Recent comments in /f/history

agreea OP t1_iuagkzq wrote

From the abstract: "We argue that the mafia arose as a response to an exogenous shock in the demand for oranges and lemons, following Lind’s discovery in the late eighteenth century that citrus fruits cured scurvy."

-

When we discovered that citrus cures scurvy, the only place that grew lemons at an industrial scale was Sicily. Sicily didn't have a strong enough state to protect lemon farmers and enforce contracts between them and the rest of the supply chain. So the mafia formed around the opportunity extort / protect farmers and enforce contracts (e.g. futures) between various players in the lemon supply chain.

I've seen this theory elsewhere, including John Dickey's Cosa Nostra: A History of the Sicilian Mafia.

You can probably extrapolate this more generally, that organized criminal groups form around certain industries that the state cannot or will not protect.

955

ImOnlyHereCauseGME t1_iua9xyi wrote

One of the common misconceptions (largely from Hollywood) is that Medieval castles were dark and colorless when in fact they were reasonably well lit and had many colored tapestries. My question is if this was also common in the poorer homes. Were the serf’s/peasant’s homes nicer than portrayed in movies (generally dark huts) and were their clothes dyed in bright colors as well or was that generally just reserved for the wealthy?

5

jezreelite t1_iua5thq wrote

Your question is based on a false premise.

The Russo-Japanese War and World War I didn't involve the Soviet Union (they involved the Russian Empire, which was a very different beast from the USSR); Poland didn't take part in World War I (I think you're thinking of the Polish–Soviet War, a separate war and took place during the Russian Civil War); the Soviets WON the war against Finland; and the Soviets didn't defeat Nazj Germany because of the winter. At most, it can be said that the winter caused the failure of Operation Barbarossa, but that's not remotely the same thing as helping them successfully take Berlin.

That being said, much of the perception of Westerners during the Cold War of the perceived invincibility of the USSR was incorrect, but that had little to do with their military power and everything to do with their economy. Collectivization during the 1930s basically destroyed Soviet agriculture and premiers after Stalin were forced to buy grain from abroad to prevent starvation. These problems were later compounded by the high price tag of the Soviet War in Afghanistan and the cleanup after the Chernobyl disaster coupled with revolts by the Baltic states.

6

GrantMK2 t1_iua5j9s wrote

Performance in the 1900s and 1910s isn't going to impact much analysis of them post-World War II.

For why:

  1. Ability to raise pretty large armies.
  2. After WWII they controlled (or at least had controlled by aligned governments who couldn't afford too much of a breach with them) a vast amount of land and its resources, much more of Europe than any Russian empire ever had.
  3. A lot of nuclear weapons and the ability to deploy them at a lot of targets.
  4. They had considerable ideological appeal to a lot of the world.
  5. They did inflict a lot of casualties on Germans and their allies.

Now it's not as though failures didn't get noticed. In fact, Finland was so embarrassing that they weren't expected to put up a good defense against the Nazis. That they could push Germany back, even if it required a lot of logistical support from the US and came about alongside invasions of Italy and France, goes to show that a weak military doesn't necessarily stay that way if there are the right motivations and it has time to change.

7

rkgrunge t1_iua2qx1 wrote

I think what has been said here by the orginal commenter is that in the past he had taken an anthropology class, probably at a university, which was taught by a professor. Now, this professor we're talking about would write articles in addition to teaching. And by coincidence the commenter has noticed several of these articles posted on reddit, which he just commented about.

16

calijnaar t1_iua0bbj wrote

I can't think of anything involving conspiracy theories on the level of the JFK assassination, but there were plenty of cases of political assassinations in Europe in the past 150 years.

Firstly, there's various Anarchist movements killing high level political leaders around the turn of the 20th century. (This is not limited to Europe, by the way, US president William McKinley is another prominent victim). Several European monarchs and nobles were killed, including Tsar Alexander II and the Austrian-Hungarian Empress Elizabeth. Several non-royal leading politicians were also assassinated, among them French president Sadi Carnot, three Spanish prime ministers: Antonio Cánovas del Castillo, José Canalejas and Eduardo Dato Iradier, and Russian Prime Minister Pyotr Stolypin.

