Helloo

How were German and Japanese POW's really treated? I know that the Jews and Russians were treated badly because of their origins, but what about the rest?

I've heard that the Japanese were cruel, but then someone stated: "In the book Death March, one of the former prisoners interviewed said that they were assembled shortly after the surrender. A Japanese officer told them that Japan was not a signatory to the Geneva Convention, and as such the Americans were not prisoners of war, but rather were guests of the Emperor." Were POW's treated differently across Japan, or were they all treated the same way?

Thank you for reading.

How supportive were his followers at the start and all the way through his investigation, through to his eventual resignation? We're they in disbelief that he could do those things? At the time was it seen as a witch Hunt? How did his supporters respond when he finally stepped down? We're they fervently devoted all the way through? Was there a point where most shifted from their support?

I always read in books or see in documentaries that "Ceaser raised two legions" or "sulla went to the region and raised a legion". Yet I always hear about Rome having professional armies yet these legions seem raw. Also didn't the Romans have a 25 year service. Were legions ever disbanded? How did recruitment and training go? After the destruction of Carhae how did Rome raise another army to fight Hannibal?

How long was military training before combat for a fresh legion and how would a current legion add recruits?

Why did USA give up Vietnam?

I'm interested in learning more about the migration period and specifically about how the Roman army was organized in response to the many shifting events of the period.

Generally today, most western Churches (ie Catholic and Protestant), as far as I'm aware, tend to hold to the idea of Substitutionary Atonement: Jesus had to die to take the punishment (from God, because God is so just that he couldn't not do punishment) for mankind's sins. But I read that, among theologians, this is an idea that became popular in the latter middle ages, and before that, in the early middle ages, a more popular theory was Ransom Theory: Jesus died to, with his death, buy souls from Satan. But then God tricked Satan by resurrecting Jesus.

Is this correct? If so, what caused the shift? Are there any other theories that were popular or influential among theologians? Did eastern Churches have different ideas?

I was discussing Palestine with a Palestinian student of mine the other day, and he mentioned Britain giving the Jews Israel. My impression was rather, 1)the Balfour Declaration said in the future the Jews would get a homeland, but nothing much was done about it 2) Britain allowed Jewish immigrants to move to Israel, and after WW2 lots of Jewish refugees (I remember something about how they limited the refugees allowed there, but then there was a bunch of refugees stuck on ships dying off the coast, so they relented and let them all in), and then the Israelis, angry at what they saw as British failure to protect them, had a revolution (I remember something about the King David hotel being blown up?) where they fought the Palestinians and essentially chased the British off with their tails between their legs, then declaring the creation of the State of Israel. But I don't know that much about the period, and of course, reading about it on the internet is somewhat suspect since it's so ideologically charged.

Two fellow students and me are writing a paper on the influence of the vikings on the north-sea economy. We would like to know if any of you have sources about the vikings in Britain in the 9th and 10th century? Anyh sources on the Netherlands and Denmark in the same period whould be of great help too.

Say you were an average inhabitant of the colony and had five shillings tucked away. If that were a modern day savings account how much would you have?

It is well-known that Albrecht Durer made illustrations for the fechtbuch (Der Alten Fechter Angangliche Kunst). Some online sources say that Maximilian I was so impressed by Durer's mastery in both art and fencing that asked him to made the fencing and wrestling manual.

So the question is: are there any reliable sources on Durer abilities as a swordsman/fencer? I couldn't find anything but historical anecdotes.

Moreover, how did Atlantic traffic from India, South Africa and Australia compare to the traffic through Suez-Mediterranean-Gibraltar?

I have been wondering whether ancient historians, like Thucydides or Plutarch could be considered as reliable secondary sources or should be regarded as primary sources. As a rule of thumb,a secondary source is a work that interprets a historical event or period after the event has occurred and, generally speaking, with the use of primary sources. So, Thucydides and Plutarch, should be consider secondary sources But considering them as such, seems awkward. What is your opinion on that?

Hello everyone! I am a south slav who is very interrested in slavic history and culture! The culture part I allready have afterall I have lived in slavic countries all my life but I desire more. I really want to read a good book about slavic culture and more importantly history. Where do we come from? What makes us diffrent from Germanic People? What are our origins and our first beliefs and leaders? etc. etc. I would love to hear from you guys and what you would recommend for me! I'd love to get a good book or two on slavic history!

One might think that with huge advancement in computation technology, we should be much closer at deciphering it. Is there any serious work still going on this or there is a lack of interest or this particular subject is lacking funds?

I see these statistics where an army will fight a battle at the beginning of their conquest with 50k men and lose tens of thousands throughout the campaign. Then at the end of the campaign hey have 40-50k soldiers. How does this happen?

[deleted]

The Germans made a lot of technological advances in WW2 that were pretty ahead of their time, but why would they spend so much time and money developing experimental technology instead of sticking with what they knew would work? What was the incentive to do this?

Did people convert to other religions in the times or ancient Greece?.

For example, are there examples of an egyptian person who stoped worshiping egyptian gods and started worshiping greek gods?.

I know sometimes people would adopt a certain god into their pantheon, and there were things like the Mystery of Mithra, but I mean people saying x gods are fake and y gods are real.

If they escaped East Germany into West Berlin, they would still be in a walled and isolated city. Wouldn't it be easier to find a weaker point along the iron curtain (the border the Soviet Union shared with Western countries), rather than over the heavily policed Berlin Wall?