archived
stringclasses 1
value | author
stringlengths 3
20
| author_fullname
stringclasses 0
values | body
stringlengths 1
29.4k
| comment_type
stringclasses 0
values | controversiality
stringclasses 2
values | created_utc
stringlengths 10
10
| edited
stringlengths 4
10
| gilded
stringclasses 5
values | id
stringlengths 7
7
| link_id
stringlengths 8
9
| locked
stringclasses 0
values | name
stringlengths 10
10
| parent_id
stringlengths 8
10
| permalink
stringclasses 0
values | retrieved_on
stringlengths 10
10
| score
stringclasses 862
values | subreddit_id
stringclasses 1
value | subreddit_name_prefixed
stringclasses 0
values | subreddit_type
stringclasses 0
values | total_awards_received
stringclasses 0
values |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
True | PhantomIdol | null | Good catch. | null | 0 | 1315955847 | False | 0 | c2jobxj | t3_kdymm | null | t1_c2jobxj | t1_c2jk0tc | null | 1427596654 | 1 | t5_2ssp3 | null | null | null |
True | PhantomIdol | null | I can assure you it's not. It was a discussion that I took place in and I was merely looking for a historian's take on it. | null | 0 | 1315955882 | False | 0 | c2joc3d | t3_kdymm | null | t1_c2joc3d | t1_c2jiw8w | null | 1427596656 | 1 | t5_2ssp3 | null | null | null |
True | what_the_crap | null | Argue that they killed the most natives, who would want to refute that? | null | 0 | 1315967698 | False | 0 | c2jptfi | t3_kex5q | null | t1_c2jptfi | t3_kex5q | null | 1427597421 | 2 | t5_2ssp3 | null | null | null |
True | WedgeHead | null | Not sure how much detail you want on this.
Political marriages (princesses being married to foreign kings) are known from the very earliest historical periods. Much better known are marriage contracts from pretty early on in Ancient Mesopotamia. Although they tell us very little about the human feelings involved, they give us enormous insights into the legal rights, statuses, and materials exchange associated with the act.
Marriage in Mesopotamia was a link between larger families as much, if not more than, as between individuals. Early Mesopotamian marriages are definitely affairs involving both families. The exact order and details of these customs are not known in all periods, but the general outline looks like this:
* 1) betrothal or engagement
* 2) reinforcing exchanges or payments by *both* sides (both parties provide gifts)
* 3) the physical move of the girl to the father-in-law's house
* 4) establishment of co-habitation with husband.
The protracted nature of the proceedings were a social lubricant that made it easier for both parties to take care of all the details. In some cases the bride or groom were not old enough to marry and so the ceremonies had to wait until they were of age. In any event, the documents clearly spell out that marriage is about property and obligations.
Marriages were generally between families of equivalent social standing. Marriage contracts generally had to specify the terms for mutual separation. Men could divorce women they found difficult to live with but they had to pay back the marriage gift. Divorced women could choose to live in her former husband's home. Marriage was predominantly monogamous. Only the very wealthy had secondary spouses (asshatu) or slave concubines (esertu).
In Ancient Egypt, marriage was more conventional. Families arranged marriages, but young people looked about for suitable spouses and romantic love was idealized. Most ancient Egyptian marriages were also monogamous.
In ancient (Shang/Zhou) China, one's patrilineal "houses," or descent groups (zu, shi), had a lot of influence over whom you could marry. Shang rules of exogamy only allowed marriage between people from different descent groups. Women forfeited their membership in their lineage group when they married and joined their husbands' clans and ancestral cults. Most lower-class Shang Chinese were monogamous. Upper-class men frequently took secondary wives. In Zhou times, these were often younger sisters or other close relatives of a chief wife.
* Adapted from Postgate *Early Mesopotamia* (1992) chapter 5 and Trigger *Understanding Early Civilizations* (2003) chapter 9.
| null | 0 | 1315968947 | True | 0 | c2jpzhm | t3_ken6t | null | t1_c2jpzhm | t3_ken6t | null | 1427597501 | 11 | t5_2ssp3 | null | null | null |
True | [deleted] | null | My next post in this subreddit was going to be asking for recommendations on books on the history or Isreal/Palestine.
I'm not trying to hijack this thread, but any suggestions would be appreciated. | null | 0 | 1315971128 | False | 0 | c2jq9bs | t3_kdrvv | null | t1_c2jq9bs | t3_kdrvv | null | 1427597628 | 2 | t5_2ssp3 | null | null | null |
True | littlespy | null | totally agree! | null | 0 | 1315999274 | False | 0 | c2jsaff | t3_kdymm | null | t1_c2jsaff | t1_c2jlrl5 | null | 1427598586 | 2 | t5_2ssp3 | null | null | null |
True | foretopsail | null | They enforced religious freedom in a way their neighbors weren't willing to. | null | 0 | 1316008480 | False | 0 | c2jsyak | t3_kex5q | null | t1_c2jsyak | t3_kex5q | null | 1427598912 | 7 | t5_2ssp3 | null | null | null |
True | HenKing12 | null | I'm also taking AP US history. Did some reading a on this a few days ago. [George Calvert](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/George_Calvert,_1st_Baron_Baltimore), who was a respected British statesman, was a closet Catholic. When he "came out" there was public outrage because of the Protestant discontent during the era. But he secured a charter to Maryland and became Lord Baltimore. He wanted to attract English settlers to his colony, so he allowed for Protestants and Catholics to worship (not completely freely because he warned the Catholics to not scare away the Protestants). On the other hand, the Maryland Charter was a throw-back to feudal times, and set up a rigid class system (that wasn't put into effect well) so you may want to come up with some defense for that. Good luck, and feel free to fact-check me. | null | 0 | 1316032927 | True | 0 | c2jwarb | t3_kex5q | null | t1_c2jwarb | t1_c2jsyak | null | 1427600475 | 5 | t5_2ssp3 | null | null | null |
True | alesserknownceleb | null | The Maryland Toleration Act of 1649 I would think is your best primary source for this - full text of it [here](http://oll.libertyfund.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=1048&Itemid=264).
It more or less defines hate speech, a fact made relevant by the recent [hate crime case](http://www.wbaltv.com/news/29168043/detail.html) that been making headlines around here. | null | 0 | 1316040733 | False | 0 | c2jxb86 | t3_kex5q | null | t1_c2jxb86 | t1_c2jsyak | null | 1427601092 | 4 | t5_2ssp3 | null | null | null |
True | agentdcf | null | As a student in cultural and environmental history in modern Britain, the British empire, and the United States, I've found several books truly eye-opening.
One is William Cronon's *Nature's Metropolis: Chicago and the Great West*. It's an environmental history of Chicago, with some chapters that are truly stunning, in particular the chapter on the annihilation of space in the meatpacking industry and the one on the invention of the grain future.
Another is Ken Pomeranz's *The Great Divergence: China, Europe, and the Making of the World Economy*. The first half is a truly staggering takedown of decades of scholarship that believed that Western Europe was exceptional in some particular way that led to the Industrial Revolution. The second half is an argument that does more to link industrialization to imperialism than any other work I've seen. This work really transformed my understanding of the modern world, and it would be a good challenge to some of the other works suggested on here, like Jared Diamond or Niall Ferguson.
And finally, Michel Foucault's *The History of Sexuality*. This may get some flack on here as Foucault tends to provoke strong reactions. I find him very insightful and his critiques useful if not universal. He is a French post-modern(ish) theorist, however, so he is not easy to read. The History of Sexuality I think is his most accessible book. If you want the same basic subject but with a more empirical approach, try Thomas Lacqueur's *Making Sex: Body and Gender from the Greeks to Freud*. | null | 0 | 1316052501 | False | 0 | c2jyopx | t3_k7kck | null | t1_c2jyopx | t3_k7kck | null | 1427601730 | 3 | t5_2ssp3 | null | null | null |
True | studakris | null | Foucault...booooooooooooooooooooooooo.
