Between the Allies and the Axis, which country had the better system for repelling enemy bombers? Did the need to fight off vastly larger Allied raids mean that the Germans developed better air defence than, say, Britain had during the Blitz?

I'm not asking anyone to put forward any arguments for slavery, I think the moral arguments against it are obvious enough.

Nonetheless my question more or less has 2 parts:

A) What was greatest % of the human population that was enslaved at any one point in history? and B) Did societies that had more slaves have an economic advantage over those that had less? If there was a strong advantage, then surely every nation would seek to acquire as many as possible in an endless quest to gain an competitive edge over their neighbors.

Thank you for your help :)

I had a professor say MacArthur worked with and at UC Berkeley students and professors. But i can't find any information that supports such a claim.

I recently found out that Ante Trumbic is a distant relative and haven't been able to find much on him besides his wikipedia page. I understand he played a major role in the creation of Yugoslavia and is a signer of the Treaty of Versailles. If anyone could scrape up anything preferably in english that would be amazing. I also have a bunch of pictures of my family on austro-hungarian luxury ships leaving Split that Ill try to find.

Compare:

"If one is to boast of flesh and blood the Jews are actually nearer to Christ than we are...If we really want to help them, we must be guided in our dealings with them not by papal law but by the law of Christian love. We must receive them cordially, and permit them to trade and work with us, that they may have occasion and opportunity to associate with us, hear our Christian teaching, and witness our Christian life. If some of them should prove stiff-necked, what of it? After all, we ourselves are not all good Christians either."

• That Jesus Christ was Born a Jew, Martin Luther, 1523.

"There is no other explanation for this than the one cited earlier from Moses - namely, that God has struck [the Jews] with 'madness and blindness and confusion of mind' [Deuteronomy 28:28]. So we are even at fault in not avenging all this innocent blood of our Lord and of the Christians which they shed for three hundred years after the destruction of Jerusalem, and the blood of the children they have shed since then (which still shines forth from their eyes and their skin). We are at fault in not slaying them."

• On the Jews and their Lies, Martin Luther, 1543.

Luther had already split from the Catholic Church by 1523. So what exactly happened from 1523-1543 that led to such a drastic reversal in Martin Luther's thinking?

[deleted]

I just read that the average wine consumption for medieval person was 3L/day as it was used massively as a drinking, cooking, healing ingredient and also that the water was too "polluted" to drink. How polluted? (Might be biased cause I'm French and study was about medieval times in France )

[deleted]

How was it decided with where you would serve. Would you have any choice? Did it differ for draftees and volunteers?

[deleted]

I realize about the colossal task this is for you (an nevermind me once I get to actually reading them) but I need to know.

EDIT: In fact, let's put the date to 1993, my year of birth (and I was born at the very end so yeah what bibliography is good up to my birthday xD)

Forgive me if this has been asked; I tried a few different searches but couldn’t find anything.

I’m wondering how identity was ascertained in old times if heraldry or similar was unavailable. How did people know of someone’s signature was authentic? Were people better at recognizing facial features?

I’m sorry if this question is too vague to be meaningful, I’m having a little difficulty putting into words what I want to ask.

Basically how did people recognize people they hadn’t met or know if a letter was genuine?

Games of this nature are lauded for their educational value, and their capacity to inspire interest in history among the general public is I think undeniable. However, these games also have a tendency to create or reinforce certain modes of thinking about history. What do you consider to have been the net impact of these games on the public's level of knowledge? When discussing history, is there a noticeable difference between the players of these games and people of other backgrounds in terms of how they approach historical questions?

Cities like Rome, Athens, Pergamon and Antioch were all built just off the coast with their own port city counterparts (Ostia/Portus, Piraeus, Elaea and Seleucia Pieria respectively). Why? Why didn't their port cities overshadow them once they became established centers of trade?

