My question is two-fold.

1.) Around what time did bows and swords start being seen as "bizarre" in a war?

2.) Are there any examples of battles being fought with one army having entirely bows and swords, and the other with guns?

Let's say I'm a printer in the late Seventeenth century in The Holy Roman Empire; I've been handed the latest bestseller, "Philosophiæ Naturalis Principia Mathematica," and have been contracted to print a new edition. How long does it take me to set up the press for a single page of text?

I suppose my question has multiple components: first, was the physical crown of a hereditary monarchy traditionally passed down from monarch to monarch? Second, if the crowns were generally passed down, what would happen if the heir's head literally did not fit the crown? Did they perform alterations on the crown itself or was a new crown made for the heir? Are there any famous instances of this occurring?

I'm curious if this was an attempt to reach out to the people of the Soviet Union as if to say, "We respect you, if not your government," or if this was a marketing tactic seen similarly today in film with the inclusion of Chinese locations in blockbuster films. If not, why was the U.S.S.R. sometimes referred to positively in these songs?

I've heard this interpretation a couple of times from non-historian academics. Is there any truth to it?

Hey =)

I live in Egypt, and being a Muslim majority country the conquest of Egypt by Omar Ibn Al Khattab is usually portrayed as a liberation from the Byzantines and that the population of Egypt welcomed them with open arms. Is this true?

I find that hard to believe considering that they were foreign occupiers who forced their language + religion on the population.

What are some good books/sources to read on the topic?

Thanks

Is it just random that the southernmost and westernmost parts of the German speaking world remained Roman Catholic while the north and east of Germany became Protestant? Or were there specific demographic and social factors in those places that led to their adoption of or resistance to the Protestant Reformation?

I used Germany as an example because it's a place where the geographic fault lines of the Reformation are still present as opposed to other nations which either became completely Protestant like Sweden or remained completely Catholic like Austria but my question applies to all of Europe.

I know that nobles had a real incentive to become Protestant because it meant that they'd no longer be subject to the authority of the Vatican, but it's impossible for me to believe that the common people just went along with cuius regio, eius religio and broke with Catholicism simply because their Lord, Prince or King did and not because certain factors led them to personally adopt the Protestant faith.

Maybe it's a blind spot in my own education, but I can't name a single piece of literature from Egypt before the Ptolemaic period. I think most educated westerners can name and summarize at least a couple of comparatively ancient works from ancient China, India, Mesopotamia, Israel, and Greece. Is the lack of recognition due to prejudice? What are some works I should check out?

Hey, y'all. When I was growing up in the 70's and 80's, I remember many men, relatives and fathers of friends, even teachers, continuing to wear parts of their Vietnam combat fatigues to work and around the house, often also growing large beards. I even worked with a guy about 5 years ago who was still wearing a shirt over his work clothes that was the same as he had worn in combat in Vietnam, and still with the beard. In Ray Monk's excellent biography of Wittgenstein, I learned the philosopher wore parts of his Austro-Hungarian World War I uniform for decades after the war. What is the history of such things? It is more prominent in some wars than others? Compared to the Vietnam vets I remember, I've seen less of that from people who've fought in the American wars in the Middle East, or so it seems. Reading suggestions are much appreciated!

Did any tribes, especially in the Indian Territory, attempt to overthrow American/Confederate government control or try to raid areas attempting to take back their land? Seems that the most ripe time to strike for them would had been at that time.

I am a big fan both of the US National Park Service and Theodore Roosevelt, and often see the two spoken about together. However if it was Wilson who actually established it why is he not spoken about nearly as much as Roosevelt? Was it because of Roosevelt's general stances and actions on conservation or was he a driving force behind Wilson's decision?

Title

[deleted]

From what I have learned so far, East and West Germany seemed to allow the free passage of any citizens to and from each Germany before the wall was built. Was this because they had good relations at the time? or was it simply because they never saw the emigration from East Germany as a problem?

I'm interested in discussions, of any length & reading level, of the development of the concept of Western Civilization. Has it been a constant in Europe since the time of the Roman Empire? In which eras and locations was it most developed & revered?

Pocock writes that "When we speak of 'Western Civilization,' therefore, we mean an Ancient Greece and Rome re-imagined and re-created by a modern 'Europe' originally transalpine and barbaro-Roman." I'd love to read perspectives, & details, on that view.

(Am interested in the same question about the construction/recognition of the "ancient constitution" of England, but that's a little far afield here).

(FWIW, it was thinking about how 19th & 20th century thinkers, in particular Arendt & Kierkegaard, studied & cared deeply about classical writers that gives rise to this question right at the moment.)