When people or documentaire talk about the WWII, they just mention the war crimes that committed by the the Axes and especially the Reich, but I have never heard someone mentioning the crimes committed by the Alleid, not only the Soviet Union but also on the western front, against the german civilians or others, which I am quite sure there were many.

[deleted]

Historians of reddit, to what extent did USSR play a significant role in ensuring the victory of the communists in 1949?

I was wondering primarily about customs, rites, prayers, etc. I understand the first gospel is Mark’s which was composed around 70. But how was it like before? How did the apparition of this new gospel affect the community? Was there any opposition or internal conflict because of the gospels?

Hello smart history people, It's me, a lowly dumdum. I have to gather resources (journal articles) for a historiographical essay. I am not asking for answers just a few historians names and the articles that explore the question:

'To what extent does the history of empires show that empires share common features across history?'

I struggle with histriographical arguments.

With how effective chemical weapons were in World War 1 why were they never used in the European theater of war? (Japan did use chemical weapons)

My theory is because war was a lot less static then it was in World War 1 so it was harder to use. But on a under equipped army (example early soviets on defense) it could spread utter hell through the lines.

Would love to see what the actual reason by this was and if I was correct.
~Cheers

How does such a large and successful civilization collapse without a Hollywood movie depicting dramatic civil unrest or natural disaster? I don’t think I have ever read or seen in film any depiction of how collapse on such a massive scale happens.

I blame it all on video games but in my head I picture most cowboys wearing something pretty similar to modern blue jeans, but then I start up a game of Red Dead 2 and can't find anything like that so I can't tell which game to believe.

We’ve all heard the old adage “take a hit from the peace pipe.”

I’m looking for general information on the question above:

what type of drugs did they use, how important was it to the culture, what were their thoughts on it as a tribe (good, bad or indifferent). Were drugs widely used? Did they use them differently than we do today??

In regards to Marijuana, was it common for each tribe to grow their own or was it such a random occurrence that the average Native American would never run across Marijuana.

Thanks to anyone with any knowledge on this.

My understanding of the Great Schism might be very... very... generalized

But my understanding is that... around the First Council of Nicaea, anything that wasn’t essentially Chalcedonian/Catholic was deemed a heresy

If that in fact is how it happened, how are there so many denominations of Christianity that’s been allowed to thrive?

Thanks all!

Did they think they compare them with crocodiles? Or consider them hazards? Taste like chicken?

That is to say what is the oldest record we have of what you or I would call a restaurant. For this example let's say: A perminate structure with reasonable hours (e.g. not only serving 3 meals a day) where you could enter, choose a drink and an entre from a menu and eat with your family before leaving.

As an example, what kind of ships and people would you expect to see along the Danube river between the 15th-18th centirues? Did people travel by boat for convenience? Was there even trade traffic? Could you expect to meet a lot of ships if you sailed from Vienna to Wallachia?

I've noticed in some historical settings, the word "fire" is used as a command to launch arrows or siege weapons. I always figured that the use of that command came about with cannons where a fuse needed to be lit with fire. Was it also used for medieval weaponry?

[deleted]

So I remembered an argument that me and two of my professors got into over Nazism's relation to the greater politics of Europe and I was interested in shooting it to this sub. Basically to summarize what we talked about me and one professor felt like Nazism was a logical conclusion to imperialism, white man's burden, and other white supremacist ideology that was common at the time. The other professor felt like Nazism was itself a unique ideology to Germany and was unrelated to the greater imperialist philosophies of Europe. Granted I understand there is a difference between imperialism and Nazism, but I feel like it's an evolution of the philosophy. I guess for more context the professor who supported me was a African history professor who held a very negative view of imperialism and the professor who didn't was an anglophile who specialized in 20th century British history.

To be sure, I figure that Vicksburg falling was more symbolic than literal as it wouldn't be impossible to slip through, but I would expect that that symbolic loss, with the Union now able to patrol the entire river unmolested by shore batteries or enemy ships, would be a pretty devastating blow not just to morale generally, but most specifically to those now cut off from 'the heart' of the Confederacy.

So how did the public in places like Arkansas or Texas respond to this, and what kind of impact did it have on support for the war: both within the civilian population as well as the military stationed there?

It is an infection, so he must have gotten it from someone he was in contact with. What kind of people would the young king have been around in his youth for him to catch this infection?

Thank you

I am mostly interested in the Mycenaean civilization and Minoan. If coins didn't exist, then what was the trade currency used?

Thank you!