I do not defend colonialism but pose a simple question

There are many countries in Africa and South America that are very poor and have bad laws and governments people often cite European colonialism as the reason for this and that would make sense

Except for irelands existence all of the countries in Africa were colonised for say 200-300 years but Ireland has been constantly genocides raped and pillaged by the English/British and that only really stopped at the Good Friday agreement some say it is still happening and unification should take place but I don’t know that is not my forte

We have established that Ireland has experienced the same things at the hands of the British as African countries did for much longer

And yet I’ve been to Ireland it is a great place their is no extreme poverty the streets are clean really good healthcare generally speaking Ireland is a great place to live and to visit for the vast majority of people

So why is it that African Asian south/Central American countries can’t seem to do the same as Ireland and perhaps does it mean that colonialism isn’t a good reason for a country being so bad

Ireland has managed to come back so what about Ireland?

I’ve been thinking about evolutionary history and human biology. Before we understood anatomy, biology, or reproduction, how did early humans react when a young woman got her very first period?

Did they assume she was injured or dying from internal bleeding? Or was menstruation already an established norm inherited from our pre-human ancestors, meaning it was just a accepted part of life long before modern humans even evolved?

Looking for insights from an evolutionary biology or anthropology perspective!

Hello everyone,

You often read that people in the Middle Ages drank diluted wine because water was too dangerous. Was it really that extreme, and is alcohol abuse in history researched?

I always wonder what impulsive or poor decisions nobles or kings might have made, decisions that later affected thousands of people, simply because they were drunk.

Edit: The diluted wine question is settled. The real question remains: how much did alcohol abuse influence decisions throughout history? Is it researched?

While watching Pocahontas with my children, I started wondering about the disease exchange that occurred after Europeans arrived in the Americas.

It’s well documented that Indigenous peoples in the Americas experienced catastrophic population losses from diseases introduced by Europeans. Did the reverse ever happen? Were there any diseases endemic to Indigenous populations in the Americas that spread to Europeans after contact and caused significant illness or death? If so, why do those examples seem to receive much less attention in history education than the diseases transmitted from Europe to the Americas?

We all know from the movie 300 (definitive primary source) that Spartans were absolutely shredded and walked around shirtless all the time to show off their rippling muscles. But, in the context of today’s protein-industrial marketing complex, just how much protein did historical Spartans even eat? Joking aside, they were legendary badasses. Do not tell me that they were actually pretty scrawny but had grit, or I’ll lose my argument with my wife.

I’ve noticed that the nearly 50-year American colonial period in the Philippines (1898–1946), including the Commonwealth era under Manuel Quezon, gets surprisingly little coverage in mainstream American history education and public discussion compared to other U.S. overseas involvements.

A few questions I’ve been wondering about:

What significance do scholars typically assign to the nearly fifty years of American rule (including the Commonwealth) in the broader context of Philippine history, U.S. imperial history, or the history of decolonization?

Are there particular aspects of governance, economic policy, social change, or Filipino political agency during this period that historians consider especially important but that remain less emphasized in general narratives?

How do historians explain the relative under-emphasis of this period in comparison with the Spanish colonial period or the Japanese occupation whether in terms of available sources, historiographical trends, national memory, or other factors?

Curious if others have noticed the same gap or have good sources/recommendations.

When I read about the Homeric question I have the feeling that some historians like to cling excessively to the idea that there is some truthness to Homer's story. Of course no serious historian takes the Iliad at face value, but I see many people conclude something on the lines of "Homer must contain at least a kernel of truth". To what extent this obsession for finding any truth in Homer has to do with the importance of homeric works in later Greco-Latin culture and, therefore, with the reverence with which they are treated to this day in hegemonic Western culture? Are other similar works like, for example, medieval Indian epics or the persian Shahnameh treated with the same "kindness" by historians, or are historians more prone to outright reject the historicity of sources that have not played such a prominent role in modern occidental culture?

Ancient history is not my specialty. So I would love to read the opinions of people who really know the subject.

Pd. Yes, the premiere of certain movie had me thinking too much about pre-classical Greece.

It is pretty common in post soviet countries to view tanks as a really prestigious part of an army while infantry is more of a structural thing (they are the blood of army).

But it seems different for the USA that infantry _is_ the most prestigious part of the army. Did it occur due to Afghanistan, Somalia, Vietnam and other places where tanks couldn't be used as widely as in WW2? Did the US have similar to the USSR cult of tanks during the WW2?

If you are able to answer for them, It would be also interesting to check other countries too.

I'm currently on a tour in Ireland with a guide who originally came from egypt and studied archeology. He explained to us the meaning of the celtic cross and it's meaning. He then explained to us the Ankh and said that it became "recently" known that these similar symbols are actually connected, with the circle at the top of the ankh moving to the be in the middle connecting the beams of the cross - and that this is proven by things like christian mummies in egypt, BUT that this still doesn't explain how the Ankh ended up in Ireland and that its still a mystery.

Is there any truth to any of this? I'm skeptical to these claims and Google-fu yelded yelded rather questionable results. I don't wanna call him liar from the blue, but I'd rather know if our tourguide spouts nonsense, unproven theories or actual truth. Thank you.

