Someone comparable in influence to philosophical thought, and perhaps around the same time period.

Something I have never really seen discussed is the logistics of marching an army during this time period. I'm not bothered about the crusades as such but this seems a good example of an army having to march a long way.

On top of the marching how were things such as supply lines handled? Did they rely on tribute from other cities?

Before cannons, how would ships fight? And how would cities defend agaisnt attacks from the sea?

After being onslaughted in my inbox for commenting on the Weavers being somewhat responsible for Ruby Ridge, I wanted to see how much of the current general knowledge of the situation is based in reality. The following is based on most of what I was being told in my inbox.

"The Weavers were Religious and while they visited the Aryan Nations compound they were not Racists. They were entrapped by the government. They were gave the wrong court date and without warning were descended upon by the Federal Government, surrounded, dog and child murdered and then never gave any chances to peacefully end the stand off until after the intentional murder of his wife, who was an innocent bystander in all of this."

I do not believe most of the above, but this is the general narrative I've been bombarded with. How close is this to the truth? I've always understood they were essentially Christian Identity movement type people, in a time where these groups were a violent threat, they had notice of a warrant between the missed court date issue and the shoot out. The boy pulled a gun on US Marshalls after his dog was shot, and that Vicky Weaver was shot through a door unintentionally after Weaver and Harris were making patrols to "protect" the cabin. All this wrapped up into the Weavers 'end of the world' style religious beliefs.

[deleted]

I was wondering about this, given that on the one hand it's considered a mandatory religious duty, but on the other, such a journey from somewhere like Indonesia or West Africa in pre-modern times would have been a lengthy, dangerous and expensive task, surely beyond the ability of the average peasant farmer?

If there were areas where the Hajj was not undertaken, how did the inhabitants deal with that? Were there ever "alternative pilgrimages" to a more accessible holy site?

Presumably all noble families were started from just a regular person.

The nuraghe built these huge structures that wouldn't really be rivaled until the middle ages thousands of years later, as well as having complex trade network in the western Mediterranean. I have seen it suggested the Phoenicians, all about that trade, may have even developed from this civilization. Their civilization, like the Egyptians survived the bronze age collapse, and looking at the Mortuary temple of Ramses II and the depiction of the Sea people, they appear to be wearing identical cuirass to those depicted of warriors in the nuraghe civilization.

So why are they not brought up as much as the Greeks, Hittites, Minoans, and Egyptians? Even when the latter did so extensively?

It's like we just forgot about one of the great civilizations from that era.

I just noticed that although I heard and read a lot that Engels' first-hand experience managing his father's business influenced his ideals, and that later it was from this business that he could draw money to support Marx financially during the writing of Das Kapital, I don't really know much about Engels the businessman. Do we have any records of that?

From my understanding, the Chancellor wasn't a very powerful position in comparison to the president during the Weimar Republic Era. If this was the case, I just don't understand why Hindenburg allowed Hitler to have so much power while he was still the president. It seems that he just totally let Hitler take the reins with the passage of the Reichstag Fire Decree and then especially the Enabling Act. Basically why was Hitler the one calling the shots when Hindenburg was still alive?

I apologize if this is a dumb question. I'm not much of a history buff.

I've been watching and listening to various documentaries and it seems like all of the great technology that the ancient Egyptians used was simply lost somewhere along the way, leaving us guessing or hypothesizing at how they did everything they did. I just don't understand how that is possible without some kind of mass catastrophe that wiped everything out.

Here I'm referring to the Shakespeare play(1599), rather than the act itself.

Brutus repeatedly says he loves Caesar, but killed him to save the Republic from becoming a Monarchy. Wouldn't this be somewhat treasonous as the premise of a play?

In Europa Universalis IV, there's a small event that can happen after the Protestant Reformation where the price/value of fish drops. The explanation given in game is that since fewer people are observing Lent, the demand for fish falls. Is there any record of an event like this happening?

I was reading about China's rover on the moon and saw they are the third nation to land on the Moon behind the USA and Russia. And it then got me thinking about the cold war and the space race. So why did the USSR never commit to a manned landing?

Thank you for you time.

I'm reading Jonathan Fenby's A History of Modern China and he mentions in passing that during the late 60s, Mao was very concerned about a soviet attack on China possibly including a nuclear strike on Beijing (the threat was considered serious enough to relocate some officials from the capital). Was there any basis to these concerns (e.g. misinterpreted intel etc) or was the idea just out of nowhere?

Thanks.

My understanding from TV documentaries (which might be wrong), but before around the 1700s, food preservation was a major issue. Things would simply rot, so had to be eaten fairly soon after gathering and methods like salting could be expensive.

So how did castles feed their garrison for months on end while under siege?