I'm having a conversation with my husband about the kinds of revolutions that have happened around the world and we were wondering if anyone has done a count accross history to ascertain if revolutions that are primarily internal and have very little outside influence are any more or less successful and any more or less likely to lead to a period of stability than revolutions that are heavily influenced by outsiders.

Asking for a personal project.

I want to know more about the political situation regarding the unification of Castille and Aragon.

Why did the two kingdoms unite?

When did "Spain" officially came to be known as such?

I know that Isabella was the queen of Castille and Ferdinand the king of Aragon. What I'm curious about is who really held power after the two monarchs married. As far as I know, in your typical European monarchy, one monarch(typically the king) held the power, while the other(the queen) was merely a consort and held no true power.

Did the two rule their respective kingdoms independently, or did they rule both as equals? Was one considered to have more power and the other to be the lesser party(i.e. the 'consort')?

I was just wondering what version preachers during the Great Awakenings would have read in revivals or studied.

[deleted]

Recent national comments regarding the use of poison gas has made me start to think more specifically about World War II and concentration/work/death camps.

When the Nazi's started their rule in the 1930s, they systemically began stripping away rights and privileges from the German Jew population. Where any of these laws also intended to apply towards other minorities? I.e., Gypsies, homosexuals, Bolsheviks?

At the time of mass killings in Russia and other conquered territories, were Jews in Germany (and other occupied regions) considered German Nationals?

When individuals were sent to the camps as a punitive measure (for example, Gottfried Graf von Bismarck-Schönhausen) would the individual lose their citizenship?

Holmes used cocaine, and occasionally morphine. At the time though, it wasn't illegal, which obviously is quite different from today! What did it mean to be a cocaine user in late 19th-century Britain though? How would his habit be viewed by readers when the books were being published?

I'm doing some research for a story and I'm struggling to find information about this time and place in history. I'm specifically interested in the very first decade of Queen victoria's rule (1837-1847) I'm particularly interested in the following questions: -Was industrialization booming in this decade in the same way as its typically associated with the industrial revolution in Scotland? -What were the towns and small cities that were changing the most during this period? maybe through newly built railroads. -Was the idea of leaving the UK even remotely considered by the people at this point?

• What was the national identity of Scotsmen at the time like? and how did it compare to the idealized image of Wales, Britain, and Ireland (Northern and Southern, or were they seen to be more or less the same thing?)
• What were some common superstitions of the time, the last witch hunt had been about a century prior and it was currently illegal to claim to have magical abilities if I'm not mistaken.
• Every society has it's public hysteria, if it wasn't witches, what was it in Scotland? Christians? Foreigners? MASONS? or was that a mostly British thing? -In fact, how were the Freemasons regarded in Scotland? -And finally what was the most prominent radical group or political party in Scotland? and did they hold any political power?

If yes, how exactly did ancient romans and craftsmen of the time come to decipher the mathematics behind such creations?

I've done a good bit of reading at places like Wikipedia, but I don't have any background in Jewish history. In layman's terms, could someone tell me what the main differences between Rabbinate and Karaite Judaism? I gather it is somewhat similar to differences between Orthodox/Catholic/Protestant Christianity, but I've really failed to discern the difference in what I have read. Thanks much!

I tried to find a reliabla source for the claim that Cleopatra used to take baths in donkey milk and honey. But unfortunately I did not find any primary sources. Everywhere I only find "it is said that so and so". Do any of you fine Historians know an anwer?

In history we learned that Gorbachev supported Castro and backed Cuba, how did they communicate and in what language?

After the Battle of Hastings how long did it take for the Normans to eliminate Anglo-Saxon culture? I do know that Middle English was spoken nearly fifty years after 1066 and William the Conqueror tried to leave Anglo-Saxon nobility in peace under his rule until they began to revolt but when did people start identifying themselves as English and not Anglo-Saxon?

Also, a little bonus: when was old english no longer used in England?

I know there were places in Vegas where you could view the testing, but were the bombs common knowledge in American households? And did they expect them to actually be used?

As I understand it, the north had a lot more distance of rail laid at the start of the war and continued to expand that throughout the war whereas the south not only started with less, but also had their rails damaged regularly without the industrial abilities to repair them.

How much did this matter to the actual outcome of the war? Were rails a very important part of Civil War logistics, or were moving things by boat or through regular land methods more common?

In Churchill's Milestones to Disaster he mentions how Britain had a vastly superior navy to Germany at the time; and yet Germany was able to quickly capture and hold a large country across the North Sea. Churchill explains some of the failures of British troops on the ground in Norway but doesn't really explain why German troops were not simply sunk on their way over.