Please would you be able to tell me names of historians that believe Henry VIII was a Catholic, rather than Protestant?

Thank you

It is something of a given that every discussion of High Medieval society will discuss the guild as being central to urban society, but that raises the question of how exactly a fairly specific social and economic form came into being and how it became so important and uniform everywhere.

I suppose this carries a hidden question of whether it really was so uniform and widespread. Were the guilds of Lubeck basically the same as those of Florence?

What exactly was the difference between these two positions? I've tried researching the subject and got lost due to military jargon.

Hello historians,

I am currently reading a book called Hell's Cartel by Diarmuid Jeffreys which is about the chemistry conglomerate IG Farben of Nazi Germany fame. The book reads like a chronological history of Germany at the time but with a very heavy focus on how decisions and events impacted IG Farben. After the Nazis came to power the author describes how some executives in the company, like the famous Nobel Prize laureate Carl Bosch, were against Aryanization which is in line my understanding of how the holocaust happened (i.e. that it was something that the Nazis forced upon the German people). However, the author also mentions IG Farben executives who were shockingly gung-ho with regards anti-Semitic policies. My question to you guys is therefore the following:

How integrated were Jews in European society at the time and were they a powerful faction in European politics then?

It stands to reason that if similar attempts of Aryanization were to be made today in America or indeed in Europe they would be met with considerable difficulty considering the thorough integration of Jewish people in these societies. Were things different then?

Thank you in advance!

OrbitalTurtle

Initially posted this in /r/Japan, but I realised this would be a place to get more holistic responses than just anecdotal ones.

In an interview with the Atlantic, Hideakki Anno of Neon Genesis Evangelion fame mentions:

“Japan lost the war to the Americans. Since that time, the education we received is not one that creates adults. Even for us, people in their 40s, and for the generation older than me, in their 50s and 60s, there’s no reasonable model of what an adult should be like. The article goes on to say that "the theory that Japan’s defeat stripped the country of its independence and led to the creation of a nation of permanent children, weaklings forced to live under the protection of the American Big Daddy, is widely shared by artists and intellectuals in Japan.

This came as a surprise for me, given that the Allied Occupation of Japan ended more than 60 years ago. Are the effects really still being felt now, or is this Anno trying too hard to distill a complicated web of events into a single talking point? Keep in mind that Anno gave this interview in 2007, ten years ago, fifty years after the dissolution of the Occupation.

Sorry if this intrudes into the space of /r/AskSocialScience. LMK and I'll remove it if it is.

I've heard about the "Battle on the Ice" being a major blow, but the general efforts still seemed to continue on for a few decades afterwards. Was there something decisive that finally caused these crusades to end, or some reason they petered out?

For example, how could you trust a bank to keep currency for you, if there is no way to prove who you are when you return? What if the people you dealt with died? On the other hand, how could a bank give you your money, not knowing if you were telling the truth or not? You could even hire people to vouch for you.

I mean like an academic work. I was recommend the book Green Deen: What Islam Teaches about Protecting the Planet but it's less an academic work on Islam and environmentalism and more a book to encourage Muslims to care about the environment. I'd like more of a historical perspective if that makes sense

I would like to preface this by saying that I'm not sure if this question belongs here, but I thought historians would be best suited to help me out.

In popular media (this question actually came because I was watching a Tom & Jerry movie) whenever we see a pirate we see a parrot on their shoulder. I've never questioned the legitimacy of the pairing but now that I'm older I have to wonder if it's legit, and where it comes from. Does anyone have any clue?

My curiosity was piqued when I read that Philip V of Macedon was threatening to assist Hannibal during the Second Punic War. How quickly could information about defeats, victories, or other setbacks have reached him or other players in the region in that time?

Why did he push for elections? Why would he voluntarily dissolve communism? Was there a any clear plan about how Russia would transition to a new government?

Also, on an unrelated note was it true that the early USSR was more egalitarian than the U.S.?