I'm sorry, but I feel I'm compelled by moral obligation to state my displeasure with Foucault. Nothing against Foucault per se, but those miserable days writing Foucault papers. | null | 0 | 1316053720 | False | 0 | c2jyu1z | t3_k7kck | null | t1_c2jyu1z | t1_c2jyopx | null | 1427601803 | 2 | t5_2ssp3 | null | null | null |
True | agentdcf | null | LOL, like I said, he always producers strong reactions. I think I appreciate Foucault more now, in retrospect, than I did as a first-year PhD struggling through my theory seminar. He's not easy to read, for sure, and he can drive you nuts when you try to pin him down. Still, his arguments about power and knowledge are just essential to understanding so much current historiography. He's a major source of critical insight. | null | 0 | 1316055732 | False | 0 | c2jz2xt | t3_k7kck | null | t1_c2jz2xt | t1_c2jyu1z | null | 1427601919 | 2 | t5_2ssp3 | null | null | null |
True | fun_young_man | null | I am expecting a 12 page analysis on Discipline and Punishment to be on my desk/in my inbox by 3pm tomorrow. Please pay particular attention to his discussion of the panopticon. Thanks. | null | 0 | 1316058424 | False | 0 | c2jzejv | t3_k7kck | null | t1_c2jzejv | t1_c2jyu1z | null | 1427602069 | 2 | t5_2ssp3 | null | null | null |
True | fun_young_man | null | If you want a fun and light introduction to the ancient Med. let me recommend Courtesans and Fishcakes. | null | 0 | 1316058662 | False | 0 | c2jzfix | t3_k7kck | null | t1_c2jzfix | t1_c2i8x3w | null | 1427602081 | 3 | t5_2ssp3 | null | null | null |
True | fun_young_man | null | I don't envy that poor GYN. | null | 0 | 1316058716 | False | 0 | c2jzfrr | t3_k7kck | null | t1_c2jzfrr | t1_c2i8vqa | null | 1427602084 | 5 | t5_2ssp3 | null | null | null |
True | studakris | null | One of the wags in my department once stated that "the only good thing the AIDS virus ever did was to get rid of Foucault" | null | 0 | 1316077314 | False | 0 | c2k0wn6 | t3_k7kck | null | t1_c2k0wn6 | t1_c2jz2xt | null | 1427602777 | 2 | t5_2ssp3 | null | null | null |
True | [deleted] | null | MA Student hoping to be a PhD. Specialism: Medieval Mediterranean/Medieval Economic History | null | 0 | 1316095802 | False | 0 | c2k21mf | t3_jxh0x | null | t1_c2k21mf | t3_jxh0x | null | 1427603318 | 2 | t5_2ssp3 | null | null | null |
True | Killfile | null | Marriage is a means of dealing with resource scarcity and the nature of marriage reflects the nature of resource scarcity in society.
Presuming that land follows the paternal line (though, not always) you'll see a stronger move towards polygamy in societies that have greater resource scarcity.
Likewise, should land follow the female line... polyandry is more common.
As resource scarcity becomes less of a problem we approach a model of marriage more in line with how we view it in most of the Western World today though arranged marriage will remain common so long as the family and kinship group (tribe) are of greater importance than the individual.
Only with the rise of individualism during the Renascence do we start to see marriage for love as a socially acceptable institution.
Bottom line -- marriage hasn't always been ANYTHING and people who tell you otherwise have a political agenda they're pushing. | null | 0 | 1316102134 | False | 0 | c2k2ulb | t3_ken6t | null | t1_c2k2ulb | t3_ken6t | null | 1427603691 | 1 | t5_2ssp3 | null | null | null |
True | Speculum | null | >Likewise, should land follow the female line... polyandry is more common.
This is pure speculation, imho, since there are no societies in history with female-only inheritance rights. | null | 0 | 1316191155 | False | 0 | c2kca7l | t3_ken6t | null | t1_c2kca7l | t1_c2k2ulb | null | 1427608277 | -1 | t5_2ssp3 | null | null | null |
True | ChickenChickenNugget | null | They wanted to avoid conflicts in their colonial empires, and thwart an increasingly offensive Germany.
This article sums it rather well :
[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Entente_cordiale](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Entente_cordiale)
| null | 0 | 1316278557 | False | 0 | c2kke5i | t3_kiqdo | null | t1_c2kke5i | t3_kiqdo | null | 1427612169 | 9 | t5_2ssp3 | null | null | null |
True | tehnomad | null | It goes a little further than that. Since the Napoleonic Wars ended in the Treaty of Vienna in 1815, the French and British did not have a war between them. They were even allies in the Crimean War (1853) and during the Second Opium War (1856). In addition to focusing on colonial empires, the French and British were also concerned with the growing power of Russia and Germany during the 19th century. | null | 0 | 1316281585 | False | 0 | c2kkpwt | t3_kiqdo | null | t1_c2kkpwt | t1_c2kke5i | null | 1427612323 | 8 | t5_2ssp3 | null | null | null |
True | erstazi | null | Even compared to Pennsylvania's stance on religious freedom? | null | 0 | 1316294405 | False | 0 | c2km3az | t3_kex5q | null | t1_c2km3az | t1_c2jsyak | null | 1427612970 | 2 | t5_2ssp3 | null | null | null |
True | [deleted] | null | The Franco-British friendship since the 19th century is a classic case of "the enemy of my enemy is my friend", the common enemy in question being the German Empire. | null | 0 | 1316295363 | False | 0 | c2km71c | t3_kiqdo | null | t1_c2km71c | t3_kiqdo | null | 1427613020 | 6 | t5_2ssp3 | null | null | null |
True | DocFreeman | null | This a common misconception. It's very difficult to pinpoint ONE day that the Roman empire just stopped working. I'm sure if you looked hard enough you could cite the sacking of Rome or the division of the Empire but even then Rome's decline (at least as I've understood it) was a centuries long process.
Comparing to modern day America, imagine if barbarians invaded southern Arizona. Sure we would fight them off but then another 20-30 years later they invaded again and we pushed them back a little less or just agreed to incorporate them into the United States. Repeat this process for another 200 years and you eventually get the collapse of the Roman empire.
It didn't help that over time the differences between the Eastern and Western segments of the empire became more pronounced and distinct. Returning to the American analogy imagine if the Western states just decided they were going to establish their own rules and systems of taxation and in essence minimizing the relevance of Washington D.C.
So to directly answer your question, while I have read isolated incidents of Roman soldiers sort of being abandoned in far off provinces these instances were very rare and more often involved either a slow withdrawal of military power from the region (like what we are attempting to do in Afghanistan/Iraq) or the soldiers just decided to integrate with the local populations and establish their own communities (I know of this specifically happening in what is now Spain).
Full disclosure: Most of my knowledge about ancient Rome comes from 1-2 classes in undergrad and 4 years of classical latin in High School. | null | 0 | 1316361085 | True | 0 | c2kriz2 | t3_kjcz1 | null | t1_c2kriz2 | t3_kjcz1 | null | 1427615591 | 17 | t5_2ssp3 | null | null | null |
True | DocFreeman | null | I wrote like 4 paragraphs trying to answer this question but I wasn't able to come up with anything that wouldn't open itself up to interpretation and criticism. Plus it's really complicated and there's a lot of factors.
So here's a wikipedia link. I'm sorry, please forgive me for failing to be a good historian.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/US_aid_to_Israel#Recognition_of_the_State_of_Israel | null | 0 | 1316362053 | False | 0 | c2krmil | t3_kjdal | null | t1_c2krmil | t3_kjdal | null | 1427615645 | 7 | t5_2ssp3 | null | null | null |
True | DocFreeman | null | It's a little over-simplistic but there was a book I read some time ago called *A Little History of the World* that was fairly interesting. It was written back in the 1950s so take it with a grain of salt and its very western-centric but I liked it and it did a good job covering everything from the ancient Greeks up to the Nazis. | null | 0 | 1316372939 | False | 0 | c2ksves | t3_k7kck | null | t1_c2ksves | t3_k7kck | null | 1427616230 | 2 | t5_2ssp3 | null | null | null |
True | mrsavage | null | Thank you I have always wondered about a possible answer to this question for many years I appreciate it | null | 0 | 1316384871 | False | 0 | c2ku92k | t3_kjcz1 | null | t1_c2ku92k | t1_c2kriz2 | null | 1427616874 | 3 | t5_2ssp3 | null | null | null |
True | PresidentCleveland | null | Well, as a historical question, its simple. Truman wanted to get reelected. All those Jewish votes and supporters would help that. Although by a wide enough margin in '48, most thought he would lose to Dewey. Of course New York did and still does have the largest Jewish population. Dewey on won that state by 1%. Taking New York from the Republicans would have given him huge breathing room for the rest of the states.
