In Shelley's book, the monster seems to be very intelligent. However, in modern culture, Frankenstein's monster seems to be little more than a zombie with scars and bolts on his neck. How did this change in depiction come about?

[deleted]

How did he keep the public and SA supporting him when he was gay? I know he was eventually killed, but that seemed to be due to other reasons.

It seems like, with the Holocaust, for example, the ethnic features of Jews would be more recognizable, but it seems nearly impossible to tell who was a certain African ethnicity during this time period.

So in the game Dynasty warriors he is featured in there being shot by an arrow to the eye in; I believe, a battle against Lu Bu.

The game doesn't show him eating it but from before I've seen it is mentioned that he ate his eye.

Question is why? Was he just a hardened bad ass who gave 0 fucks and just ends up eating it? Did he even ACTUALLY eat his eye or is this just something mentioned in the history books as being fact?

[deleted]

I am currently looking at books about Japanese history, because I want to know more about the country. Right now I’m looking at “A History of Japan From Stone Age to Superpower”, second edition by Kenneth Henshall. Is it a good overview of Japanese history or are there better books out there? Keep in mind I’m not a historian so ease of reading is important for me.

I am not sure if this is the correct lace to ask this question. However I am writing a short essay regarding the Civil-military relations of Turkey (mainly post 1980 coup). The questions I specifically have to answer are as follows: What is the relationship between the organization and the political rulers? Are they distinct? Who sets policy, goals, and budgets? How does the society reconcile a military strong enough to do what the political leaders ask them to with a military subordinate enough to do only what the political leaders authorize them to do? Any answers to these questions or suggestions of informative material I should look at would be very much appreciated.

Finally, I am specifically interested in how the civil-military dynamic has evolved since the election of the AK Party in 2002 to present day. I would like to state that I have no intention of sparking a heated debate. Rather, I am simply in search of information and answers to the listed questions to help my understanding of this relationship.

What evidence do we actually have of female samurai? I know there are stories about specific women such as Tomoe Gozen, but I read something in Steven Turnbull's "Samurai Women 1184-1877" that really made me think:

"The archaeological evidence, meagre though it is, tantalizingly suggests a wider female involvement in battle than is implied by written accounts alone. This conclusion is based on the recent excavation of three battlefield headmounds. In one case, the battle of Senbon Matsubaru between Takeda Katsuyori and Hojo Ujinao in 1580, DNA tests on 105 bodies revealed that 35 of them were female. Two excavations elsewhere produced similar results."

I can't find the actual article he is referring to. Does anyone know what article this came from? Do we have any other type of evidence of female samurai, other than written accounts?

Was it just ship design, or did metallurgical and carpentry technologies advanced as well. Could 14th century tools and shipwrights build a Ship-of-the-line by blueprints alone?

[deleted]

After doing some limited research I found out that the Marines weren't the only ones doing all the fierce fighting against the Japanese, but how much of a role did the Army have?