Was it a particularity famous, well-known event? Did the average roman know and/or care about it? Was aid sent?

Hope I can make my question clear also cause I'm not a native speaker but here goes:

When watching television and reading the news it seems to me that some of the main points in American Christianity are anti abortion, anti gay and anti sex education/sex before marriage.

I never hear anything about the 'nicer' parts like turning the other cheek, loving theigh neighbour and treating others like you would like to be treated.

Overall I get a very 'hostile' feeling from Christians in American media, and to be honest I actually thought that that was what Christianity was all about before doing some more research (being raised non religiously I didn't know much about it).

I also researched some 'hardcore Christian' groups like Jehova's Witnesses, but even they seem to focus more on being kind, are for proper sex education and tolerate gays (even though they do say it's wrong).

So my question is when and how was American Christianity shaped into what it is today. When did they let go of the 'be kind' parts and started having a more oppressing type of attitude? Did this even start in America or is it imported?

I was reading Heban by Ryszard Kapuściński (reportages about African countries), and something got my attention. Author wrote that in 1960's (maybe even 1970's), in European countries like France, UK, there was fear about newly indendent African states, would be eager to take revange against former occupants, with a help from Soviet Union. He wrote about even fears of invading Europe. Did this debate were a serious concern in media, or some paranoic clickbait thing?

If not, what did they think about them after the conquest of Egypt?

As per the title. Basically everything we know, not just the history of civilizations and the consequences of human actions. Starting from when we were cavemen, the tools we used... The first civilization to appear, the first flamethrower that was used, when paper was invented. How much do we know about everything that has ever happened, and how hard would it be to index (write it down) this?

Furthermore, why was he allowed to write and publish a book, was released less after less than a year, and later become chancellor? Wouldn't his actions sort of disqualify him from doing any of these things?

In the late 18th and early 19th century British textile mills bought their cotton from the US South, which used slave labor. It seems it would have been cheaper to use slave labor then ship the goods to Europe rather than buy cotton and produce the goods in England.

Why didn't British textile owners set up factories in the US South and utilize slave labor to produce their goods? Would it be because of tariffs? Lack of energy sources in the US South? Were slaves somehow not cheaper than workers in England?

Thanks

I've heard that legally speaking, the strategic bombing of cities in WWII wasn't a war crime. Is this true?

Perhaps an odd question, I know. I'm interested in what motivated people to buy various appliances and gadgets, in the context of the 70s or 80s.

Are we talking about minutes, hours, days (in some cases)? I once read that battles during the crusades sometimes went on for hours and some even days - is that accurate?

I always wondered whether battles really played out like in the movies in which the front row of the armies just suicidal/ fanatical ran into the other side hacking everything in sight or if it looked more like police/ violent demonstrators who kind of just pop up on the first line beat or throw something and then retreat back into the line?

Obviously the latter tactics would take much longer than the former.

I knew that Charlemagne had famously ordered the execution of any person that killed another on charges of witchcraft, and I believe that even a Pope condemned the belief. I assumed that the church changed its opinion in the new millennium, possibly due to Reformist tendencies, but was confused by the number of clashing decrees, penitentials, and synods that occurred around the same time which had strongly contrary arguments.

Condemnations of the belief in Witchcraft as unChristian, pagan, and heretical:

• Council of Paderborn (785)

• Saint Boniface (d. 754)

• Saint Agobard (d. 840

• Canon Episcopi (before the 11th century)

Condemnations of Witchcraft, which implicitly suggest its existence and power:

• Synod of Tours (813)

• Synod of Paris (829)

• Regino, Abbot of Prum (d. 915)

How were these different writers, bishops, and kings able to reconcile these points? Was the belief in witchcraft another internal conflict for the early church as what Orthodoxy really meant?

What did the socio-economic hierarchy look like? How many groups were there and how much did they make? Was the barrier between the groups permeable, or was ones life station fixed?

A lot of descriptions of Greek battles end with one side or another erecting a trophy but I've never read anything on what exactly these looked like or whether there was any upkeep of them. Would they have been maintained as a reminder of the victorious side's power or was it just a very temporary arrangement? Note I'm talking about battlefield trophies, not victory monuments set up later,e.g. at Delphi.

If you're a historian focused on a subject, let's say the Roman Empire, and find a interesting book on a subject you know little of, like feudal Japan, what do you do to try and estimate the credibility of the book?

What are the steps you take to ensure the book your reading is not bunk if a simple "author x book y historically accurate?" google search doesn't work?

When I was in middle school, we read a story in history class about two submarines who I think were surfaced while they were battling. So, I don't think that torpedoes were used. During the battle one of the submarines thought they had won the battle for whatever reason, I think they thought the other submarine surrendered. So, they started leaving the battle since they thought they had won. The other submarine saw that the other submarine was leaving so then they thought that the other submarine had surrendered, so they thought that they had won. Both submarines thought they had won when neither of them won.

Thanks in advance.

I'm seeing some afrocentrics and "hebrew israelites" claiming "King James was black" (as in the KJV's King James), and although I know this is obviously false, it's one false claim I started seeing more commonly recently than before, so I got curious: Is the claim that KJ was black old in these BHI or afrocentric circles, meaning did anyone of significance in these movements ever say this before (as in the time period this subredit accepts questions about)? And on another note, I can even understand saying ancient egypcians, jews etc were black (at least they live somewhat close to large black populations, and it's harder to know how very ancient people looked like), but why King James? Is there any old folk legend about him being black or something or is this just arbitrary? I mean really, just google "king james black" and there are even books about it!

[deleted]

I tried asking this question elsewhere and I suppose it sounds so strange and possibly controversial that I'm having a difficult time getting approval. Was this a real thing? I've noticed multiple comedy films, satire, where the Jewish characters often live down inside tree stumps and burrows and one has to have a password to get through. Was this an actual historic thing, like people lived this way to escape persecution, or is this just comedic nonsense?

So I'm in the pre planning stages of a comic idea with various historical settings and I wanna tell a story about Unit 731 (The Japanese chemical and biological weapon experimentation facility from WWII) and I need to know what happened to the scientists who worked there and some of the more horrifying experiments conducted there. Can you help me?