Why do we still support them so much? I would say that's more of a political question, and shouldn't be asked here. But here's my inflammatory answer: US politics is more corrupt. Israel requires the US for its continuing existence. Thus is really the only state that needs and has a powerful lobby in the US. Most other wealthy people's contributing dollars go to many many different causing, but all contributions from wealthy Jews go towards helping Israel. The Republican party tries to be the more Christian, generally more religious party. Supporting Israel is short hand for saying you're a Christian, that you believe in the revelations for the Bible.
Of course there are no facts to back that up but that's my go. I think most of our foreign policy is unjustly swayed by lobbyists. Israel just has the most to gain from the US supporting it. | null | 0 | 1316406999 | False | 0 | c2kwtqc | t3_kjdal | null | t1_c2kwtqc | t3_kjdal | null | 1427618086 | 5 | t5_2ssp3 | null | null | null |
True | [deleted] | null | I occasionally teach a course on late antiquity and DocFreeman pretty much has it right. I have a load of resources - if you feel like doing some reading, let me know and I'll post a bibliography. | null | 0 | 1316430140 | False | 0 | c2kycqg | t3_kjcz1 | null | t1_c2kycqg | t1_c2kriz2 | null | 1427618814 | 2 | t5_2ssp3 | null | null | null |
True | [deleted] | null | M.A. student, focusing on pre-modern China and Central Asia. | null | 0 | 1316455619 | False | 0 | c2l0yg3 | t3_jxh0x | null | t1_c2l0yg3 | t3_jxh0x | null | 1427620101 | 2 | t5_2ssp3 | null | null | null |
True | [deleted] | null | Alexander the Great was Greek. No, he was Macedonian. I think it makes a significant difference.
Genghis Khan was a complete "barbarian". No, he was actually fairly cultured man. He just so happened he wanted to live in a yert.
China. Broad topic. But I always smirk when people get upset over China becoming economically more powerful than the United States. It was a brief period where the United States was superior; China is simply returning to the way of life before the 19th Century unequal treaties and exploitation.
| null | 0 | 1316456317 | False | 0 | c2l1223 | t3_jzbbq | null | t1_c2l1223 | t3_jzbbq | null | 1427620156 | 6 | t5_2ssp3 | null | null | null |
True | [deleted] | null | I'm Chinese/Central Asia and their relations and I find Peter Hopkirk's books fabulous easy reads. They literally read like thrillers. The Great Game is very timely and interesting; it's about Russian and British interests in Central Asia (mostly the "stans"). His Foreign Devils on the Silk Road is another page turner of his about the Talmalkand (I forget the spelling and I am being lazy and not looking it up) region in western China where Europeans essentially robbed the area of important artifacts to preserve them and study them. China is obviously not happy with that. He's not a historian though, he's a trained journalist so I don't know if they're exactly "scholarly" but Jared Diamond isn't an historian either and I haven't come across a history professor that doesn't have that book on their shelf.
I also enjoyed Jack Weatherford's books, but again, not a n historian. He revises a bit of history and shows Genghis Kahn and the Mongol empire in a completely different light.
A good overview book and one of the first books I actually read on the subject is Empires of the Silk Road by Christopher Beckwith. I think Beckwith does a good job giving a general survey of the different Steppe nomads from the Scythians up to today. It makes one think about the histories that are lost in the end but live on today in pop culture. The epilogue truly brought things full circle. Central Asia shouldn't be neglected, it bridges the gap between Europe and Asia! | null | 0 | 1316489454 | False | 0 | c2l5gdg | t3_k7kck | null | t1_c2l5gdg | t3_k7kck | null | 1427622220 | 3 | t5_2ssp3 | null | null | null |
True | brigantus | null | Not the OP, but I wouldn't mind seeing that bibliography. | null | 0 | 1316506111 | False | 0 | c2l712y | t3_kjcz1 | null | t1_c2l712y | t1_c2kycqg | null | 1427623039 | 3 | t5_2ssp3 | null | null | null |
True | [deleted] | null | OK, here is a selection of texts from the course bibliography:
Cameron, A., *The Later Roman Empire AD 284-430* (London, 1993)
and
-----, *The Mediterranean World in Late Antiquity, AD 395-600* (London, 1993)
Jones, A.H.M., *The Later Roman Empire, 284-602* 4 vols. [2 vols in paperback] (Oxford, 1964)
------, *The Decline of the Ancient World* (London, 1966)
Lenski, N., (ed.), *The Cambridge Companion to the Age of Constantine* (Cambridge, 2006)
Maas, M., (ed.), *The Cambridge Companion to the Age of Justinian* (Cambridge, 2005)
Mitchell, S., *A History of the Later Roman Empire, AD 284-641* (Oxford 2007)
Potter, D.S., *The Roman Empire at Bay* (London, 2004)
Bowersock, G.B., Peter Brown, and Oleg Grabar (eds.), *Interpreting Late Antiquity: Essays on the
Postclassical World* (Cambridge, Mass., 2001)
-----, *Late Antiquity: A Guide to the Postclassical World* (Cambridge, Mass., 1999)
Brown, P., *The World of Late Antiquity* (London, 1971)
-----, *The Rise of Western Christendom: Triumph and Diversity AD 200-1000*, 2nd ed. (Oxford, 1996)
Fowden, G., *Empire to Commonwealth: Consequences of Monotheism in Late Antiquity* (Princeton,
1993)
Maas, M., *Readings in Late Antiquity: A Sourcebook* (London, 2000)
Moorhead, J., *The Roman Empire Divided, 400-700* (Harlow, UK, 2001)
Rousseau, P., (ed.), *A Companion to Late Antiquity* (Malden MA, 2009)
Chadwick, H., ‘Envoi: On Taking Leave of Antiquity,’ in *The Oxford History of the Classical World*
(Oxford, 1986), pp. 807-828
Brown, T., ‘The Transformation of the Roman Mediterranean, 400-900,’ in *The Oxford Illustrated
History of Medieval Europe* (Oxford, 1988), pp. 1-62
Markus, R.A., ‘From Rome to the Barbarian Kingdoms (330-700),’ in *The Oxford Illustrated
History of Christianity* (Oxford, 1990), pp. 62-91
Gillett, A., *Envoys and Political Communication in the Late Antique West, 411-533*, (Cambridge University Press; Cambridge, 2003)
-----, (ed.) *On Barbarian Identity: Critical Approaches to Ethnicity in the Early Middle Ages*, (University of York/Brepols, Turnhout, 2002)
And a specific work on the **military in the Roman East outposts**:
Edwell, P., *Between Rome and Persia: the middle Euphrates, Mesopotamia and Palmyra under Roman control* (Routledge, Abingdon, 2008).
Hope this is useful.
| null | 0 | 1316507988 | False | 0 | c2l74nq | t3_kjcz1 | null | t1_c2l74nq | t1_c2l712y | null | 1427623076 | 5 | t5_2ssp3 | null | null | null |
True | brigantus | null | Thanks. | null | 0 | 1316512586 | False | 0 | c2l7cb2 | t3_kjcz1 | null | t1_c2l7cb2 | t1_c2l74nq | null | 1427623177 | 2 | t5_2ssp3 | null | null | null |
True | LittleMerced | null | in camps in the early modern european wars there was the concept of "may marriages" or partnerships that lasted for one season of war. Women involved with a soldier in such a partnership sometimes had inheritance rights over the legal wife. But such is an exception.
