Football (soccer) developed into its modern form in the 19th century. At that point, countless European immigrants had - of course - already settled in Northern America. Still, when football had arguably already become the most popular sport in Europe (late 19th and early to mid 20th century), hordes of Europeans - including many Italian, Irish, German and certainly after WOII Dutch people - moved to the United States of America and Canada in order to start a new life. Yet, football (soccer) has arguably only gained significant popularity in both USA and Canada over the last few decades. Why is that?

Many, many thanks in advance!

I just joined and have lots of questions. I would like to know if there is any information on how Julius Caesar assembled a fleet to invade England. Did he have a new fleet built on the English Channel OR did he have Roman ships brought around from the Mediterranean to the English Channel for the invasion. Likewise how did Claudius accomplish his invasion a century or so later. ?? Does anyone have any info on this.

Another question is how did the Romans manage to move those obelisks from Egypt to Rome...solid stone weighing hundreds of tons?

Any experts on the tribes that lived in Pennsylvania that know of any natural landmark places native Americans considered holy?

Why the allies declared war only on Germany, while Germany and Urss invaded poland together?

And while we are at it, do we have the recipe?

I'm a political thought postgraduate, and one of the thing my department specialises in is conceptual histories and histories of ideas. My university also has a good history department. However, the two very rarely, if at all, interact and collaborate.

Simply put, I was wondering if there's any literature on the difference between these two 'disciplines' or however you may so call them, or what the main differences people would think distinguish these two fields.

In particular, I've got some time recently to write on my dissertation about Political Theory on Europe, and was wondering if there's any obvious differences between a 'history of Europe' and a 'history of ideas of Europe' that spring to mind.

The source is from the war diary of the otherwise unremarkable 541 Searchlight Battery of the Royal Artillery, the commanding officer of whom had a certain knack for writing reports. The full passage was:

Heaven help any jerries who land anywhere near our Searchlight Sites. The Glasgow Scotties are tough. It has been suggested that Hitler dopes his Troops when they go into battle. A much better effect could be achieved in this Battery by dosing them with two pints of the wine of the County. It is aptly described by the Gunners as ‘Jungle Juice’.

While I was vaguely aware that the Germans drugged their soldiers, I believe with amphetamines, I was surprised that it seemed to be relatively common knowledge by this stage of the war. How and when was it discovered, and how did the news spread?

A common notion by many people is that the Mongol invasion of Europe was primarily stopped by the death of Ogedei Khan as Mongol tradition requires princes to be present for the election of a new Khan. How historically accurate is this? And what could have caused the Mongol withdrawal aside from the Khan's death?

...And have there been any attempts to locate where these exist if they exist?

It seems there are big gaps in written records before 1000 AD. The church seems to be responsible for most written records and with many of the prophets living for hundreds of years how sure are we that they kept a accurate accounting of time. If they had a reason would it have been possible to change the year without a largely illiterate population even knowing.

Does anyone have any British translated archives or collections relating to Meiji Japan, any responses would be greatly appreciated as i am filling out a dissertation proposal on the changing role and image of the Samurai in Meiji Japan.

Scotland's civil law system is based on Roman law, whereas England's is based on common law. With the Union in 1707, why did Scotland choose to keep its own separate legal system??

In a few battles, especially in Muslims accounts, it is said that some battles last for 3 days or 4. Some examples are Siffin, Yermuk, and Qadissiyah. I have read researchers say that at max a man in armor can fight in melee for 40 minutes or so. And battle accounts in ancient times were quick affairs were the opposing army routes and is then massacred. So does this casts doubt into the accounts themselves or was it common when the opposing army does not route?

I couldn’t find any information online. I know the question is a bit broad and doesn’t specify a time period but I’m curious as to when people started having sex in various ancient societies, which presumably ended in a pregnancy?

Now modern wisdom suggests that the ideal age for pregnancy is early twenties but presumably people didn’t wait that long and also people had no access to contraceptives.

Another thing I’m interested in is the fact that humans wait the longest between reaching sexual maturity and becoming sexually active. Presumably again in ancient times people started having sex as soon as they reached sexual maturity, like every other species on the planet. Given that pregnancy before the age of 15 is considered risky, does this mean that a female would usually suffer from stillbirths, miscarriages and other problems before a successful pregnancy?

I appreciate any responses

The organization was dominated by Moscow and the Kremlin, but contained much of Eastern Europe. Did Poles, Ukrainians, Latvians and the like consider themselves to be conquered by Russians, or just one part of a broader and equal whole? I'm more specifically asking about Eastern Europe rather than Central Asia.