I've heard several stories here. My background is Polish so I have a bit of a interest into Polish history.

I've talked to some old timers about the war and many would say the Polish Army fought the tanks on Horseback, now this may seem ridiculous and maybe somewhat brave, but more or less stupid. I heard from family sources that this horse vs tank, was nothing more than German propaganda in Italy.

I understand Poland was not high in tech during the time, and I could understand using a cavalry to split up infantry, but to ride against a tank? I find that utter nonsense.

A few years ago I seen a documentary about Hitler with a close acquaintance of his doing much of the talking. At one point she mentions a time when she and Hitler was alone in his office. She was upset when she learned of what was happening to the people that were sent to the concentration camps and was there to confront him. Hitler told the young lady that she was too sentimental. He explained to her that since Germany was losing thousands of it's best men everyday that is was to balance nature.
Basically he said that since the world was losing 5000 great Germans everyday the he should kill 10,000 jews, gypsies, homosexuals and anyone else that wasn't part of his master race.
Are there any more examples of Hitler publicly acknowledging the Holocaust?

If this post appears racist or offensive in any way, know that is not it's intent.

Recently, I finished "Heart of Darkness" by Joseph Conrad... and a theme that is persistent throughout the book is the idea that "The Eyes of Western Civilisation hold back the Heart of Darkness".

That said, are Human Rights an invention of western culture... spread over time through territorial acquisition and Colonisation. I realise that the Europeans did not have the best human rights record upon the initial colonisation of certain regions... but even then, the natives seemed to be protected from Tribal wars and racial genocide that occurred without the European masters. And it certainly seems that medieval Europe had a more civilised understanding of "Human Rights" then America or Africa of the same day.

I just saw the new 300. Of course, it was not historically accurate.

I found myself looking at some east asian art in my art history textbook, and I had a thought... Realism seems to be far less common among civilizations outside the mediterranean. Why, if for any reason at all, did it not emerge? Or did it emerge, I'm just not looking right?

reason being, i just recently finished Spartacus (the show) and he, and a few others would kill roman guards/warriors like it was nothing in the show ... Granted they took them by surprise sometimes, but still...how often did this happen, and was a Roman guard/warrior this weak against a gladiator like Spartacus and his men?

I know the real life Spartacus rebelled against his leaders in real life with weapons found in the kitchen, (I'm guessing he picked up the guards swords too?)...

For example, would an educated Greek aristocrat see Odysseus as a universal symbol or is that strictly a modern interpretation? Why were these myths considered so valuable by ancient Athenians?

As a modern reader, it's hard for me to see the importance of the Descent of Inanna, Epic of Gilgamesh, Beowulf, and similar works unless analyzing them from a Jungian perspective. Were these stories just seen as entertainment, as embodiments of transcendent aspects of the human experience, or somewhere in between? Do we even know?

Posting here rather than in a mythology or literature subreddit because I'm interested specifically in the role these works played in society and day-to-day life. Thank you in advance, and thank you most of all for tolerating my ignorance.

It seems rather popular by people to compare the supposed decline of the US with the fall of the Roman Empire. But back then, did anyone write about how Rome was declining or going to fall? Did anyone notice that Rome wasn't as strong as it used to be and lament the fact? Or what other reactions were there, if any?

So, since I discovered this sub, it's become a personal goal of mine to get a flair with that subject, but I'm having a hard time finding a starting point. Here are a few things:

• The book list didn't really have a whole lot about pre-Conquest England, and next to nothing that really dives into the details of battles and the politics surrounding them. The only thing that jumped out at me was Fleming's Britain After Rome, but the description made it seem like it wasn't what I was looking for. I recently read The Norman Conquest: The Battle of Hastings and the Fall of Anglo-Saxon England by Marc Morris and this is (mostly) the sort of book I'd like to read on the subject. It talks a lot about the politics in England before, during, and immediately after the Conquest, as well as the effects that certain technologies had (specifically the rise of the castle in England). It does go into a bit of religious and architectural detail that I think is extraneous to my goals, but overall I found it extremely useful. Does anybody have any recommendations?
• I've found that most of the books that cover early-Middle-Ages Britain are involved mostly with the social and cultural effects of the Anglo-Saxons. Being that I'm looking to focus more on the martial aspect of the history, I'm concerned that these books won't suit my immediate needs. Are there any books that anybody knows of that are focused on my interests? Specifically, I'd like more information on Cnut the Great and his conquest of England.
• I have a feeling that the best place to find more information in the post-Conquest era on the subject would be in biographies of important martial leaders. What are some names I should be looking for? Are there any biographies that are a must read?

I don't know how long it's going to take for me to get the knowledge I need for this, but I'm profoundly interested in this stuff either way and am prepared to consume as much on the subject as possible.

Why have the majority of past civilizations been patriarchies? Neither the Roman or Greek empires had equal rights for women. It seems egalitarian nations seem to be a fairly new concept.

Opposition wouldn't, in this case, have to be the communists but rather anyone he perceived as a threat to his power.

I'm looking for some scholastic articles and journals about real events that happened back in the 1800s in the Southern U.S. I am preparing research for a conference presentation and I need real stories as evidence for my claims. Scholarly articles about the overall effects of slavery would also be appreciated. Thanks you guys

I was watching The Book Thief and started to wonder. How did the Natzis actually find the Jews? I mean, suppose I'm Jewish or some other religion. If I walk down the street there is no way that someone can recognize me as Jewish over say a Christian or a person of another religion (assuming I'm not wearing any religion specific clothing)

What prevented Jews in WWII from just blending in with the rest of society during WWII? I guess they could track them from the Synagogues but that would only go so far.

Britain forcibly deported the French Acadians in the wake of the Seven Years War in 1755 because they wouldn't swear an oath of allegiance to England. Then not even 20 years later, in 1774, the Quebec Act was passed, establishing Quebec's territory, allowing them to use French civil law, and retain their Catholicism and culture. Why such a 180? Were these two different methods of dealing with the threat of the French in North America--first deporting them, then trying to pacify them? Any light shed on this would be fantastic. And I'm seriously considering researching this for my term paper, so any sources would be helpful as well!