Is this a fairly recent historical narrative, or has academic literature on the Holocaust always included a discussion of the persecution of homosexuals?

Additionally, how aware were both the gay activist community and the general public of this history? For example, when did the gay-rights movement adopt the Pink Triangle as a symbol? If an average person walked past a Pride parade in a Western city, in 1980, and saw someone waving a flag with the Pink Triangle on it, would they have understood it's meaning?

Also would I still say that I speak latin?

And did they volunteer to be there or did they get drafted?

My question isn't as straightforward as the title above suggests. Basically, history as a discipline is currently firmly rooted in the Western episteme and positivism with their associated conceptions of what constitutes "truth", "fact" and the "natural", often in opposition to concepts like "belief", "faith" and the "supernatural".

So when scholars interact with source material that belongs to or touches on that second group of concepts they often take whatever narrative the material provides at face value, without judgement (that is to say, no historian of medieval popular belief would say that belief in revenants is bullshit and that the walking dead could obviously not exist), to uncover something beyond the claims being made.

But it seems to me that despite overtures to be respectful towards the source material, like for example ghost stories and alien abduction reports, and their compilers is an implicit hierarchy of knowledge that is constructed by the very way we talk about these things. It seems to me that despite our best efforts, simply by using terminology like "belief", "faith" or the "supernatural" the historian is actively participating in the subjective evaluation of what constitutes real knowledge and consequently upholding the episteme from which they draw their concepts and vocabulary.

SO to rephrase my question:

Can historians talk about ghosts and aliens without making implicit judgments on what constitutes "real knowledge"? Are we just simply trapped in the conceptual framework provided for us with no alternatives? Is there even a point to challenging that framework?

I've heard that Chinese railroad workers organized themselves into communal work groups, with separate members assigned to do the laundry and the cooking, and being paid by the others, but what do we know of how the miners operated. Are there records of their lives and experiences in English?

[deleted]

Seeing how some Catholic natiosn supported the Reformation to destabilize the Austria-Spain superpower in the 15-1600s, did the Russians support Protestants in the land of their Catholic rivals?

TL;DR: What was the Russian/Orthodox opinion of Protestantism and the Reformation?

[deleted]

Either for a live showing or for a physical copy, I'm assuming the former came first but I've been suprised before.

I was watching a documentary and it said that when the Wermacht shelled Stalingrad, the rubble from the buildings made it easier for the Red Army to defend. They said it slowed progress for the Germans and was one of many things that helped lead to defeat. How true is this?

Welcome to Monday Methods!

Back after a month on holiday hiatus, today's topic is comparison as a method and tool in history.

Seeing as inauguration is right at our door step, a lot of questions here as well as a lot of media reports have taken to a historically comparative perspective concerning inaugurations as well as previous administrations. These comparisons often serve to put things in perspective, link them to previous experiences, make a point or just to fill some space in a text.

But how useful is comparison in history and how can it be applied methodically? Often history appears very unique to a specific time and place to us but other times, comparisons seems like they could lead to a gain in knowledge whether it is comparing Gaul and German tribes in their resistance to the Romans or genocides within the the filed of comparative genocide studies.

What are your experiences, tips and questions? Did you ever employ comparison as a method in your research? What was the outcome? Share and discuss below.

Whilst researching Srebrenica and the aftermath during my history degree I always found the location of the Dayton Accords quite interesting and wondered whether similar accords were formed in the USA concerning foreign issues.

I have seen many old American cartoon which we now consider very racist. I was wondering if other countries ever had similar cartoons about white people in America.

'Modern Greece' meaning the nation state which we today know as Greece, aka, since the war of independence.

I read that it was because the uncles had no children, but then why wouldn't the crown have passed first to them and then back to her if they died childless? Especially where the crown had never passed to her father because he was dead?

(And yes, I am watching the Victoria TV series which just started here in the US.)