The author references the idea that London could be declared an "Open City". Based on the context, what do you think this means?

Primary sources are usually  more accurate and are written by someone who experienced it or witnessed it. secondary sources are those who heard of it after the fact that can lose details and or twist the event in a light that benefits them.

It me to understand the world and my place in it. for example, (and i know i’m using the terminology ‘historical perspective’ loosely here; some of my examples may be better termed an ‘evolutionary perspective’) knowing that all humans can trace their ancestry back to a common ancestor who lived in southern ethiopia ~200,000 years ago makes me feel connected to everyone on the planet. knowing that some of our ancestors left africa about 70,000 years ago and interbred with more archaic hominin species in europe and elsewhere, me to see the stupidity of white supremacist ‘purity of the race’ themes. seeing how religion was used to enslave people, and how callously lives were thrown away by those in power in the world wars of the past century makes me feel extremely fortunate to be living in the modern era. and, perhaps most importantly is that this knowledge makes me for the sacrifices our ancestors made to get us to this point, and determined to do my part to make the world a better place for the next generation.