I haven’t heard much talk about this and I was wondering what the logistics and deployment cycles were like for soldiers on both sides? I know for example there was a draft in both America and the UK, but how long were they deployed for? If and when did they get to come home? I don’t hear a lot about soldiers coming home during actual wartime, but I can’t imagine they were deployed for the duration of the entire conflict? Thanks!

From what I've read, the Golden Stool (Sika ɗwa, according to Wikipedia) of the Ashanti was an important part of the Asantehene's claim to power. I'm interested in why the Golden Stool was so important and how it actually functioned within the politics and society of the Ashanti. A throne made of gold certainly functions as an incredible display of wealth. However, things I've read suggest a spiritual connection to the Golden Stool, but descriptions of this are unfortunately vague. Additionally, there seems to be an emphasis on keeping the Golden Stool secret and secluded. How did the many roles of the Golden Stool, as well as it's seclusion, affect its use as a symbol of royal power? What do we know of the Golden Stool and it's function within court life or greater Ashanti society?

I know this question was asked a couple of years ago, but I’m asking again to hopefully get a more thorough answer.

I just finished a biography of Captain Cook. During his multi-year voyages, much of his crew, including Cook himself, could not swim. I know that in those times maybe people weren’t “professional” sailors and may have just picked up work on a boat, but in the case of these big naval expeditions the crew was carefully selected of experienced men. You’d think if you were making a career in the Navy you might think about learning some basic strokes. These guys were going to be out for years on a boat, and yet couldn’t swim!

This is just speculation, but I do wonder that if had Cook been able to swim, he may have avoided his death in Hawaii. He was stuck on shore as he situation escalated with the men in the pinnace too afraid to swing back in and retrieve him. Had he been able to swim, he could have made a last ditch effort to get off the beach and back to the pinnace.

I know in the open seas swimming doesn’t do sailors much good, but they would spend a considerable amount of time in protected harbors. Being able to swim seems like it should just come with the territory. What gives?

I simply do not understand how medieval politics worked because I do not understand a) who had power over whom or b) how individuals justified their behavior towards one another.

Prior to the Protestant Reformation Europe was Catholic. And it seems like the Pope has power. The Pope controlled something called the Papal States (although I have no idea what this is), three Archbishops were electors of the Holy Roman Emperor, and the Pope was able to nullify oaths sworn to the Holy Roman Emperor during the Canossa affair which itself resulted in a rebellion against the Emperor. So clearly there was power there.

Yet wars between Catholic monarchs (or claimants) happened. Did the Church support one side or the other? What happened if the wrong side won as it were? Or when the Pope was specifically on one side (e.g. during the Italian Wars)?

For that matter, how much power did Kings, Dukes, Emperors, etc. have over their noble subjects? The Holy Roman Empire had a fair number of wars where its member states were participants on opposing sides. The King of England used to rule parts of France (Brittany, I believe). How did people know what their rights and obligations to different groups were?

And how were even further foreign relations conducted? How could another state do diplomacy with the Holy Roman Empire (or any composite monarchy) and how were Christian states able to do diplomacy with non-Christian states?

It seems to me that the modern view of politics is much simpler. The actors are states, states possess certain rights over their citizens/subjects and territories, which they describe in some way or another, and they join different international institutions which have limited ability to enforce their rulings.

But I do not see the logic in medieval politics. I am not sure who the actor is (the individual royal, the various realms ruled in personal union, the different estates within each realm, more transnational entities such as the Catholic Church, etc.) and I am not sure how they know what obligations they have and what powers they have.

To be clear, I assume that there is an internal logic to this. And I assume that it is one that changes over time. So I am asking what that logic is.

Apparently Socrates referenced the existence of a signed language:

If we hadn't a voice or a tongue, and wanted to express things to one another, wouldn't we try to make signs by moving our hands, head, and the rest of our body, just as dumb people do at present?

But I'm more interested in the first attempts to describe an SL in any detail. The first attempt at a dictionary. (I'm not expecting a grammar prior to Stokoe, but if one does exist I'd be fascinated.)

It seems like most aircraft in WW2 were painted various colors, but the P-51 always stood out in its silver color. Is there any reason for this? My dad told me they were not painted so they would be faster to produce, just curious to know if this is the case or not.

Next up: Impersonation and Disguise

I was recently reading a little about Jamestown, and its history as England's first colony in the Americas. Wikipedia states that 80% of its population died within the first 3 years - with it taking many more years for infrastructure to be established and population resettled.

What I was wondering was, what was the point of it all? What was so valuable to England that they pushed on with the settlement even after an 80% mortality rate? Was it resources? Was it land? It's seems an awful lot of effort, wealth, and lives to be throwing away - especially considering that it wasn't the first failed attempt - with the lost colony of Roanoke preceeding it.

Now that I'm asking it, I suppose the question is also valid as to why North America was colonised in the first place? The most valuable resources lay in the Caribbean Islands and in the Amazon Rainforests. There must be something I'm not aware of, because it seems like Britain's rewards in the region did not make up for the resources they spent to get the colony going.

There must have been some good long-term planning involved. :\

Thanks for the answers. :D

From what I've read, everything about pirates was a very unenjoyable experience. Both being a pirate and interacting with pirates seemed kinda scary. Where did pop culture take a turn and make being a pirate be so enticing to children?

After watching (most of) the film United Red Army, I learned that there were a handful of university strikes in Japan, including a couple violent ones that resulted in violent takeovers of universities by students, similar the the Columbia University takeover in the United States. Can anyone explain the background of these events, and shed more light on what happened?

Vote for what you liked. Submit something you liked and don't see here!

I imagine most weapons, explosives and ammunition was recovered, but what about uniforms, carrying equipment, helmets?

What forms of alcohol were invented in medieval times?

How expensive (comparatively) we're they?

How easy to come by were they depending on one's class?

How popular were they depending on one's class?

To my limited knowledge of Catholicism, the Pope has been apart of the Roman Empire, Western Roman Empire, (the Aryan Christian "Ostrogoths" maybe?), Justinian's brief newly united Roman Empire, the Papal States, France briefly, and a mixture of different Italians States leading up to Italian unification and then later Mussolini gives the Pope and Cardinals the Vatican and a little land to call theirs.

So in all of this time and exchanging of Rome between different countries, did the pope ever go to war? Be it in defending Rome (or Avignon) from invaders or going off with his own Papal army on crusades?

The month names suggest that March is the first month of the year, yet the year on the modern Anglophone calendar begins with January. When and why was March chosen to start the year initially, and when and why did it switch to January starting the year?

I understand that for the most part Europe didn't really have centralised governments and was quite sparsely populated generally.

But also that in stories such as Jason and the Argonauts they infer other areas have people ruling over them.

If he was interested in conquering huge swathes of land, why was it only to the east after the Persian Empire and not also to the west?