I get that bows against heavy armored opponents can be useless, but after the invention of gunpowder armor was obsolete. So here is my idea: instead of giving my French or Prussian line infantry only muskets, give half of them bows or crossbows. They would send 3-4 times a heavy arrow rain before the enemy line infantry could reload. And without any cover, shields or armor they would get rekt (they would even stand in line on a open field in a massive formation that is not hard to hit).

So why doesn’t Napoleon or any other warlord did this? It makes so much sense in my head. ???

If it was just the swinging half-doors that you see in movies, how did they keep people out when they were closed and such? Seems like a pain to take real doors on and off every night.

As for the title. I want to learn about historical figures, events, the Opium wars, Communism, Mao, Tibet, WWI and WWII, Sino-Japanese war, the Nanchino massacre, and how the Communist party shaped the modern China.

Thanks.

This "fact" seems to be spreading on the internet but I don't believe it is true. Do we have any sources that it is so? Almost every blog that is spreading this "fact", not surprisingly, does not provide any sources.

Hi, I'm a Polish law student, I got the task to write a Roman will, but I don't know how to do it, could anyone help or send some pattern?

How were large sums of money exchanged in the early middle ages like Anglo-Saxon England when silver pennies were the only currency. And if Byzantine solidus or Arab denar gold coins were used then what were the exchange rates to silver pennies?

I recently learned that this branch of the Yuan government existed and was almost an independent nation or a vassal state.

I was first surprised by how modern it's name sounds, if someone can comment on that that would be great, but what confuses me more is: why?

Why Tibet from all regions got this special treatments?, it wasn't particularly rich, strategic, or strong, was it?

Hello historians! I hope this question will be acceptable. I've done my best to put it within the scope of the rules, and I believe this is the appropriate avenue for my inquiry.

Long story short, I'm a writer, currently writing a story set in 1947. I've come to a point in my script where I'd like a very affluent character to be transporting something of value. I have my character taking a journey from England to Paris, and I want the item to be somewhat concealable, but valuable either historically, or intrinsically.

I've considered a diamond, but that seems to cliche to me. While I understand diamonds have long been used as an analog for value itself, and have long been used as placeholders for value, I want it to be a little more historically relevant than that.

Is there maybe a lost document that would be relevant that I could use? Maybe some vital piece of information, some kind of heirloom or significant material thing that my character could be transporting?

I hope again that this is permissible, and thank anyone in advance who is willing and/or able to help me figure this out! This proved a difficult question to simply google.

I'm also interested in the role of Black and other people of color in science fiction stories. How difficult would it have been to get a story about a black man published in a pulp magazine in the 50's.

"Pre-1900" is not to imply that that is when the change took place, it's just my personal observation that the trend of giving an alternate title using "or" was more common in 19th-century texts.

I understand that we do subtitle movies and books today using text after a colon, but when and why did this come to prominence?

It just seems to me he went to so, so much more trouble setting himself against the Church, divorcing his wife, making myriad enemies in Europe etc; when FitzRoy could've been his last ditch heir to the throne if Queen Catherine proved incapable of bearing a son. Henry even acknowledged him as his son. He could've told Anne Boleyn to be happy as his recognized mistress or kick rocks right? With the Tudor dynasty being so much more stable than the monarchy was in the Plantagenet days, why wasn't this considered more of an option for Henry?

Alright so maybe this one requires context: Last year I took a journalism class for a prereq and the professor said that pornography of nobles helped start the French Revolution by challenging the respect and reverence commoners were supposed to give them originally.

He said that originally it wasn't high brow writings from philosophers like Voltaire that really challenged French society, but rather pornography smuggled in that depicted French nobles getting down to it. He painted a picture that more of history is informed by lowbrow culture than we'd like to think. Is this true in anyway or did my professor completely mislead us?

Is there any reading material that documented this tenure?

So, my question came about because of the impression that I have been given by known completely unreliable exaggerating bullshit artists who told me years ago that the reason the Romans never conquered Ireland was that they were afraid to go up against the lunatic Irish.

Now, as an Irishman, that would be a lovely thing to be able to believe but, I doubt it. So my question has a few parts.

Why did the Romans never invade Ireland? Were we just historically lucky?

If they had attacked Ireland, what type of forces would they have encountered? Would their have been a realistic amount of organised resistance? Who would that have been? What form would it have taken... guerilla style forces or organised, more regimented armies?

I have an almost total lack of understanding of the history at the time, so this could also be a cross post with "Explain it like I am Five", so consider me to be totally clueless and my knowledge a clean slate!

I think this is a very interesting question. The HRE, a thousand year old institution at the time, having ties with the United States, a young nation at the time and that still exists today. Did they exchange ambassadors? Did the USA think the HRE was just a medieval antiquity?

I apologize if this post sounds vague or is posted a lot. I really just want to be able to find a good book and dive right in. But I don't need it to be a huge tome that'll take me forever to get through. It has to be engaging but also obviously well researched and thorough. I'll take any suggestions you can think of.