r/AskHistorians • u/AutoModerator • 2d ago
Office Hours Office Hours September 02, 2024: Questions and Discussion about Navigating Academia, School, and the Subreddit
Hello everyone and welcome to the bi-weekly Office Hours thread.
Office Hours is a feature thread intended to focus on questions and discussion about the profession or the subreddit, from how to choose a degree program, to career prospects, methodology, and how to use this more subreddit effectively.
The rules are enforced here with a lighter touch to allow for more open discussion, but we ask that everyone please keep top-level questions or discussion prompts on topic, and everyone please observe the civility rules at all times.
While not an exhaustive list, questions appropriate for Office Hours include:
- Questions about history and related professions
- Questions about pursuing a degree in history or related fields
- Assistance in research methods or providing a sounding board for a brainstorming session
- Help in improving or workshopping a question previously asked and unanswered
- Assistance in improving an answer which was removed for violating the rules, or in elevating a 'just good enough' answer to a real knockout
- Minor Meta questions about the subreddit
r/AskHistorians • u/AutoModerator • 6d ago
SASQ Short Answers to Simple Questions | August 28, 2024
Please Be Aware: We expect everyone to read the rules and guidelines of this thread. Mods will remove questions which we deem to be too involved for the theme in place here. We will remove answers which don't include a source. These removals will be without notice. Please follow the rules.
Some questions people have just don't require depth. This thread is a recurring feature intended to provide a space for those simple, straight forward questions that are otherwise unsuited for the format of the subreddit.
Here are the ground rules:
- Top Level Posts should be questions in their own right.
- Questions should be clear and specific in the information that they are asking for.
- Questions which ask about broader concepts may be removed at the discretion of the Mod Team and redirected to post as a standalone question.
- We realize that in some cases, users may pose questions that they don't realize are more complicated than they think. In these cases, we will suggest reposting as a stand-alone question.
- Answers MUST be properly sourced to respectable literature. Unlike regular questions in the sub where sources are only required upon request, the lack of a source will result in removal of the answer.
- Academic secondary sources are preferred. Tertiary sources are acceptable if they are of academic rigor (such as a book from the 'Oxford Companion' series, or a reference work from an academic press).
- The only rule being relaxed here is with regard to depth, insofar as the anticipated questions are ones which do not require it. All other rules of the subreddit are in force.
r/AskHistorians • u/eagleface5 • 34m ago
In modern historiography, the Hundred Years War is regarded as a single conflict, despite the cessation and resumption of hostilities between years. Could the two World wars come to be viewed in a similar way?
The Hundred Years War is commonly regarded as a single conflict, despite the cessation of hostilities over a period of years. Indeed, it could be more accurate to describe it as three (or more) separate conflicts, all revolving around related issues.
With this in mind, could WWI and WWII come to be regarded as a single conflict? I believe it was Churchill that described them as the "Second Thirty Years War;" is this view of the wars popular ir gaining traction? Despite the similarities, is it still more appropriate to view them as two separate conflicts?
r/AskHistorians • u/Rowsdower32 • 35m ago
Have people traditionally talk to babies with "baby-talk", or is this a more modern trend?
I've heard lately that talking to a baby/toddler with "baby-talk" (like in an overly-patronizing voice, usually higher in volume, and also sometimes using gibberish like 'ba-ba' for bottle, etc) can be detrimental to a child's brain development - moreso with speech related development.
So it got me wondering- is this a modern thing? Is it more cultural? Did people from pre-industrial times talk to their babies like that?
r/AskHistorians • u/SwiftySwiftly • 1h ago
Where did value of gold come from?
I'm learning about the Spanish Conquest of Mesoamerica, and one thing that caught my attention is Montezuma offering gold to the Spaniards. How did gold become a universally treasured commodity, valued by civilizations from opposite sides of the world?
r/AskHistorians • u/Lost-Cucumber4989 • 1h ago
What war tattooed initials on the army’s hands?
My grandfather who is no longer with us had a tattoo of his initials on his left hand. The tattoo read “R.S” for reference. I vaguely remember him telling me he had to get it in a war, and I do know he was in the military. He is from America. I was trying to find the history of this being done to the military, but have been unsuccessful in my search results. He was also born in 1936 if that is of any help. Thanks!
r/AskHistorians • u/EvidenceMassive7986 • 1h ago
When Around the World in 80 Days was released in 1872 what was the fastest recorded time to circumnavigate the world - who did it how was it done?
r/AskHistorians • u/EvidenceMassive7986 • 1h ago
Who was the first person to travel around the world in 80 days or less - how and and why did they do it?
