I can't think of any history class I ever took where the period in Greek history between the death of Alexander and the Roman conquest was covered. All courses on the Greeks seem to always end right after Alexander dies and a brief overview of the successor states (generally just the Seleucid and Ptolemaic Empire).

The next time you hear about them is always that they got conquered by Rome, which occurs roughly 200 years later. Was there anything interesting going on in Greece at this point? Was it just a period of a long and slow decline?

Additional, not totally related question: In high school I had a teacher who seemed to absolutely love the Spartans. I can't remember if he was talking about the Macedonians or the Romans, but he said that instead of try and conquer Sparta they just conquered everything around them and forced them to subjugate due to their isolation. None of my Professors ever mentioned this. Were the Spartans so fearsome that they were actually just avoided by the conquerors?

Or better phrased:

How do Historians try to mitigate cumulative errors in the reporting of history?

It seems like erroneous corrections and biases could change history overtime as people continue to reference pieces of history off of new sources.

Re-Submitting due to lack of attention.

It is said in legend that Toyotomi Hideyoshi built Sunomata castle overnight and surprised the Saitō. How fast could he build it while still surprising them?

Speech writers, campaign strategists, press secretaries, that sort of thing; people specifically serving that politician and his image / career, not just assisting him in carrying out his official duties.

Everyone presumes they are the 'Princes of the Tower' (sons of Edward IV and Elizabeth Woodville). But why has no one done a DNA test to confirm their identity? If it was possible to do so with Richard III's skeleton, why not these?

As I wrote the title of my question I remembered the Aztec ballgame, but I was specifically thinking of the colonial time period onward. I have no idea what sort of sports were popular in that period. What was out there and how popular was it?

In the Alexiad, Komnene frequently refers to crusaders from western Europe as "Celts":

The Celtic race is independent, does not seek counsel and never employs good military order or skill, but when battle and war occur, there is a baying in their hearts and they cannot be held back. Not only the soldiers but also their leaders fling themselves irresistibly into the midst of enemy ranks.

Was this a common descriptor used by Byzantine sources? Were there ideological reasons for this choice of vocabulary, or was it just a Greek idiom?

I don't really have a specific period or area in mind, but let's say anything prior to 1000 AD.

Being a veteran of the US Army we were always told about how our unit was involved in other wars or battles, ribbons on guidons, coins, etc. Even if the unit name had changed over the years the accomplishments stay. But do the German military units now do anything similar from WWII or WWI?

I've been looking into the history of war brides, particularly Japanese after the events of World War II. In 1952, there was an amendment in the immigration policy to allow Australian servicemen to bring their Japanese wives to Australia. I was wondering, have there been any cases of Australian servicemen bringing only their children over before this amendment? Say, if the mother was deceased?

If you cannot provide any answers, feel free to point to any sources that may help. Thanks. :)

What is the oldest war for which a country is still paying reparations, or what are the oldest bonds still in existence?

I heard that a while back the UK government was still paying out bonds from the Napoleonic wars.

Alternatively, what are the oldest stocks in existence? Like for the East India Conpany or something.

Question see titel, thanks for your answers!

I just read a passage that stated the level of death and destruction caused by the Mongols during their conquests was unseen again until the 20th century.

How did a pre-industrial civilization manage to do so much destruction that it would be unmatched until the modern age?

Roman infantry tactics are often perceived to be effective against all of their enemies. What are good examples of where the tactics they employed being nullified by their enemies?

Primo Levi in his book "If This Is A Man" aka "Survival in Auschwitz" specifically states that those destined for murder in Birkenau were not provided with water.

Was this consistently the case? Was water deprivation part of the standard operational procedure for the SS?

In the twisted world of the Destruction Camps, it makes sense. Thirsty people will eagerly flock towards a sign that says "Showers"; and when the thirsty Primo Levi was in the actual shower of Monowitz-Buna he describes it as "minutes of bliss" presumably because he was finally able to drink after days without water.

Edited to add:

In his autobiographical book "The Pianist", Władysław Szpilman describes how the water supply to the Assembly Area was deliberately cut off by the SS, and he describes children dying of thirst as they went from person to person begging for water.

Women carrying children dragge themselves from group to group, begging for a drop of water. The Germans had turned off the water supply to the Umschlagplatz on purpose. The children's eyes were lifeless, their lids already drooping over them...their dry lips were open like the mouths of small fish discarded on the bank by the fishermen.

I am driven to surmise that this went beyond wanton cruelty -- thirsty people crowd towards "Showers" if only to drink one last time prior to death. The policy may have become SOP for the SS, initially inspired by viciousness, but then implemented when it was discovered that it simplified the mass murder process.

I suppose that extant records of the SS procedure are not available?

Prior to Christianization.