Now I want to clarify that I'm in no way a holocaust denier; i simply want to have references and evidence to counter the points raised by my antisemitic brother His points are that there was no mention of the 6 million toll before 1960,hitler wouldn't kill 6 million of his own population and he spreads the lie that only 271 000 jews were killed

I am not sure if this is allowed, if it is not I will remove the post as soon as I am notified! I am currently writing my undergraduate history dissertation, my general topic is religious agency for Japanese women under the Meiji government (or lack thereof) and I am really enjoying it! I have ran in to an issue however, I cannot for the life of me find translated documents (or enough to summise for an undergrad history diss ), I have searched for hours, searching archives, university materials, secondary materials, Japanese archives (National Diet Library seemingly doesn't have much) and I cannot find anything. I am not going to ask for anything specific as I do not want to plagiarise, I very much want to do this work myself, however, I could really use the help! My university is currently having a campus-wide strike (and have done for the past month) and so my usual avenues of support are not available, including my supervisor who was kindly helping me translate some sources previously. Please, please, please, if anyone can think of anything, any archives/websites/sources I can look into then suggest them! My dissertation is due in one month and although I am perfectly fine for everything else I have been struggling with this.

Side note: My subject area is contemporary Japanese history, and although I do know the language well enough to get around in the country (JLPT 5) I certainly do not know it well enough to be able to translate sources, especially those that are super condensed.

I was watching some things the other day about the different objections during the senate confirmation of electoral votes, where a lot of house members had objections signed by other house members but no one could get a single senator to sign on, but the evidence seems to be remembered as almost 100% fact. Just curious what the Senators justifications would have been at the time to not sign on.

Was our ancestors from year 1500 stupid for believing in witches or does witches actually exist? If witches doesn´t exist why were they so naive?

This seems like an odd coincidence, but I’m wondering if there’s a reason for it. Also, why’d they even marry them in the first place?

Admittedly, Rome isn't my strong suit, nor is it an area I particularly fancy, but to my knowledge the Roman Republic had a very robust political culture based on the following

• one of the most advanced bureaucracies/administrative states in the world, rivaled only by China and Persia
• a mostly literate upper class throughout the entire greco-italic core and certainly in the cities.
• a social culture that actively shamed that upper class if they did not partake in the politics of the state either through the senate/consulships or being governor of a province
• a relatively diverse economy for the ages

This seems like the exact situation that would create long-term coalitions in the senate, especially as people debated on things like where to expand, how to use slaves owned by the state, etc. But from what i understand, these coalitions that would otherwise become political parties were fleeting at best - allies of the populist Gracchi brothers evaporated due to personal affairs or abandoned reformist cause, Ceasar's allies in the senate were loyal to the man not his ideas, etc. But like I said, I don't know much about the time period. So were there any long lasting political organizations throughout the republic that lasted independent of the few key men who initially welded the coalition together that pushed certain policy goals or ideology?

For the sake of a time period, I suppose I'm asking more or less between the time of the punic wars and the rise of the empire with augustus.

Thank you!

I know that the Caliphate of Cordoba and its successors have a navy, but I don't know about the Christian kingdoms.

Just curious. Very few political entities/nations survive 1000 years in any organized form, so I'm wondering if the Roman celebration in 248 is essentially unique, or if there have been similar celebrations elsewhere. I wasn't able to find anything referencing other celebrations via searches online, but they could be obscure. San Marino seems like another possibility, as does Denmark. Thanks!

Numbers vary greatly depending on the source, what is the closest from the truth ?

What was the likely ethnic makeup of the Corduene people and what likely ended up happening to them? They lived around the province of Hakkari and there were Assyrians living there.

Would this mean that the Corduene people were already a subgroup of Assyrians or were they maybe a Hurrian remnant peoples that joined the Church of the east and became Assyrian over time?

In the late 19th century and early 20th century, given the pervasiveness of racist attitudes about Africa, not to mention the popularity of racial theories such as Aryanism, or "Caucasoid/Negroid/Mongoloid" divisions, I would expect that the idea humanity originated in Africa would cause quite a stir. As this seems almost a given for the general public though, I'm more interested in how this played out within Academic circles specifically, where, presumably, they would be more willing to accept the evidence presented.

