I did do a search and didn't find anything so I apologize if this has been answered before:

I've always wondered if we had any evidence to prove (or refute) Anne Boelyn's supposedly numerous affairs. I know that Henry was gearing up to marry Jane Seymour and therefore would be pretty motivated to get rid of her, but is there any evidence to support either side? Or is it all lost to history?

There is a spa in Japan with a red wine hot spring bath, which claims Cleopatra used to bathe in wine. I can't find any actual sources which state this, so just wondering if it's true and if any texts claim this? Thanks!

I am currently reading a book of world history and it mentions that the Aryan peoples invaded Northern India in the second Millennium BC and that they brought Hinduism or what would become Hinduism with them and displaced the Native population, mainly the Dravidian peoples.

Due to the nature of the book, being a global history of the world, it lacks any specificity regarding these claims. When it refers to the basis of Hinduism, is it simply referencing the Paganism of the Aryan people, such as various beliefs in Wotan amongst different European and Germanic peoples, or did Europeans already worship many of the modern Hindu gods and bring these deities with them to Northern India?

If it is the case that they worshipped Hindu gods and actually exported it to India with them, why did Hinduism die out in Europe even before the introduction of Christianity?

Hope this isn't a silly question, but I found it a rather interesting bit of history, but lacked much in the way of an in depth explanation of it.

I am struggling to find any information on the background for decolonization and any help as well as insight would be appreciated.

Or whenever they were first used in such a way. Did they have any use beyond looking pretty and being malleable? Also, if other elemental metals fall into the mix, like copper feel free to include.

Are the current levels of immigration into Western countries very high in global historical terms? What other periods in history have had similarly high rates, and what happened? Did most of the migrants assimilate peacefully? Or did they displace the native population? Or end up being expelled/ethnically cleansed? Are there patterns in what happens historically?

I suppose if we are being specific, like in the War of the Roses. were men organized like units with some sort of officer leading them? or was it much more disorganized?

For example, one could see Cao Cao as a villain while Liu Bei was the hero, and this is because in the romance Liu Bei is simply the protagonist because he represents carrying on Han. But what is another understand in which we could see Cao Cao as being heroic and Liu Bei being villainess? What were they really like?

It seems like from what I've researched that the vast majority of Africans, at least half of the people in rural China, many if not most Southeast Asians, most people in India and a significant minority of Latin Americans did not have electricity in their homes in the 1980s. Many others had only token or intermittent amounts of electricity, just barely enough to turn the lights on sometimes or perhaps power a black and white TV if they were lucky.

So were nearly half of human beings essentially living in the 19th century in 1985? Did rural Third Worlders who were off the grid use battery-powered items such as radios and flashlights? Did other portable electronics such as cameras penetrate these parts of the world?

I suppose it's possible my numbers are an overestimate, but I'm pretty confident in them. I know that Thailand for example wasn't electrified outside of the Bangkok area until the 1980s, and 40% of rural Chinese were still using kerosene lamps even into the early 1990s.

For comparison, about 12% of the world's population lacks electric power in their homes now. But I'd imagine a lot of those people still have cell phones.

I'm just wondering, since I haven't been able to find much info on this by poking around on Google: where were free blacks and black slaves in Canada usually from? I know the majority of slaves were from West Africa, but I got a DNA test that said I had a small bit of East African ancestry (I know DNA tests aren't exactly admired by everyone, and I know their limitations, but I did have it verified by Doug McDonald of U of Illinois and he said it was legitimate ancestry and not statistical noise). It's not from my mother's side, who is descended from American colonials in the South. Rather, it's from my paternal grandfather's side, who is Irish, Eastern European, and Canadian. I think it's much more likely to be from the Canadian side, since the East African segment is embedded in British Isles DNA but there were more people of African descent in Canadian history than Irish. I could be wrong, however.

I know that this ancestor could have possibly been Fula, since recent research has shown that they have substantial amounts of East African DNA despite the fact that most of them live in West Africa nowadays. Or, perhaps this ancestor could have been imported directly from East Africa via the Arab slave trade and then was traded off to Europeans at some point. This ancestor could be from Madagascar or Mozambique, a known source of slaves from the European Atlantic slave trade; however, from what I have gathered, people from Mozambique and Madagascar score very low to non-existently in Nilo-Saharan or Afro-Asiatic ancestry, which is what my DNA segment is.