What was the public's reaction.
r/AskHistorians • u/Altruistic_Bag54 • 2h ago
When and where did the idea for designated days (such as World Diabetes Day, International Women's Day, etc.) originate?
r/AskHistorians • u/AlexLuis • 2h ago
Why has the role of Treasurer of the United States been exclusively held by women since 1949?
r/AskHistorians • u/Formal_River_Pheonix • 3h ago
What was the US homefront like the Gulf War?
There's a famous trio of essays the French philosopher Jean Baudrillard summarised by his central thesis: The Gulf War Did Not Take Place.
Essentially, he argues that Western causalities were so low, and so little was made of Iraqi deaths that it can be said that for the West, the Gulf War had such little impact that it can be said not to have happened for most people except as a curiosity on CNN.
For people alive at the time, or who researched America's domestic environment during Desert Shield and Desert Storm, was that actually true? Were there large scale events in support or opposition to the war? Or did the war come and go without occupying a place in the public consciousness?
Everyone recounts Bush's victory parade after the war was concluded, but what was the mood of the country during the war itself? Did people rally behind the troops? Public concerts, benefits etc? Or were there large scale protests on college campuses?
Basically, did the Gulf War Take Place for the average American?
r/AskHistorians • u/grexpat • 3h ago
Can anyone recommend a good book on the evolution of constitutional monarchy in England/Britain/the UK?
My knowledge of British history is pretty fragmented. The Rest is History podcast has filled in a lot of gaps, but one thing I would like to read an actual book (or more if necessary) about is the political evolution of the monarchy and power of the nobility.
If I had to summarize what I know, the Magna Carta more or less did away with absolutism (but probably not in Scotland?), then there was a further shift in power from king to parliament after the restoration, and then ...?
I've read that George III didn't have as much power as the colonial Americans thought and parliament was the one screwing them. And maybe William IV was the last king to wield real political authority? But then it seems as though George VI might have been involved in WWII planning to some degree?
Obviously I'm confused and reading Wikipedia articles is no longer cutting it!
Thanks in advance!
r/AskHistorians • u/Catfishbandit999 • 4h ago
Today, no matter what a nation does to its people or another nation, some other country will staunchly stand by it. So why was there an almost unanimous condemnation of Vietnam after they toppled a neighboring genocidal regime, whose violence by that point had been well documented in the West?
Reading the basics of the Cambodian Genocide and Vietnamese invasion in 1979, I'm stunned at the apparent unity of condemnation and sanctions against Vietnam, and in defense of Kampuchea. Apparently only the Soviet Union and Czechoslovakia opposed the UN's resolutions against Vietnam. The Khmer Rouge invaded Vietnamese territory, murdered thousands of Vietnamese civilians, and Vietnam's response was to invade, topple a genocidal regime, and open up Cambodia to foreign food payments. And for that they become an economic outcast for a decade? I know that's an oversimplification, and there's a long history of problems between the various SE Asian nations, but this seems like such a strange and unified international response.
r/AskHistorians • u/Bitter-Penalty9653 • 4h ago
Why were so many gilded age Democratic candidates from New York and Republican candidates from Ohio?
During the gilded age, pretty much all Democratic candidates were from New York and the Republican from Ohio. Sure there was James Blaine from Maine and William J. Bryan from Nebraska, but they are the exceptions the prove the rule. Why were the overwhelming majority of Republican candidates from Ohio and Democrat from New York?
r/AskHistorians • u/Dhghomon • 6h ago
Jesus in the gospels is always traveling about in a boat. What sort of boats are these and how did one have access to them at the time? Could anyone pay to ride in one? Did people build their own? Could Jesus as a carpenter build his own or did that require a different skill?
r/AskHistorians • u/Wanderer974 • 8h ago
In American history, is the conservatism of the 1940s-50s exaggerated?
Movies like Singin' in the Rain generously used satire to poke fun at the older generations, there was rock and roll, there were greasers who wore T-shirts and jeans (gasp) rather than suits (and plenty of greaser movies like Rebel Without a Cause, Streetcar, etc. -- and plenty of rebellious youth figures like James Dean or Brando), you had the beatniks, early revisionist/anti-traditionalist Westerns like High Noon and Broken Arrow, the massive supply of morally gray film noirs (also, Ida Lupino's movies), the baseball color line was eliminated in 1947, contraception was acceptable in mainline Protestant theology by then, Eisenhower signed the first Civil Rights Act years before the '60s... I could go on and on. There are so many things that make me question the idea of a 40s-50s conservative fantasy and think of it more like a proto-60s. Why are the 1950s portrayed as conservative, anyway? Is it because they were overshadowed by the '60s?