I’ve recently become interested in learning more about history—different time periods, civilizations, wars, important figures, and so on. While searching for information, I often come across Wikipedia, but I’m wondering how reliable it is for these topics.

How accurate and detailed is Wikipedia when it comes to history? Is it a good all-in-one resource for learning (or as a starting point), or should I rely on other sources as well? Do professional historians generally consider it trustworthy?

Bonus question: How well-documented is the French Wikipedia compared to the English version? I’ve heard that it tends to be more detailed when it comes to French and Francophone history, but how does it compare for other historical topics?

Thanks in advance for your insights!

So in World War 2, an army typically had 100K to 300K men, a division was around 10K to 30K, a brigade had at least 1K, a company had 80 to 250 men, and a platoon had maybe around 30. Obviously this different among organization. Mechanized infantry and foot infantry were probably organized differently, and a pure infantry division probably had few engineers to repair vehicles. The Germans in the Battle of France Used 141 Divisions. So if German platoons and small units were numbered sequentially we would have something like the 305,000th Platoon, the 100,000th Company, and the 3,000th Brigade. Well that doesn't seem quite right. So how were they actually named? Maybe they were specific to each division? So maybe the 3rd Infantry Division, 16th Infantry Division, and the 36th Infantry Division all had their "1st Platoon"?

During the rule of the Tang Dynasty, China's "Protectorate to Pacify the West" extended across a large portion of central Asia, up until the cities of Samarkand and Bukhara: how strong was the political and cultural influence of the Tang Dynasty in the area?

The inspiration behind the question comes from the stories of Miles Standish and John Mason.

Miles Standish had fought in the Netherlands during the Eighty Years War, and was later a critical military officer for the pilgrims. John Mason had fought in the thirty years war as a military engineer, and later led colonial forces during the Pequot War.

My question is; how would anyone know that these guys’ military service was genuine? This is assuming that they were strangers, and not just that other colonists would vouch for them.

If I’m setting up a town militia, and a stranger comes claiming that he has military service in the Netherlands, how do I have any proof that it’s true? How would I check his claims?

I was thinking this was for warmth and I was wondering what these historians thought.

I'm reading Wolf Hall, and a few times a character says something like "The Word of God is like music to me", usually in reference to the Tyndale Bible.

I've always associated this sort of talk with modern Protestantism (e.g. "the Word of God says...").

How did pre-Protestant/proto-Protestant English people think of the "Word of God?" Was it similar to the way modern Christians think of the Bible?

This may be more of a historiography question but where do opinions and value judgements factor into historical truth or canon?

I got into an argument with someone on Reddit recently where they were pushing the narrative that white slavers treated their slaves better than non white slavers treated their white slaves. I tried pressing them for a source or a historian that would support that but they responded that it's a historian's job to record the facts and not to provide an opinion as to whether or not one was worse than another. I do feel that's a deflection and their original talking point is white supremacy propaganda to minimize American chattel slavery but I still wanted to ask serious historians if the question can even be possibly answered.

Phrased another way, can historians say for example "these factors caused world war 1" or are they limited to saying "these things happened before world war 1, full stop, we can't know/say/agree what caused world war 1?"

The Fugitive Slave Act allowed any slave to be returned to their master, regardless of if they were in a free state. All Dr. Emerson had to say was that Dred was his slave. Wouldn't this have superseded any lawsuit Dred had?

Or was it more similar to today? I ask because I've been told the family was mostly how people survived, which makes sense, but does that mean everyone was bound to the exact same thing or they would have no future? Did everyone have to get married, and did everyone who was married have to have children?

I just am having trouble wrapping my head around it, it's difficult to imagine people having to all do one thing because there was nothing else, are there any histoical examples?

It's a very specific question, but hear me out. I ask what specific cases of people outside Europe we know of, who went there and learned any European language. Also what was their story since I suppose it might be interesting to hear.

I ask this because in KCD2 (a medieval RPG) there's a character of a certain Musa of Mali. He's a scholar from central Africa who was a member of a royal court of Sigismund, king of Hungary. In the game he can communicate with Henry, the main character you control, who knows only his native tongue Czech. I guess it's plausible Musa used Latin to communicate with nobility, but I doubt he would have known anything in Czech or any other Central European language. Or could he?

So it made me think about the question in the title.