In Western Europe marriage was political for people in the upper to merchant classes, or thereabouts. People in lower classes got married older when they had accumulated more wealth (which might not be much). It's a common misconception that people during this period got married at like 13, and while members of the peerage and up might have done this, most people got married in their late twenties to early thirties. These marriages were not political- they were partnerships for survival.
Hope this helps. | null | 0 | 1316514414 | False | 0 | c2l7f6g | t3_ken6t | null | t1_c2l7f6g | t3_ken6t | null | 1427623217 | 3 | t5_2ssp3 | null | null | null |
True | eidetic | null | Just to clarify, the [testudo formation](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Testudo_formation) was a specific *type* of [phalanx formation](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phalanx_formation). | null | 0 | 1316537676 | False | 0 | c2l9pav | t3_k38l0 | null | t1_c2l9pav | t1_c2jdyci | null | 1427624289 | 2 | t5_2ssp3 | null | null | null |
True | eidetic | null | People always seem to have this kind of misconception that those who came before us were somehow much dumber than we are. Sure, we know a lot more than they did, and some of the things we know and take for granted would probably blow their minds, but they weren't totally backwards, bumbling idiots. They may not have been as smart as we are by today's standards, but they still had the same *capacity* to learn, figure things out and what have you. | null | 0 | 1316538162 | False | 0 | c2l9rwl | t3_k38l0 | null | t1_c2l9rwl | t1_c2h6dt4 | null | 1427624323 | 2 | t5_2ssp3 | null | null | null |
True | Killfile | null | DocFreeman has, as others have stated, pretty much encapsulated how the fall of the Roman Empire wasn't a sudden event but there was a transformation in the Roman military that is important to your question.
Because the fall was a long time in coming, Rome had long-since retooled its military to require less upkeep. When we think of the Roman Legion we imagine the Augustinian legion at its height -- the [Lorica Segmentata](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lorica_segmentata#Last_uses_and_disappearance) armor, shield wall, vast swarms of engineers and infantry. You've got that opening bit from Gladiator in your head right now, right?
Yea... all of that was gone.
By the time Rome was sacked in the 5th Century the legion was a mere shadow of its former glory. The massed and mobile formations of men had been replaced with in-place camps and Rome had moved from a strategy of aggressive expansion to a defense in depth model which depended on the Empire's vast size to allow the military to respond.
What were once austere legion outposts became permanant military camps, then border outposts, then regional cities, and finally, as Rome's influenced waned, the hubs of commerce and urbanization in what were once provinces of an empire.
There was no single moment where a solider might have realistically thought "that's it, we're cut off from Rome now" but if someone could have held the long view of the centuries they would observe the slow transformation of the legion and its forward encampments into... well.. London, Paris, and a host of other cities.
Gradually, over time, the soldiers stopped being soldiers and became citizens of their own little corner of the world. After a few generations they were no longer so concerned about defending Rome so much as defending themselves.
Thus did the Roman Empire end... not with a bang, but a whimper. | null | 0 | 1316549679 | False | 0 | c2lbje3 | t3_kjcz1 | null | t1_c2lbje3 | t3_kjcz1 | null | 1427625155 | 3 | t5_2ssp3 | null | null | null |
True | Killfile | null | It's very very complicated and, to make matters worse, you're asking a fundamentally **political** question. Different brands of political scientists will give you different answers.
Ultimately, those brands of political science influence historians.
A political Realist might tell you that we support Israel for reasons of power. Israel makes it easier for the US to project power into the Middle East and gave the US a major hand up during the Cold War. Russia's long and storied history of Pogroms against the Jews made Israel a natural US ally and we exploited that.
A political Liberal (or maybe a Functionalist) might pin the whole thing on holocaust guilt and the rise of international law and the US's role in the post-war world. We could have bombed the concentration camps but we didn't. We pushed for the creation of the UN (which ultimately created Israel). Lots of tiny threads connect the two countries.
A political Marxist might point out that the US banking system is, lets be honest, centered upon the portion of the country where the most Jews live and that said banking system gives those who run it enormous control over the US government. They thus choose to use some of that control to protect the state of Israel which itself creates wealth disparity and facilitates the exploitation of natural resources in the middle east.
All of these are at least somewhat correct (and lots more besides). All of them are also missing some details or other. Ultimately, politics is the first draft of history. Even once all of us are dead and gone, historians will fight over what the US relation with Israel meant. It will be a very long time indeed before any sort of general agreement is reached... and even then, probably only because a lot of the details will have been lost to time. | null | 0 | 1316550445 | False | 0 | c2lbnq6 | t3_kjdal | null | t1_c2lbnq6 | t3_kjdal | null | 1427625211 | 16 | t5_2ssp3 | null | null | null |
True | Killfile | null | Is Professor Lendon still there and still strangely entertaining? | null | 0 | 1316550579 | False | 0 | c2lbofm | t3_jxh0x | null | t1_c2lbofm | t1_c2iohe6 | null | 1427625221 | 1 | t5_2ssp3 | null | null | null |
True | sychosomat | null | Yes, I never actually took his classes (he was on leave for the majority of my years) but talked to him a few times. I ended up taking my classes with Professor Meyer. | null | 0 | 1316556155 | False | 0 | c2lch4w | t3_jxh0x | null | t1_c2lch4w | t1_c2lbofm | null | 1427625596 | 1 | t5_2ssp3 | null | null | null |
True | agentdcf | null | Give us those four paragraphs! Of course people will argue with your interpretation or get upset about it, that's how history works. | null | 0 | 1316569570 | False | 0 | c2le7li | t3_kjdal | null | t1_c2le7li | t1_c2krmil | null | 1427626418 | 7 | t5_2ssp3 | null | null | null |
True | mrsavage | null | So were the border troops hired locals in the end or still native romans?
| null | 0 | 1316615462 | False | 0 | c2lhr4w | t3_kjcz1 | null | t1_c2lhr4w | t1_c2lbje3 | null | 1427628152 | 2 | t5_2ssp3 | null | null | null |
True | Killfile | null | By the end the Empire was recruiting from beyond the boundaries of the Empire. Gradually, however, those camps just became cities. | null | 0 | 1316615783 | False | 0 | c2lhsi9 | t3_kjcz1 | null | t1_c2lhsi9 | t1_c2lhr4w | null | 1427628177 | 2 | t5_2ssp3 | null | null | null |
True | agentdcf | null | Colley is required reading in every graduate-level British history course I've ever seen, though I've never read Johnson and Boswell. Still, I'd be happy to read an introduction for you. PM me for my email address. | null | 0 | 1316628696 | False | 0 | c2ljkp7 | t3_kmsky | null | t1_c2ljkp7 | t3_kmsky | null | 1427629011 | 1 | t5_2ssp3 | null | null | null |
True | agentdcf | null | These responses so far are good starting points, and they certainly reflect the orthodoxy.
But... they've never really sat well with me. Why would Britain ally with France and Russia AGAINST Germany, when France and Russia were the two empires that they actually came into conflict with, right through the 19th century? British and French ambitions repeatedly ran into one another in Africa, and British and Russian ambitions frequently clashed in central Asia. The German empire overseas in the late 19th century was a joke, frankly, and it was no threat to Britain's imperial interests outside Europe. Within Europe, I don't see any compelling geo-political reason for Britons to regard the Germans as the greater threat than the French. Perhaps it is true that the British simply decided to make common cause with their traditional enemies to prevent conflict in their empire, but why would they make that decision at that particular time? They'd had no qualms about fighting for imperial aggrandizement before.
Then again, there's also the issue of naval strength. Britain was dependent on overseas trade for its prosperity and had been for a long time. After the 1850s, it became dependent on overseas trade not just for prosperity, however, but also for basic survival as Britons began to consume more and more food from North America, Russia, and southern hemisphere producers like Argentina and Australia. By 1900, Britain was importing something like half of its calories. In this situation, ANY strong navy was a threat, whether French or German, American, Russian, whatever, because they could threaten British food. In my research, I've seen debates among flour millers and corn merchants in the late 19th and early 20th centuries where they worry about this. To them, both France, Germany, AND the United States were all dangerous because they could cut off or attack Britain's food supply and force them to capitulate or face famine. Indeed, they discuss the possibility of war with France MUCH more than Germany, and they often spoke of Canada (and Australia a bit, too) as counter-weights to the US. Of course, this is just one group of people with opinions derived from their experiences, so we can't really use it to explain everything. But still, it does show me that we should be a little suspicious of explanations for the Anglo-French alliance that rest on imperialism or the growing power of Germany. Maybe it was a simple calculus of power that found Germany uncomfortably strong and France increasingly unable to match Germany. The French were certainly terrified of this after 1870, but it just doesn't seem like a clear-cut, obvious explanation.