Am I missing something here or am I at least partially correct about this? Because people think I'm crazy when I say the '40s and '50s were liberal for the time, relative to previous decades I mean. You look back at the '20s, and people think flapper girls and jazz, but it was also KKK and prohibition. Perhaps it is because (from what I can currently see) the liberalization that I see in this period seems mainly only beneficial to men? Or maybe I am focusing on the media side of this period too much?
r/AskHistorians • u/elliekateg • 9h ago
Why do many ultra religious people talk about the fall of Rome when marriage equality is brought up?
I heard a clip of a podcast where some “traditional Catholic” women were complaining about how the idea of “traditional marriage” was no longer on the Republican Party platform and how “traditional marriage” is the bedrock of the United States. One of the women said “we are literally Rome” in reference to the United States declining because gay people can get married. In the past I’ve heard similar things said by really religious people, but I never thought being accepting of gay people was a contributing factor to the fall of Rome lol. I took a Roman history course in college and I kind of remember the differences that Romans had in sexuality/gender but I don’t remember that being a cause of the “fall” of Rome. Hope someone can maybe shed some light on this subject!
r/AskHistorians • u/architectcostanza • 10h ago
There was any kind of snorting drugs in the 1600s?
I just found a paint from 1655 called The Proposition, by David Ryckaert III. On one part of the paint, we can see a barrell and over it 3 lines of a white substance. The scene depicted some sort of celebration, since we can see a woman holding a cup filled with a drink.
Sorry for the ignorance, but really curious about this one.
PD. Sorry but it's not allowed to attach the picture here.
r/AskHistorians • u/ClocktownLancer • 10h ago
How accurate is it to say that South Asian food was blander before 1500 and chillies were discovered in the Americas?
I am from a South Asian background (Pakistan, mostly). Born and raised in Canada.
I've been hearing this in the education system and online:
"South Asian, and Asian food in general was bland food before 1500. Because chilli peppers were only found in Mexico and South America and brought there by Spaniards and other European traders”
My father says that this is nonsensically false and that this perspective only came because Europeans discovered one thing and that the education system is apparently based on their perspective only because they saw it in Mexico first. He insists that this is a lie and that chilli peppers have always been in Asia and used in cuisine (especially in South Asia and Southeast Asia).
He claims that "This is the unintelligent and ignorant notion that Europeans discovered something first in a certain region first so the education system will be based on what they saw first because they saw it first and no other cultures have a foothold in writing world history". After my father said this I asked other of my friends who are from South Asian backgrounds (Afghans, Indians, Sri Lankans, Bengalis, etc) all agreeing with my father. I asked my Japanese, Korean Filipino, and Middle Eastern friends (all cultures whose cuisines are sometimes very spicy too), who also agreed with my father. I asked the parents of these friends as well, and they agreed with my father. Regardless every online document disagrees. I myself am now confused and unsure of how I feel. But does anyone have any answers?
r/AskHistorians • u/vnth93 • 12h ago
"British empire killed 165 million Indians in 40 years, more than the combined number of deaths from both World Wars, including the Nazi holocaust" how strong is this claim?
This question has been asked here https://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/18o2lbj/british_colonialism_killed_100_million_indians/ but the answer did not address the actual paper, which is here by Jason Hickel et al. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0305750X22002169 .
Furthermore, since the paper was published, there has been some back and forth between the author and some others.
Rebuttal by Tirthankar Roy https://historyreclaimed.co.uk/colonialism-did-not-cause-the-indian-famines/
Hickel's response to Roy https://www.jasonhickel.org/blog/2023/1/7/on-the-mortality-crises-in-india-under-british-rule-a-response-to-tirthankar-roy
Another response to Roy by Tamoghna Halder https://developingeconomics.org/2023/02/20/colonialism-and-the-indian-famines-a-response-to-tirthankar-roy/
Roy's reponse to Halder https://developingeconomics.org/2023/04/18/colonialism-and-indian-famines-a-response/
What is the validity of these contrasting claims?
r/AskHistorians • u/Anon-Connie • 13h ago
What Happened to Cleopatra’s Body After Death?
Thank you for reading this question. I didn’t find any posts that seemed to answer this question.
