Furthermore, how did the rest of the world view them? Were they seen as usurpers or legitimate rulers? I would assume this depends on who is doing the viewing.

All I found on the internet was an all text Latin novel.

[deleted]

[deleted]

I was just watching band of brothers for the first time, and in episode 9,near theend of the war,American company finds out about a camp and they have no idea about what is it. Is it true that noone had any idea what was done?

i remember seeing them long ago, but for the life of me, am unable to find them atm.

all searches with my keywords will bring up the most recent recession or other countries

I'm thinking in particular of those amusing Macaronis on their Grand Tour going through it, though any first-hand accounts from locals touring the ruins would be very welcome!

Was there a fee? Did you hire a local guide? Were there maps + guidebooks maybe? Could you touch stuff?

Forgive me for a poorly-worded question. I'm doing some work on late 1800s documents and the handwriting is physically larger than mine.

I'm curious if this was common. "Did people used to write bigger?" is what I want to ask.

From what I have read most stuff seems to dismiss the topic , arguing "it was never as massive as Haiti".

Which from what I can tell this is true but that is like saying that antebellum Missouri wasn't a slave society because slavery was a lot larger in Mississippi.

If we for example look at a medieval painting of the crucifixion, the roman soldiers will be dressed in the garments of a medieval soldier, and the apostles will be dressed like a medieval monk. Generalising a bit, this seems to me to be a dominant trait up until some time in the late renaissance/early baroque, where artists began to render their historical subjects more 'correctly'.

Can we assume that people in the middle ages knew that their subjects were not dressed in this way, or did they in fact not, meaning that the more historically correct renditions we see in later era's are due to an increase in historical knowledge? I have been guessing that is more due to the tendency of the time to represent things symbolically rather than literally, but I would love to hear any thoughts or suggestions for reading.

I guess this example is also an attempt to get at a larger question ; How did history think of history? Were people of that time in any way 'interested' in knowing how people lived before them (besides the very outspoken interests in lineage), what tools they used etc. - or can we imagine a time when people were 'unaware' that things had ever looked different than in their own time?

I've heard stories of scientists a millennia or two ago getting very upset that people didn't accept their work without question, or myths accepted as fact simply because no one bothered to check what a scientist essentially guessed at. This is not to say we're past the point today of believing in myths or ever being wrong, but generally today we regard peer review to be a pretty important thing. When did that start, and who started it?

It seems like it would be more beneficial to simply execute or imprison leaders that had been overthrown. For example, if Napoleon had simply been executed, he could not have returned to France to attempt retaking power. Were they exiled for moral reasons, or something else entirely?

[deleted]

A lot of Allied aircraft and armored vehicles arrived just around the end of the war. Aircraft like the Gloster Meteor and the P-80 Shooting Star, and tanks like the IS-3, T-44, Centurion, M26 Pershing, and the T95/28 superheavy tank, along with various prototype vehicles arrived just at the end (M26), arrived but saw no combat, (Centurion, Meteor, T-44), or were cancelled when the war ended (T95/28, T29-series heavy tanks).

Would these vehicles have been deployed into combat if the war had gone on longer?

For example, the M41 Walker Bulldog was deployed to Korea for combat testing even before it had been officially adopted and deployed.

Did any or the majority of the troops have some experience fighting and living in such environments, or were they just as out of their element and miserable as most of the allies on that front?

He estimated that Egypt had a tradition of film that predating most of the rest of the Arab world by "decades". I know nothing about the history of Arab film, so I was wondering: is Egypt the historic center of the Arab film world? If not, where?

Hey Historians, I'm doing an research paper about crimes from the 1930's, and I really found the subject of Serial Killers to be really interesting. I've found common names such as Joe Ball (coolest uncoolest guy on my list), Nannie Doss, Albert Fish, and Harry Powers; not to mention the Cleveland Torso Murderer. I'm kind of stuck here, and I'm wondering if you guys know any under rated or uncommon names that I could research about. Sorry if this seems like a homework question, but I hope I could get some help.