[deleted]

A lot of the writers of history were employees of ambitious, power-hungry people who didn't care about the truth and wanted their side and themselves to look good.

With Julius Caesar being declared dictator for life in 44 BCE, having other republican titles and honors bestowed upon him by the senate, and essentially having absolute power, can he be considered the first emperor despite Augustus actually taking the title?

WWII and especially the pacific theater has fascinated me since my early teens. Everytime I watched a new documentary or read a new book on the topic I kept wondering how Americans seemed to have gotten through a battle with disproportionally lower casualties when compared to Japanese ones, especially in the island hopping campaigns. I understand that Japans Military leaders were often too stubborn to give up certain islands and demanded them to be defended to the last man and/or occasionally sent troops on suicide missions. When looking at statistics of the battle of okinawa for example, I do not understand how ~80 000 Japanese soldiers, who would rather die than surrender to the enemy were only able to kill ~15 000 American soldiers in the process of defending the island and ultimatly dying after having failed to do so. Wouldn't the fight-until-the-last-man menrality give the Japanese a psycological advantage over their counterparts? Or was the air and sea support too powerful for the Japanese to stand a fair chance against the Americans? As far as I understood the military technology of both sides was relatively on par at the time. How big of a role did the decryption of Japanese communication and over all American military tactics vs Japanese tactics play?

Tldr: What are the reasons for Japanese casualties to out-number American ones by often times 2:1 or more? (I.e. Battle of Okinawa 80 000 vs 15 000)

I recently visited Italy and learned that Pompeii was known for it's wealth. I can't help but think that, had I lived in the countryside a safe distance away from the volcano, I would have taken a few friends a few shovels and gone after some of that gold. However it's my understanding Pompeii was not excavated until the 1700's.

If there is consensus for one direction versus another, what is the evidence?

I was informed that there are some Israelite Exceptionalists who claim that Israelites were just very different from surrounding cultures, and thus began with monotheism that was corrupted into a pantheon.

However, I am more interested in non-exceptionalist views for either direction.

I have been wanting to write about Baba Yaga, she is a figure that interest me, but I want to know the history of her usage, where she came from, and how she is used in folklore. Also, if anybody knows any scholarly books/articles I could read that would be great too.

My Friend and I were having a discussion as to who the 4 main allied powers were (specifically 4 is a whole other story). We agreed on the big 3 but disagreed on the last one. It was between France and China.I argued France because of the fractured nature of China because of the warlords and Communists, as well as no sign of a modern Navy or air force. Correct me if I'm wrong but the French Fleet and Air force were still active throughout the war right? My friend argued China due to France's capitulation and relegation to Africa. Similar to the question, was Frances industrial base in Africa similar to that if China's? We've been having this debate for hours now.

Is Edward Gibbon's "The History of the Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire" still considered accurate considering historical excavations, findings, and new evidence of the fall of the Roman Empire? Is it considered outdated?

I have no doubt the prose and syntax is articulately put together and worth a read on those merits.

However, I'm wondering if considering the years since there is new evidence suggesting a different approach.

I'm not exactly concerned with this thesis "loss of civic virtue," but rather his understanding of the events as being accurate? Did he have false information?

After the expulsion decree was signed but not yet proclaimed across Spain (for a novel I'm writing about the expulsion) my characters, who are in the know, need to find a ship to take them from Malaga to Naples. How would they find a ship master to take them? On the dock? In some office?

[deleted]

[deleted]

A certain Scottish officer had at least three children out of wedlock with the daughter of a late sergeant in his regiment while they were living in the West Indies in the 1780s. The officer went on to marry someone else and rise through the ranks, and his biography mentions only his legitimate children.

Was it typical for the wives and children of servicemen to travel with them to the colonies, and for their daughters to bear the children of officers without being married to them? How many British women were present in the West Indies in the 1780s? What were the dynamics that led to the birth of army brats out of wedlock?

[deleted]

By that I mean, was the 20th Maine on the extreme left flank of the Union line that important? If they fell, would the Union position truly be that compromised?

Why wasn't he able to have his body more thoroughly cremated or destoroyed so that his remains could not be recovered by the Russians?

As we well know, modern historiography has discredited the notion of a single definitive defeat of indigenous peoples by the Spanish conquistadors in North America, while bringing into focus the importance of conflicts between indigenous peoples in bringing down the Aztec Empire.

So after the defeat of the Aztecs, where and from whom did the strongest opposition to colonial encroachment stem from?

I know they were around for a long time but does anyone have an answer?

[deleted]

In WWII I recall hearing about British ships sinking French battleships and cruisers. How did the French react to this, and how did everyone else? Did the British ever have to deal with reprocessions because of this?