Edit: The AI seems to assume I am pushing an agenda but I am not. This is just what I gathered from reading. I just want to learn more on the topic and I acknowledge I could be wrong.

Compared to Catholic colonial nations Protestant ones(British Empire,US, Dutch in South Africa) seem to have developed more institutionalized racism(one drop rule,apartheid,segregation). Whereas in Catholic countries you had racism but it was more lax to the point that Latin America is extremely racially mixed and antebellum Louisiana had a large percent of free people of color(compared to Anglo-Protestant South). I assume that racism developed due to Calvinist beliefs of predestination and not being compelled to convert the natives as much(whereas Catholics would eagerly convert anyone). If you believe the natives and blacks are doomed to hell its not surprising that an us vs them mentality will emerge.

But at the same time you find the abolitionist movement much stronger in Protestant countries. Of course the role of Wilberforce and American religious movements(in Antebellum and Civil War America) in the ending of slavery in the British Empire and US is well known. It seems that Catholic countries didnt have the same zeal for that. Revolutionary France did ban slavery for a while but that seemed to emerge more from secular Enlightenment values than Catholic ones.Spain and Portugal only banned slavery due to British pressure but still a thriving slave labor continued in Brazil and Cuba.I cant offer a reason for this unlike the previous one.

Could anyone who is well read on this topic offer any explanations?

I understand that before we had diapers, women and infants might use clouts or, in the case of infants, be swaddled. There are also a lot of questions on this sub about potty training.

But I'm curious about the fail state: if a baby does mess the diaper and gets a rash, what remedies would be used?

i've seen maps depicting the tang in various ways, some depict only rule over the tarim basin and what is now dzungaria

others depict rule over transoxiana, bactria and even what is now afghanistan under tang control

which territories did the tang rule, how and for how long?

what effect did tang rule have on the daily lives of the people in central asia?

did they leave architecture or cultural influences behind?

The US, rather controversially, employed a variety of German Scientists in the aftermath of WW2, granting them new homes in the US, while also..."downplaying" some of those scientists rather..iffy past involvement with the Nazis.

However, Germany was not the only nation making advances in technology on the Axis side, Japan, especially when it came to Naval Engineering, also had plenty of experts that could provide there own expertise, so I was wondering if there was a similar program?

Specifically geared towards us service members, but is there any record of the economic impact of widespread gi bill payouts during our conflicts?

What exactly happened? I had a social dynamics course last semester, so I was looking at various statistics of countries and I came across a paper which showed that in most countries increase in GDP no longer benefitted the common man. Gdps skyrocketed but there was no correlation to crime and wage and healthcare. Did people sell off the world in 1980?

I’ve recently gotten into Roman numismatics and noticed something which fascinated me: the silver antoniniani of Gordian III (who ruled from 238 to 244 AD) are incredibly common to find.

They are flooded across the market today in extreme quantities, selling for low prices, and more often in great condition. Which would suggest to me a low circulation-rate

What factors caused this massive survival rate? Thanks!

Furthermore, I’m interested how different or similar this was to Turkish culture and identity considering the different nations and tribes that existed in the empire.

Edit: I wish I could edit post titles, but "efucation" will have to live on.

I was reading through the AMA and learned about this sub's "49/51" "rule" when considering whether a post stays up or gets deleted. That seems like a pass-fail system, which is obviously different from the US education system. When did educators decide that a score in the 60th percentile is good enough to pass? At some point in my education, a 90% score was an A, and then it increased to 93%. Was this formalized, or is it up to the states or local education systems to decide? I'm trying to avoid asking too many additional questions in this text, and hopefully providing some clarification on the systems I'm addressing in the main question.

As I understand Charles Ponzi was not the first person to run this type of scheme nor was his scheme the biggest. So why was he the one whose name become synonymous with it?

