I'm considering Islam, Judaism, Christianity, and Catholicism although it is a form of Christianity it's quite different I've noticed and often considered separate from Christianity. I'm not asking for an explanation of each although if it will help explain your answer go for it. Thanks a bunch Historians!

I feel like there's very few people here that actually studied gender history. I looked over the faq (in the women's history section), and there was a lot of speculation that was upvoted. Some of the questions were either answered with speculation or simply isolated examples from within another specialized field (and usually this was only to provide numbers or basic facts, not anything detailed).

This is a great sub, but I'm worried that it might be lacking in this regard. My main concern is that someone might go to the faq, read one of the questions, and assume that that's all there is to a particular subject about women's history. Many of the answers weren't even historical in nature, but simply, again, speculating about biology.

AskHistorians is often admired as a sub for their rigorous standards - this is why I'm kind of concerned about the state of women's history on this sub. I'm hoping this won't be seen as too rude or out of line, but the thought of it has been kind of nagging me lately.

If I leaked a bunch of diplomatic information in say...1850 to a newspaper in the US, what kind of recourse would the Government have in prosecuting me?

In Flanders Field, for example, where lines moved back and forth by a couple meters. Once you've advanced those few meters into no man's land, how do you hold it? I've read that trenches were up to ten feet deep; how do you dig a new trench in the middle of no man's land under enemy fire?

I've been watching The Great War on YouTube but have been having trouble understanding exactly what the front lines looked like on a small scale. How were trenches getting dug beyond territory you already held?

The Mayans in Apocalypto are shown capturing slaves for sacrifice. Did they really do that? And if they did, why? What did they think the benefits were?

Its a curious thing for me especially when it comes to the representations of Jesus, I wonder if they are any accurate.

What Ethnic groups/tribes lived in the Area Jesus would have been born in? Was he "Mixed" blood in anyway since the levant is generally an area where alot of stuff is going on?

My professor said this casually and I don't quite understand what it means - could someone please elaborate?

From what I gather, it was a Himalaya outpost, possibly a trade outpost. What is the historical accurate version?

My professor said this in sort of a "I'm pretty sure" kind of way, after saying there is no evidence that any of them ever chose not to take the vows of monastic life. Is this true or at least a reasonable assumption? She explained that the family unit was more important at the time (the time of Benedict and onward) and individual choice wouldn't have factored into the decision much. I dunno, that just seems a bit unrealistic to me but what do I know.

While I'm here, can I ask how common it was for children of well-off families to be given up as oblates? My professor gave us an example of such a family with 4 children - the eldest son inherited the family's title and land, the eldest daughter was married off with a dowry, while both the younger son and daughter became oblate children. Would this be the normal way of doing things for younger children? What would be the alternative?

I looked them up on wikipedia and was really confused. Can someone explain what they were in simple terms? Thanks.

Have anyone considered that an existing city can be Troy and then renamed, instead of being somewhere in a mysterious location near Mediterranean sea? EDIT: Spelling. Sorry for bad wording and slight spelling confusion ;)

I was watching a historical program and got curious about how life would be for Roman soldiers carrying out the siege of a city, and I'm hoping people can answer some of my questions.

How were the camps laid out? How orderly were they? Were they built like a small town, with blacksmith tents and mess halls and such? Or did the soldiers cook and carry out their own repairs? What duties did soldiers have while there was no fighting? Did the army build walls and fortifications encircling the city, or did they simply surround it with soldiers?

Considering Japan's traditions and view on pride, how did the allies manage to keep Japan stable after they'd been defeated? Why were there not more guerrilla warfare; Japanese people who refused to accept the defeat? Also, from what I understand, it was/is common for the winner to co-operate with the opposition in order to overturn the ruling power with whom one waged war. Was there such an opposition in Japan for the allies to co-operate with?

Most popular film and television dealing with Southern slavery (Gone with the Wind, Django Unchained, 12 Years a Slave, etc) deal with large plantations which would have had many slaves in industrial roles. Yet I'm sure there were a significant number of households that only had a few (1-4) slaves for housework, whom every member of the household would know personally. How common was this arrangement?