Why did the romans kill their psychopathic and sadistic emperors all the time, while the dictators of the 20th century, like Hitler or Stalin, have never been assassinated?

So obviously we need to clear up what I mean, “Prussian” not exactly being a unique ethnicity or even language- however, anyone who has ever met a German will tell you that their regional identities are usually much more strong than their national ones. Every German I’ve met as identified themselves as “Hanoverian” or “Bavarian” etc. rather than German.

So, what with the old Kingdom of Prussia being the dominant military (and later political) entity in the Holy Roman Empire and then German Empire, it’s reasonable to assume that they had just as strong a regional and cultural identity, if not stronger due to their geographical displacement from the rest of Germany and also their dominance in the aforementioned manner.

So with all that established, the USSR comes in, ethnically cleanses Ostpreußen and fills it with Russians, all the Prussians are deported to Germany. What happens to them though? Are there any today who keep up Old Prussian groups like there are with Rhodesians? Did any remain in Danzig? Or were they all integrated into Germany at the time? Are there any left today at all or has the culture completely gone?

I can also throw on the end that I am aware of the German “aristocracy” who are still cosplaying as having their old titles despite Germany now being a Federal Republic, I’m not sure to what extent if any these individuals maintain a Prussian identity, nor if that identity is genuine, nor if it is a widely practised identity, so my mere cognisance of their existence doesn’t help me that much unfortunately.

Edit: just wanted to add I’ve received a few comments about links between the Nazis and Prussian history, and about how there were actually a few different peoples within the Kingdom of Prussia, etc. As interesting as this is it’s not what I’m asking about, not about the Nazis or the Teutons or the fact that the Prussians were originally a Baltic speaking people, I’m just interested in to what extent the Prussian identity, to the extent there was one (that being German- Speaking people who lived in Ostpreußen and the surrounding area and referred to themselves as Prussians in the way a Bavarian would call himself a Bavarian) persisted after their expulsion from their regional homeland following its annexation by the Soviets.

based on my shallow knowledge of history, Jewish community never occupied other countries or did any bad stuff like ethnic cleansing. So what is the reason why they were targeted in Europe and in Russia? There are neonazis in USA today, but usa saved many from torture camps after hitlers death. So why do we have neonazis here and in current times?

I read something about most Jewish people at that time were money lenders as one of the reasons. But what is so wrong about it. That’s what banks are and we have them all over the world.

I'm having difficulty finding comprehensive (English) resources that delve into the daily minutiae of life for emperors in Imperial China - things like daily routine, weekly schedules, regular rituals/ceremonies/duties, etc. How often they met with siblings, friends, family, concubines; recreation and freedom of movement; and how these differed for different emperors. I'm especially interested in the Tang/Song dynasties.

I've only been able to find Patricia Buckley Ebrey's Emperor Huizong, and while I love the depth and detail, it's much more politically-focused and the content is organized more around the developments in court governance and politics rather than Huizong himself. I think I saw a book on Li Shimin, but again, it focused on politics.

Does anyone know of any good books, please? (If there really aren't many, books fitting on the topic on emperors of other dynasties are fine too, or even Chinese TV dramas that accurately depict the daily life of emperors.)

Thank you very much in advance!

Thomas Paine is one of my favorite historical figures, and i am interested in how groups like the Levellers were centuries ahead of their times. Thomas Paine of course was an Englishman and lived most of his young life in England. Is there any evidence that he was inspired by the Levellers or was at least aware of them and their ideology?

Im enrolled in a 100-level African American literature college course. The professor claims that Hughes was labeled a "radical" because he supported racial equality. While I am sure there is some truth to this, my professor failed to mention who labeled him a "radical" and failed to provide evidence for the motive. Furthermore, I have searched and found that Hughes was a Soviet sympathizer and the time he wrote "Put one more 'S' in the U.S.A." follows the first Red Scare. This seems like a plausible, and possibly but not necessarily alternative, motive for labeling Hughes a "radical." What is the historical consensus on this issue rather than the canned explanation?

So, I'm writing the Epilogue of a 3-year long D&D campaign, and in the final game, as in many other games, the dark lord type character was defeated.

In my world, he had enslaved approximately a third of the world's people, who are now suddenly free, but find the lands they once inhabited to be far more barren and inhospitable than what they had left. There are of course cities and towns that were abandoned and will now be repopulated, but the rebuilding process will be long and hard.

I'm wondering, are there any historical examples of a large-scale resettlement of an abandoned or unoccupied area that I could draw from? I don't mean the type of organized resettling seen in Ireland's plantations, more so people returning to their homeland after a war, or discovering a new area to build a civilization. I just want a vague idea of what type of natural, social and political hurdles might arise in this process.

Thanks everyone :)

Many of America’s most powerful and wealthy cities got there in part because of their status as major centers of trade (New York and Boston for example)

Now one would think that being a city at the mouth of the Mississippi, the heart of so much trade, would be rich from all that commerce.

But the city and the state are (compared to the rest of the country) rather poor. What gives?

I'm asking this question to specifically find out exactly what distinguished these groups from each other in terms of culture aside from difference in language.

More generally I'm curious how different the cultures we assign different labels to actually are from one another? I always read that they are distinct culturally but what does that actually entail?

Today, the accepted doctrine of nuclear strategy is one of deterrence via mutually assured destruction. The fundamental idea of this strategy appears to be to prevent the large-scale use of nuclear weapons by an aggressor by being able to credibly threaten to assuredly destroy the entire of that enemy's state in retaliation. Under this formulation, there is no "winning" the nuclear war. However, the development of MAD as a doctrine depended on the presence of assured second strike capability, which was only made possible by SSBNs which could survive any first-strike, no matter how large. Prior to the development of SSBNs and their associated missile payloads, did U.S. military personnel think that they could fight and win a full-scale nuclear war against the Soviet Union without completely destroying the U.S.?

Apparently, the first battle of Bull Run had civilians watching from the sidelines.

Apparently the battle of Watling Street had Britons watching from their wagons, which formed a part of Boudica's defeat as it obstructed the retreat.

Is there anything to these accounts, or is it part of a literary trope whereby the side which is overconfident ends up ensuring its own defeat?