Perhaps it was an issue of relative decline, as Britain became relatively less powerful over the 19th century. But if that's the issue, they should have been much MORE wary of the United States and Russia than Germany.
In any case, I'd love to hear more from diplomatic historians or military historians of modern Europe on this issue.
It's really an excellent question, and thanks to the OP for bringing it up. | null | 0 | 1316630860 | False | 0 | c2ljw5s | t3_kiqdo | null | t1_c2ljw5s | t3_kiqdo | null | 1427629161 | 8 | t5_2ssp3 | null | null | null |
True | eternalkerri | null | Ghengis Kahn is a Westernization of his name. They are the same person.
Quite often historical people will have Anglicized names to make spelling and pronunciation easier. Sometimes this does not work out that great as there is no literal translation
For a great example of that, just look at the many different spellings of Col. Muahmar Gaddafi's last name. | null | 0 | 1316633749 | False | 0 | c2lkbuj | t3_kn1j1 | null | t1_c2lkbuj | t3_kn1j1 | null | 1427629367 | 12 | t5_2ssp3 | null | null | null |
True | had_a_beast | null | His name was Temujin, Ghenghis Khan simply means 'supreme conqueror' or 'great leader' | null | 0 | 1316635244 | False | 0 | c2lkjpm | t3_kn1j1 | null | t1_c2lkjpm | t3_kn1j1 | null | 1427629469 | 19 | t5_2ssp3 | null | null | null |
True | wallychamp | null | **Why England Chose to Ally with France over Germany**
After the Napoleonic and Prussian Wars the French were kind of on their heels in Europe. They were poor, their people were discouraged and the Germans had just taken a chunk of their homeland (there's a fascinating exhibit on this in the Musee de l'Armee in Paris).
The Germans, on the other hand, were now unified, fresh-off a victory against France and hungry for more.
Here's where Britain's relations with both the Germans and French change:
With Italy only recently becoming unified, The Portuguese and Spanish still reeling from territorial losses in Central and South America, the Ottomans being chased out of Eastern Europe, and the French as weak as they had ever been, Germany became a clear favorite for "Europe's Bully." However, since Germany wasn't directly starting fights with the British, and the British had their hands full with their territories, they were happy to leave a watchful eye on Germany but not take any direct action.
France, on the other hand, knew they were beat and started playing the role of "England's little brother;" effectively acting in international affairs only when the [British approved](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/France_%E2%80%93_United_Kingdom_relations#Second_French_Empire). I wouldn't exactly define these two countries as "friendly" in this time period, but they both knew who wore the pants in their relationship.
**Why the British Didn't Take a Stance Against the US**
As was evident from their relationship with Germany leading up to WWI, the British of the 19th century were complacent to not become involved in conflicts with other world powers that were avoidable. This sentiment was echoed by the US who were settling into isolationism having recently ousted Spain from the New World and achieved their Manifest Destiny after a war with Mexico.
Had the U.S. attacked a British trade ship, I am positive that there would have been a third English war. However, as that didn't serve either country's agenda, that didn't happen.
I will unfortunately admit that I know very, very little about Russian History, so I can't say for sure but I would imagine that their relationship with Britain followed the same "You stay out of my way, I'll stay out of yours" mentality.
I apologize for how brief and informal this response is, let me know if you need any clarification and I will expand when I have a little more time. | null | 0 | 1316637018 | False | 0 | c2lktbi | t3_kiqdo | null | t1_c2lktbi | t1_c2ljw5s | null | 1427629593 | 9 | t5_2ssp3 | null | null | null |
True | brigantus | null | Genghis Khan is the most common name for the 13th century khan (king) of the Mongols, who founded an empire and conquered much of Eurasia during his lifetime. There is no 'right' way to spell it--Genghis Khan himself was illiterate--but it's true that "Genghis Khan" doesn't really give the best idea of the original pronunciation. That spelling actually goes back a long while; it entered English in a roundabout way through Persian. In modern Mongolian his name is spelled Чингис Хаан, and the best way of rendering that into English is probably "Chinggis Khaan" (the "kh" sounds like the "ch" in a Scottish "loch"). Chengis Khan (or similar) is often used nowadays as a compromise between the phonologically accurate Chinggis Khaan and the familiar Genghis Khan. In the past there were other spellings like Jengiz Khan. They're all the same person.
Technically Chinggis Khaan was a title. The long aa sound in Khaan is the modern Mongolian form of "Khagan", a title meaning "Khan of Khans" or Emperor. Nobody really knows what Chinggis means, the most popular suggestion is that it comes from an old Turkish word for the ocean. The whole title is usually rendered in English as "supreme" or "universal ruler". His original birth name was Temujin, which means iron. | null | 0 | 1316639387 | True | 0 | c2ll68s | t3_kn1j1 | null | t1_c2ll68s | t3_kn1j1 | null | 1427629764 | 9 | t5_2ssp3 | null | null | null |
True | ReleeSquirrel | null | Cool! Thanks. <3 | null | 0 | 1316642393 | False | 0 | c2lllso | t3_kn1j1 | null | t1_c2lllso | t1_c2ll68s | null | 1427629967 | 1 | t5_2ssp3 | null | null | null |
True | agentdcf | null | I like it. I'm a little uncomfortable with terms like "their people were discouraged" or "[the Germans] were hungry for more"; what do those terms really *mean*, exactly? They suggest a kind of unproblematic, personification of national identities that are more complicated than that.
But, overall, this is a stronger case for continental power-politics. Thanks. | null | 0 | 1316644571 | False | 0 | c2llwrq | t3_kiqdo | null | t1_c2llwrq | t1_c2lktbi | null | 1427630112 | 5 | t5_2ssp3 | null | null | null |
True | wallychamp | null | Yeah, I'm the first to admit it's sloppy writing. I wrote it on a break at work so it unfortunately took a bit of a "explain to me like I'm 5" tone. | null | 0 | 1316644804 | False | 0 | c2llxvj | t3_kiqdo | null | t1_c2llxvj | t1_c2llwrq | null | 1427630126 | 3 | t5_2ssp3 | null | null | null |
True | thatwasntababyruth | null | Another good example is Confucius, who's name is technically Master Kong. Kong Fu Zi, a more respecting version of his name, was anglicized into Confucius (Kong being pronounced koh-ngg, and Zi being pronounced Zuh). | null | 0 | 1316651668 | False | 0 | c2lmv8o | t3_kn1j1 | null | t1_c2lmv8o | t1_c2lkbuj | null | 1427630632 | 5 | t5_2ssp3 | null | null | null |
True | [deleted] | null | Also Chinggis is common. | null | 0 | 1316653397 | False | 0 | c2ln3jv | t3_kn1j1 | null | t1_c2ln3jv | t3_kn1j1 | null | 1427630744 | 2 | t5_2ssp3 | null | null | null |
True | LittleMerced | null | African-American Religion: Interpretive Essays in History and Culture by Fulop
Slave Religion: The "Invisible Institution" in the Antebellum South by Raboteau
and After Redemption: Jim Crow and the Transformation of African
American Religion in the Delta, 1875-1915 by John Giggie (who is an awesome professor and historian.
For articles, try the ATLA database as well as the Jstor database | null | 0 | 1316688825 | False | 0 | c2lq9qm | t3_knd8i | null | t1_c2lq9qm | t3_knd8i | null | 1427632234 | 6 | t5_2ssp3 | null | null | null |
True | Tenth_Doctor | null | Thanks a ton ^_^ | null | 0 | 1316696036 | False | 0 | c2lqo7x | t3_knd8i | null | t1_c2lqo7x | t1_c2lq9qm | null | 1427632423 | 1 | t5_2ssp3 | null | null | null |
True | eternalkerri | null | I do not have a degree (mostly I ended up owing a debt, so I can't finish), but I have spent most of my life reading, studying, and writing about history in general.
