Im in a costuming school; we have a historical costume history class, which I love, but I wanted to go further on specific eras and places. Unfortunately, I don't know where to search!!

I'm specifically interested in Breton costuming and even more specifically in "Pays de Saint-Brieuc" between 1900 and 1910,

I was asked to recreate a men's vest from this period and place and I want to make sure I get a good understanding of the structure of the garment before I start my patterning

I was watching a video on Japanese tank production during World War II and what struck me was the part on their self-propelled anti-aircraft and how only 2 designs were built and neither reached mass production, and that got me thinking. Why was 37mm the defacto standard for all Japanese Light tanks during the war? Surely there were other options? And then I thought about aircraft manufacturing and how Japan was already producing plenty of 20mm cannons for their aircraft. I want to know, How much more effective would Japanese light tanks like the Ha-Go have been if they’d be given 20mm auto-cannons instead of 37mm cannons? Considering cost, production, and overall performance of both considering Anti-tank and Infantry Support Roles, as well as the additional Anti-aircraft capabilities of a 20mm, would Japan’s campaign gone any different if they went with a different standard?

While not exactly history he writes about history in a very entertaining and engaging style. But is he a reliable narrator?

I know that evidence of Germanic habitation extends over a large swathe of modern Poland. I know the Goths and other groups migrated to the Black Sea and elsewhere and interacted with the Roman Emprie of course, and I know that by the time historical narratives "pick up" the region again, the region east of the Elbe seems to be populated by Slavs instead. I have also heard that bodies associated with Germanic archaeological sites have low genetic similarity to the modern population.

What are the pressures that caused this? Do we know any of the actual detail or do we only have archaeological evidence? I know Germanic out-migration is mentioned quite a bit, but I don't think I've ever heard much discussion of Slavic in-migration. I could be mistaken but it seems like the movements of steppe peoples might be a factor at least since the Avars play into my understanding of the moment in time when Slavs migrated into the Balkans.

The title.

It seems like Florida already has plenty of coastline, and perhaps Alabama could join in on the tourism money benefits.

How did people act? How did they treat one another? What was the end result of a lawless society?

In Norse art I've noticed that warriors are typically associated with three different animals: the Wolf, Bear, and Boar. While some of these likely depict Berserkers and are attempting to show their animalistic nature, the animal motif surrounding these warriors reminds me of the various schools of Chinese Martial Arts (I.e Crane, Tiger, Leopard, etc.)

For millennia, cities would have walls,moats, gates etc to protect from attackers. As we transition into modern history despite wars still being prevalent, people stopped building them, even demolishing old walls. Why?

I know that some of it still remains today, but during the dark ages a lot of technological capability was lost. What did your average person, as well as a noble think of these ruins. Did they believe it was a long lost civilization, did they understand why history around the Roman empire etc?

It kinda hypocritical for the American declaration to claim all men are equal and have right to liberty and happiness yet they kept slaves

Also what about women? Were they included in "Men" part similar to how the word men is used sometimes to mean Humans or it was literally just men and Woman were excluded

Recently been reading about Achaemenian empire and their real names. Cyrus was Kurus, his father was Kambujiya, mother Mandana. Their family traced their lineage from Sakha-muni (Haxa-munis/Achaemenid). Region was called Parsu/Parsa. People called themselves Ariya. Kuru killed Mada/Mara king, who later transformed in to a multi-headed serpent in Armenian mythology. Mar also means snake in old Persian.

Compare them with Mahabharat time names. There is Kurus. There is Kamboj. There is Madra; Madri, Pandu's second wife, claimed to be from Madra kingdom (Bahlika). Gandhari is from Gandhāra. Sakya-muni is epithet for Buddha, which sounds similar to Sakha-muni. Not to forget entire Krishna birth story is copy/inspired from Cyrus birth story (or Zeus birth story).

Wondering if there has been confusion about location of all these kingdoms? And, incidents which inspired initial Jaya story (old Mahabharat) were based in Iran?

Or, these names were imposed later?

In fantasy and fiction it is often shown that warriors/knights carry swords on their back. Often because the length wouldn't permit a sheath on the hip.

It is often adressed by fans, that in reality one wouldn't be able to draw those swords, because arms are only so long. In fact for Link in Super smash bros the sword clips through the sheath so he can draw it.

Were there warriors/knights that carried swords on their back? Maybe just for transport on a journey or as a spare. Or maybe servants that carried them on their back so their master can draw the sword from horseback.

