Especially considering the very different beliefs of the four rulers, did other parts of society seesaw back and forth?

How Bohemia was not Germanized to the point of being a majority and irreversible Germanic nation by the early XX century?

​

Bohemia was governed by germanics and has all its western border, north and south surrounded by germanic lands. I know that by 1910 something around 30% of the population was Germanic/German-speaking, but I wonder how that percentage was not even higher in a land that germanic people had complete control for at least 800 years and was in the heart of Holy Empire and then Austrian land.

The Americans did during the American Revolution but why wasn't there a Canadian Revolution?

Reading though the day's articles and such on the 75th anniversary of this engagement. The German plan of reaching Antwerp, relying on pillaged supplies and if by some miracle they could even pull that off being able to hold the encirclement of the Allied northern forces seems very far fetched if not downright impossible.

Was Hitlers power even in late 1944 still so absolute nobody could tell him what an awful idea this was, even to the point of disobeying?

From what I’ve read the Taipings prioritized the Han ethnic group, so did they have any interest in retaining places like Tibet, Mongolia and Xinjiang? Dungzaria, Inner Mongolia and Qinghai and were not provinces but had large Han populations.

The Qing also ceded a fair amount of territory to Russia did the Taipings consider that their territory? And how about the tributary states like Burma, Vietnam and Korea?

I've always loved the idea of the British Empire being a melting pot of cultures and people. It would have been nice to have had a situation where there was free movement of people between all nations under the British Empire. Why didn't Britain take a similar approach to France in this respect?

EDIT: Someone commented that "We did. It's called the Commonwealth". The Commonwealth of Nations is not what I mean though. French Guiana is an integrated part of the European Union. It's literally part of France in all respects but geographical location. Why didn't New Zealand, Australia, India, Kenya, South Africa, etc. end up with a similar arrangement and be fully integrated parts of the UK?

Specifically I think about how the Russian Empire at the time of the October Revolution wasnt as industrialized as the rest of europe. Or how China wasnt really industrialized at all with more examples in places like Vietnam and Korea. I Hesitate in including Eastern Bloc nations like Poland and Romania as they were sort of "coerced" into being communist states by the USSR.

I'm interested in how enough of them ended up there to e.g. have an Armenian kingdom North of the Crusader states.

I've often come upon Armenian quarters in random Balkan cities and Armenian traders seemed to have gone everywhere.

Major General Smedley Butler went to Congress in the early 1930s to warn of a plan to overthrow FDR and institute a fascist dictatorship. What do historians think about how real this plot was? Was there a real threat the US government would be overthrown?

And if so how did they rationalize the different gods to themselves? Did they assume the other was wrong and that they were in fact the ones with the real gods? Or did they have some sort of concept that their gods were in some sense the same but they had different ways of recognizing them?

Hi all, I’ve been looking for a book on all aspects of Mesopotamia, from the first civilisation until the fall of Babylon. Does anyone have any recommendations?

thanks

I’m asking with North America in mind but I’m also interested in Central and South America.

I’ve read about the regional routes Native Americans made for trading and travel, but how did they travel? Was there something comparable to a wagon that people built? Were there specific animals that they rode?

How was the first Islamic caliphate so successful? They were dealing with a very big empire comparatively I.e sassanids.

I find Jewish history fascinating but I am admittedly not very well read on the subject. I’ve come across this claim multiple times but I am sceptical,

Kurds can be Sunni, Shia or Alevi Muslims. They can be Christians, Jewish, Zoroastrians, Yazidi, Yarsanist, Agnostic or Atheist. In political opinion they can be considered the most radical in the Middle East. Compared to neighboring groups such as Armenians, Assyrians and Arabs, they seem a veritable cornucopia of dissent. Are the Kurds really so diverse or is it a case of “Kurd” not being a useful way to talk about these different groups?

Their armor also seems to have changed from plate armor to mail. Was it because it was cheaper to make mail armor and spears as Rome experienced a weakening economy? The former seems like the superior equipment to me.

As always, thanks for your answers!

Hello historians!

My girlfriend and I are going on a roadtrip on the east coast of USA. We are probably going to visit NYC, Philadelphia, Washington DC, Charleston, Savannah, Atlanta, and some smaller places in between. I'm really interested in anything World War 2 related and have visited lots of interesting sites in Europe (We're from the Netherlands).

I was wondering if there are interesting places to visit to learn more about the US in World War 2. We are probably visiting the Arlington cemetery but other than that we have no clue on interesting sites.

I hope someone is able to help us with some valuable info, anything is appreciated!

Thanks in advance,

Ruud

The descendants of Menelaus inslaving the descendants of Agamemnon, within 400-500 years of the Trojan war, is a rather depressing thought.

I've read that his two invasions of Korea in 1592 and 1598 were initially to conquer the Joseon Dynasty then proceed to China, but how could he imagine success against the comparatively larger and wealthier Ming Dynasty? Was he unaware of the size and power of his Chinese adversary, or was China weak enough that such a move was deemed plausible by the Japanese?

Why is it that the Czech Republic is among the nations with the highest percentage of atheists, while Poland is one of Europe's most Catholic countries? Both countries share similar languages and cultures and both suffered a great deal under fascism and communism.

Nevertheless, the Czech Republic has about 10,3% Catholics instead of 76,4% in 1950 (wikipedia) and Poland has 89,8% Catholics nowadays.

I do get that religion was not tolerated and even prosecuted during the half century of communist rule, but why did this whipe out Catholicism in the Czech Republic and not in Poland?