My general focus has been on American Gulf Coast and Caribbean colonization (1492-1750's), piracy, the American Revolutionary period (1770 to 1800), and 20th Century warfare specifically the World Wars and Cold War.
I would most definitely say my strongest suits are the Cold War and Caribbean Piracy and Colonization. | null | 0 | 1316697874 | False | 0 | c2lqtr4 | t3_jxh0x | null | t1_c2lqtr4 | t3_jxh0x | null | 1427632496 | 1 | t5_2ssp3 | null | null | null |
True | [deleted] | null | I am a PhD candidate and a graduate instructor, whose broad major area of focus is US history since Reconstruction. More specifically, I am more adept at Modern US history since 1945. Even more specifically than that, I'm writing about the federal courts reforming of southern prisons in the 1960s and 1970s. I also have a law degree, and I consider myself first and foremost a legal historian. Please tag me, if you so choose :) | null | 0 | 1316709668 | False | 0 | c2lsatj | t3_jxh0x | null | t1_c2lsatj | t3_jxh0x | null | 1427633188 | 2 | t5_2ssp3 | null | null | null |
True | sychosomat | null | One thing to understand is that the Roman legions had both native romans and auxiliaries. The auxiliaries were non-natives typically and were essentially brought in and given the opportunity to earn citizenship for service. By the time of the 3rd and 4th centuries, most Roman legionaries came from outside of Italy and the inner provinces, instead being made up of those from outer more war like areas (this is all very generally speaking).
Also, the expand of Killfile's explanation, the process originally was that legions in the outer regions would get their pay and supplies through Rome, who would collect taxes from the empire. Later, however, the Emperors told them to simply get it directly from the locals instead of from Rome. They became beholden note to Rome, but the local regions. | null | 0 | 1316712651 | False | 0 | c2lsqy7 | t3_kjcz1 | null | t1_c2lsqy7 | t1_c2lhr4w | null | 1427633403 | 2 | t5_2ssp3 | null | null | null |
True | Themiskan | null | I highly recommend "As the Romans Did: A sourcebook in Roman Social History" by Jo-ann Shelton [amazonlink](http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/019508974X)
It gives you a ton of excerpts from ancient texts that do a great job of explaining daily life in Rome. It may not accurately explain the period of the collapse, I don't have my copy at the moment to check, but if you're curious about daily life in general you can't go wrong with this | null | 0 | 1316724972 | False | 0 | c2lumga | t3_kjcz1 | null | t1_c2lumga | t1_c2l74nq | null | 1427634364 | 2 | t5_2ssp3 | null | null | null |
True | Themiskan | null | Great point sychosomat. I'd like to expand upon this briefly because this is an interesting facet of Rome. The term "Roman" at the time of the collapse described almost all of Roman territory. One of the Emperors (a soldier emperor I believe) gave "universal" citizenship to the Empire at one point, making all free men in Roman territory a "Roman." Roman emperors themselves came from Africa and Gaul (Spain / France) and Roman citizens would have existed in modern-day Spain, France, Libya, Egypt, Italy, Switzerland, Turkey, and more in the Middle East.
The Auxiliaries that sychosomat mentioned above would usually be an equivalent sized unit to the legionary it accompanied that was staffed by non-citizens. Service in the auxiliary was a method to gain citizenship | null | 0 | 1316725450 | False | 0 | c2luoz6 | t3_kjcz1 | null | t1_c2luoz6 | t1_c2lsqy7 | null | 1427634401 | 2 | t5_2ssp3 | null | null | null |
True | [deleted] | null | This link explains a religious connection for the U.S.'s support for Israel. Growing up in the church I heard this sort of stuff quite often "Oh the US is doomed if we ever turn our back on Israel" is one of my father's favorite things to say if Israel is ever brought up or is on the news. http://www.beliefnet.com/Faiths/Christianity/2002/06/The-Rapture-Factor.aspx?p=1
Specifically support for Israel by religious politicians on both sides of the aisle. | null | 0 | 1316743557 | False | 0 | c2lx0hd | t3_kjdal | null | t1_c2lx0hd | t3_kjdal | null | 1427635485 | 4 | t5_2ssp3 | null | null | null |
True | stoopidjonny | null | IANAH, however I believe that the reason that Chinese Americans don't ask for an apology (if that is indeed true; I don't know) is because most of the Chinese US population immigrated since the 1970s ( http://web.me.com/joelarkin/RaceDemographicsandMonterey/Chinese_Ph_III.html ), when China's mistreatment of its own citizens would be a more recent memory than the Yellow Peril days. I know my aunt's grandparents were killed in China (the reason given by the family is because they were Christian). As for China's perceptions of the mistreatment of Chinese in America, I think they would be more concerned with their mistreatment at the hands of Japan and Britain than that of expats in the US. | null | 0 | 1316798617 | False | 0 | c2m20h5 | t3_k2p20 | null | t1_c2m20h5 | t3_k2p20 | null | 1427637913 | 1 | t5_2ssp3 | null | null | null |
True | [deleted] | null | [deleted] | null | 0 | 1316798856 | False | 0 | c2m21rt | t3_jxh0x | null | t1_c2m21rt | t3_jxh0x | null | 1427637931 | 2 | t5_2ssp3 | null | null | null |
True | ZaphodAK42 | null | Question about this question: Why has the US always seemed to have two prominent parties, when other countries have a variety? | null | 0 | 1316801210 | False | 0 | c2m2ex6 | t3_jxlaw | null | t1_c2m2ex6 | t3_jxlaw | null | 1427638103 | 2 | t5_2ssp3 | null | null | null |
True | banal_penetration | null | I honestly don't know of any, and haven't come across any, but that does not mean it doesn't exist. Looking around, the only related things I could find were these, which don't exactly answer your question:
http://copac.ac.uk/search?rn=6&any=soviet+union+narcotics&sort-order=ti%2C%2Ddate
http://copac.ac.uk/search?rn=7&any=soviet+union+narcotics&sort-order=ti%2C%2Ddate
http://www.cedro-uva.org/lib/cohen.future.html
Whether anything crops up in more general histories of narcotics, I wouldn't know. This seems like the sort of thing that someone should be researching (though who knows what sources may or may not exist).
I would be really interested in seeing if someone else knows of anything. | null | 0 | 1316813727 | False | 0 | c2m46gy | t3_kpb4a | null | t1_c2m46gy | t3_kpb4a | null | 1427638934 | 2 | t5_2ssp3 | null | null | null |
True | SecuritybyOrwell | null | Thank you for the effort. It seems so weird that we know so much about the effects of crack on the inner cities of the United States in the 1980's (and that's just one example) but know virtually nothing about illicit drug use in the Soviet Union. Now consider that the Soviet Union (at it's time of collapse) had nearly 300,000 million citizens, there must be some documentation of drug use or at least border guards seizing drug shipments. When I have time, I'll start doing more in depth research, though, I wouldn't have time to go to Russia and start sifting through archives.
Someone out there has to know something | null | 0 | 1316820413 | False | 0 | c2m4zx9 | t3_kpb4a | null | t1_c2m4zx9 | t1_c2m46gy | null | 1427639320 | 3 | t5_2ssp3 | null | null | null |
True | SecuritybyOrwell | null | Sure! The Netherlands. They used to administer over modern day Indonesia and South Africa as well as various parts of South America. Of course then there is always New York, which used to be called New Amsterdam. Also, the Dutch Antilles were only decolonized last year. | null | 0 | 1316822781 | False | 0 | c2m59pt | t3_k5he9 | null | t1_c2m59pt | t3_k5he9 | null | 1427639449 | 6 | t5_2ssp3 | null | null | null |
True | [deleted] | null | Maybe you could find more info in [The Mayflower Society](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Mayflower_Society). | null | 0 | 1317005769 | False | 0 | c2ml3wa | t3_krcy3 | null | t1_c2ml3wa | t3_krcy3 | null | 1427647061 | 7 | t5_2ssp3 | null | null | null |
True | AncillaryCorollary | null | Wow, 102 people came over less than 400 years ago and now have tens of millions of descendants. That's unreal. | null | 0 | 1317010353 | False | 0 | c2mlo8q | t3_krcy3 | null | t1_c2mlo8q | t1_c2ml3wa | null | 1427647313 | 4 | t5_2ssp3 | null | null | null |
True | karmalien | null | While it sounds huge consider [rabbits](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rabbit#Reproduction):
>This means in one season [about 9 months per year] a single female rabbit can produce as many as 800 children, grandchildren, and great-grandchildren.