(There were also many unsuccesful attempted assasinations, for example on Leopold II of Belgium, the Ottoman Sultan Abdul Hamid II, Wilhelm I of Prussia and Queen Victoria, but also on Benito Mussolini)

The German Weimar Republic saw a lot of politically motivated terror and assasinations, with several prominent politicians being assassinated by right wing paramilitaries. The killings of Rosa Luxemburg and Karl Liebknecht during the Spartakist uprising in 1919 are actually surrounded by some conspiracy theories, as there are claims that the Freikorps members who killed them had approval from government officials (possibly even president Ebert). Kurt Eisner, the premier of the People's State of Bavaria was assasinated by a nationalist who apparently acted alone. In the 1920s the Organisation Consul was behind several high profile assasinations, including those of former finance minister Matthias Erzberger and foreign minister Walther Rathenau.

The later 20th century saw terrorist assassinations by left wing paramilitary organisations like the German Rote Armee Fraktion or the Italian Brigate Rosse. The RAF carried out several attacks against US and NATO facilities, among their prominent victims were Jürgen Ponto, director of Dresdner Bank, and Hanns MArtin Schleyer, head of the German employers' association in the 70s and senior diiplomat Gerold Braunmühl in the 80s. In 1991 they assassinated Detlev Karsten Rohwedder, head of the Treuhandanstalt reponsible for the privatisation of the state-owned property of the former GDR. This is another case where there are some conspiracy theories, because although the RAF claimed responsibility, there have been claims (by Rohwedder's widow, amongst others) that remnants of the East German Stasi were involved (allegedly because Rowhwedder and the Treuhand were close to finding money sectreted away by the SED).

The most prominent victim of the Italian Red Brigades was former Prime Minister Alberto Moro with a later group in the 90s and early 2000s killing Masimo D'Antona and Marco Biagi, advisors to prime ministers Massimo D'Alema and Silvio Berlusconi.

There were also assasinations (and other attacks) by various separatist/independence groups like the Irish IRA, the Basque ETA and the Corsican FLNC. The most prominent victim of the IRA is probably Louis Mountbatten, 1st Earl Mountbatten of Burma, a close relatuve of the royal family. The ETA assassinated Luis Carrero Blanco, prime minister under dictator Francisco Franco, and more or less his designated successor. The FLNC assassinated Claude Érignac, the prefect of Corsica.

There were also assassinations by criminal groups, like the Mafia killing of Italian judge Giovanni Falcone.

The closest you can come to a JFK style mystery is probably the assasination of Swedish prime minister Olof Palme in in 1986 which is essentially still unsolved (there were theories about an involvement of the Kurdish PKK, later Christer Pettersen was convicted of the assassination, then acquitted in a second trial)

Another death surrounded by conspiracy theories is that of Uwe Barschel, minister president of German state Schleswig-Holstein, who was involved in allegations about a very dirty reelection campaign with illegitimate attacks on political opponents. His death in 1987 was ruled a suicide, but there have been various conspiracy theories claiming that he was actually murdered (usually to cover up wrong doings during the campaign etc)

6

Ferengi_Earwax t1_iu9z58m wrote

First off, there are hundreds of trmples all over ancient egypt with hieroglyphics stating the king protects egypt from barbarians and shows him bashing their head in. There are steles which record all kinds of victories over barbarian peoples and they often denigrate the people. And I'm not sure how you couldn't find any sources, I literally got dozens of sites right away... but here you go. https://www.thetorah.com/article/egypts-attitude-towards-foreigners#:~:text=In%20ancient%20Egypt%2C%20the%20attitude%20towards%20foreigners%20varied,a%20mace%20on%20the%20exterior%20of%20temple%20walls.

https://www.gradevalley.com/ancient-egyptian-attitudes-towards-foreigners

https://anthropology.msu.edu/anp455-fs18/2018/11/29/foreigners-in-egypt/ here they talk about how subjected princes or their kids were taken to egypt to be culturally washed and made egytian to be sent back to rule their people under egypt.

https://chrisnaunton.com/2020/09/03/the-foreigner-as-scapegoat-lessons-from-ancient-egypt-and-today/

https://www.bloomsbury.com/us/foreigners-in-ancient-egypt-9781474241601/ .... again there are thousands of depictions of foreignors in tomb paintings. Rarely kind.

If you're looking for books, search it yourself. All of this info I found in seconds.

1