When I tried searching on my own it gave me a century wise list, but we all know fashion changes multiple times in just a decade. So I was wondering there's anywhere I can get more detailed information about the clothing worn by people in the past. It would be great if they're not just about European fashion history, East Asian and South Asian would be good too. Also if there are explanations according to the context of the sociopolitical and economical factors leading to the particular fashions practiced in a specific space and time? I think the medieval times are a good point of reference to start from, but if there's any information on ancient civilizations and their takes on fashion and the trends during their peak, that would be great too.

• Do we have records of servicemen in Allied militaries who sympathised with the Axis who:
  • Defected to the Axis
  • Sabotaged their nation's war effort to help the Axis win
  • Engaged in deliberate friendly fire incidents
  • Fragged their superiors
• Did Allied nations have a campaign similar to McCarthyism to weed out Axis sympathisers within their nations, out of fear that the Axis could use them as a fifth column?

Learning history in school I was always told regarding the blitzkrieg attack to Britain, Germany pushed in through Belgium they defended themselves and held them off long enough for Britain to fortify and retreat. Did such a small country really play such a big part in this war.

Did extensive trade lead to the spread of fish sauce and pasta?

We also known Italians have dumplings made from pasta dough. Did those exist in Rome? Also how come Anatolians and Slavs got their dumplings (manti and pierogi respectively) from Turko-Mongols instead of trade with Rome?

I’ve been studying Persian society and the Greek world 500-440 in depth and I feel like the only advantage Greece has over persia in terms of living conditions and civility is democracy

This being said women in Persia held far greater prominence and rights than in Greece, slavery was banned under Zoroastrianism and religious tolerance was rife (see Cyrus in the book of Ruth)

I was wondering if western society did well to be based off Greek society or if we would be more advanced and less concerned with warfare if the Persians won and western society was based on Achaemenid ideology??

I'm doing this thing in minecraft, and my keep has a big wall around it with battlements, murderholes etc.. and I'm gonna add a village surrounding it, but I wasn't sure if the village would have the same type of wall.

I don't have any examples on hand, but it's the one where the marginalized person generally speaks in a very bass, very serious voice, starting sentences with "Me does this, me does that". Is that a new development? And where did that come from?

Thank you!

A quick (probably wrong) google shows only about 5% of the population in the South owned slaves. Why would an average confederate person risk their life and go to war for something that only affected/benefited a small elite few?

In book five of Livy’s history of Rome he says that Publius Licinius Calvus, the first plebeian to become a consular tribune, was “an elderly member of the senate.” I was under the impression that at this point in Roman history only patricians could be appointed to the senate but apparently that’s incorrect. Livy covers the Conflict of the Orders in detail but never (as far as I remember) mentions plebeians gaining access to the Senate, which seems like something that would be worth detailing. At what point were plebeians allowed to serve as senators?

When I was growing up I often heard that the native Americans perceived the Europeans. wrongly, as gods. How true is this? Was the native idea of a living god even comparable to our all-powerful judeo-christian one? and if not, if their gods were more "grounded", were the natives even wrong in thinking of the Europeans as a version of their gods?

Most young Northern Irish people know that a major factor of the Troubles was economic discrimination against the Catholic community, and that nowadays both of our neighbour states are noticeably wealthier than us, but also that the North was one of the most industrialised places in the world in the early 20th century. Were Protestants in the North still wealthy compared to their equivalents in Britain and the South when the conflict began in the 1960s, or was the North seen as a backwater even then?

Just purchased an old ~1840 house in the Catskills region of New York and the peeling paint is revealing... a ton of blue? Blue walls, blue radiator, blue doors... I even found blue shutters in the barn. Was this a style of a certain era? Is it oxidation? What does it all mean?!?! WHY SO MUCH BLUE!

I’m reading James McPherson’s “Battle Cry of Freedom” and in the chapter on the wrangling by the South to gain diplomatic recognition by the European powers McPherson mentions the French proposed that France, the UK, and Russia jointly call for a six month armistice but “this so blatantly favored the South that pro-Union Russia quickly rejected it.” The book doesn’t say why Russia was pro-Union in its outlook and I’m curious if anyone knows what the Russian calculations were at that time.

Hi all, first thank you for the hard work and great content that goes into this sub - I'm looking to learn more about the Mongol invasion of Japan in 1274 and 1281 and curious if there are any good books (in English) that you all would recommend. Academic or pop history are both fine with me, but it the first of my Japanese history dives so would appreciate any guidance here.

Back when things were segregated what would people who were Asian, Latino, etc. do? Would they also not be allowed to go into the business/use the amenity or would they be able to because they are not black?

We often hear how Thor was the “god of Thunder” or Odin was the “god of war.” Did the ancient Norse actually view their gods in this way (as in “god/goddess of _____”) or was this an invention of later scholars to understand the Norse pantheon as similar to the Ancient Greeks’?

In 1970, the author Yukio Mishima, noted ardent Japanese monarchist, conducted a coup attempt supposedly to inspire the Japanese Defense Forces to reject the 1947 post-WWII constitution and place the Japanese emperor back into power. After seizing a military camp with four others, Mishima gave a speech and then committed ritual suicide.

It is said the soldiers mocked and jeered the speech, finding it more irritating and laughable rather than actually inspirational. Was Mishima's position perhaps more sympathized by the Japanese populace? Or was the act purely symbolic?

The ordinary people would not likely have come into contact with those from outside their area, unless in a market of some sort. But the upper nobility/kings, etc would have had some contact, for example the Northumbrian kings in alliances with the Gaels/Picts or the Welsh with the Mercians. How would they communicate? Was it simply a matter of being bi-or tri-lingual? Or seeing that many of the upper classes, if they were educated, would have been through the monasteries, so would they use Latin as a common language? Even the Welsh/Irish had different forms of Gaelic, as I understand, but could they understand each other when they spoke to each other?

So dude gets drafted, sent to some base for processing and basic training...he DOES NOT care to be there. Perhaps he is somewhat defiant, purposely acts lazy, does tasks slow, hell...maybe even voices his displeasure of clearly not wanting to participate in this.

What was done to him? How was he handled?