Particularly interested in pre-Christian Scandinavia, but I'll happily learn about post-Christian magic in that part of the world too, if it existed in any documented form.

Are history books reporting it any differently than newspapers did at the time?

In particular I saw a moderately upvoted post on reddit saying that all the gas in the camps was never used to kill people, just pests. It said that during the years we've romanticized the war so much that we're not studying facts anymore. Now, I know that the holocaust definitely happened and that's not up for debate in this sub (I read all the other holocaust threads in this sub). I just want to know if there's any evidence of "facts" about the war changing over time.

I'm writing a research paper on the topic for a college English class, but have experienced considerable difficulty finding really strong, credible sources discussing the issue. So far I've found that Ford, GM, ITT, IBM as well as Rockefeller owned Standard Oil and Chase Bank had a hand in supporting up the Nazi war effort. Problem is that many of sources I've came across don't appear to be the most reliable.

Great Depression? Civil Rights era? Gilded age labor movement?

Given the Tories victory in the war after all

Was it a popular topic?

I started thinking about it, and Corporations get a lot of criticism, or praise depending on one's political stance. However, I really personally don't know what a Corporation is, so I decided to ask /r/ELI5, and while they do that... I wanted to ask AskHistorians... what is the historical background of Corporations, and where do they come from in the American sense.

Wouldn't it be simpler/faster/cheaper to just shoot somebody in the back of the head? Even a guillotine would seem to be simpler.

This has bothered me for a long time and I can't seem to find a clear answer. Maybe a clear answer doesn't exist, I have no idea. Help?

I'm not sure if this is completely the right subreddit, as it may be more of a social science question but involves history.

From my understanding, both Asians and Africans were highly discriminated against when they first started to arrive in America. Both groups started very low on the "socioeconomic totem pole." However, the descendents of Asian immigrants seem to have overcome these challenges while the descendents of African immigrants have not. Asian Americans score higher than almost every other ethnic group despite on tests and have the highest average wages.

Why is this? Clearly, no ethnic group is inherently superior to another, so what historical factors played into allowing Asian Americans to rapidly climb the socioeconomic ladder?

Hi, curious to know more about how children were viewed in society and how they were treated, say in ...

• ancient greece, in athens

• in the ottoman empire

• in the middle ages

• in America, during the revolution or the civil war

I would be happy to get your perspectives on any of these time periods. Other time periods are also fine by me. I'm just curious because I saw this comment on reddit: "This may surprise you, but its only in the last 100 years that children are seen as anything but a burden and slave labor."

Thanks!

I was looking at the dates of when various tanks in WW2 were first designed and produced and noticed that both the Sherman and T34 (both of which incorporate sloped armor) were started (and even completed) before the Germans produced their sloped armor tank, the Pz V Panther. Why was Germany so late in this endeavor? Why do people keep on talking about "superior German technology" if sloped armor didn't start there?

Edit: added second question

By this I mean Ireland before the English started taking lands of theirs. From like 600 AD-1000 AD? I'm mostly wondering about politics and what the social pyramid looked like, or if it was similar to that of say, the French or other Western European cultures. Thanks!

I was watching a television show about Australia and I realized I don't know much of anything about the history of the native people and what their societies are like in modern times as far as government relations and tribal land division.

(I'm sorry, I would link to the picture I'm talking about, but I currently have neither access to the picture nor a scanner, and I can't find the picture online...)

My grandmother owns a children's encyclopedia from the 1930s called the Wonderland of Knowledge, and in one article there is a picture of a young white boy, aged 10 at most, wearing a ring. The article is about dental care as opposed to something about 'exotic peoples of foreign climes', and the article has absolutely nothing to do with jewellery whatsoever. The boy looks like he's from a fairly middle-class/well-off background.

So was it common for boys in those days to wear jewellery like that? I dunno, it's just that boys wearing rings is not something I associate with the 1930s...