My linguistic anthropology professor claimed that the local language was forbidden following the Norman invasion, which is why so many academic/political words in English come from Norman French. Is this true?

Once upon a time the legal drinking age in the US was 18. At some point it was changed to 21. What happened to those people ages 18-20 who were already drinking? Was it now illegal for them to drink or were they somehow grandfathered in?

I'm just wondering since it seems kind of ridiculous for someone to be able to drink one day and the next day be legally unable to.

Or other forms of protective gear

I love history. I recently started reading it, and it's blowing my mind. I am curious to know how the facts presented in this book measure up with other historians.

So Oppenheimer said "I am become death, the destroyer of worlds". But apparently some say that the sentence from the Baghavad Gita should rather be translated "time" instead of "death". So what would be the more adequate translation?

Or maybe this isn't the right subreddit for this question. If so, where to x-post?

I would think that a country which drops two nukes on you would be at the bottom of your ally list. How did the two countries normalize relations so quickly?

I am currently reading the travelogue/pop-history book In Search of Zarathustra: The First Prophet and the Ideas That Changed the World By Paul Kriwaczek.

In it, Kriwaczek strongly claims that Gnostic forms of Christianity (including Gnosticism in the 1st-2nd century AD, Catharism, Bogomilism, and Manichaeism) are all continuations of Zoroastrian dualist beliefs.

I've read several books on Gnostic Christianity and the early Christian Church (including The Gnostic Gospels by Elaine Pagels, Primitive Christianity in Its Contemporary Setting by Rudolph Bultmann) as well as the "Great Courses Plus" course Gnosticism: From Nag Hammadi to the Gospel of Judas.

In all of that, I have never heard anyone suggest a direct or even indirect link between Zoroastrianism and Gnostic forms of Christianity.

Does anyone know of any credible historians that make such a link?

In the book(and movie) Tyler goes on an extended monologue about the origin of soap in Indian burial pyres.

I can't find the passage from the book, but here's the scene from the movie courtesy of IMDB:

Tyler Durden: Now, ancient people found their clothes got cleaner if they washed them at a certain spot in the river. You know why?

Narrator: No.

Tyler Durden: Human sacrifices were once made on the hills above this river. Bodies burnt, water speeded through the wood ashes to create lye. [holds up a bottle]

Tyler Durden: This is lye - the crucial ingredient. The lye combined with the melted fat of the bodies, till a thick white soapy discharge crept into the river. May I see your hand, please?

[Tyler licks his lips until they're gleaming wet - he takes the Narrator's hand and kisses the back of it]

Narrator: What is this? Tyler Durden: This... [pours the lye on the Narrator's hand]

Tyler Durden: ... is chemical burn.

Title.

The Church of Scientology, or at least individuals acting in the name of it, committed a number of bad acts prior to being given recognition as a religion so why were they still rewarded? And why weren't they treated as a terrorist organiation?

Since I've started tracking my caloric intake it seems mind boggling to me how it is possible.

I'm interested in the formation of Germany and the events leading up to it as well as its results, but I don't quite have the time to read a physical book. I'd also love recommendations on the unifications of Italy and Japan.

Thanks in advance.

What I mean is, for, say, a Sherman to be kept operational, what as required besides the tank and its crew? How many men and machines were required behind the front to supply the fuel, ammo, parts and repair, and so on?

I'd be especially interested in comparisons between various vehicles, ie the difference in supporting a Tiger II vs. a Panzer III, as well as countries to boot. How much more (or less) did the US need to support a Sherman compared to the Soviets with a T-34?

I said medieval era, but I'd be happy to hear answers about how it was paid for and what the expense was anywhere, any time, pre-Enlightenment.

I searched for an answer but I didn't see anything on it in this sub and not much turned up in my Google search either.

Was healthcare affordable? Was it widespread? Did people save up just in case? Couldn't find much on this topic and I'd appreciate a knowledgeable answer or two.

Thanks!

I'm researching for a school project, and some linkable sources would be appreciated, thanks!

So I was wondering why the startegy that Germany primarily used in WW2 was so effective against countries such as Poland and such but not effective against America or Russia. Furthermore, how did the Americans and Russians beat this startegy.

How common were African slaves in Ireland before the practice was abolished by Britain?

After the fall of the roman empire in 476, the medieval kings and emperors in western europe considered themselves successors of the romans. Charlemagne was crowned as roman emperor in 800, when the eastern roman empire still existed. How did they feel about this? Was there any conflict between them and the Holy Roman Empire back then?