From what I've heard, medieval warfare was about wars of atrittion. Therefore, why is there such a focus on combat? For example, why are there so many different weapons and armors, so advanced and refined? Why are there diferent types of units in medieval armies? I understand that armies where prepared for the off-chance of having to fight, but why is weaponry so developed, having that many sets of armor and different types of weapons?

I am currently a 11th grade student in Belgium, studying the WW1-WW2 interbellum and the transformation from pacification to aggression.

So in order to add some context: firstly we have the "failed" League of Nations, then the Locarno treaties (1925) (which caused Germany to join the League of Nations in 1926), leading on to the Kellogg-Briand Pact (1928). All these treaties directly condemn aggression and the League of Nations and Locarno tried to assure cooperation of threatened nations in case of war. We know the League of Nations failed because its sanctions were not always complied with and it basically became a "European winners club", reducing its effectiveness. An example of this are the "failed" disarmament conferences in 1932-1933 and the fact that Japan (1931) and Germany (1933) left the League of Nations without any strong repercussions. Locarno, however, should have had a bigger impact. It was fairly clear concerning border disputes (at least for western nations). We have also got the Dawes (1925) and Young plan (1929) in order to relieve Germany of some pressure pertaining to their (relatively) enormous reparation payments.

Now I understand that after the world financial crisis of 1929, and the inability of the Weimar Republic to function and operate effectively (my textbook argues this is due to lacking German democratic tradition - they have never had a proper democracy before then) Hitler has a fairly easy time using fear and despair to the advantage of his own politics. My question is, however, why did the world (at least the capable nations) not react more firmly to German expansionism (especially under a fascist regime which has clearly expressed its wish for "Lebensraum")? Nobody really cared about the German rearmament (1935), the occupation of the demilitarized Rhineland (1936) and the "Anschluss" of Austria (1938) (western nations only protested vocally). My textbook mentions that 1: the US didn't care for the EU as their policy was clear: isolationism and limiting itself to informal colonization. 2: France wasn't ready to fight another war as it had suffered so much from the previous one and the economical crisis (1929), 3: GB was too busy expanding its imperial empire ,4: the USSR and Germany maintained good relations after the Treaty of Rapallo (1922), they were still consolidating their own country, plus Stalin didn't really care for international politics and 5: Western Europe didn't think the war would extend to the west. I find it hard to understand why GB didn't act more aggressively: wasn't it them who were always afraid of European hegemony? During their entire modern history they have always attempted to prevent a decisive European concentration of power, and now one was building right before them. I understand that the GB thought communism to be a greater direct threat than fascism and certainly, I understand they were occupied with their colonial empire, but surely they must have seen this as a threat? Why did they think that Germany would halt its expansion with the appeasement politics in the Munich agreement (1938)? If anything, it made them believe they could get away with it. What made Poland the trigger? If western Europe wasn't sufficiently prepared for yet another war, then why did they decide to defend Poland? Was the cause due to Britain's fear of communism as the USSR was also involved?

tl:dr It was very clear Germany was craving for more. Most countries were not in a position to prevent this, the UK was. Why did the UK not intervene aggressively earlier?

Thank you for reading and I hope that it is possible to shed some more light on the underlying politics in this time.

Sincerely, a student

edit: some more context.

During Henry's reign, he split his dominions between his four sons: young Henry got England, Normandy, and Anjou; Geoffrey, Brittany; Richard, Aquitaine; and John, Ireland.

When Richard acceded, did he inherent all of the above? Or did the various dominions split upon Henry's death?

As is well documented, the Soviets (sometimes more grudgingly than official Patriotic war history details) deployed women to a greater extent than any other warring force of world war two.

Some of the more famous ones were Colonel Marina Raskova and Major Yevdokia Bershanskaya. Now, a Colonel is a rather high ranking member of any military organization, and I got curious... Is there any female officer of the Soviet union who, during wartime, got to a higher ranking than Colonel? If so, who?

I just finished reading Soviet Women on the Frontline in the Second World War by Markwick (a great book by the way) but I finished the book with this question in mind.

I hope this is an okay question, it's my first time posting here.

I'm mostly picturing medieval time. Was there a court wizard or something like it? What WAS magic back then.

So I was wondering how Black people were viewed and treated in ancient Rome

The most famous mafia, of course, was the Italian mafia. There's also the Russian mafia, Serbian, many others. Did the Jewish mafia conflict with these other organizations? What was the organization of the Jewish mafia? Was it a single organization, or a collection of separate criminals? Are they still around, or was it mostly near the beginning of the 20th century?

Did they bite them apart and tie them into giant knots?

So nowadays in Chinese, Monday is called 星期一, literally means day 1 of the Week, Tuesday is called 星期二, literally means day 2 of the week, and so on and so forth, with the exception of Sunday 星期天, which literally means Sun-day.

But I'm curious, what was the name of days in Ancient China? Answers from Zhou Dynasty to Qing Dynasty are all accepted as I wanted to know it them all.

I've heard this "fact" repeated a lot but when I began looking for survey results or anything like that I haven't been able to find any.

[deleted]

Did he ever kill people or just leave the dirty work for his followers?

It's peace time in the realm. I'm a wealthy noble knight. What do I do? Am I expected to spend time patrolling or on guard duty? Would I be spending my days exercising and weapon training? Do I have an actual job? Or do I just go home and read a book until I'm called to fight again? Would I likely be living in my lord's castle or be given a house in the village, or small homestead nearby?

Were medieval docks, outside the city walls?

Possible follow ups: What did Zoroastrianism look like at this time/what was it like compared to the modern religion?

Also, what course of study would one pursue if they wanted to focus on this subject?

Hopefully this is the right place to ask, I would think there's some historical reason behind using pints as a unit of measure for beer. Why not half liters?