As castles in Japan look significantly different to those in Europe, I was wondering how a siege would be undertaken.

Simple as that. In every sport that I can think of that has a scoring area like a goal or a net, it's right smack up against the boundary of the field. One of the most interesting things for me about hockey has always been the ability to play from behind your adversary's goal.

It was a book that he wrote where he omitted everything with Jesus Christ being the son of god and rather shows him as just a person who wants to do good in the world. I don't know which founding father it is, what the name of his take on the story of Jesus is, or even if it's still in circulation, but I would like to read it and see how much it changes my perception of Jesus.

I'm found some of the conspiracy theories are very interesting yet not sure of the reliability of the theory. If we question everything then we have nothing to stand on. I guess.

Seems an interesting question to ask. We have seen the falls of major governments within the past four or so years, is this a rare thing to have so many o overthrow s of the government in such a short time? Its interesting that some nations that are not arab have caught the spring fever.

I'm reading The People's History of The Vietnam War (2003) and it says that America never apologised for the use of Agent Orange in Vietnam, because, 'to do so would be to admit what had been done in the war' (p.231). The book says that to admit what had happened would expose them to numerous consequences: such as compensation for the victims of Dioxin (both in Vietnam and America); and that they would have to admit guilt for the attrocities they were trying to pin on veterans (through media coverage of false stories about public disgust for veterans, especially those who opposed the war). And that they did this so that in the future they could still gain public support for future wars that required ground-troops: 'now that most people knew the war was a mistake and wrong, the blame was being dumped on the GIs' (p. 229).

In essence, to admit to such a heinous act as mass-poisoning, whether intentional or not, would be to admit that the command structure supported brutality, wanted a lot of kills, and that the macabre actions of some soldiers (ear-trophies, mass-killings of innocents,...etc.) was the direct result of the orders of their superiors and not some entrenched desire of the individual soldier to kill for gratification.

So, my questions are: did America ever apologise for Agent Orange since this book was published? I know it is helping in a cleanup, but did it ever actually say 'sorry'? Is it justifiable to link this refusal to apologise (up until publication) with shifting the blame of war-crimes onto the GIs? And, is public opinion still against the GIs as 'baby-killers', or do people accept that the government was to blame for the Vietnam war?

I'd also love to hear people's opinions on this book in general, and how accurate it is in all areas.

Sorry for the amount of text and thank you in advance for all those who respond. If anything is unclear about what I've written, please let me know :)

It's arguable that most of the modern lay perspective of the German Empire comes from it's role as the "adversary" in WWI - it's not seen as either being "good" or "bad," but rather was just the powerful Imperial nation that happened to clash swords with the liberal democracies of Western Europe. Sure, it was ruled by an Imperial government and people had less say in how their country was run, but it was also highly productive and produced many influential people in the realm of science and technology.

So going deeper than this basic understanding, what was the nitty-gritty real-world experience of German citizens? Did they enjoy the fruits of industrialisation, perhaps to a larger degree than the French and British? Was there some resentment at the lack of political representation, compared to other industrialised nations? Ignoring the obvious behemoth of the inevitable conflict of WWI, was there any plans for the future of country? How well appreciated were the arts?

Danke for your responses!

Do scholars have any hypotheses as to why this would be part of the mythology?

Edit: ok, it was Thor who kicked the poor guy in, not Odin.

I am reading The Guns of August. Obviously I can visualize how the German used their artillery to destroy the fortresses at Liege and Namur. Later on, I anticipate that those artillery are going to be useful on other fixed targets, such as trenches.

But how exactly do you make artillery (or, in prior wars, cannon) effective against marching soldiers? I am just having trouble visualizing the impact they would have.

Sorry to be morbid.

We read an excerpt for out labor history class. (Along with an excerpt of 12 years A Slave.)

Eugene Genovese seems to paint a semi-rosy picture of slavery. He argues that the slaves had some agency. How they work hard on Sundays for extra money, how they worked hard for their family dinners, how they got together for the holidays, how they sang songs making fun of their masters, etc.

But it seems like he's being a bit too nice about it. We read Solomon Northrup's 12 Years along with some other accounts of slavery. It was a pretty crappy life being a slave.

But Roll Jordan Roll won awards and sold well. Do any historians disagree with Genovese and felt that slaves were victims 100 percent?

Thanks so much!

Edit: *American Civil War.

When I was in college, I had a music theory professor tell a very amusing anecdote about Handel. While I like the story, I've never been able to find any other evidence that the story was true. While I respect the professor and his PhD, I was wondering if any historian could either confirm or even deny ("there is no way that ever happened because...") the tale.

The story goes that Handel was rehearsing (professor said Messiah) in a second story room with a soprano and two other vocalists. Handel was seated at the harpsichord guiding the rehearsal, when the soprano became increasingly annoying. She would frequently interrupt the rehearsal, claiming her part was not big enough, that she was being ignored, and demanding Handel write more music for her in this particular section. Handel suffered it for a while until eventually, in the middle of one of the soprano's complaints, Handel stood up, picked the woman up (professor described Handel as a very large, barrel chested man), seated her on the window sill, took her arms and leaned her out the window. Handel them calmly explained that when the women stopped screaming, he would pull her back in. After the screaming subsided, Handel pulled her back into the room and the woman ceased to complain.

So, did it happen? Might it have happened? Is their no way of knowing if it happened? Or did it not happen?

All I know is that it was between pro-slavery and anti-slavery groups and it helped start the civil war.

According to the Wikipedia the percentage of Buddhists in Indian population is about 0.8%, this despite the fact that it originated in India, is very old (more than a couple of millennium) and shares many aspects with Hinduism.

He believed in a system of checks and balances between three branches of government, which is used today in the United States. Are there any weaknesses in this type of system that Montesquieu supported?

I've always had this idea that all pagans never really cared about other pagan deitys. And that Christianity was the only religion that cared about what ever other peoples thought. I decided to ask the professionals to see if I am right (which I doubt) or not.

As an example, People A worship god A while people B worship god B, what would people A think of god B? would they denounce it? Not care/acknowledge it? Or view it as a deity but not one they worshiped?

/u/Hangs_From_Trees provides a perfect example of answer im looking for.

Did pikes deploy in front of muskets presenting a wall of spear points?

Form a square with muskets huddling around the pike block hiding under the pikes?

Did muskets enter the pike block occupying empty spaces to make a very densely packed formation?

When shooting, did the muskets go behind the pikes to reload and then march back to the flanks or front of the pikes to fire?

What was a typical ratio of pike to musket?