If so, what was it like? If not, who kept the peace and how were crimes prosecuted? I know during the days of the Late Republic powerful people could be prosecuted and that people like Cicero acted as lawyers, but what about your average rapist, murderer or thief?

I am really interested in naval warfare. Especially the period ranging from before WW1 all the way until after WW2. I love the big battleships, the aircraft carriers, just everything! I would love to research more on this topic. Everything from naval doctrines, naval tactics, ship types, famous ships and ship classes, all the different navies at the same, and so on!

What books do you guys suggest for someone interested in this? As a german I am especially interested in the german navy of WW1 and WW2 and the austrian navy of WW1 (they had a quite big navy)!

Can someone fill me in on a couple things about Ghenghis Khan that I've read but haven't been able to properly fact check (please provide credible sources if possible). So I read that he took the horse tails that represented each tribe that were all different colours and he took them all and bleached them so that they were all the same colour and were unified. Is this true? I also read he put up three tents over three days when sieging a city, one white, one red, then one black. These affected who would be killed when the city was sieged. When attacking the Xia xia kingdom (or something like that it was the gateway to china) the mongols ran at the walls and when the defenders thought they had killed the Mongols they came out and many had faked death and jumped up and forced their way in. Are any of the above facts true? Any other interesting things about the mongols may as well be shared too. cheers :)

So say if the Chinese or Moroccans had landed in America first wouldn't disease still have whiped out a majority of the native Americans.

I'm talking things like towels, cutlery etc.

I found one, does anyone know of any other?

If there was a rebellion in a town, or some revolt by his vassals, how would the king know? Was there some sort of a messenger system to know if the town was still under the king and not under enemy occupation? If yes, couldn't the messages just be faked by his adversaries to misdirect him?

Hi all, bit of a randomly specific question here.

For context, I'm a PhD student researching marine invasive species that mainly spread through fouling ballast water tanks in ships. I'm looking at areas that have seen shipping transport for millenia (north east Europe and northwest Pacific), but these species wouldn't have been transported in great number until the adoption of water as ballast. I'm using genetic techniques to build an invasion pathway history, but want to see if what I've built roughly corresponds to the actual shipping history of the regions.

To that end, does anyone here have any insight as to when ballast water began being used en masse by the shipping community? From what I've found online, the 1800s pops up as a rough idea, but there's nothing more specific than that.

After Frederick III managing secure the title of Holy Roman Emperor(several Habsburgs have been king of the romans beforehand), was there any serious opposition for the Habsburg election to the imperial throne until the succession of Maria Theresa?

Okay, so I know a lot about the ideological differences between the two countries that grew ever since 1953 (I also label Mao's general dislike of Khrushchev's foreign policy as an 'ideological' issue).

But the purely ideological reasoning seem to be lackluster. Surely, the leaders of the two most powerful communist nations in the world at that moment should have been mostly guided by objective reasons unrelated to petty ideological struggle. Especially since their alliance should have been quite powerful (Soviet industrial base combined with Chinese population numbers?), but, for some reason, politicians of the two countries chose rivalry as opposed to increased cooperation.

Why?

Did he receive monetary payment for his 'service' to the Reich (akin to normal politicians) or could he just take what he fancied like other autocratic leaders?

I deal in beer and this comes up a lot, as the term both refers to specific styles of beer from the Czech region that's fairly prominent in the field, and also to just nightlife in general and its characters. How come? When and where did this happen and why?

[deleted]

In a Game of Thrones, after Tyrion Lannister is abducted by Catelyn Stark, the Lannisters start gearing up to go to war with the Tullys. Now, at this point, both the Tullys and the Lannisters are still loyal to the Iron Throne. Now, this isn't the first time something like this has happened. It is mentioned that the Lannisters have gone to war with other houses before. This strikes me as odd. Imagine if the governor of Washington decided to go to war with the governor of Oregon, there's no way that the United States federal government would let that happen. Yet, in a Game of Thrones, the Iron Throne does nothing to intervene. It's almost like it's considered normal for this to happen. I'm curious if this sort of infighting is realistic to a medieval feudalistic society? I'm not talking about Robert's Rebellion or the War of the Five Kings, where rival lords battled for the title of king itself. I'm talking about instances where lords who are vassals to the same king go to war with each other beneath the king, if that makes sense.

I understand how military provinces had either a proconsul or propraetor but how were provinces governed after the military expedition was complete? For example, when Caesar took Gaul, he was a proconsul, but how was Gaul governed after he returned to Rome?