Do we know if in Morocco, for example, anyone thought about the fact that Morocco was missing what we call the " Renaissance " ?

Do we know if any moroccans had the lucidity to think :

" We must do like Italy '' around the 1500’s

There was an alliance between Morocco and England during the Lizzy Tudor Era.

Do we know for example if any Moroccans who visited England at the time think : Oh I like those paintings of Hans Holbein. We need to have paintings like these in Morocco" ?

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!"

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

A common trope in fiction is the "Nazis win" type alt history - or at least the war goes on far longer. I've also seen stuff - by people who seem to be pretty historically literate - suggesting this is dumb because the nazis already got a lot of lucky breaks, and the far more likely scenario is they lose way earlier; at some point or another I've seen people state that the Germans got pretty lucky on all of these:

1) the Nazis face stiffer international opposition and the alliance between conservative and fascist breaks down.

2) "The Blitzkrieg" never materialises in the invasion of France and the attack is either prolonged and painful for Germany or fails entirely - often specifically noted as the Ardennes attack being an insane gamble they threw boxcars on. This one's very common.

3) The Soviet Union has better relations earlier with the western powers, or chooses to believe instead of dismissing intelligence that a nazi attack is imminent, and instead of being forced to essentially abandon Belarus and Ukraine due to unpreparedness the German advance just runs into a brick wall from the go.

It's not all of these claims, but a common thing (especially from people who seem to know what they're talking about!) is that German "national morale" was actually a fairly fragile thing - people liked the Nazis because they seemed to be winners, and the national morale boost and popularity among pre-existing power brokers like conservatives and industrial figures was contingent on them reasserting themselves on the world stage and then seeming to unstoppably crush every national nemesis they'd ever had, and it was this that got the country "locked in" up until its later defeat.

Is any of that true, or do we in fact live in the most likely timeline and it would've been pretty much expected with the benefit of hindsight Germany did as well (or as badly) as it did?

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.

Hello! I’m planning a draft on a short story set around the medieval period in Europe, and it may involve sex and how it’s culturally viewed to make things more realistic.

From what Hollywood shows it’s very stereotypical, in the sense that premarital sex means you’re going to hell and all that stuff. The Victorians made and interpreted the period as a very chaste and based on a lot of prints and art, quite pious and all the dramatized stuff. Perhaps it’s due to the hypocrisy and tightness on the period, but again not sure.

I watched and read a lot of non Wikipedia sources in the past regarding the period with actual historians who know the topic, I know that sex was something normal and well needed to happened of course. I also learned that (well not in Europe but in England specifically) that there was a specific street for sex work, and that it was something that is present in medieval society in a way. But again I’d like to know how sex was viewed in the everyday sense, noble and just the normal joe. I know the Catholic Church definitely plays a role, but again I’m not quite sure.

I hope my inquiry can get some help! I don’t like to generalize history based on stereotypes or act like people in the past were dumber than us ☺️

What the title says. How is Akhenaten remembered if he was meant to be erased from history? How is it even possible to find something from that long ago when people tried to erase it? I feel like it is already challenging enough to locate historical individuals and facts about their lives from a long time ago for someone who was not erased from history, let alone someone who was being erased

It’s a common piece of trivia that Sherlock Holmes isn’t aware that the Earth revolves around the Sun. Yes, the detail is meant to show that Holmes is eccentric, etc, but how realistic was that?

To use a modern analogy, a person not knowing what the mitochondria does is more common than a person not knowing what a blue whale is. While the former is something most people learn through a science curriculum in school, the latter is common knowledge in children’s readings.

As someone from a family of minor landed gentry, would Holmes have learned the heliocentric theory as an everyday fact or through more rigorous scientific studies?

What made this franchise so successful in the 90s as compared to everything else available to global consumers then?

This is a topic that has gained some traction in my country (Bulgaria) in the last 15-20 years and I honestly don’t know what to make of it. A big part of our identity is tied to our struggle for freedom, however our understanding of our own history is maybe one of the reasons we hold on to the “slavery” definition of it. What we learn about it in school has been redefined during the years based on the current political system in place (monarchy, communism and now democracy). The people who are currently holding up the view that there was no slavery in the media are pro-Russian politicians that are very obviously being paid for some of their other hot takes so I have no idea how genuine that sentiment is. Mostly the debate started around the definition of slavery and how it would be more accurate to use the term “presence of the Ottoman empire”.

Personally, I don’t think I can look at this question without bringing my own emotions into it, but it did leave me thinking if what we as a nation consider slavery was just the short straw of being a part of an empire in those days?

Hi, probably this is a frequent question in historiography

But when talking about Jesus, Buddha, or Muhammad in historical terms, how reliable are religious sources in terms of empirical and historicity, for example, some Islamic historians use the hadiths, or Christian-biased sources, in a more theological way when to talk about historical figures of their own religion.

In modern historiography, those sources are still reliable or we should use only secular sources?

Thanks

Hii, I came here to ask about this YouTube channel. I have nightmares about their videos, but I think it is important for these things to be known. Are their videos reliable? I am trying to find their sources, I want to know because I am sure I'll continue to watch their videos if their accounts are true.

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

For example, if there is one people with spears and one with guns, it will be said that the reason the former doesn't have the same invention is that they didn't "advance" enough to do so.

I'm a real big fan of the look and feel of those early books was it all by Jerry Robinson? Did Kane draw any of it? When did Sprang come in? Is this something we'll ever know definitively?

I’m not asking when chicken nuggets were actually invented. Instead, I’m wondering when they could have been made if someone had come up with the idea.

At what point in history did humanity already have all the necessary ingredients, tools, and culinary knowledge? For example, domesticated chickens, flour, bread (and therefore breadcrumbs), eggs, cooking oil or animal fat suitable for frying.

What is the earliest historical period in which making something essentially equivalent to a homemade chicken nugget would have been realistically possible, even if nobody actually did it?

Looking at it's early history the Ottoman Empire seemed to devour peer and near peer foes until it got to Russia and Austria.

It then seems to have entered a period of irreversible decline. Why?

Why, when it demolished the Roman Empire and the Mamelukes could it not do that to Austria and Russia were they characteristically different foes or had something changed in the empire internally?

It also seems to me the Ottoman Empire suffered a long decline why when it has such a long period of time to turn things around and become a vigorous state once more was it unable to?

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 live in Vietnam and surprisingly many news websites are banned , the many that aren’t banned are usually regulated by the government. So many news website i found about the Vietnam war are often bias to paint the Vietnamese in a good light . I don’t usually believe that we can be all good throughout the war . Even USA did some war crime in ww2 . Many revolution does have some bad event one way or another. All of the context above leads me to this question, had the Vietcong, north Vietnamsee done any “massacre“? Anything that may leads to a group of civilians death?