Based on my (fairly limited) knowledge of history, I get the impression that Persia/Iran was the seat of one or another powerful empire for much of human history, while outside groups that conquered the region rarely managed to hold it for long. Is there a clear reason for this? Or is my impression incorrect?

We just watched the 1999 film The Messenger: The Story of Joan of Arc and curious about the castle keep defense weapon used by the English in the film during the depiction of the Siege of Tourelles, Orléans on May 7, 1492.

Once the French have begun charging the gate, Vincent Regan's character Buck orders the English soldiers to arm, fire, and reload a inner gate defensive weapon he calls the 'porcupine'. It appears to be a stacked crossbow wall, with about 48 large bolts, all triggered simultaneously, that seems to be a very effective and deadly defensive weapon (albeit slow to reload and difficult to move).

I've never had the chance to visit France and I can't find anything online about it online, so I'm wondering if it was a real thing ever or perhaps just an artistic liberty taken by the film's creators?

Thanks!

Long story short: I don't work in history but it is a lifelong passion of mine. As an adult with a family and career, I have returned to university to study history and an opportunity to serve on a historical preservation commission in my town may be available to me. It has me wondering, how many of you are professional historians, and how many of you have found a way to participate in other capacities?

I am looking forward to your replies!

I've been interested in religion recently, and have found conflicting views about the existence of Jesus. Christopher Hitchens says that we do not know if he existed, as all of the writings about him occurred hundreds of years after his death. However, other, less opinionated intellectuals, will say that we do know that he existed. Untainted by ideology, what are the facts?

I know it was important for women to marry as virgins. But there are so many shows/books where women have sex before marriage. Was it an unspoken truth that most women did?

I'm writing a story set in 1930s/40s Germany.

Could women be lawyers in early 1930s Germany?

I'll probably have other questions in the future. Thanks!

‘Victorian literature’ meaning both sources written in and sources written about the Victorian era. A trope I’ve seen is that an upperclass’s child is being married off to an emerging middle class spouse to ‘save’ the upperclass family. But how could upperclass families be cash poor yet still pay for servants and upkeep of their estates? Wouldn’t owning land generate income?

I've noticed that in the later period of the Ottoman Empire, oftentimes the Sultan and the Caliph would be two different people. Why did this come about? I was previously under the impression that the Caliph and the Sultan were always united in one person so that they were essentially interchangeable.

Why were the positions separated? When did this happen? What were the functional differences in the offices, and finally, were there conflicts between the two for supremacy?

For example,medieval accounts written by monks,17th century treaties or declassified government documents.

I also read that there were horned helmets found that predated the Vikings. Were there any other cultures using them? It does seem like for battle they would not be ideal

Also why do lions show up even in the countries they aren't naturally found in?

We all know one of the biggest reasons the Europeans were able to rapidly conquer the Americas was because more than 90% of the people were eradicated with European diseases that the natives weren't exposed to, therefore weren't immune to. Is there any evidence of major outbreaks caused by Leif Erikson's expedition, and if so, why didn't it spread throughout the continent?

Recently I read the "Flotsam" (original title: Liebe Deinen Naechsten) by Erich Maria Remarque. The plot follows, in short, the story of several political refugees from Nazi Germany trying to set their foot and survive in the neighboring countries. It is set in 1936-1937 and based on the experiences of the author, who himself was forced to leave Germany in 1938. The characters and the plot are also inspired by many stories he heard from other emigrants at that time.

In the book there are two instances of characters who were in a concentration camp. One of them escaped, another was released. The released one is clearly traumatized, he screams in his sleep. The names of the camps are not mentioned. In addition, in several conversations the concentration camps are mentioned, and they are a symbol of the inhumane times that the characters have to live in.

My question is: did the concentration camps exist in the 1930s, several years before the WWII? Were they already "death camps" at that point or just some sort of primitive rehabilitation institutions? If they already were places of torture (as the trauma of that one character suggests), why would anyone be released? And how is it that the concentration camps were already at that point common knowledge and people knew what was happening inside of there? The characters move across Czechoslovakia, Austria, Switzerland and France and stumble across many people, which implies that the truth about the concentration camps would be already "delivered" to several strong political players in the pre-war Europe. This last thing seems odd to me.

Thanks in advance for taking your time to reply.

P.S. For anyone that googled the title of the book and saw the mention that the book is based in 1939: I think this is a mistake of the distributor. In the version of the book that I have the cover description does not say this. And in the epilogue it says that it is based in 1936-37. At some point of the book there is winter, so if it was 1939 there would be a reference to the start of the WWII. Yet there is no mention of war in the entire book - the only instances where the word "war" is used is during philosophical conversations. There are also no dates stated in the book, except the months, seasons, and the obvious historical placement (objects, politics, names, countries, etc.).

I am an amateur in religion and know only a few things about many religions. My question was, since these are such important religious texts which were sent by 'God's and the preachers - Abraham, Moses, Jesus, Muhammad, Vyasa, Valmiki, etc - were such important people, there should be direct manuscripts from them, isn't it? Like direct documents written by Abraham, Jesus, Muhammad, Valmiki, etc, right? You know, preserved manuscripts of Koran, Bible, Mahabharata, written directly by Muhammad, Abraham/Moses/Jesus, Vyasa, etc.

My question is simple: where are they, if Historians have ever found them? If they haven't been found, how can Historians say for certain these guys existed at all?

This question came into my mind because whenever I have read any snippets from religious texts, it is always in third person in third person. Like someone is narrating about someone narrating someone. Why?