According to Richard Carrier in one of his books (I think it was 'On the historicity of Jesus') he says that the view that Jesus didn't exist at all was a fringe opinion. Did his (and also subsequent) research change the acceptance of this topic?

Edit: typo

Obviously it wasn't able to eradicate the burgeoning Christian faith, but Barnaby Rogerson's "A Traveller's Guide to North Africa" asserts that:

"Few Christians, when faced with the choice between a horrifying death in the amphitheatre or an easy (albeit temporary) apostasy, could resist making the latter choice. The noble army of martyrs was a small and select group."

Was martyrdom a common occurrence during Roman persecutions of Chistians to begin with, or were there mass apostacies committed by the early Chuch in order to duck under these cullings?

The French went from a monarchy, to a brief dictatorship, to an Empire, and to my understanding the French would proclaim 4 republics over the course of history to the present. If the Republic was so short-lived why do we consider the first French revolution to be significant?

Thx

Before the introduction of Taoism, Buddism, and Confucianism, what did the ancient Chinese believe in?

I pondered this question after seeing an enormous airliner jet fly only a few hundred feet over my head. I live right next to an airport. I thought wow that plane moves extremely fast and if it were to drop bombs on me it would be physically impossible to evade a machine designed during wartime to kill.

I've read from multiple sources that Douglas MacArthur disagreed with the use of nuclear weapons against Japan during WWII and was even appalled by the act. However, he wanted to use nukes against China in the Korean War. Why and when did he change from being strongly against nuclear weaponry to wanting to use nukes against China?

There are many viewpoints and takes on history; but my question concerns the following:

How was world history taught around the turn of the century (the 1900s) in W. Europe and the United States.

If you are an expert on another region and time period, please glance by this post.

Is there a curriculum from back then, in the regions, that we can look to and analyze?

I am mostly interested in seeing how teaching it then would be similar and yet different to teaching it now.

If my question is too vague, please let me know andi will do my best to ameliorate.

I just saw the movie Mary, Quern of Scotts.

At the very end one of the titles Elizabeth is refered to is Overlord of Scotland. Is this a title that English kings before her also had and which she inherited? Or did she aquire it at some point? And how was it last acquired?

Also, what did said title entail at that time?

Hello r/AskHistorians! First time poster here. I'm sure you guys get these sort of questions a lot, so I do apologize for that, but I could really use some advice from you folks. I've made the decision to pursue a degree in history, as it's the only subject I have ever been truly passionate about. HOWEVER, I've been doing a lot of reading lately (maybe too much) about the "horror stories" of the history degree. I've really started to second guess myself, as it seems many history majors struggle finding employment after school. My plan originally was to achieve my masters in Anthropology and try to work for a museum or Archaeology firm, but as I said I'm starting to panic, and think that this isn't the best decision. I could just really use you guys' 2 cents, as maybe some of you have been in my shoes. I'd really appreciate any feedback. Thanks!

I understand that they had different father's and different political opinions.

But can someone point to a historical source where both are discussed at the same time by a contemporary? Even just statues or busts that look distinctly different.

[deleted]

Immediately, I think to the fact that it adds up to the age of 17-18 when starting kindergarten at 5, but the age of 5 to begin formal education seems quite arbitrary as well. If the system was not originally devised as it is today(eg: started with 10 grades or something) and instead evolved from some other system, what urged the changes?

Why did Cherokees immigrate from the US to Liberia? Was there a significant amount of immigrants? How did they mix with the existing population? Are there any traces of Cherokee culture left today?

Has it been proven Cherokee lead to the creation of Vai?

?

In many countries the driver's side is the left seat, but primarily British and former modern British colonies drive in the right seat. Why this difference?

It's currently written in the Roman but I assume they used a different script before the Christian missionaries or whoever reached the area and spread English.

In the 14th-century novel Romance of the Three Kingdoms the Warlord Gongsun Zan is described as having some of his riders mounted on White Horses because nomadic tribes (?) he fought revered them as holy and thus would flee rather then kill the horses. Now this is so well known it seems that he is always statet to be the "White Horse General". I also always thought that this is a historical fact but today I read his translated Sanguozhi biography (which are the historical record of the Three Kingdoms era) online and it never even mentioned any White Horses at all. My question would be, is there any historical record, or any other volume of the Sanguozhi that mentiones the White Horses in association with Gongsun Zan or is this actually just another invention for the Romanticised Novel?

I’m not really asking why Brú na Bóinne ISN’T widely known as much as Stonehenge, just why is Stonehenge SO popular.

Thanks in advance!!

We often hear in popular culture that Roman soldiers were silent during battle, but I believe I read something awhile back that stated that Romans had a battle cry that involved their shields and voices. Is there any truth to this? Or are stereotypical depictions of Legionnairies accurate in this?

I know they fired their missiles in front of the infantry and then retreated behind once one side charged the other. I know in Agincourt longbowmen joined the melee with their own weapons like hatchets. Was this common? If they didn't do that, did they just wait in the back for the battle to be over? Did they have any other uses besides skirmishing?