historical work and came across this.
With Dan Carlin's newest episode being released with a focus on Japanese culture, beginning with the 'opening' of Japan to the west, while I do want learn all the things I can about that period, and the Japanese post ww2, I want more knowledge of early Japan. Which is actually harder to find in book form than I thought, as most books my library has focus on Imperial Japan in the 70 or so years leading up to ww2.
So I need sources and good books on early Japan, with a focus on the cultural aspects if possible (really curious on how Shintoism has played into the society). Thank you in advance!
I'm looking to start reading good history books again and I'd like to start with a crash course on modern ME history. I'd like as macro a level as possible with useful deep dives into the most important events and actors. Thanks for your time!
I was wondering how were murders and the discoveries of dead bodies in the streets of a major European city treated? I was specifically wondering about 16th century onwards.
Would there be an investigation into what happened much like today, or would they simply clear the body away and forget about it?
I am looking for a history podcast that is a more advanced level than for example the Dan Carlin podcasts. Don't get me wrong, Dan Carlin podcasts are great and I am not saying that I know everything he talks about, but I would simply like to know if there are any podcasts (preferably about 20th century) that talk about events or historical processes on a more advanced level, than for example Dan Carlin.
When Poland in exile declared war on Japan, Japan rejected the declaration. Their reply was “We don't accept the Polish declaration of war. The Poles, fighting for their freedom, declared war under the British pressure.”
How does one reject a declaration of war?
Ive been reading Genghis Khan by Frank Mclynn and he talked about how Temujin and Jamulha worked together, to take over the steppes before Temujin betrayed Jamukha.
So as historians or history buff bois, do you think this is true or false?
I write a musical, it takes place in London, 1940. The end of the musical will be the end of the bombing, but I can't imagine how should it goes. Suddenly there are no planes? Or the military find the people and tells that it ends? Newspapers maybe? I want to be historically accurate.
A lot of historical focus, at least in all of the history classes I took that covered WWII, centers around Germany and the rise of the Nazis. How did the rest of the world view what was happening in Germany? Did it come as a shock when Hitler annexed Austria and then invaded Poland?
Backstory: my dad worked for the company that bought ELCO, who made the PT boats. One day, to clear out space, the company decided to throw out a buildings worth of old blueprints from ELCO. My dad served in the Navy and thought it would be cool to have a blueprint and his boss told him that he was welcome to take one. By sheer chance, after two minutes he had the outboard profile of PT-109. For thirty years it sat, rolled up in a metal tube in my dad's closet, and occasionally we would unroll it. I didn't recognize the importance of the boat until I was in my twenties, at which point I suggested to my parents that we frame it and display it. It is now in my possession and hangs on my wall out of direct sunlight.
Last year I went to the National WW2 museum in New Orleans, and ever since then I have been wondering if this "belongs in a museum", as Indy would say. I've done some internet searches and cannot find any other references to the blueprints for PT-109 existing in an archive, which has made me wonder if this is the only existing copy of anything from the PT-109 blueprint set. I've thought about loaning/donating it to the WW2 museum or the JFK Library, though I would want to make sure that it was actually displayed somewhere that it could be appreciated by the public and not just stuck in some archive.
I want to do a couple things, but don't really know how to do either of them, and this is where I was really hoping that a sub full of history buffs will be able to give me some advice on this.
Link to the framed blueprint (sorry for the reflection): https://flic.kr/p/29dCU49
Since slaves represented a substantial financial investment, the North must have had some idea of how to transition out of slavery beyond 'yer free'! Was it reimbursement? Was there a road map of how the north hoped the southern economy could adapt, and to what extent did they propose the government's help and involvement? Were there forces in the South that agreed with or otherwise tried to encourage such a plan of transition from bondage?
Hello, can someone tell me some documentary movies about the Austro-Hungarian Empire or , if not possible, about WW1 ? I have always searched for such ones and never found one good. And yes, I know about the Great War Channel on youtube :). Thanks a lot in advance .
I was discussing this with a friend a week ago and neither of us really had an answer. We were talking about how the US was impacted by Southern construction following the Civil War and then began thinking about how Europe was shaped by reconstruction efforts post-World War 2. In high school, we kind of glossed over this, shifting immediately to a quick summary of the Pacific Theater following a brief summary of the European Theater so any information or perspective on the topic would be super helpful.
For those who don't know the evangelist "Luke" has different names in different languages. Wikipedia states that "Luke" has died in 84 AD in Antioch. The language of Antioch in that time period was latin as far as I know (not 100% sure though. There where a bunch of different languages in Antioch, also just because they had a new leading empire there in todays Syria doesn't mean Lukes parents spoke the language of the mentioned new empire), which means the actual name of Luke should be (if Lukes parents spoke latin) Lūcās, which would be very close to "Luke", unlike lūqās for example which would be hebrew. My first question to this is, if I am getting something historically wrong here. My 2nd question would be why no sources state that and insted often just mention that his name is written different in different languages and not stating which language is the one his parents used. My 3rd question is how can names change that much in different languages? And my final question: What is Lukes actuall name considering everything i mentioned and maybe even more, i haven't thought about yet. Thanks for any help and sorry for bad English.
Edit.: Changed "born" to "died"
Edit2.: Sadly i can't change the title, but what i meant is the evangelist Luke instead of the apostle Luke. Edit3.: apostle might be correct too since he's "counted among the seventy disciples who are referred to as the seventy apostles in the Orthodox tradition." -@LateInTheAfternoon
Did they already consider themselves part of a common cultural region, despite the political division between the hundreds of states in the HRE ? And did they already have a common sense (and desire?) of unity ?
For those like me who are very interested in rome. Does it annoy you that roman legionaries are portrayed 95% of the time wearing the lorica segmentata? Especially when the most famous era of rome would arguably be the gallic wars ( or just anything to do with Julius Caesar really) when the armour looked quite different.
Personally it annoys me but I wanna know what you think.
Even when his policy was shown to have failed and he was forced to resign, why would he continue to push that policy as part of the War Cabinet?
This has been triggered by watching the Darkest Hour.
I understand that Chamberlains closest Allie Lord Halifax came round to fighting Germany in defence of Poland however once Churchill became prime minister reverted to opening channels with Hitler
Was appeasement continued because of dire situation of the BEF surrounded in Calais and Dunkirk in retreat? Or was it a more ideological position that chamberlain could not let go after he had pushed so hard for the Munich agreeement which had cost him his premiership?
/r/History is a place for discussions about history. Feel free to submit interesting articles, tell us about this cool book you just read, or start a discussion about who everyone's favorite figure of minor French nobility is!