Hello, I know that he was the propaganda minister of Germany but I believe that this was not what the masses were told was it? Thanks in advance

I know one of napoleons great advantages over his opponents was his ability to have a very large army bc he used civilians. Similarly I’ve heard it said that the side with the most soldiers usually won the battle in ancient warfare. Obviously there are lots of famous examples of when that isn’t true such as Julius Caesar, Hannibal at canae, the Greeks vs the Persians, etc, but are they just famous because of how out of the ordinary they are? How accurate would it be to say that the side with with most men won more often than not? If that’s not the biggest predictor, is there something else like maybe how far stretched your supply lines are, wealth of the civilization, having profession soldiers vs farmers, specific weaponry / tactics or Calvary that you would consider a larger factor than sheer man power?

Like if you were an ancient ruler and maybe your considering raiding your neighbors. Would you feel confident going into battle simply knowing you got more guys and so you’re odds are pretty good?

Did population continue to be a main contributor for medieval (pre gunpowder) era warfare?

Many times; in multiple versions of the Robin Hood tale, there are instances where characters mention that death is the penalty for taking one of the king's deer. In that vein, my question is threefold.

1: Was there a time period where a man would hang for poaching in England.

2: Were lords partially or completely exempt from this penalty, as members of the nobility.

3: What were peasants allowed to hunt on their lord's lands, if deer belonged to the king.

I appreciate any answers to this, and thank you for your time.

I just finished reading Eric Schlosser's Command and Control, which did an awesome job outlining the history of the United States' nuclear arsenal, nuclear accidents, and assumptions the US had about their Soviet counterparts. I was wondering if there is any good companion to this book that could give similar information from the soviet side (in particular, Soviet nuclear strategic decision making and what they thought was happening in the US). Thanks!

Did Hitler ever make plans to invade Switzerland, and were there Swiss who wanted to join the Allies/Axis side?

Long time ago, i've read an article wich bring a message written by queen Elizabeth I of England sent to an Ottoman sultan and it was something like:

....... our religion protestantism is a monolithic religion like your religion unlike the filthy pagan catholics, help us o felw monolthic great sultan aganist those pagan Spaniards and but us under your protection blah blah something ........

And am wondering if it is real or not? off course it wasn't like that but you do understand the meaning of the message :) am learning english so exuse me if it was bad :)~

[deleted]

It strikes me after reading about the Anglo-Saxon settlement of England that the origins of the Anglo-Saxons and their ethnic background and even the means by which they came to England is very similar to that of the Vikings.

Both groups originate in Scandinavia and Norther Germany, both groups speak related languages, and both groups came to England as naval invaders and eventually colonists.

And yet both popular culture and history seem to suggest that the Vikings (or Danes) and the Anglo-Saxons were extremely different groups of people, that the Vikings terrified the Anglo-Saxons, and that when Vikings settled the did so in their own state (the Danelaw) with significantly distinct differences to the Anglo-Saxon kingdom of England.

Did the Anglo-Saxons not realize that the Vikings had similar geographical and ethnic origins to themselves? How is it that people with such similar origins and related language and ethnicity could come to be so alien from each other in a matter of a few hundred years (from the beginning of the Anglo-Saxon settlement of England c. 500 and the beginning of the Viking raids and invasions c. 800).

Or is this just an artifact of pop culture and obsolete historiography and the reality was more like a protracted struggle for land and power between a spectrum of similar and related peoples?

In reading about this I was trying to figure out at what point he was cremated, because it's called "ashes" (cendres), but he was not. Is this just a French idiom?

Why wasn't Italy occupied by the allies like Germany was after WW2?

Hello people of the internet.

I was casually doing my math homework when I started wondering whether native Americans knew about math, and if so how advanced their knowledge was?

I found a few articles on google but I would love to know more, and maybe read some interesting stories if you know any.

I'd be especially interested in the 1790 - 1801 period!

Since there is a famous painting about this crossing, I'd like to learn more of what actually happened during the crossing if at all possible.

Is it two names for the same thing or is there a difference.

As far as I'm aware, most of the world's homophobia was influenced by Islam and Christianity, but India and some other countries on the subcontinent are largely Hindu and Buddhist populations. So what caused homophobia to gain ground there, was it cultural influences or the influence of Muslim sultans occupying India for some time?

Most of what I can fine online relates to modern indigenous rituals, not 16th Century or earlier

I read War and Peace recently and of course there is the part during the Battle of Borodino where Pierre Bezukhov, a pretty much random person shows up and starts fighting French people and getting ammunition and what not. Was this just a device for the book or would random people show up and fight frequently?

In EU4, the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth begins as a personal union between Poland and Lithuania created by an event really early in the game (so right after the crusade of Varna). The game offers the Polish player the option to have the Lithuanian monarch rule over Poland as well (and for it to become his primary title), but the player can also reject this and opt for a local noble to ascend on the Polish throne instead. Was there any such historical movement that opposed the Lithuanian monarch to rule in Poland, and if so what where they suggesting instead?

It seems to be a somewhat universal thing throughout the world. I've seen red & blue lights being the standard "police colours" all over the world and seeing them in some pretty far flung places made me wonder where it came from.