Edit: For clarity, I do not think any such contribution would have been worth it. And I have absolutely no doubt any such contribution was done first and foremost to cause pain, not to extract benefit.

Most of the Iberian peninsula merged together via unions of the crowns (royal marriage such that one person becomes monarch of several different kingdoms), eventually becoming modern Spain. Is there a particular reason that Portugal never joined?

It seems that in other areas (like the British isles) the union of crowns process tends to group kingdoms up to natural geographic barriers, or else to result in countries of comparable size. Portugal on a map just screams "natural part of Spain", so I'm wondering if this is just how the cookie crumbled, or a union almost happened, or maybe I'm missing something. Thanks!

The Winter War on here is a common topic. However this question is not about the war itself, rather what were the postwar ramifications for Finland as a result of their participation on the side of the Axis?

They had to know the Vichy Government were puppets of Nazi Germany. How could they go from a mindset of trying to resist (Scuttling of the Navy at Toulon) to so openly opposing the Allies during the early part of the war. Opposing the landings in Morocco during Operation Torch comes to mind. I've seen arguments like the "honor of the French Navy" was at stake. But shouldn't they be more opposed to being puppets of the enemy who invaded their country? Were some of the admirals just really power hungry?

I can't wrap my hide why so many of them just willingly went along with Vichy France in the face of defeat at the hands of the Germans. What caused this?

It seems much more time and energy effective to eat grains by making them into porridge. It takes a tremendous amount of work to grind a whole grain to flour. Why did the early farmers bother with all this work?

I've heard this claim countless times, but have been unable to confirm or deny it (not that I've tried too hard).

The infantry was aiming for the horses of the attacking cavalry, but in the heat of the battle, was it a common occurrence that a neighbouring infantry square was hit?

Hi all, I have been doing some research and I was hoping to find some insight. I am a casual reader who loves history, and I was hoping to get an opinion. Which would you recommend: The Wars of the Roses by Dan Jones or the Wars of the Roses by Alison Weir? Both have been held in relatively high regard elsewhere on the internet, but I was hoping to find a definitive answer. Thanks in advance!

I was wondering if during the age of colonization, primarily from Europe to the Americas, there was ever a group from one country setting out to colonize a stretch of land, only to run into a fledgling colony by one of their rival European powers?

I only know that it exists also in arabic, but i found little sources about the hebrew version that didn't give me enough information. i don't even know it's name. help please?

I'm watching the BBC documentary about Napoleon and they mention Britain was the most against France's democracy, but from my understanding Britain was a constitutional monarchy unlike their allies. So why did Britain hate French democracy?

[deleted]

How did the Klan react to Hilter and him advocating the creation of a white ethnostate? How did they view the second world war? Were they anti-Germany for their connection to the U.S./ U.S. identity and them viewing German rule as totalitarian/anti-indivual freedom, or were they in support of Nazi Germany and their enthnocentric views?

[deleted]

I'm reading "The Military Institutions of the Romans" by Flavius Renatus, and he states that "though after the example of the Goths, the Alans and the Huns, we have made some improvements in the arms of the cavalry".

I know who the Huns and the Alans are, but searching for more information about the goths was fruitless, and just led me to heavy metal songs. Can anyone explain to me who and what they were? Thank you for your help.