Both are very large estimations:

• Nanking (50K – 300K)
• Atomic Bombings (129K – 246K)

Do we have any idea how comparable are both events in terms of death count? Just to be clear, I'm not trying to justify the bombings or anything; just making comparisons for research.

To be more specific, how different would wedding ceremonies have been from modern Catholic ones?

English is not my first language, i looked this up and have a hard time understanding if they were, please help to explain.

I have been looking but it's so hard to find something unbiased and not to difficult to read. Can someone help me out?

And are there any other comparable moments in the late Middle Ages/early Modern period where a ruler switched to the language of the people rather than that of the ruling classes?

I have looked through countless drawings reenactors and various other things and i have noticed i can only find images of bracers that would offer no hand protection which it seems like that would be a very big problem since the hand would be one of the most exposed areas in combat was there any sort of armor for that area before the crusader era?

How are they used on the battlefield and does the US Military have any equivalents of these classes?

I am currently listening to the audio book of Sapiens, and during the chapter discussing Hernando Cortez manipulating the Aztec aristocracy I wondered how he would do so? What about the first Portuguese in Goa? Magellan in the Philippines? Dutch and English in Indonesia and Australia?

What language would they speak? Would they use interpreters? How long would it take to learn each other's languages with zero educational resources?

I'm wondering if you all have questions for a relic who loves talking about old times. He's fully cognizant and likes writing letters but I don't know history well enough ask informed questions.

He was an Italian soldier fighting the allies as a paratrooper, captured by the British in North Arica during the battle of El Alamein, escaped the prison camp loosing a friend in the escape, then snuck across North Africa and Europe back Italy. He spent the night between the legs of the Sphinx one of his first nights after his escape! He then moved to Argentina after the war where I hear a lot of former Axis supporters went. He says he didn't know what atrocities the Germans doing during the war and that he doesn't agree with their ideals but he's pretty racist and thinks...differently about people than I'm used too.

He comes from a different time and perspective and we have a great opportunity to learn about the past. It would also keep him engaged. Can anyone think of questions for him or things you'd like to know more about considering his experiences?

Hi historians! I need to write an analytical paper on slavery/black American leaders pre-civil war. While I can think of loads of topics (underground RR, Tubman, Turner, Douglas)...I'm struggling finding something to analyze for 6 pages without just summarizing what/who I'm talking about. Any ideas?

I came across this paper by a Japanese historian. He claims that there is no objective evidence that the Japanese army ever enslaved Korean women for prostitution, other than the testimony of sixteen victims prepared by the Korean government. He's unabashedly right wing and patriotic, but is what he says here true?

This masochistic drift of public opinion within Japan reached its peak in August 1993 when Chief Cabinet Secretary Kouno Youhei officially acknowledged and apologised for the enforced prostitution of Korean women by the Japanese army: "With regard to recruitment of comfort women, businesses who took orders from the Army were the key players but, even so, there are many examples of people being assembled against their wishes by means of enticements or force. It is clear, too, that the Military Police were also directly involved."

At this time, the Japanese government devoted all of its energies to searching for materials that proved this prostitution was enforced, but none were found. Even so, Japan was issued with strong demands from the Korean government to 'restore the honour of these women by acknowledging that prostitution was enforced on them,' and it subsequently issued an apology based on statements from sixteen witnesses prepared by the Korean government, without even cross-examining them. It is worth nothing that the content of these statements has not been made public to this day. Underlying this apology was the preconceived notion that the Imperial Japanese Army had undoubtedly carried out evil actions, and that these Korean women were hardly likely to have lied....

As a result of chief cabinet secretary Kouno's informal remarks, all junior high school history textbooks have since 1997 provided an account of the 'comfort women issue'. However, in that same year, research by the journalist Sakurai Yoshiko showed that Kouno's statement was the outcome of diplomatic considerations, and that no objective proof existed. Consequently, the realisation spread that Kouno's remarks could not possibly form the basis of any historical account. But outside Japan, Kouno's remarks were seen as absolute, evidence-based proof of the Japanese government's acknowledgement of guilt. The situation now is one where people take the extreme view and insist, in all seriousness, that to doubt or deny the enforcement of prostitution by the military is on a par with denying the Nazi holocaust....

...research by Koreans themselves and by the Japanese historian, Hata Ikuhiko, has made it clear that the confessions of Yoshida Seiji about his rounding up of comfort women on the island of Jeju do, off the coast of Korea, which is regarded as the classic case of sexual slavery, are a fabrication. ^(Hata, Ianfu o Senjo no sei, pp 229-48. See the Korean writer, O. Sonfa, who also denies the possibility that the Japanese could have enforced sexual slavery (Seikatsusha no Nihon tochi jidai, pp42-4, 54-5, 223-4))

This is from: Nitta, Hitoshi. “And Why Shouldn’t the Japanese Prime Minister Worship at Yasukuni? A Personal View”. Yasukuni, the war dead and the struggle for Japan's past. Edited by John Breen. New York: Columbia U Press, 2008. Print.

What I know: Sir Charles Warren was the metropolitan police commissioner at the time of the Jack the Ripper Murders. He resigned right before Mary Kelly died and had given an order previously that if another murder occurred, nobody was to enter the scene. This lead to there being a sizable delay entering the crime scene.

My thoughts as to why he is a possibility (highly circumstantial):

-The phrasing of the order is odd given that no other jack the ripper murder occurred indoors.

-The timing of his resignation

-The murders stopping after his resignation and redeployment to Singapore

-He wanted to train bloodhounds to find Jack the Ripper (first to do so), if he was the killer and the dogs tracked him down he would have a reasonable alibi

-Being high-up in the Police would allow him to know the very frequent Police routes of the area and given him an opportunity to survey the area.

problem areas:

-nothing personality wise points to him being the killer

-not a lot of evidence to go on

-older than the suspects described

What I'm wondering: Has anyone done research into him being Jack the Ripper? I tried doing some google searching but can't find anyone accusing him, only referencing his role in the case. If so, is there any evidence I am missing that clearly removes him from the suspect list?

TL;DR: it would be a crazy tv show like twist if the police commissioner was Jack the Ripper but theres some circumstantial evidence that makes me believe its a possibility

Were there any known cotton plantations in the antebellum South operated sans slavery?