[deleted]

The summers in Scandinavia are temperate with the average temperature staying around 15C/60F which isn't exactly the warmest, so to what extent did life change from the harsh winters?

The Scandinavian log cabins were well designed to surviving the harsh winters, and with a practically limitless supply of timber the stove in the house could always be lit and life centred around this stove. But as the weather got warmer did life continue to be mostly lived inside, or was it moved outside leaving the house just to be slept in?

Did diets drastically changed? I know they consumed a lot of salted or smoked fish and meat like lutefisk and root vegetables in winter, but did this vary when to came to summer?

Finally there has been some discussion into how raiding patterns changed throughout the year, with more raids in summer and rarely any in winter. I can't seem to find any good sources on this, and would be interested in reading more into it

I ask this because often missionary position is seen as the norm for heterosexual sex so I was wondering if it was always seen that way and what moral, social and physiological issues would mean it would be used or not used in various eras.

EDIT: Wow, this post blew up! I originally thought it was a quite esoteric and strange question and I wasn't really expecting many answers outside of 'Why would you want to know that?' but I'm extremely humbled and happy with the community that AskHistorians is and how great everyone in this thread has been. I'm going to go through and read the comments but thank you so much for satisfying my curiosity.

In 1945 the USSR succeeded in obtaining full U.N. member status and a seat in the general assembly for two of its constituent republics, the Ukrainian SSR and Byelorussian SSR; a condition which was maintained until the dissolution of the USSR in 1991.

I know that a Ukrainian permanent mission to the United Nations, with its own (Ukrainian) Permanent Representative existed throughout the Soviet Era (and it's reasonable the same was so for Byelorussia) - but how were these missions run? To what degree were the U.N. representatives of these countries allowed any autonomy of action? Did the staff of these missions see themselves as representing the voice of their republics or were they essentially rubberstampers of USSR policy.

Recently I saw an article in my language (Serbo-Croation) that has caused quite a stir for some people. Basically this Serbian guy who thought he was a Serb all his life took a DNA test and found out his DNA is pretty much Bosnian/Montenegrin and less Serbian. Throughout Yugoslavian history people have changed their identities over and over. During the occupation of Montenegro lots started to identify as Serbs, and of course that continued to echo on throughout generations, until they take a DNA test and receive the shock. So my questions is pretty much the title, but I understand it might be complicated. Like for Mexico a lot might say that the people who's ancestors came from Spain are Spanish, but they might be more Native Aztec than Spanish due to the mixing between the two.

If Hitler died before 1941 or even 1942 or say he won the war but died of heart attack, were there any plans to succession ? In addition I've heard someone say that Stalin forbade the assassination of Hitler in 1944 since the successor would surrender, does this statement hold any truth ?

The full question stated on the referendum was:

"Do you consider necessary the preservation of the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics as a renewed federation of equal sovereign republics in which the rights and freedom of an individual of any nationality will be fully guaranteed?"

Inspired by a claim in r/politics that an alternative to the Civil War could have been for Lincoln to buy all the slaves that existed in the South and simply freeing them.

Could have have afforded this? Could the US Government have afforded this? Would this have even been a viable option?

Sorry for the facile phrasing, but more specific questions usually don't get as much attention.

I'm doing a course about genocide at the moment, and we're looking at some of the arguments on bystanding in relation to the Dutchbat at Srebrenica. In particular, some of the graphic and frankly dehumanising graffiti at the site drawn by the Dutch troops was really what sparked this question.

I've had a look but I can't find any conclusive or easily accessible information about Dutchbat-III, the battalion that was deployed at the time to defend the enclave.

What was the background of these soldiers (as both people and military personnel)? Were they conscripts or volunteers? Did the battalion volunteer to go on the peacekeeping mission, or where they ordered to? What was their training and intended role in conventional warfare? Did they have any special peacekeeping prep? How was it? Were the enlisted, NCOs and officers all of a similar(ish) background, or was it a socially mixed battalion? How did they perform both prior to deployment as peacekeepers and in prior peacekeeping roles within Bosnia? What was the profile of the troops themselves? Were they the type of people who do well as peacekeepers?

I can expand on/clarify exactly what I mean if needed, the questions above are just a general idea of the kind of info I'd really appreciate.

Just to be clear: I am not looking for moral judgements, judgements of their performance during the massacre or a description of the events of the massacre. I'm specifically interested in all the contextual info about the battalion deployed at the time of the massacre.

Thanks for reading :)

When was coffee introduced to Europe?

How long did it take from the introduction till coffee was seen as a normal thing?

How strong did they make the coffee back then and how would a cup of black coffee differ compated to a ordinary cup one could get in Northern Europe today?

[deleted]

There's so many arguments surrounding this topic and I just wondered what you guys think. Did Hitler give the definitive order for the Final Solution? Were the ordinary Germans to blame and how anti-Semitic were they before the Nazi party came to power. Did events such as Aktion T4 and the Madagascar Plan lead to the Holocaust? It is so widely debated whether or not Hitler held the responsibility for the Holocaust so it would be interesting to hear your opinions

This question mostly focuses on whether acquiring Portugal's colonies helped in alleviating the loss of wealth from the Dutch revolt in the Eighty Years' War or only further stretched Spain to its limits.

To what extent was the Deutsche Demokratische Republik able to pursue its own independent policies without the approval of the Soviet government, i.e. the Politburo? I'm definitely a newcomer to East German history, but after studying the language and watching a lot of DEFA films I'm becoming very interested in the life of the peoples on both sides of the wall after the end of World War Two. Can anyone recommend any sources (they can be English or German language sources) that give good glimpses into the everyday life of the German people? Something similar to the film 'Winter Ade' that came out in 1988.

I'm just interested in hearing what is known about the translation process worked for Matthew Perry's expedition to Japan in 1853. At that point, the only Westerners having significant contact with Japan were the Dutch, so how exactly did President Millard Fillmore's letter to the Japanese government get translated? And who translated the Japanese responses?

Perry then went on to negotiate the Convention of Kanagawa, which I've found was written in Japanese, English, Dutch and Chinese. But who was doing the translation of these tense, high-level treaty negotiations?

I remember a documentary I watched. It was about a man who was exploring underground subways that were abandoned. It in a major city in the USA. During the show he mentioned he believes that behind a brick wall lies a steam engine train. I am trying to find more about this information.