Was it only because of territorial ambitions? I can not understand why would he want to fight on several fronts, with UK still being free land.

What is the history of the cross? The cross was originally a brutal method of punishment, so how and when did it get turned into a religious symbol? Also, was the cross used as a religious symbol before the crucifix became a popular image, or did they develop together?

(Reposting since nobody responded the last time I asked) I am currently reading Robert Fisk's "The Great War for Civilization" and he talks about the various Jewish gangs that attacked British soldiers and property in the lead-up to Israeli independence. I had always thought Britain was the primary driver towards the creation of Israel, so learning this was surprising to me. Can somebody please give me some more context on why this occurred?

From what I know from popular culture it always seems like the Franks started out with pretty much nothing in terms of military or economic power, much the resources necessary to amass armies large enough to effectively challenge the Swabians or Burgundians.

I tried "askreddit" but didn't get a good answer. I get that Spanish speaking populations are very religious, but there are a ton of very religious Americans too.

I also heard that it is Joshua. Fair enough, but football players don't yell "Thank you, Joshua!" People don't say "Joshua Saves".

Somone suggested I post here, so how about it, is there some historical reason English speaking people don't name their babies Jesus?

If not when did society decide it was bad or disdainful?

I am aware of the larger effects the Norse had on the British Isles, but does this go into the artwork as well? It seems to me just through what I've seen over the years that Irish and Norse knot-work is vastly similar. Is it coincidence that both cultures have this art style, or is there a certain reason?

Been doing some research into the subject myself and I'm just looking for some new perspectives on the matter.

Did they try to work together? The way WWII has always been presented to me is that the two countries fought common enemies, but they fought their own wars pretty much independent of eachother.

.

1. You never hear of CA's participation in the war.

2. How could the government have tracked your movements?

I know Japan established prefectures in Sakhalin, Korea, and in Taiwan. Does that mean these new prefectures were completely annexed, incorported, and integrated to Japan's core territories? That these new prefectures will stand as equal as the main Japanese prefectures, and are fairly represented to their national parliament?

Also, did they plan on establishing Japanese prefectures in every territory they took? Or did they plan on making some territories mere dependencies or protectorates? If yes, what's the determining factor on whether a territory becomes a prefecture or a protectorate?

Also, were they willing go give Japanese citizenship to the peoples of the lands they annexed?

Hi AskHistorians,

Kind of a shot in the dark, but I'm looking for great examples of historiography for a generally "meh I'm bored" high school student. The historical topic isn't important - mostly looking just for compelling writing and a clear structure so the student can get an idea of what it means to place and compare sources in their historical context.

Any and all pointers would be much appreciated. Also, if this isn't the right subreddit please let me know and sorry.

Thanks!

Everyone during the wars that made up WWII knew about the first World War, when was 'decided' that the events around 1939-1945 were another World War?

I hope I have not misunderstood the context. Right now, it appears they are interchangeable, but if there is a subtle distinction I would like to know. Please explain.

More broadly, what were the economics associated with such estates? How did they make or lose money?