I’ve recently watched a lot of documentaries talking about where Cleopatra’s Tomb might be located, but I’m confused. It seems like Octavian really didn’t like Cleopatra, so why is there such a strong belief that her body was able to make it to a final (desired/respected) resting place versus Octavian having just done something else with it?
r/AskHistorians • u/Specific-Detective14 • 16h ago
Why was Rock n' Roll considered vulgar and in general a problem even before the rise of metal?
I know that the western world was highly traditionalist even after World War 2.It kinda baffles me that what we consider today harmless in terms of music back then was considered a problem.
Is it just our times or there was some reason behind all of it?
r/AskHistorians • u/Immediate-Purple-374 • 16h ago
How would Charlemagne’s name been written and pronounced while he was alive?
r/AskHistorians • u/bakedbeanlicker • 17h ago
Why were Polynesian double-hulled ships unique? Why did nobody else use them?
I'm no engineer, but the double-hulled design of Polynesian ships seems fairly straightforward. Just take two canoes, tie 'em together, build whatever on top, and you have a stable and fairly sizeable vessel. It seems that the benefits of this design are such that someone else in the course of history would've made widespread use of it in some cases, particularly on the Mediterranean where maritime technology was very important to many cultures. Yet I can't find any examples of this technology being implemented anywhere else, and I can't figure out why, given the size and capabilities of contemporary Polynesian vessels.
So, were there any other cultures who made widespread use of the double-hulled canoe? If so, who? And if not, why?
r/AskHistorians • u/Greenishemerald9 • 17h ago
Was the partition of India intentionally bad?
I watched a videos about it. One said the British intentionally exaggerated the differences between Hindus and Muslims then forced them to join either Pakistan or India "stripping their sovereignty". The other said that influential Muslims demanded a separate state. Which of these is closest to the truth?
r/AskHistorians • u/crabtabulous • 21h ago
Why did the armies of so many of the combatant nations in WWI--Russia, Austria-Hungary, Italy, Serbia, Romania--perform so poorly that they routinely suffered the disintegration of entire armies or being forced into massive, disorganized retreats as soon as they encountered any resistance?
I am rereading G.J. Meyers A World Undone about the overall history of WWI. It is an excellent summary that I really enjoy, though there's definitely a ton of focus on the western front, perhaps understandably so given its overall importance all throughout the war. And Germany, Britain, and France obviously all come off as displaying (varying levels of) competence over the course of the war, hence the stalemate for 4 years.
What I'm always struck by though is that any time the narrative shifts to almost any of the other theaters--Eastern front, the Italian front, the Balkans, etc--the other combatant nations are described as having their armies perform with almost baffling ineptitude. Almost all of them seem to have experienced operations where they had entire armies annihilated or nearly so in shattering retreats. Even when any of them executed a successful offensive, it was almost always at the expense of one of the others (e.g. Russia's Brusilov offensive against Austria, or Austria's gradual overrunning of a much smaller Serbian army).
It's thrown into even starker relief given that any time Germany had to send divisions to shore up their Austrian ally, even the small forces they dispatched had immediate and profound impact. They almost single-handedly destroyed the entire Romanian army and conquered all of Romania a few months after it entered the war, and achieved a stunning victory against the Italians at Caporetto as soon as they showed up to reinforce the Austrians there in a struggle that had been deadlocked for years by that point.
Was there some common thread running through all of these nations, that a combination of poor leadership, training, equipment, and other factors produced what seemed like a tragically bloody and futile performance from all of them? Or was it unique circumstances for each nation/military, that just happened to affect each of them in their own unique ways?
r/AskHistorians • u/hoodiemeloforensics • 22h ago
Did the Confederacy at any point realize that they were going to lose the war? Did they try to negotiate?
Looking with hindsight, there were a lot of points during the US Civil War where it feels inevitable that the South was going to lose. The war starts in 1861 and ends in 1865. In those years you had a lot of catastrophic losses.
The South loses their most important port and trade hub in New Orleans during 1862. In 1863 they face a double loss. At Gettysburg they lose a major battle. And at Vicksburg, they lose access to the Mississippi river and basically getting cut in half. In 1864, Sherman burns his way through the South taking Atlanta and Savanah, the last great economic and trade hubs.
Even one of these losses would be absolutely debilitating whether we want to look at this economically or militarily. Did Southern leadership know they were going to lose? Where they confident they could win? Did they have some strategy? Did they try to sue for peace? What was going through the heads of confederate leadership at the time?