And then consider [bacteria](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bacteria#Growth_and_reproduction):
>Under optimal conditions, bacteria can grow and divide extremely rapidly, and bacterial populations can double as quickly as every 9.8 minutes.
And then consider some beings in earth's history that are thought to reproduce every few thousand years. I cannot find their name (and would probably not be able to pronounce it correctly).
That puts "unreal" a bit into perspective. :-) | null | 0 | 1317023120 | False | 0 | c2mmwti | t3_krcy3 | null | t1_c2mmwti | t1_c2mlo8q | null | 1427647902 | 5 | t5_2ssp3 | null | null | null |
True | brinleyk87 | null | While the Mayflower Society is an interesting read, I am almost positive that there were other European settlements that were founded earlier than Plymouth, Mass. (St. Augustine, FL http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/St._Augustine,_Florida). Anyone know of any information on the families that settled there? | null | 0 | 1317044682 | False | 0 | c2mo2wz | t3_krcy3 | null | t1_c2mo2wz | t3_krcy3 | null | 1427648452 | 6 | t5_2ssp3 | null | null | null |
True | AncillaryCorollary | null | Wait, what do you mean there were beings that reproduced only every few thousand years?? | null | 0 | 1317046524 | False | 0 | c2mo918 | t3_krcy3 | null | t1_c2mo918 | t1_c2mmwti | null | 1427648596 | 1 | t5_2ssp3 | null | null | null |
True | scientologist2 | null | When Florida was ceded by Spain to Great Britain in 1763, the town’s 3,000 Spanish residents had to leave.
which sort of leaves the Mayflower as the oldest.
However, [there are cases like Eva Longoria](http://www.pbs.org/wnet/facesofamerica/profiles/eva-longoria/8/). In 1767, Pedro Longoria, Eva’s 7th great-grandfather, received almost 4000 acres along the Rio Grande in a land grant from the King of Spain. This is still later, but gives you a place to start.
see
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_North_American_cities_by_year_of_foundation | null | 0 | 1317046868 | False | 0 | c2moaam | t3_krcy3 | null | t1_c2moaam | t1_c2mo2wz | null | 1427648610 | 5 | t5_2ssp3 | null | null | null |
True | [deleted] | null | I know that my family, the Moormans, came in the early 17th century, and now there are a ton of descendants all over the country. Probably not as many as the mayflower society but we're definitely tied into the larger families, esp. the Clarks. | null | 0 | 1317047872 | False | 0 | c2moe6y | t3_krcy3 | null | t1_c2moe6y | t3_krcy3 | null | 1427648661 | 2 | t5_2ssp3 | null | null | null |
True | brinleyk87 | null | This is more along the lines of what I was thinking. Right now the oldest verified family I can find is the Tuttle Family in New Hampshire- founded a family farm in 1635. After 11 generations, the family farm was sold in 2010.
Source: http://articles.cnn.com/2010-07-30/living/oldest.family.farm.tuttle_1_farm-tuttle-s-red-barn-sons?_s=PM:LIVING
| null | 0 | 1317048020 | False | 0 | c2moet3 | t3_krcy3 | null | t1_c2moet3 | t1_c2moaam | null | 1427648670 | 4 | t5_2ssp3 | null | null | null |
True | brinleyk87 | null | Have an exact date? And what area of the country (if ya don't mind me asking). | null | 0 | 1317048196 | False | 0 | c2mofh7 | t3_krcy3 | null | t1_c2mofh7 | t1_c2moe6y | null | 1427648679 | 1 | t5_2ssp3 | null | null | null |
True | [deleted] | null | Huge settlements in Virginia and then outwards in Ohio several years later. A common page used as a springboard to research for my family is linked here:
http://freepages.genealogy.rootsweb.ancestry.com/~sunnyann/moorman.html | null | 0 | 1317048702 | False | 0 | c2mohlv | t3_krcy3 | null | t1_c2mohlv | t1_c2mofh7 | null | 1427648708 | 2 | t5_2ssp3 | null | null | null |
True | [deleted] | null | My 5th Great Grandfather is this man whose lineage is fairly easy to trace to about 1600, but then it gets hazy
Charles MOORMAN 1746-1803 Louisa County, VA | null | 0 | 1317048818 | False | 0 | c2moi39 | t3_krcy3 | null | t1_c2moi39 | t1_c2mofh7 | null | 1427648713 | 1 | t5_2ssp3 | null | null | null |
True | past_is_prologue | null | Official title: Museum Educator
What I actually do: Collections management, public programming, lift heavy things the other staff can't, teach other staff how to use their computers, minor repairs around the museum, media stuff, and my bosses favourite phrase "other duties as required" so basically anything.
Good times. | null | 0 | 1317049478 | False | 0 | c2mokwi | t3_krny8 | null | t1_c2mokwi | t3_krny8 | null | 1427648750 | 3 | t5_2ssp3 | null | null | null |
True | Killfile | null | There really is no short answer because any short answer leaves out some fairly important aspects without which the Cold War doesn't make sense.
The US and the Soviet Union had a somewhat rocky history and weren't inclined to trust each other. The United States was part of the coalition that pressured the Russian Monarchy and the Russian Provisional Government to stay in World War One. That decision cost a lot of Russian lives. Moreover, the US intervened in the Russian Civil War.
The US was ideologically closer to the Capitalist nations of Europe and the founding premise of Soviet Communism was that it must sweep the whole world in order to be secure (Stalin would later revise that). Later, George Kennan would write that Communism must expand or die and that by containing it the United States could destroy it.
To some degree or another then, the US and the Soviet Union were bound to oppose each other.
But following WWII the US and the Soviets were the only two major powers remaining. Everyone else was devastated by the war. The antagonists thus sought security in the ability to defeat the other. As with the World Wars, both predicted that the next war would be fought over Europe.
This lead to attempts to consolidate military power and influence in preparation for such a war which lead, in turn, to an arms race. Tanks and bombers gave way to a nuclear arms race and the notion of a global thermonuclear war with mutually assured destruction.
In short, there is no one cause for the Cold War save that both sides believed that some sort of conflict -- political or military -- was inevitable and that being prepared to win the military conflict gave one the upper hand in the political conflict. The resulting build-up in weapons became an end in and of itself.
| null | 0 | 1317052331 | False | 0 | c2moyor | t3_krwb6 | null | t1_c2moyor | t3_krwb6 | null | 1427648932 | 16 | t5_2ssp3 | null | null | null |
True | eternalkerri | null | Communist Soviet Union wants to spread Communisim through force or coercion, also feels threatened.
Capitalism, led by the last Western Superpower left standing after WWII likes its money and feels threatened.
Both have bombs that can kill everything on the planet.
Que proxy wars. | null | 0 | 1317054142 | False | 0 | c2mp8ai | t3_krwb6 | null | t1_c2mp8ai | t3_krwb6 | null | 1427649056 | 0 | t5_2ssp3 | null | null | null |
True | gnusounduave | null | My family first came to America on 26 Sep 1732 on the Palatine Ship Mary.
