Hey gang,

Just asking some questions. Answers super appreciated; answers with citations/links/recommended readings more so. :D

1. Was there an issue with vermin/rats/ect and the amount of corpses generated?
2. Is there any notes on how animals were reacting to the various battles and massive drop in population?
3. Was immigration as a result of this war a thing, and if so where did the refugees head to if at all?
4. What was the average peasants view on the war? I would speculate this would vary depending on faith and location, but did the average hungarian or german know the stakes and know about what was actually going on to any great degree?

I was born in the early 90s and don't recall "Indian" being a respectable term for Native Americans past the 90s (and even then, I might have only thought it was okay because I was a child). What I do recall is Native American being used a as the preferred term. Was this simply a word choice by the author? Or is my recollection of acceptable terminology fuzzy?

Two-part question:

1. Knowing what we know now about how Japan was in 1946, including how Japanese people reacted when the book was translated, how accurate was it as a description of Japan in 1946?

2. How accurate is it as a description of Japan in 2020?

Specifically in the Ubaid and Early Dynastic Periods (3800-2900 BCE and 2900-2350 BCE)? I’ve heard that we don’t know whether kingship/priest kingship was invented twice or transmitted because Egypt and Mesopotamia seem to have had no contact for a several hundred years, maybe a millennium, around this period, though there seems to be trade both before and after.

What is up with this?

in 2022, we use 2022. in 1950, they used 1950 in 4000 BC, I'm sure no one said "it's 4000 BC"

What's the first year people used our current system?

Hello Historians, I’m trying to figure out exactly what type of “pipe” the historical depiction of the Pied Piper used in the 1592 painting of the Pied Piper by Augustin von Mörsperg. Because the pipe he is holding seems very different looking from historical pipes of the time period and through my own research I have not found one that looks similar I’m hoping the scholars of this Reddit can help me figure out the name of that particular pipe in the painting.

In a lot of WW2 media having an enemy "on your tail" seems like a real concern for pilots. I know that some bombers like the German Ju-87 had rear-facing turrets, and the B-17 had its iconic ball turrets but my question is specifically about single-seat monoplanes (eg. the Spitfire, Me-109, Mustang etc.)

​

Did any side try equipping its (fighter) pilots with rear-facing guns (not turrets) in order to dissuade pursuers? Or is there some technical reason why this simply cannot be done?

The narrative I grew up with, as an American Polish Jew, was one of isolation and betrayal by non-Jewish Poles. Leon Uris's Mila 18, which I read at a formative age, also paints a picture of Poland's Jews being abandoned to their fate even by those who actively opposed the Nazis. Is this a more or less accurate picture of what actually happened in this period?

Some context: My great-great-grandfather was a soldier in the British Indian Army during either WW1 or WW2. I know he was a soldier and served in one of the world wars but I have conflicting information. He was born during the 1900s (the decade) yet the predominant information is that he fought in WW2, when he would have been in his late 30s or early 40s.

He was ethnically Tamil and he was a Mudaliar by caste. The issue is that I cannot find any of the Mudaliar castes listed under the martial races on the wikipedia page. I am afraid I did not find it elsewhere either.

That leads me to my question: How important was Martial Race Theory by the time of the world wars?

After watching some youtube videos, I'm a little unclear on how war gets started and possibly ends back in times when communication was poor. Any assistance in trying to understand this would be welcome. Major questions I have regarding this are:

1. How does a war start? If someone decides to go to war with someone else, won't an army just showing up out of nowhere be basically impossible to stop by the time they show up if the other people are unprepared?

2. To that same point, if one nation informs another nation "hey we're gonna attack you". Whats to stop them killing the envoy and retaliating beforehand?

3. In terms of ending a war, if people are always fighting, how does one inform either an army or the nation that they're willing to surrender? Won't the enemy be killed on sight if they're in war?

Premise: I was looking at medieval miniature illustrations, and started thinking about how different Roman (by which I mean not Eastern Roman) images must have been. Then I realized that I don't know anything about Roman books at all. So what do we know? Has any exemplar survived at all?

20,000? 200,000? 2,000,000? Essentially I'm asking how many vikings actually came to Britain. Would they have been overwhelmed in terms of shear numbers by Anglo Saxons and Celts?

Also, when did the Norse language cease to be spoken in the Danelaw area?

From my understanding, the IJN didn't commit either Yamato or it's sister ship to any significant naval action until 1944, although both were available several years prior.

What was the logic behind this course of action? Surely a "desperate" engagement in 1943 would have offered a better chance for the battleships to create havoc, especially given that Japanese air cover only became less and less effective as the war progressed.

It seems to some degree that the Japanese intention to create a battleship that could fight multiple enemy capital ships at once was ignored if they waited to seek an engagement until American naval air strength was at its height.

Was it related to their fuel issues? Thanks!

Was there a concept of museums in historical civilizations? For example when the romans conquered Egypt did they bring artefacts home for public display?

So if I remember correctly Spartans claimed to be descend from the Heracleidaes, and considered themselves foreigners and invaders of the region Laccdoma (southern Greece) whereas most others in Greece considered themselves descend from the Helen and his children known as Hellen’s (if I remember correct Helen and Heracles were step brothers or really close friends? Or is that a different Helen) So if these two groups are claiming different propertied mythological origins, did the Helen’s (for example Athens, a propertied sub type of Hellens known as Ionians) considered Sparta to be “Greek” and did the Spartans who considered themselves to be Heracledaes considered the Hellen’s to be “Greek” did they considered themselves as kin?

Was the tension with Japan so high already that they knew it was them and only them? Were the plane types and markings such common knowledge amongst the armed forces stationed there that they recognised who was attacking them? Or was it simply that Japan sent a declaration of war straight after it happened?

In many stories set in the past, you'll see female characters eat herbs or drink teas after sex in order to prevent them from being pregnant.

Is there any truth to these abortifacients? Or is it just something used in fantasy and psuedo-historical works? How wide-spread was knowledge of them and how was their success rate? How did cultures learn to use them?