When France of liberated how did the reintegration of the German puppet work in reality were there a large group of the population of the south that was pro Germany and has the spilt had any political effects today when you compare South and North France

Or was it just a privilege?

One reads of lords frittering away their inheritance on gambling or bad investments, but are there examples of the nobility who completely ignored their parliamentary duties and focused on other things, like travel or exploration? (Many google searches have not found an example)

If they did so, would they have been censured by the queen or government in any way?

I find medvial Republics every interesting but I couldn't find a book on this topic

I’m studying a bachelor in Science of Religion. We have to take on a foreign language (I got a permission to select Brazilian Portuguese language classes which I did abroad) and then translate and analyse a religious text that was originally written in that language.

I am having trouble finding such. The Bible is a translation so that I can’t use; candomblé and umbanda are traditionally not scripture-based; nor are the indigenous religions.

I’m mostly interested in the meeting between indigenous cultures and the Catholic Church, but any suggestions would do. Could be any first meeting where they mention a saint or describe the Catholic or heathen religions, rituals, religious people, etc. Could be a later, important religious speech. Stuff like the vatican's speech about liberation theology is also a translation, so that doesn't work either.

My own professors are not in fields related to Brazil or Portuguese so I can't ask them for help, and I am the only one who got the permission to take Portuguese so I can't ask my study buddies for help either.

There is a theory the "genetic bottleneck theory", that between 50,000 and 100,000 years ago, human populations sharply decreased to 3,000–10,000 surviving individuals. I wonder if there are any written texts or tablets in Summeria that might account for these times?

On movies and games, we always see medieval armies on decades-long sieges. Is that historicaly viable? Couldn't medieval armies just surround the fortresses and ocuppy all the country? Thanks for the answers in advance.

Or maybe those stories do exist but I've just never heard about them

This question partly stems from just recently discovering that a great deal of the books I grew up with come from the fifties. Catcher in the Rye for instance was written in 1951, and the first book of Lord of the Rings came out in 1957.

I’m curious what high school English classes were assigning to read, say, in the 1940s, before those books came out.

Recently, I listened to a podcast which featured Robert Kiyosaki as a guest. He's an American author/businessman of Japanese ancestry and he mentioned that five of his family members fought during World War II.

Three of them, he claims, fought with the 442nd Infantry Regiment in Europe. This seemed plausible to me, as I already knew this unit from the PBS miniseries The War and it was comprised mostly of Japanese Americans.

However, he then goes on to mention that the two other family members fought the Japanese and were even captured by the Japanese. This seemed odd to me, as I seem to recall that the 442nd Infantry Regiment was specifically deployed to Europe rather than the Pacific due to it being comprised of Japanese Americans.

My question: Is there any record of Japanese Americans 1) fighting the Japanese 2) being captured by the Japanese during World War II ? And if so, what typically happened to these POWs following their capture?

I know there’s debate about how Milan managed this, but it’s generally accepted that for whatever reason, Milan’s death rate during the plague was, though shocking (12-15%, I think?), quite small compared to other northern Italian cities that lost 30-50% of their populations in a few years.

What were the long term effects of this? Were they suddenly in a position to dominate Lombardy and pressure powerful, more distant neighbours like Venice, Florence, and Savoy? Did it just confirm their own hegemony, and still leave them weakened since their vassals and hinterland were still hard hit? Did Milan become more culturally or economically dominant? Did it help to cement Visconti rule?

Monotheistic religions are by definition the belief that there is only one deity to worship, and thus that other gods don´t exist. That normally is associated with the prioritization of one religion over others, like in the Roman Empire when Christianity was declared the state religion in 380 until 1453. Even in the Caliphates, you still needed to pay taxes and didn´t have equal rights to a Muslim if you were a person of the book, let alone other faiths (in most instances, Shahanshah Akbar had major rights given to Hindus).

Iran used to follow Zoroastrianism, a contender for the first monotheistic religion in the world aside from perhaps Atenism in Egypt. Why were the Zoroastrians so laid back comparatively when it came to converting other people and tolerating other religions, even sending the Jews back to Israel and building them a temple? My best guess is that Zoroastrianism doesn´t see the afterlife as eternal punishment for non believers, and even sinners are reconciled with Ahura Mazda after only a year.

Was there ever a point in US- USSR relations where I could have sent and received mail? What challenges would I face? If it wasn't possible, how soon after the collapse of the Soviet Union could I have sent or received something?

Ive been trying to find resources to understand but seem to be unable to find any.

Also while were here what was the job of a Tudor viscount.

Are the jobs the same as they are today?

Thank you.

According to different sources it was either invented in the 17th or 18th century. Apparently, before that they used sharp axe-like stone blades (is this even true?). Now I really wonder why no one used straight razors before, it's essentialy just a very sharp metal knife after all, a simple thing, but seems to make shaving so much easier.

Today we can refuse to buy coffee and cocoa produced under harsh labor conditions. Was it possible for the abolitionists?

For example, did any abolitionist refuse to produce slave ships, not buy sugar/cotton produced in a slave plantation, deny donation from slave owner, or refuse service from a pro-slavery church?

And, did any abolitionist church went as far as denying all religious service to slave owners?

In ASL class we learned about Gallaudet university which is , for all I know at the moment , the only University for the Deaf community .

How did Gallaudet come to be ? Was there such a push for the Deaf community to have a school predominantly for the Deaf Community . And how did the hearing populace assist the creation of Gallaudet ? Was there a large desire from the hearing populace at large to have a school for the Deaf ?

In 1415, the king of Portugal got a bunch of soldiers and took the Morrocan city of Ceuta. Wikipdia says that they had 48,000 troops.

​

AFAIK, portgual was not exceptionally wealthy and had a relatively small population. Yet it managed to get together 200 ships and nearly 50k guys. That is more than English and French (+allies) armies at Agincourt *combined*, which was fought the exact same year. Even if we assume enormous exaggeration, this number seems hard to fathom if it was exaggerated by a third, a half, or even 3/4's.

Charle's VIII's army with which he invaded italy with was roughly half this size, and it seems like most of the forces in the Italian wars, over a century-century and a half later were 15-30k, fielded by much larger countries.

I've seen this ~48,000 number before, so I don't think this is just wikipedia, but even portugal itself in the 1437 battle of Tangiers fielded 6-8k (roughly in line with the army of Henry V or Charles the Bold) so where on earth did those other 40,000 guys come from and why'd they never show up again?