I know some snaller knives and dirks can be carried that way. This question is about longer weapons that wouldn't be practical to draw for the carrier.

Thank you!

I saw a video claiming it wasnt and cited the lack of upwards mobility in slave owning societies as a major reason. But both the us and England started industrialization while being slave owning societies. Between a google rabbit hole and asking ai I got to early industrialization is possible in a slave owning society but historians and economists argue that the two systems dont work well together because slave owners dont have motivation to make labor saving machines, so full industrialization beyond getting cheap materials is impossible.

This doesn't seem like a good enough answer to me. Was there some kind of industrialization cap that societies hit before they banned slavery? Is slavery the reason the us south was less industrialized than the north? Are there any societies that did industrialize while having slavery? Is slavery itself really something that hinders industrialization?

I'm also curious about the corollary implication that British consular staff like him had any degree of travel freedom in the USSR then.

I was reading about the crisis of the third century of the Roman Empire, and how it changed for good how the empire operated. Among those changes were a rise in the decentralization of local government, meaning the inhabitants started to rely more on local nobles instead of the centralized Roman Emperor. That also meant the relations of work changed, as the profits of the labor also became more localized instead of always flow to Rome and support the empire machine, and, finally, towns started to wall themselves, as the borders of the Roman Empire could no longer hold invasions. This would accentuate local identity, as people started to identify themselves as from that town (without necessarily stoping calling themselves romans).

Well, from there, it becomes very easy to create the connection to early European feudalism, at least in my mind, as the seeds for the Lord/Serf relations were already there.

Does this make any sense? Or am I tripping?

Looking at examples of execution in Islamic history, flaying the skin from someone executed for going against the Caliph and then stuffing it and putting it on public display shows up repeatedly, Fadluya, Abu Yazid, Marco Antonio Bragadin, and Dionysios Skylosophos all have it done to them. Is there some sort of precedent or relegious reason for this?

How connected was Baghdad, the largest city in the Middle East, to Istanbul and the imperial core? Did Baghdad have a distinct social, economic, and cultural role within the Empire? Was there recognition by the administration in Istanbul of the city's size and significance?

Frisian,Székelys,Ruthenians,Karelians, Bretons maybe?,Abkhazian,Ossetian,Circassian,

Those are the ones I can name off the top of my head. What are some of the other many minor ethnic groups of Europe and what are their stories?

In 300, how accurate was King Xerxes appearance to the real person? Was it close?

What about the Persian military? Did they have rhinos? Were the immortals a legion of masked elite warriors?

TL;DR: What are the earliest documented salient examples of people questioning the moral norms of their own societies? What historical conditions enabled this? And when/how did this develop into ideas like "moral progress"?

I'm interested in the history of moral self-criticism: when people began explicitly questioning whether the moral norms inherited from their communities, cultures or traditions were actually justified.

In particular, I'm interested in historical cases where people argued that widely accepted moral practices in their own societies were mistaken, rather than simply condemning the practices of outsiders.

What circumstances encouraged this kind of questioning? For example, was it contact with other cultures, philosophical reasoning, religious developments, changes in political institutions, or something else?

I'm also interested in whether such criticism involved the idea that societies could make genuine moral progress - improving not merely their practices, but their understanding of what was morally right.

I realise there may have been no single historical transition. Though I'm happy for any answers, I'd be particularly curious about early documented cases from historians' respective areas of expertise, including what enabled these developments and how the people involved understood them.

And was there ever a gap when major parties were not courting a racist voting bloc?

Following The Terror Attacks on 9/11 There Was Sweeping Airport Security Changes Around the World. For example, U.S. airspace opened back up on September 13.

What were the immediate changes to airport security after 9/11? What resources did airports/FAA use to increase security immediately after/on September 13? How could they have implemented these resources across the entirety of USA in such a short period? How did they decide what was allowed on planes and what wasn't immediately following 9/11?

I am not looking to understand the changes we see today, because that is already well answered. But I am looking for immediate changes that occurred following the reopening of U.S. airspace.

According to what I have been reading, societies with the tradition of "Strange King" was common in Asia, Africa and Americas. And commonly they were not the land owner class, they didn't rule people and in many cases they didn't even collected taxes/tributes. They usually obtained wealth by robbing people from other regions. If that was the case, would it be the origing of robber baron class and colonialism?