In my casual reading, I often come across mentions that the city of York itself was not Yorkist during the War of the Roses, and at one point (I cannot recall when) the Yorkist pretender had to negotiate extensively to enter "His City of York" (a flimsy pretext); however, in the same period in another sovereign state, such as the Duchy of Milan (which I am much more familiar with) it would be unthinkable for a vassal of comparable stature in relation to the sovereign, such as the Count of Arona, not to be able to enter the town of Arona itself. In the same period, after fleeing Cyprus, queen Catherine was created countess of Asolo by the Republic of Venice; this did come with the associated fief. Further, I recall Catherine de' Medici awarded petty counties to her favorites a century later; these also came with land (and consequentially, allowed her favorites to draw incomes).

Why and how did English noble titles become dissociated form land ownership so quickly?

Well, the tittle says it all. It's controversial to talk about it in my country because, well, I don't really know why, we just don't want to face our past I guess. Anyway, I'm very interested in this topic as I want to be able to answer to people who post on various portals about how "actually good and kind" the whole horrible period was in Croatian history. I would greatelly appreciate reliable sources. Additionally, some information on treatment of captured population.

The reason I'm asking this is because I can't seem to find any source that isn't painted as controversial here in Croatia. There's been a worrying rise of misinformation regarding the whole timeframe and history textbooks mention the attrocities in 1 sentence (or at least it was when I was going to primary)

Thank you in advance.

Let me be a bit more specific about that question as it may seem confusing. I've been researching Marco Polo and am wondering what an intrepid explorer like him would be going through mentally when visiting a foreign culture. Did these explorers see their foreign peers as alien? Inhuman? Polo, born in Venice, must have lived with an overwhelmingly white, Christian based people.

I recognize that this also taps into some cultural and societal viewpoints of the time and is difficult to tack down into a few paragraphs. I'd love the input, and am fascinated by this time period of courageous exploration on both sides!

I don't get it. The British destroyed the government building and they were arch-enemies. But by WW1, they were long-time best friends. What happened during that 100 years?

I'm a professional writer hired to pen an occult mystery novella set in pre-war Japan. I'm big on research, however, so rather than write uninformed canard I've been devouring books on the subject, ranging from tea-culture to their day-to-day life to their imperialism and military structure to their native mythologies and ghosts.

However, there's one facet I've been unable to find more than the merest (probably uninformed) statements about: the treatment of westernized Japanese prior to and during WW2.

How were the westernized Japanese treated? Were they marginalized, persecuted, simply ignored? If they were persecuted, by whom and how seriously?

I'm especially interested in full books on the subject, or comprehensive articles. I'm not scared off if these books have a thick veneer of "academicalism," by the way. So any and all recommendations would be fantastic!

Thank you so much for your time and answers!

I figure that as the Free Tibet concerts began in 1994 the movement must have already had considerable cachet by then, particularly among western celebrities. So as in the title, why? There are numerous minorities with separatist elements within larger states (including the Uighurs of Xinjiang), so why did Tibet become such an obsession?

I have a project final in a class where I have to make a 10 minute video presentation about a topic from Ancient History, and relate it to an aspect of the modern world. For example, Relating the Cave allegory to Highschool, or Aristophanes to modern comedy. I'm not sure if this would be the subreddit to help but all suggestions are welcome. The time period/ locations these subjects have to come from is from the beginning of man to Mesopotamia, Egypt, Greece, Persia, and Macedon.

"The phantom time hypothesis is a historical conspiracy theory advanced by German historian and publisher Heribert Illig (born 1947) which proposes that historical events between AD 614 and 911 in the Early Middle Ages of Europe and neighbouring regions are either wrongly dated, or did not occur at all, and that there has been a systematic effort to cover up that fact"

I work as freelance videographer in the detroit area and I happen to get a job from the Pentagon, through a mutual friend to film, William Cook, who was one of the first black marines in America, because he was receiving the Congressional Gold Medal. He went to tell a story about his time in Iwo Jima. He said that the ship they were sailing on had "classified" equipment on it. He said that they had to wait outside of the island for days until the rest of the army had it cleared and then they left and it was only the black marines on there. After awhile on the island, he said that the enola gay came and landed, his commanding unit said they just had to refuel it, but he remembers people the "classified" cargo they had onto it. I asked if he thought it was the atomic bomb, he said yes. Funny story is that after that, I had to give the footage straight to the Pentagon and they have since "lost it". I have looked for any information about the Montford Point Marines actually being the ones to transport and load the atomic bomb, but have found no evidence of it, could it be a true story, would America send the first all black marine group to handle and transport the atomic bomb?

Most books and people Ive spoken to ultimately go towards religion. Religion plays such a big part historically in the Arab-Israeli conflict, especially in regards to rights to holy places and bilblical rights to land,but how far does it go?

What are the other reasons that previous peace processes have failed? And is religion interlinked with these failures? For example having religion behind political decisions, creation of settlemebts etc..

Do politics, culture and education of the generations play a significant part in allowing the conflict to continue and the hostility between the Arabs and Israelis to remain

Ultimately, although cultural and political decisions and actions fuel and effect the crisis, would you say that religion is the main hindrance and is the biggest fueler of this seemingly continuous conflict?

I was wondering about this lately. Did they eat bread with some sort of sauce and dipped it there, the ate it.

I understand that the Russian Grand Princes of the 11th and 12th century had connections with the Byzantine Greeks, and that they interacted with Eastern European Catholics. I'm just curious as to the opinions of Russian Princes towards the crusades. Did they agree with the idea of a "Holy War" that the crusaders followed, or did they see it as a foolish venture?

In my armchair historical reading, sources closest to the events always seem to be given higher authority. However, this belies the fact that we, who are furthest removed from the events, consider ourselves best able to derive the truth.

After all, historians today can draw from more sources, archaeology, etc. and arrive at a better picture of events than do ancient sources. We consider ourselves more objective, with a birds-eye view of the whole picture. Wouldn't the same be true to some extent of ancient sources that have a comfortable distance from the events?

Do historians ever place value on distance between the written source and the events, as well as proximity?

Were the spoils of piracy really worth the effort during the Early Modern Period? How much money could the average pirate really expect to make from leaving the Merchant marine and joining a band of Buccaneers?

Was Privateering really an effective strategy for National policy? Or was it only good for picking fights with other nations?

You see it occasionally popping up in video game writing, with people saying this game or that game is the 'Citizen Kane of gaming' or complaining that games haven't had a 'Citizen Kane moment' yet.

Social Darwinism might not be the right word. I mean, during the period when Europeans believed Europeans to be superior to other races by virtue of being European, how did historians explain the Mongol victories in Eastern Europe? I suppose the same question could be asked of the Huns, Persians, Arabs, Turks, and other groups that have fought and defeated the Byzantines and other Eastern European powers.

Based on some wikipedia browsing, I understand that enigma machines were captured on several occasions.

Why didn't the Germans have some sort of system in place to destroy these materials that were so damaging in the hands of the allies?

In hindsight this seems to be a huge mistake, as I also understand that the allies capture and study of these machines played a large part in their victory, and I can't imagine it would have been extremely difficult to implement some sort of training or device to automatically destroy these objects.

Im doing research on the ancien Greeks and read that they had a great cultural impact on the Western World. But what about the rest of the World? What can a person from Eastern Asia, Africa or any other part of the World appreciate that was bestowed upon them by the ancient Greeks? Thanks in advance for the answers!