This isn't really a history question, but I'm trying to get a consensus here. While I'm aware that many in the fields of science and philosophy tend to be less religious, I am unable to find a good insight into what most historians believe. Do you consider yourself personally religious, and if so/not did your study of history affect your decision?

I know from searching that this question has been asked before - but there wasn't an actual answer given I think - so apologies if this isn't okay!

I'm just curious about it - any input would be great ta!

The US + Canada territory is really huge, but every time I look up information about battles against Indians, there are a few hundred Indian warriors at most. It leaves me with the impression that American Indian population was really small at that time.

Have we been able too estimate the number of the people who lived in North America before Europeans came?

My grandfather who spent his younger years growing up on the eastern front has told me numerous things about the Second World War, but one thing he has told me has always stuck with me was that during the advance on Germany by the USSR, the Soviet Officers and "higher ups" would (or did at least once did) have lower ranked infantry troops march over a German landmine field to detonate the mines and pave a way for tanks and trucks to drive through unharmed. Was this just propaganda fed to the people through the Germans or did this and things of this sort actually happen?

Was hungary in ww2 complete garbage or did they contribute a bit? Most of the battles I read about seemed to be the Germans doing all the work for them. Did the hungarian infantry soldiers ever kill any soviets in large numbers at any point during the war? I've read about the hungarian tank corps were pretty good but I'm wondering If the infantry ever did anything good?

In other words how important was hungary during ww2 did they make any considerable difference or help at all?

Hello! I've asked here about the Prague spring and the invasion of Czechoslovakia some time ago, but now i started wondering, were there any Czechoslovak citizens who didn't support Alexander Dubcek's reforms and in general how did other Eastern Block citizens feel towards the reforms and the invasion? And what was life like in Czechoslovakia after the invasion? Thanks in advance!

Between the official account given by the PKI and the various alternatives postulated by scholars like Benedict Anderson, do historians know what really happened?

How important a role did it have? What kinds of vessels were in use?

I've always heard that in the 'olden days' doing a household's laundry was basically a full-time job...a job that usually fell to women and/or servants.

Was the appearance of washers and dryers part of the movement away from households having servants, and women gaining larger roles outside of the home?

It is my understanding that, while a train he was on was captured by rebels, the Tsar abdicated the throne. Thus, the February Revoltuion passed with little violence. But, those in power, wanting to stay in the war, caused the Bolsheviks to initiate the October Revolution, where the Romanovs were all executed.

Have I missed something?

In any case, I await your responses.

As I understand it, the American colonists were being taxed without being represented in the British Parliament. The heavy taxes were mainly because of the French and Indian War which was meant to protect them, and to continue protecting them with soldiers. Sure being taxed without representation kind of sucks, but it was meant to be in their best interest, so is that really enough justification to start a war that killed thousands of people? With all the talk of liberty among the founding fathers you would think it was a much more crucial liberty being infringed upon (freedom of speech/religion/thought or something) rather than freedom to not be taxed without representation.

Sorry if this is the wrong place to post this. If so please redirect me.

Thanks.

WW2 is portrayed in modern media and text as exceedingly brutal and the Nazies and Allies despising each other bitterly, but was there ever an event like the Christmas Truce (or other small "truces" where the soldiers would mingle) in WW1, or instances when opposing commanders respectfully interacted after a battle (can't remember any particular instances of this, but I know it happened pre-WW2 sometimes, I think I remember reading about a Continental Army commander having dinner with a British general while being help captive after the battle of New York in 1776, I can't remember for sure though)?

In cultures where the current standard dating had not yet been accepted, how did they historians date things? Did they use a similar number-line with a different 0 year?

[deleted]

Was the tempura poisoned? Did he choke on a tempura??!!

Is it fair to conclude that the vast majority of Europe being sparred by the wrath of the Mongols, while formerly more advanced and wealthier societies in the Arab world, Persia and East Asia were utterly destroyed, led to the former's eventual rapid rise to global dominance? I know there's other factors often cited for this, like the mobilization of armies in the Reconquista (and the eventual influence of many of those soldiers post Reconquista in exploration), post-plague peasant revolts in Western Europe leading to the relative demise of serfdom (and thus the unleashing of more human capital), the competitive forces between hundreds of kingdoms, states, cities etc... helping to spur technological development, and the sacking of Constantinople and the transfer of ancient knowledge out of that city and into present day Italian cities ... Among many other factors. However, after reading about the utter destruction to these societies by the Mongols, and the "luck" that most of Europe was sparred, appears to me to really the biggest factor.

Sorry for any typos. Typing on mobile.

There may be a lot of differences in opinion and perspective among historians on this, I'm interested in any and all of them.

[deleted]