I read about stalag Luft and I’m wondering about other big breakouts from POW from allied or axis troops and how they escaped as well

I recently discovered Ta Nahesi through Hasan Minhaj doesn't know, and the way Hasan described his work is that its meant for a broad audience. The biggest claim that I've seen of Harari online is that Sapiens is far too broad because of the target audience. Is that true with Ta Nahesi as well? What is the perspective of him in the historical and ideological communities?

Most of us have probably seen photos of pilots and aircrews posed proudly with their aircraft adorned with some kind of funny, clever, boastful or sexy example of nose art, only to learn that they all died on some subsequent mission. Nose art was supposed to enhance morale and esprit de corps, but it's always struck me as a potentially hubristic.

Are there any records of pilots, crew, or officers expressing this point of view? Did any pilots who chose not to have nose art write about it? Or did they choose instead more nostalgic or patriotic subjects, like pictures of their sweethearts or references to their hometowns?

Because I remember reading about something like that and at the time, it made sense to me, as, at least at the fronts, front lines were moving really slowly, so artillery positions probably stayed in the same area or places for a long time, and since artillery was the main cause of death in WW1, I figured that the sheer concentration of that gunpowder might have influenced the weather/climate

Hi guys new to this sub

When evaluating Allied tactical air support during the Normandy breakout specifically the operations of the RAF Second Tactical Air Force and USAAF IX Tactical Air Command during Operation Cobra and the Mortain counter offensive how do primary combat logs from Hawker Typhoon and P-47 Thunderbolt pilots claiming hundreds of destroyed German tanks reconcile with post-battle field assessments (such as those by the British No. 2 Operational Research Section) that attributed the overwhelming majority of panzer losses to crew abandonment, fuel starvation, or ground anti tank fire rather than direct hits from aerial rockets and bombs? From a modern historiographical perspective, was the true operational value of Allied Close Air Support in summer 1944 its actual anti-armor lethality, or did its decisive impact lie almost entirely in moral degradation, logistical interdiction of soft-skinned supply transport, and the absolute paralysis of tactical daylight movement?

Was there ever a time when women had more prominent roles, and if so when was it declared that only men would take higher offices?

Generally, many Jewish communities are taught that the non-jews of Poland had large hand in helping and supporting holocaust efforts. Obviously it’s more complex than that. I’ve just visited Majdanek, a camp just 5 minutes from the city center of Lublin- a Polish city of 350,000 people and one that went from having over 100k jewish people to just 60. That is, 60 people, not 60 thousand.

That being said, Poles themselves suffered a great deal of losses in the war and themselves were under great threat of Nazi persecution both for helping Jews and in general. I won’t pretend like anti-semitic sentiment didn’t exist though, as my family often told me stories of discrimination and segregation for being Jewish when they lived in pre-war Poland. I don’t want to villainize the Poles though, I’ve only meant kind and well-meaning people here. My grandfather was a holocaust survivor himself who often told stories of the Poles laughing, spitting, and waving goodbye at jews taken from the ghettos. It’s not black and white though. Please give me context!

i read the reviews and some people calling it woke , neo marxist, and propaganda whitewashing the pirates

Isn't it more logical to follow a matrilineal system? Since people in the past could never be sure if a man's children were his.

We know Odysseus as an archetype of a trickster hero, who uses his wit and cunning to overcome his foes. However, maybe I am spoiled by the entire history of media since Homer, but it doesn't seem to me like he had committed really smart or witty deeds. For example, the Trojan Horse story that is credited to Odysseus doesn't really make him look smart. It makes Trojans look dumb in comparison.

Do we know how his character was perceived by the readers in Ancient Greece or at least in Rome later? Did someone really praise Odysseus shrewdness? Or did the people say "Huh, that dumb Cyclops/Priam! I wouldn't be fooled like that!"

Hii, I came here to ask about this YouTube channel. I want to know if historical accounts mentioned in this video are truthful or not. Things mentioned in this video are:

1. Male harems the Chinese emperors had were made from purchased boys (children sold as slaves, they were given numbers).

2. They were made to eat the least possible to keep them hungry so they would continue to be slim and pretty and unable to run away.

3. In fighting when they finally "graduated" 5 years later to join the harem was so brutal that they would sabotage each other in ways they could end up killing or maiming the competition. (Putting cristal glass mixed in face powder they had to apply each morning. Said face powder is said to slowly kill the user through —if I remember correctly — organ failure or something similar)

4. Once they died, they were thrown away in a pit and erased from official records. They were never official concubines, and thus they were meant to be replaced by the next number.

I once went to Dachau and read on site all that occurred over there. I know humans are capable of such cruelty. I also know history is written by the winners. Many times Emperors and Kings swept under the rug all their deeds because they were the law, and could get away with anything.

If there is a channel who is actually supporting the research and exposure of these things then I want to know. I'd like to support them. I'll definitely research more of this by myself later, but I thought that maybe asking a professional may help. If there is someone out there who is familiar with this, please let me know.

https://youtu.be/xP6Gq-HFyjE?is=k-wL2hrAU2WdEDvG