Did they have notably different daily routines? Did one group have more influence in the outcome of the Pacific war?

Given the fact that the Enigma code was often changed during the war, how exactly were those at Bletchley Park able to crack it? I am aware of Colossus but, understanding that it was one of the first digital computers at its time, how exactly did they utilize it for codebreaking? Was the whole process a mix of extreme brain power and technology?

Did the members of the Confederate Army face persecution after the victory of the Union?

For example, in what ways were their strategies alike?

In addition, why does it look like there were several successful steppe hordes motivated by plunder, while the vikings seems to stand alone as plunder motivated infantry?

Hello all. It might seem like a really mundane question, but it just struck me. I always used to think that a city didn't typically have walls all around it. That, be it Roman, be it Norman or be it a Napoleonic fort, that the city "walls" were an inner ring, that encased the upper class and palace, senate, whatever the form of government/royalty might be, and that outside the walls, the rest lived, and were more or less sacrificed in the event of a protracted siege/assault.

So, first, how true is the above? I'm currently watching Gladiator, which I know isn't a source in itself, but the city of Rome was surrounded by perimeter walls, and I realized that, some places in history DID surround their people with walls, and left the farms outside. But.. how did they get around expansion? Populations expand, houses need to be built... did they keep shifting the walls? Did they have development programs every so often to build new sections?

Obviously, this differs from place to place, and from era to era, so hit me with whatever time period you know of. It's all interesting to me, and it all helps answer me question.

They both seem very similar to me. Neither were great strategists but both were magnificent in inspiring others and promoting collaboration. Through force of personality Washington kept the War for Independence from buckling and Eisenhower kept the Allies focused. What more is there?

I want to know how the new structures ( judicial system, police, security service) were organized after dismantling of old ones. 

Is there some sort of software or app. that you use for keeping sorted your transcriptions, digital imaging, and other things like translations and standardised punctuation?

Other manuscript work discussion is welcome, but I'm mainly trying to work around the limitations I'm experiencing with Microsoft Word.

I'd also like to also find an editing programme for creating interlinear notation and translation.

Did the government consider the assassination of the President to be a contingency worth planning for? Did any plans exist at the time of Lincoln's assassination?

I tried real hard to phrase that neutrally in the space provided by the title. Here's the longer version:

It seems that whenever units of black soldiers are discussed in the media they are always units that are highly decorated, noted for their bravery, and typically earned medals of honor at a rate higher than that of non-black soldiers. Assuming the honorifics and medals were handed out accordingly and accurately (I have no reason to think otherwise), it would seem that black soldiers were willing to perform above and beyond the typical soldier. If this is the case, why were black soldiers so reluctantly allowed to fight in the Army? Why did desegregation take so long?

The obvious answer is "because racism" but that doesn't seem to cover all the angles. If people disliked black people, then shouldn't they be glad, or at least not averse to seeing black soldiers charge into the breach and get killed? If someone was neutral on the matter, then it would seem you would want to use the most effective soldiers possible.

To add to this, historically the same old arguments were trotted out each time to combat desegregation or a larger black presence in the military. They had poor eyesight, they were lazy, they were cowardly, and so on. Yet the historical record clearly proved otherwise with these highly decorated units. What was people's response to that?

Are today's Jews remnants of people who did not believe, or are they descents of an overwhelming majority? I apologize if the wording is ignorant, I'm just ineloquent

I'm interested to know the origins of the modern concept of a franchise, how it became a business model, and if there is a historical context to understand franchising that dates back to before the modern conception of franchising (McDonalds, hotels, etc).

My first AskHistorian question, big thanks to the experts and academics that made this sub possible!

What has happened in historical revisionism in the past years?