I don't have statistics to back me up here, but as a regular browser of /r/askhistorians I am struck by the high number of questions dealing with medieval Europe and the Roman Empire (or Republic). It seems that these two (admittedly quite vast) topics take up more space on this sub than any other combination of time and place. This suggests to me that, at least on reddit, these two topics have, if not an outsized place in public memory and amateur inquiry, then at least a major one. What trends in education, popular culture, and public memory do you think contribute to this dominance?

Doing research for a book and was wondering if there were any definite names for the continent prior to its "discovery".

As an armchair tactician it seems that a paratrooper attack would negate the distance the German army had to drive to reach Moscow and would be able to cut off the retreating red army in the first year of the war on the eastern front. was there ever any invasion plans that included an airdrop of the Fallschirmjäger in the Soviet Union. If not why weren't they used as airborne troops during the invasion.

While I am aware of the build-up prior to the campaign and do consider that a Soviet victory to be rather inevitable, the speed and scale of its success comparable to that of Operation Barbarossa, if not greater, is rather difficult to understand.

After all, the Germans also struck the Soviets at a time when they were at their weakest, but even their advance was fraught with various difficulties and logistical issues. The Soviets on the other hand, brushed off the 750,000 Japanese within a mere two weeks, and not only that, the Manchuria is full of terrain such as mountains and wetlands, which doesn't exactly make for an easy advance.

The Song dynasty is said to have been approaching an industrial revolution, with the implication that possibility for a full blown industrial revolution ended with the fall of the dynasty. However, my understanding is that many technologies pointed to as evidence of an industrial revolution such as printing presses and mass produced iron remained after the fall of the Song. Are there any factors that are pointed to as reasons why the Song could have undergone an industrial revolution that disappeared upon the collapse of the song?

Should be obvious that the successors I'm refering to in the title are the Yuan, Ming, and Qing.

[deleted]

I saw a documentary about WWII aviators and one veteran in particular explained that they carried beer onboard a bomber. Was this a common thing to do?

The obvious exceptions are Great Britain, the Netherlands, North-Western Germany and Ireland. And I guess, Poland, depending on how you define Eastern/Central Europe.

I have a couple ideas on why this might be, and I wonder if any of these might be valid:

1. The institutions of the Roman Empire, which the Catholic Church inherited, were stronger and this meant the Catholic Church was more deeply rooted in these areas.

2. Physical proximity to Rome. This is rough since Portugal is further from Rome, I think, than Saxony, but travel between Portugal and Rome might be easier. But then again, Poland is certainly further from Rome than Bohemia. Is it plausible that rulers closer to Rome benefitted more from the Catholic Church, and thus had less desire to fight with the Vatican over Investiture or land?

Am I completely off base here? Is there some explanation I haven't thought of? Or is it just a complete coincidence?

In the 16th century European armies began using a countermarch drill to deliver volleys: in a deep formation the each rank of arquebusiers would deliver a single volley then retire to the rear to reload while the ranks behind them stepped forward and repeated the process in order to maintain a continuous fire. Supposedly it was inspired by a drill the ancient Romans used.

What are our sources for any Roman drills similar to this, and what was their purpose of the Romans didn't have any muskets?

If that is the case, did they only focus on javelin use? How long were they and how did they carry them around? I'm trying to write a book, and I want one of my characters to be a javelineer.

Any help is appreciated. Thanks!

I know that when the RoC continued in Taiwan it was very authoritarian up until around the seventies or eighties I think. Now, it's got a fairly liberal regime and a very robust opposition party. On the other hand, the PRC has no democracy, no freedom of speech, an economy dominated by SOEs, and seemingly no chance of changing anytime soon.

Why did Taiwan change but not the PRC?

Just looking at a map, some places look like they’re gerrymandered district maps. When they were formed, what stopped western Oklahoma from being part of Texas? Northwestern Florida from being merged with Alabama? Western Tennessee from being a part of North Carolina (or vice versa)? Northern Idaho from being a part of Montana? Was it the same reason?

To be clear, I'm not asking how many black soldiers enlisted from British colonies, I want to know how many "black British" were enlisted for service during WW2. I can't seem to find any trace that "black British" soldiers existed, please help.

I know that there's a recommended reading list in the wiki. For topics not covered by the wiki, is it permissible to ask for more detailed reading recommendations?

It's hard to talk about combat in WW1 without talking about trench combat as it played such a large part in the war. In WW2 on the other hand trench warfare seems to have almost died off. So I have to ask what advancements/ changes in the years between world wars led this to be so, or is it simply a misconception?