If you look on a map, there's only 2 miles between Alaska and Russia. Why didn't people in Asia at the time see that earlier? It makes no sense to me because the two continents are that close and no one noticed it before

I know that Choctaw and Chickasaw came partly from Mexico or Central America, but I’m wondering if they left before the city became what it was in its glory days. From cursory research it seems they might have left a couple hundreds years before, but perhaps this is something no one even knows.

They didn't cite any sources, so I was a bit skeptical on this claim.

After all, I've always learned that pogroms and similar anti-Jewish persecution had existed since the Roman Empire. While I'm not denying that Martin Luther was a rabid anti-Semite, it seems rather bold (to me at least) to assume that he was the central figure to make Anti-Semitism 'mainstream' within Christianity. After all, there was the infamous 1492 expulsion of Jews from Spain which I doubt a 9 year old Martin Luther had any direct hand in it. Is this a simple case of me translating the sentence wrong?

For anyone curious, it's from the Bell Tower news "CHRISTLICHER FUNDAMENTALISMUS UND DIE QUERDENKEN-BEWEGUNG".

Sentence in question: "Antisemitismus ist historisch aus antijudaistischen Stereotypen entwachsen, die vor allem durch Martin Luther innerhalb des Christentums an Bedeutung gewonnen haben."

Which I translated as "Anti-Semitism has historically grown out of anti-Judaic stereotypes, which gained prominence within Christianity primarily through Martin Luther".

I often hear it said that China is the Roman Empire that never fell.

I believe what people mean by this is that there is a linguistic and cultural continuity for thousands of years in China which is unparalleled by any other civilization.

Is this really true though? Throughout its history China has splintered and rejoined into successor states, sometimes from within and sometimes from foreign rule such as the Mongol Yuan Dynasty and Manchu Qing Dynasty.

In terms of linguistic continuity, from what I understand China was extremely diverse (even just within the Sino-Tibetan group) until the last century when mass media culturally assimilated and homogenized much of the urban areas.

So is there any truth to the notion that China is a more continuous civilization compared to say the Western world, or does it just so happen that China is more politically united then the West in the last few centuries.

So we use BC and AC . My question is did ancient civilizations count years and based on what they counted years? What was the most used counting-system used around the globe . And did different regions use different counting-system from one another?

I asked to many questions but hope you answer.

In cleaning out my father’s belongings, I may have found German religious texts from the 18th century. What should I do?

I am visiting Greece just now, and was amazed that so many ruins have e.g. columns where part is clearly a modern reconstruction for structural reasons. But also many statues and delicately-detailed stoneworks are removed to a museum and a replica is on site, and yet other stones we are allowed to walk on and touch.

Many of these sites were basically heaps of stone blocks for two thousand years, which aren't as impressive to visit as, e.g., the Stoa of Attalos in the Athens Agora which was built in the 1950s on top of, and containing parts of, the original building.

And yet. The decision was clearly made at somepoint by someone to STOP rebuilding, as at most sites only a few columns or an arch are all that stands. How is that line drawn, and by whom?

My personal feelings are he should be viewed as a war criminal. I have several reasons for thinking this.

1. He ordered the burning down of non-combatants homes and farms that had no part in the confederate war machine.
2. He ordered his troops to pillage towns that he went through. This resulted in the execution of livestock and the stealing of non combatants resources, including items that could hardly be considered war resources such as family heirlooms. These troops were referred to as “bummers.”
3. These “bummers” had very little over sight. Their are varying reports speaking to the degree of sexual violence committed by these troops.
4. He quartered troops in non-combatants homes.
5. After the civil war, he went on to another war theater in the Great Plains, where he waged a genocidal campaign against the plains Indians.

Now, the counter point is that these measures were necessary to bring a timely end to the war, thus preventing more death. I just don’t see this as a legitimate argument. Is there any evidence to support that these tactics actually resulted in a hastening of peace talks? And even so, it hardly send seems like one could say that this tactic resulted in less death and misery unless you view this time period myopically, only focusing on 1860-1865. The South was devastated economically for up to 50 years beyond Sherman’s March. This created a milieu for further misery, corruption, civil rights violations, poverty and death.

Ok historians, I feel this is an unpopular take, so let me have it! Why am I wrong?

Trying to figure out how common it was for brother knights to have sex in spite of vows?

I know later in the order things became more secularized. Just wondering in the early order would it be common to see a brother knight having sex with nuns or local women in the ordenstaat?

Also what were the punishments associated?

Hi everyone,

First time posting here!

During the 2017-2019 period I was writing an extensive essay on the rise of Fidel Castro, and whether or not the United States, inadvertently, facilitated that rise.

As a result, I began with a historical route commencing in 1898 (Spanish-American War) and ending in 1959, regarding the United States’ influence of Cuban affairs and matters. Part of this was a report I found from the State Department (in conjunction with the Treasury) dated in around 1896-1897, discussing Cuban affairs and potential interests.

Albeit me considering it a very interesting source, as I could link this internal report to the US Government’s decision to increase the country’s involvement in Cuba, I was prevented from using it. Three History professors all told me that it was not a primary source for the matter I was concerned with as it did not refer to Castro or the movement, and it was dated prior to US occupation, and thus “best to not utilise it”.

Since they were the ones shaping my grade, I listened to them. However it still bugs me, so I am posting this. Would this be considered a primary source for my topic, even though it was not directly linked to Fidel Castro? I was under the impression that in extensive essays/dissertations, we enjoyed a certain “liberty” in using primary sources, even if not directly and absolutely linked to the matter discussed.

Please let me know of your thoughts!

The European refugee crisis is listed as the largest-ever in world history on Wikipedia and by a bunch of other sources, and I've read about it before - massive upheaval, population transfers of Germans and others, etc etc.

But what about Asia and the Pacific? I can find some few references to a huge number of internally displaced people in China (up to 100 million) but what about refugees? Were there people who fled from one country to another ahead of the Japanese? Were there significant population transfers anywhere after the war? Were there aid agencies set up to help IDPs and refugees?

Thanks in advance for any answers to this!

Was it really as simple as sending a guy to Athens or Thessaloniki and shout out in the agora “his majesty King Antiochus offers land and wealth to any that agree to settle in his realm” and people would agree to come despite not knowing where they might end up?

I am writing a book that is post-apocolyptic/post-nuclear war (not a lot of working tech) and am struggling with this aspect.

I understand how homing pigeons work, but that does not work back-and-forth for spies traveling into new territory. I've considered having someone on the inside to contact, but how would the first person to go into enemy territory send and receive messages? They are not in close enough distance for things like smoke signals or anything to work. Is the only option to have a more scout-like spy that travels back and forth? I would really appreciate any input on this, even references to books that I might be able to check out and read myself. Thank you so much in advance!!

To add on to this, I learned earlier today that the Ethiopian Bible has 84 books, whereas the Bible we use in the West only has 66. Did they just have access to documents that the early Church did not? Or were those books excluded for a reason?