I'm somewhat familiar with the notion that the majority of confederate monuments were raised in the 20th century, during the height of the Jim Crow era and the Civil Rights era, but I recently read that some were raised in the Union and border states as well. Was this around the same time as the 'lost cause' narrative, and if so, why did this pervade through the Union and border states?

I suppose this is a religious question, but I feel that by some standards, religious lore could be considered historical.

Now, I'm obviously talking mythologically and theologically, but I was just wondering if besides the normal stable of demons, Baal, Paimon, Vine, etc, new ones are created.

Does any lore anywhere suggest that new demons are made in Hell? Does Lucifer pick certain souls that have been condemned to Hell to make a new demon? This all is to ask then, I suppose, is there a finite number of demons?

[deleted]

[deleted]

From my understanding Nazi stands for 'National Socialist German Worker's Party,' which besides 'National' it has all the makings of a socialist title.

I understand that they were Fascist in their government structure like how Russia had a Communist government structure, but were they both socialist economically?

Specifically American volunteers in France. Why?

[deleted]

Considering million of Germans, Immigrated to the Americas and other parts of the World, all the German Jews killed by Hitler, Also there were approximately 2.8 million Germans killed in WWl and Approximately 6-8 million including civilians in WWII. As of today Germany has 80 million people so I guess considering how many people they loss I figured at one point they were severely overpopulated?

I ask this question as a frame of reference in light of recent events. I'm not looking into getting into the modern politics of it but I am curious what the feels are regarding them historically even post Jim Crow.

Serious question, they were in open rebellion against the Republic. Did Lincoln pardon them, or were those just different times?

At least 14 million people died on the Chinese front during the Second Sino-Japanese War/World War 2, with some extreme estimates placing the number of casualites over twice as high. This means that the Chinese front had the second largest amount of deaths during the war, if not the most deaths, depending on what the correct estimates of deaths for both the Chinese front and the Eastern front were (although it seems more likely that the Eastern front was worse, but not by much). However, we rarely, if ever, hear about China and it's presence in the war and the millions of people they lost during the war. Personally, in highschool, we learned about the Western front, the Eastern front, and the Pacific campaign as well as other less significant fronts like Italy and North Africa and of the numerous casualties, especially on the Eastern front. Yet, the only thing I remember hearing about China is that Japan invaded them in 1937, that's it. I also don't recall seeing any WW2 documentaries talk about the front, let alone any documentaries specifically about the Chinese front. Millions of innocent people lost their lives there and barely anybody talks about it. Without the Chinese Japan could have committed a lot more of it's manpower and equipment towards fighting the United States and the British Empire. Why is this? Why does it seem nobody knows anything about this forgotten part of the war? Thanks.

So, please correct if I have been misled, but we don't have original documentation from Ancient Greece or Rome. For example, the oldest manuscript of Plato's Republic is from the 9th century. That means we had a thousand years or copying from scribe to scribe. How can we be sure the texts weren't changed dramatically? Do we have any verifiable proof that Aristotle is the same now as it was from 300 B.C.? The same could be said of Cicero or Roman writers.

I know that people doubted the accuracy of the Bible for a long time but the Dead Sea scrolls helped to prove some books of the bible remain accurate from copy to copy. I just don't see or hear of anyone doubting our classical texts.

You see in the movies they run at each other, and more or less intermingle. Though this does not seem right when considering lines they were drawn up in. Is it more likely that the first few ranks of each formation fought each other while the ranks in the rear waited for their comrades to die and they could move up? I guess I'm referring to the Roman/Greek/Persian/Carthaginian sort of battles and not the Celtic armies who, from what I understand, were less organised.

For clarity, I'm referring to the Confederate States of America and the U.S. Civil War.

Given the current political climate with regards to Confederate monuments, I was curious about how invested the common soldier of the Confederate army was in the preservation of slavery and the Confederacy itself. In particular, what sort of motivations DID they have to join the army? Of course I expect them to be quite varied, but general trends would be interesting.

Say there is a condo construction project in Old Cairo and they discover something. Once the Egyptian antiquities authorities are made aware of it, who do they contact? How do they decide University of South Florida archaeologists will work on it vs. University of Cologne in Germany? Is it something like corporate project tenders, bidding and contract award?