The sling was an important weapon for skirmishers and had a lot of impact on the battlefields of antiquity, did this change in later medieval eras? Why? Did bows or crossbows replace them? Art seems to imply that darts and javelins were still used.

In Greece, it seemed that Ares was considered a god of senseless violence that represented the savage side of war. However the Romans in contrast viewed Mars as a major god who was dignified and represented wars fought for the purpose of peace. Is there a reason for this stark difference?

I’ve played a few games where the Uesugi clan supposedly had sohei (warrior monks) and I am really curious as to whether or not the clan actually had them.

I find it fascinating that the Frankish Kingdom, East Francia or HRE didn’t just take over Denmark. I understand Norway and Sweden being further away and requiring a navy, but Denmark is connected to the Frankish Kingdom and later east Francia and the HRE by land

What was the northern Andean mountain range region like before the arrival of the Spanish? I've heard that Chibcha speaking peoples came from Mesoamérica, is that true, and what does the latest archaeology say about that, and what were the motivation for the move? What was the timeline of the Muisca Confederation and what did other groups in the region's reaction to the Confederation?

I get why/how super-Saharan Africa is mostly Muslim, as well as the Middle East, but how did Indonesia end up Muslim?

I've never really understood this, Since all trenches had connections that eventually lead back to the line, wouldn't the capture of one section of trench potentially cause a breach of the entire line? Or was there a backup trench too?

Looking for clear-eyed book(s) covering these two periods. Would prefer author to not be biased by their own religiosity to avoid any skewed interpretation of the facts. I have had reconmendations but they were dotted with biblical references.

In learning about the Cold War, I've always wondered how the Soviet Union decided between making certain conquered counties puppets, and make others part of the Soviet Union itself. After WW2, why did the USSR annex and incorporate the Baltic countries, but not Poland or Romania for example? Why did it incorporate the Central Asian republics instead of leaving them as puppet regimes?

As I understand it, a woman and her children are considered the lawful possessions of her husband. I'm assuming here that women can inherit wealth. If so, then why would women with wealth of their own marry, since in that case she legally gives up her wealth to her husband, and in the process become property herself? And did men have to pay the equivalent of child support or alimony?

Lastly, what were the consequences of divorce for men, both socially and financially? I mean, I get the feeling that the divorce rate in the Victorian era was real low. So what prevented men from leaving unhappy marriages for...something else?

Many people in the United States are lamenting how early the presidential primary season has started over the last couple of cycles. This got me wondering - historically how early did primary seasons start?

In what way were captured soldiers treated during the crusades. Was it common for prisoners to be ransomed and if so, what sort of prisoners and under what sort of circumstances? I've heard that both Saladin and Richard the Lionheart massacred prisoners. Was this a common occurrence or were these mass killings exceptional?

I had an interesting conversation recently with a man who claimed that the Templars were granted permission from the Pope to vivisect captured Saracens in order to further their understanding of the human anatomy. I'd never previously heard of this and can't find any reference to it. Is there any truth to this?

Did the treatment of prisoners vary as time went on? Did it change from crusade to crusade? Did it get better or worse?

Any information would be much appreciated.

I know Nanking was the result of a poorly controlled army that was fed anti-Chinese propaganda for a long time but this seems to be the only warcrime spoken about when it comes to Hirohito.

He officially swore of the geneva conventions and actively tried boost morale among his pillaging troops during the Sino-Japanese war. He authorised the use of toxic gas 375 times during the battle of wuhan from August to October 1938 and his orders encouraged japanese soldiers to genocide Chinese villages when they had even the slightest suspicion of communist action.

Everytime a thread arises on this board it seems to focus on the problems in discipline among Japanese soldiers and the fact that hirohito was just a figurehead. This seems like a problematic viewpoint because of the orders and statements the emperor officially put out. If German soldiers were hanged for folowing orders, shouldn't he be punished too? He did far more damage even if he was just following orders, which already is a debated claim.

I feel like we should be open about the fact that the Japanese emperor recieved amnesty because of american strategic interests and not because of his innocence. Am i wrong about this?

About 60 years ago I read a wonderful introductory book on Egyptology. Written in English, probably by Englishman. It was a paperback. Writer was well known but I don't see him name in books for sale. Any suggestions?

[deleted]