EDIT: As a matter of fact I just noticed it would have been exactly 279 years ago today. | null | 0 | 1317055040 | False | 0 | c2mpdb5 | t3_krcy3 | null | t1_c2mpdb5 | t3_krcy3 | null | 1427649122 | 8 | t5_2ssp3 | null | null | null |
True | plutonium28 | null | Killfile nailed it but to make it even simpler: The US and USSR were the only two, first-world nations "left" after WW2. Thus, it was time for the *inevitable* battle of capitalism v communism to begin. | null | 0 | 1317055551 | False | 0 | c2mpg7f | t3_krwb6 | null | t1_c2mpg7f | t3_krwb6 | null | 1427649169 | 2 | t5_2ssp3 | null | null | null |
True | Cosmic_Charlie | null | Lol. Job.
Currently writing my dissertation. I've been a TA, RA, and held a job as a curator in the library. None of these pay anywhere close to enough to survive. I'm lucky enough to have a spouse with a 'real' job.
Not to be Debbie Downer, but read these before you go to grad school:
http://chronicle.com/article/Graduate-School-in-the/44846/
http://chronicle.com/article/So-You-Want-to-Go-to-Grad/45239/
http://chronicle.com/article/If-You-Must-Go-to-Grad-School/45269/
Maybe Benton is too cynical/jaded/whatever, but I think you should *very* carefully consider what he says. | null | 0 | 1317059452 | False | 0 | c2mq2bg | t3_krny8 | null | t1_c2mq2bg | t3_krny8 | null | 1427649456 | 7 | t5_2ssp3 | null | null | null |
True | Killfile | null | Minor correction: you're using the idea of the 1st, 2nd, and 3rd world as set forth by Mao Zedong. Mao described the 1st world as the Superpowers, the 2nd as the Superpowers' allies, and the 3rd as unallied nations.
While not "wrong" as such, most Western readers will assume you're using the western three worlds theory which describes the 1st as the US and her allies, the 2nd as the USSR and her allies, and the 3rd as unallied nations.
Thus, describing the USSR as a 1st world country can be confusing. | null | 0 | 1317060838 | False | 0 | c2mqaag | t3_krwb6 | null | t1_c2mqaag | t1_c2mpg7f | null | 1427649552 | 7 | t5_2ssp3 | null | null | null |
True | [deleted] | null | Following WWII both nations had deeply entrenched military-industrial complexes as well. The conflation of economic and military prerogatives definitely lends itself to the perpetuation of constant war readiness. | null | 0 | 1317062430 | False | 0 | c2mqivf | t3_krwb6 | null | t1_c2mqivf | t1_c2moyor | null | 1427649666 | 1 | t5_2ssp3 | null | null | null |
True | [deleted] | null | [deleted] | null | 0 | 1317062476 | False | 0 | c2mqj4k | t3_krwb6 | null | t1_c2mqj4k | t1_c2moyor | null | 1427649669 | -2 | t5_2ssp3 | null | null | null |
True | karmalien | null | One source I was able to find quickly is "A Short History of Nearly Everything" wherein Bill Bryson writes about microbes living deep in the sea:
> At depth microbes shrink in size and become extremely sluggish. The liveliest of them may divide no more than once a century, some no more than perhaps once in five hundred years.
Unfortunately they remain unnamed.
LiveScience writes [here](http://www.livescience.com/133-wild-extreme-creatures.html):
> Endoliths and Hypoliths are two types of extremophiles that live inside rocks or between the mineral grains. Endoliths have been found over 2 miles below the Earth's surface, and if they can stand the heat, they could dwell much deeper. Early observations show that they feed on surrounding iron, potassium, or sulfur. Water is scarce at these depths, and this slows down the procreation cycle of the organisms - some reproduce only once every 100 years!
And in a Nature article I do not have access to Google found this quote:
> [...] according to Parkes, only reproducing every 100 or 1000 years [...]
Sorry that I cannot provide better sources. All in all I would take this with a pinch of salt and consider asking in /r/AskScience. | null | 0 | 1317066060 | False | 0 | c2mqsv3 | t3_krcy3 | null | t1_c2mqsv3 | t1_c2mo918 | null | 1427649800 | 8 | t5_2ssp3 | null | null | null |
True | tapeoflife | null | A lot of what happened in Martin luthers life was right place at the right time situations that helped to bring about the Protestant reformation so if you took him put of the equation I don't think the reformation would have happened if not for a long time then never in Europe. | null | 0 | 1317070005 | False | 0 | c2mrdag | t3_k5ool | null | t1_c2mrdag | t3_k5ool | null | 1427650063 | 1 | t5_2ssp3 | null | null | null |
True | tapeoflife | null | Yes, yes, yes, to Alexander being Macedonian. Macedonians were looked down on by the Greeks so it was insulting that Phillip of macedon was able to conquer the once proud city states of Greece then his son Alexander led them to defeat their age old enemies on their own turf while the Greeks had trouble doing that in their heyday. | null | 0 | 1317070571 | False | 0 | c2mrgkv | t3_jzbbq | null | t1_c2mrgkv | t1_c2l1223 | null | 1427650105 | 1 | t5_2ssp3 | null | null | null |
True | tapeoflife | null | To add to this many of the pacific islands were under the US control and when japan attacked pearl harbor they also took many of these islands like the phillipeans (forgive the spelling I'm on my phone). And it took many battle to attempt to get those lands back. | null | 0 | 1317070891 | False | 0 | c2mrift | t3_jy24r | null | t1_c2mrift | t1_c2g1ior | null | 1427650130 | 1 | t5_2ssp3 | null | null | null |
True | litayoliechi | null | Oh, ok! Thank you for the links.
>More importantly, undergraduates had better options for employment during the boom economy.
I find that very interesting, since it is the opposite of comon belief, but he does explain it very well. | null | 0 | 1317075456 | False | 0 | c2ms6pd | t3_krny8 | null | t1_c2ms6pd | t1_c2mq2bg | null | 1427650449 | 1 | t5_2ssp3 | null | null | null |
True | Rayyn | null | Thank you very much for posting these. | null | 0 | 1317079863 | False | 0 | c2msrz2 | t3_krny8 | null | t1_c2msrz2 | t1_c2mq2bg | null | 1427650728 | 1 | t5_2ssp3 | null | null | null |
True | agentdcf | null | I understand there has been considerable debate in US foreign policy history about the causes of the Cold War. The only one I've read is Gaddis's *The United States and the Origins of the Cold War*, which I know is from at least the 70s, if not even older. Can you guys maybe give a brief account of the contours of this debate and some of the main works?
(I know wiki has a page, but I like you guys better.) | null | 0 | 1317081620 | False | 0 | c2mt0ka | t3_krwb6 | null | t1_c2mt0ka | t1_c2moyor | null | 1427650843 | 3 | t5_2ssp3 | null | null | null |
True | [deleted] | null | Then there was the Korean War that proved to be the catalyst between the two nations. But the US didn't get involved in Korea because of Communism. It's very complex, and any attempt to make international relationships look like a pissing match is just unfounded.
After World War Two, NATO and the UN were just coming up. No one had any idea where they were going (especially after the League of Nations flopped). When North Korea invaded South Korea, because South Korea was a part of NATO all members had an obligation to help South Korea. The US knew that if the UN and NATO failed to act that they would probably dissolve soon afterward. The US had the largest military at the time, so it sent a lot of troops.
Of course, we supported South Korea because we were upset that Russia didn't follow the plan that was set up for Korea. Russia was to take North Korea and fix everything up, and we were going to help South Korea. After that, they would be reunited. Russia thought this a good time to start spreading Communism, and China liked the idea too. | null | 0 | 1317085353 | False | 0 | c2mtihg | t3_krwb6 | null | t1_c2mtihg | t1_c2moyor | null | 1427651073 | 3 | t5_2ssp3 | null | null | null |
True | isitmizzit | null | Instructor at a junior college. First year. | null | 0 | 1317085982 | False | 0 | c2mtlnq | t3_krny8 | null | t1_c2mtlnq | t3_krny8 | null | 1427651115 | 3 | t5_2ssp3 | null | null | null |
True | litayoliechi | null | Do you have a masters or a Ph.D? Did you have teaching experience before you started? | null | 0 | 1317090923 | False | 0 | c2mu9rj | t3_krny8 | null | t1_c2mu9rj | t1_c2mtlnq | null | 1427651431 | 3 | t5_2ssp3 | null | null | null |
Subsets and Splits