So I understand that the classical powerhouses around Europe were all Mediterranean powers, and that their collapse in Western Europe and reduction in Eastern Europe and the Near East ushered in periods of chaos and uncertainty leading to economic decline. Why is it though, that it was continental nations which both rebounded first (e.g. Merovingian, Carolingian dynasties, "Holy Roman Empire", and which have remained dominating Europe ever since? Even when naval might became a source of great power, it was primarily Atlantic nations able to wield that effectively. I understand that Italy wasn't unified until the 19th century, but I don't understand why its previous strengths never helped it recover. I also understand that Greece was under the yolk of Ottoman rule until World War I. What I don't understand is why after World War II the empires of the past were all disintegrated that Italy and Greece have never found any way to bounce back. And lastly, of the former great Atlantic powers, why only Britain remains economically powerful, leaving only Britain and the large continental nations of Germany and France in a strong economic position.

I know I just asked a lot of questions covering a 1500 year span, but I'm trying to understand the cascades of cause and effect which began in the end of the Classical era leading into the Modern. If you can help me understand any small piece of what I just asked I would appreciate it a lot.

I've copied and pasted the post below. And figured out it was probably Prince Gabriel myself. I may be wrong, but the birth dates match up.

"The Trans Woman Who Killed Rasputin:

Today in Transgender Historical Recovery, let's talk about Princess Yusupova, the trans woman who killed Rasputin. I won't dead name her in this piece, but I'm sure you'll be able to find her name if you look, and verify the facts I am about to relate.

Princess Yusupova was born in 1887, and made clear in her memoirs that her mother raised her from the age of five in pink dresses. I actually think this is a twist on a child's insistence, and I think the evidence comes for that from a couple of places.

In the first place, Princess Yuspova, starting at age 12, would frequently wear gowns, furs, and jewels, to attend balls and parties in St. Petersburg. This first outing was met with stern punishment and disapproval from her father, but it did nothing to dissuade her from wearing women's clothing. According to her own memoirs, she even attracted the attention and amorous advances of Great Britain's Edward VII while abroad.

And she wasn't merely cross-dressing, or gender non-conforming. She made plain her desire to transition, medically, in the following section in her memoirs:

"I was ashamed of my skinniness, and longed to find a means of fattening out. Then, one day, I happened to see an advertisement which gave me high hopes. It extolled the merits of Pilules Orientales, a French patent medicine warranted to turn the flattest breasted lady into a harem beauty of opulent charms. I managed to get hold of a box of these pills and took them on the sly, but, alas, without result. The doctor who attended me saw them in my bedroom and asked what they were for. When I told him of my disappointment he was much amused, but advised me to discontinue the treatment."

The subtext in this is so clear it's almost painful. Here she is, taking medication to grant her a bust, which fails, as hormone therapy was still a thing of the future. But the desire was so strong she wrote it in her memoirs after a life spent forced to live as a man.

The evidence seems to indicate she stopped going out in women's clothing after one last scandal in 1908, at the age of 21, but this accords too with the expected post-pubertal changes which would have made passing difficult. She would kill Rasputin 8 years later in 1916, and would then live a long life, married to a woman, fathering children, like most pre-modern trans women.

It's interesting to see that no-one has ever mentioned Princess Yusupova's obvious trans womanhood in print before, despite herself having left all the clues in her memoir, and in her letters, and in the letters written to and about her. This is the difficulty that I and other trans women have with cis people who are content to try to erase the transness inherent in the persistent behavior of living a double-life as a woman for a decade, and in trying to take pills to grow breasts. But, I'm sure like the Vicountess Cornbury, there will be plenty of cis people to line up and say that this sort of thing doesn't make you trans."

I was reading some old books and I kept coming across how the British discovering the source of the nile was a big deal, and how there had been failed expeditions before. How were there? Don't you just follow the largest fork upstream?

When preparing for the extraction of my wisdom teeth, I learned that a high percentage of wisdom teeth grow in horrendous angles that interfere with the other molars. Back in early forms of dentistry, or even before then, how did people react to problems involving wisdom teeth?

Rollo, a Viking leader, was granted Normandy in the 9th to buy off Viking raiders. Was this the only case of a king granting Viking raiders land, or was this a common practice?

It's known the USSR was caught off guard with Germany's 1941 invasion. However throughout 1940 when Germany was rolling through almost all of of Western Europe and with Hitlers past statements on Lebensraum.

How could they have not realized he'd be turning east at some point?