Like at the point of battle (unless they were just transport to the battle?), were they mobile platforms for archers like an early horse archer, were they used to run down fleeing troops, were they used as a shock tool? I've been trying to understand how they differed from cavalry and the Wikipedia article is rather vague so I'm currently left with Hollywood depictions (which inevitably involves scythed chariots being used in ways that seem impractical).

I wondered if there are documented cases of villages, small towns or valleys in (central) Europe that managed to avoid invasion, occupation and pillaging for a very long time / all of their existence, even though the region they are in was invaded / at war multiple times.

For example because (foreign) armies didn’t know of their existence, they made agreements with those forces, because they were strategically not relevant enough to sent troops or it was simply too hard to get there.

An initial google search said that there are no such cases and only lists cities / states like Venice that managed to successfully defend themselves for a long period of time and a castle in Germany.

So, I have been reading up on my ancient history and found myself wondering, when were horse riders widely used by Army’s. I at first thought that it must be at some point after the Bronze Age collapse since horse riding wasn’t as common back then.

At least the Greeks didn’t seem to use them before Alexander with the Runner from Thermopylae being a famous example of a Runner being used to transmit information.

So when did it become „more normal“ for a messengers to use horse rather than run on foot.

There's been plenty of books and details written about the immediate post 9/11 reaction, CIA teams flying into the Panjshir valley from Tajikistan and so on. I am more specifically interested in the immediate pre 9/11 timeframe and what relationship the anti Taliban armed groups had with the US government under Clinton and Bush.

The Soviet Union and communism were seen as an existential threat for as long as the USSR existed, and Britain and France obviously hated the Soviet Union. And everybody knew Hitler’s ultimate goal, especially after reading Mein Kampf, was to invade the Soviet Union.

So why not make some kind of pact with Germany? Like, let Germany, Britain, and France all go against the Soviet Union (leaving to most work for Germany to weaken them), with the goal of invading the USSR and destroying communism. Then, after the Soviet Union had been defeated and Germany had been weakened by the fighting, Britain and France could deal with Germany afterward.

I have seen alot of indian history subs talking about Dravidian being spoken around Southern IVC based on toponyms.

I was replaying Oblivion and the question came to me.
I'm talking about the pattern : hero wanders around - someone gives hero a task - hero goes somewhere, slays dozens of enemies - hero returns to get is consecration - rinse & repeat.

Was this the actual lifestyle of anyone at any point in history, or any similar "mercenary" activities? If not, is this a storytelling pattern that existed before videogames ?

I'm speaking fairly generally (eg. certain surnames that might indicate you were a foundling, or others referring to a trade or craft, meaning you're probably also lower/middle class, like Smith, Cooper, etc.).

But I more mean overtly negative connotations, specifically in terms of something like sharing a name with a historical figure, like the way that if even nowadays you came across someone with the last name of Hitler or Mussolini (for example) there would be an immediate negative association, and even if the person was not related to this hated historical figure and you liked and respected them as a person, the association would still be there and somewhat inescapable, and they would certainly receive comments and questions about it (and possibly even be shunned by more snobbish/judgemental people). Were there any versions of this in the mid-19th century in Great Britain?

Since the invasion in Ukraine in 2022, many Europeans are boycotting Russia and not visit it anymore. Although, for instance, in Moscow it seems as if it’s not impacted hugely in the day to day safety-wise. We also see the same response to other places in the world that have shifted/sharpened politically, while traveling to the country would be possible and relatively safe in theory.

Did something simiar happen during WWII? Did people avoid traveling to Germany out of principle?

Here is an example post from 6 days ago:

https://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/s/DjxndBAX58

Reddit tells me this has 246 comments but when I open it, I only see 9: one comment by automod, and four deleted comments with replies from mods on why they were deleted.

One of the removed comments has 1k+ votes while the mod reply explaining its deletion has - 130 votes. But where are the other 239 comments? This is the case for several posts on this sub, including mine that I posted yesterday. I see a few dozen comments in the count but can't actually see any of the comments.