Hey all,

I'm currently doing a masterplan for the Miramar Peninsula in Wellington, New Zealand and the place is littered with coastal batteries that were installed in both world wars to protect the harbour entrance. The notable ones were to protect against Japanese invasion forces, although I doubt they would have been of much use.

I have never really heard much about how real the threat of invasion was from Japan, so I was wondering if anyone could shed some light on the possibilities, the potential strategy and contingency plans that the allies had (namely the rest of the commonwealth).

I'm not sure if this is strictly the right place for this post, but it is a question about history, and I hope that some people in the community can give me a bit of help/advice!

Last year I completed a masters degree in medieval history and have been working full time in an unrelated field ever since. I now want to return to education and do a PhD.

I've hit a stumbling block, due to the fact that the topic I want to pursue is not directly related to my masters' research. My previous research focused on racial and cultural identity and prejudice in medieval Europe, with my submitted work being made up of three 4,000 word essays on related topics in 12th - 14th century Britain, and a 15,000 word dissertation on portrayals of 'barbarian' peoples in 10th century monastic writing.

For my PhD topic, I want to keep the theme the same, but shift the focus to Hong Kong and Singapore under British rule in the 19th and early 20th centuries, looking at colonial attitudes towards native culture and race, as well as the development of specific Hong Kong and Singaporean identities. As you can see, the themes are very similar to my previous research, but are chronologically and geographically removed.

Although I have done my own research and reading on the topic, I don't hold any qualifications specific to east Asian history, and am worried that this will prove an insurmountable obstacle in terms of my application. I'm wary of emailing potential supervisors and being dismissed because of my background, and potentially ruining a chance for future engagement. Essentially, I've hit a bit of a wall.

Basically, my question falls into two parts: is this too great a leap in terms of topics considering my existing qualifications and knowledge and, if so, what can I do to close the gap to make applying for such a topic feasible? I'm open to the idea of doing another masters course on world history, or similar, that I can use as a bridge, but would prefer to go straight onto the PhD if it is possible.

My previous degrees are from UK universities, and I'm applying to do the PhD in the UK as well, in case that makes a difference to people's responses.

Sorry for the wall of text, and thanks for reading!

Sorry for loaded question!

Anyway I was playing Aggravation last night with some friends and then I started wondering how board games came to be. I did a google/wikipedia search but didn't come up with too much information.

Also by "stakes" of the game, I mean would people bet on them often, or just play for fun like we do today?

Thank you!

I've been reading a graphic novel centered around gambling rings and the Yakuza, and people keep telling me this was something that started right after WWII. Is this true, was there a huge emphasis on gambling in the country after the war, and what were other crime ventures like?

Also, at what point could the emperor be considered to have virtually no power? The Treaty of Westphalia? The reformation?

I'm hoping to ask this awesome subreddit for any books/research you may have come across that addresses what it was like to work in a typical government post during the 1918-1928 period of Russian history. I'm trying to get a look at the russian experience with government during this phase. Thanks!

I did a cursory search for this in the past, but didn't find what I was looking for.

A few specific questions that I have:

• Was most of the land owned by the upper class and rented out, or was it land owners that were working their own fields?

• What did they typically grow? Did they grow a single crop, or many different crops? Were there any farmers who were mostly subsistence, with a little extra for bartering, or did the financial burdens require most of their crops to go to market?

• What was their free time like? Was farming something that took up all of their time?

But I'm generally interested in the quality of life of a typical farmer, and an understanding of the range of lives that could be called "farmers": I know there were plantation owners, and homesteaders, but I don't know a lot of what was in between, or what the breakdown was.

Hello, I'm very new this subreddit, but love it already. I have recently taken an interest in the history of Greece and Greek Mythology, I was wondering if anyone could suggest to me some good books on the subjects?

Especially considering he apparently had no naval training?

Why did people in 1800s USA employ Chinese 'coolies' to do jobs such as making railroads? Would it not be easier to get people from Latin America or places where they spoke a European language? Surely it would have been very difficult to recruit people in China, to translate things etc.

Any period that you have information on, I was wondering this morning in the gym.

I have never heard much about communism in implementation in Vietnam. How was it? Was it better than what they had before? Did Ho Chi Minh have a strict regime, or more relaxed comparatively?

Hello all,

I have a blog about the Great War and I was writing a piece on the Serbs. I read that the Serbian military could not even equip their entire frontline force with modern rifles, but I can't find anywhere what make of rifles Serb soldiers were actually issued. Would anyone know the answer to this?

Due to their ties with Russia I assumed Mosin-Nagants but I'd like to know for sure.

i think it's Mesoptamia