This is something that I doubt will ever be solved. However, I would love to ask folks here who know more about African history and the slave trade history than I do about the demographics of Africans in both Canada and Europe. I'm speaking more about early colonial history as well, most likely the 1700's. I read that there were free Africans in Canada who were part of France's army and navy too around this time. So I suppose my ancestor could have come from that as well. I unfortunately don't know much about the Canadian side of the family except that more recent generations lived in Montreal, but perhaps older generations were from Newfoundland (Just FYI: I'm actually American, not Canadian-just of Canadian descendency).

Here are my distilled questions:

1. Was there evidence of Fula people imported as slaves or Fula as immigrants to early Canada in the 1700's or earlier?
2. Were free blacks or black slaves to the Americas imported from eastern African nations in any number via the Arab slave trade?
3. Where did African soldiers in the French army typically come from? Primarily from modern-day Senegal? This would make sense as there are many Fula there.
4. Were most slaves/indentured servants/free blacks in Britain and Ireland from West Africa? Any from East Africa at all imported by the Arab nations in the early colonial period?

I'd like to know where this ancestor may have come from. If it tested as West African, that'd make more sense. That's common enough among North Americans. But since it isn't, it may make it simultaneously harder and easier to pin down. Thank you!

There were a good number of emperors who came up from the ranks in the army to ascend to the throne, but what was the process of advancement like in the Roman army?

Do we know anything of the process of how soldiers were assessed to be fit for command? Was it possible to join as a legionary and make it to general or was this something that only happened with people with political connections who joined as officers?

I was told in a world history survey course that in the case of Egyptian rulers marrying their siblings to maintain royal purity, one reason there was no kind of taboo (equivalent to the modern squick factor of 'marry my sibling? Ewwww!) in place for royal marriages is because brothers and sisters of the royal family were raised apart.

I'm curious if this is actually true, and if it is, what was the actual reason for raising siblings separately? Was it a strictly gendered thing--specifically raising the brothers and sisters apart--or were all the siblings raised separately? If it was gendered, was this done for the purpose of making marriage between siblings easier, or was there a different cultural reason for raising male and female children separately? (I assume that such a practice would not extend past the royal family, as I can't imagine the rank and file having the resources or the wherewithal to raise children apart).

Finally, if this is true, how did it actually work in practice? Would the brother and sister have any kind of familial relationship as we recognize it today, or would they regard each other more as...I don't know...business partners, who happened to share blood ties?

Sorry if there's an obvious answer, I'm a bit rusty on my WWI history...

[deleted]

How did traditional types of European cuisine evolve, and why did they remain so different? Many food preferences seem to stem from methods of preventing food spoilage, but was the climate between areas of Europe so distinct that it necessitated separate methods of food preparation and presentation? Was food part of a National identity, limiting the travel of ideas? I guess I wish to understand why there are strong distinctions? Thanks!

Why did the plotters go with an elaborate bomb plot as opposed to one of them simply shooting Hitler? Was it that none of them were willing to expose themselves to almost certain death, or was Hitler paranoid enough that even senior soldiers would not be allowed near him while armed?

Recently, I've gotten back into my passion for Ancient cultures and politics. I'm currently reading SPQR by Mary Beard and have read quite a few articles and some short books on Greece, The Middle East, and Northern Africa (particularly on the Carthaginians), but I keep struggling to link all of these events and cultures into one cohesive world that existed and interacted with each other at the same time. Are there any books or reading materials out there that don't focus so much on one culture/empire or the other, but rather give a comprehensive look at the Mediterranean's development as a whole?I'm especially interested in the much more ancient world that lead to the initial formation of all these great ancient peoples.

It seems weird that a mere 35 years ago a majority of people thought that a religion that doesn't exist was abusing children for Satan and everyone was part of their religion including their closest friends. To the point of people going to prison for alleged Satanism. At least the Salem witch trials had a clear cause (a prank by teenage girls). I feel like I have some gaps in my knowledge because with my current info it seems like "the 1980s started then SATANISTS ARE ABUSING OUR CHILDREN. THEY ARE EVERYWHERE. MY CHILD LIKES MONSTERS THAT MEANS HE HAS DISTANCED MEMORIES. UNDER US RIGHT NOW THERE ARE SATANISTS NEIGHBORS AND TEACHERS ABUSING CHILDREN. It is 1995 and we aren't afraid anymore". Sorry for rambling. What caused it? What spread it? Why did people get arrested for no evidence? Why were people so paranoid? Also what exactly happened?