I am active in civic life and statistically, I am probably illiterate. Have I heard Homer being recited? Do I know the story and the characters? Is it likely that I or my friends can recite passages from memory? How often am I exposed to the material?

France and Germany were both former parts of the Carolingian Empire, but only the latter devolved into a bunch of small states while the former stayed intact. Why?

This question relates to a hypothesis my wife is researching, and together we are finding information and sources difficult to aquire. Specifically, she is interested in how attitudes may have changed, for better or worse, after the rise of trade regarding these commodities.

Saw that it was re-released on Netflix. Were there any disagreements about the facts presented at the original release? Have there been advances in knowledge or changes in views in the past 27 years such that portions of it are no longer held to be accurate?

Both of these areas had developed writing, but I never saw a contemporary source from these regions on the Mongol invasion. Are there any to look at?

Let me clarify this: I know the people weren't happy at all with Isabel Perón's way of ruling (economic crisis, Triple A) and that the newspapers were writing about an upcoming coup d'etat. So when this did finally happen, was it a relief for the nation? I'm writing a thesis on the Argentine junta 1976-1983, and specifically the influence the junta had on social happiness, but I can't find data about the social happiness in this period. Can someone tell me more about this? Who can help me with sources that provide the information that I'm looking for? (Graphs, numbers, stories of people who lived during that time (less preferred), or maybe someone just knows in what way the coup affected society)

My questions is was the term Italy and Italian people used in the medival kingdoms of Europe and among the city states and duchys of the italian peninsula or were there clear separations between Venice,Genoa,Ferrara,Napels, Papal State etc. Did they have a sense of common identity?

Just focusing on Europe here. Ill probably ask about other regions in future questions. I am trying to avoid a question that is too vague.

I need to be careful to focus my question and provide context for he experts on here. I know the romans used plates for their body armor, but it was a long way from being full body. I am referring to the full body plate armor that we see in stereotypical movies/fantasy books. I also know alot of the armor is wrong and anachronistic. Such as great helms used by knoghts in full body armor. My understanding is that the great helm was absolete by several hundred years by the time full body plate armor was used.

My knowledge comes from some youtube channels. They are fun to watch, but I dont know how accurate they are. To name a few metatron, lindybeige, knighterrant, scholargladiaria. There are others.

Those channels mention full body plate armor started after 1420. My understanding is that fire arms started being used heavily on battlefields by the end of the 15th century. That would tell me that the full body plate armor was nit used on the battlefield that long. I think I read that soldiers often used chest plates during the 30 years was in the 1600 hundreds, but that is a long way from full body plate armor.

I am trying to narrow and clarify my question. I understand the people on here are experts and I am trying to avoid asking something that is vague unfocused.

My understanding is that corn, or maize, existed solely on the American continents up until the 15th century and the arrival of European explorers. But Caesar refers constantly to securing a supply of "corn" for his troops. Does the word have another meaning in this context, perhaps just a generic term for food? What food is he referring to? What would his army have been eating as they moved around Gaul throughout the seasons?

[deleted]

I assume it was too impractical to keep a fire perpetually burning in your home to transfer flame. How was a simple candle lit hundreds of years ago?

According to W.J. Wood, Benedict Arnold & Montgomery attacked the walls of Québec City in late December 1775, in a snowstorm, with undersupplied troops wearing torn rags. Why did they attack at that time and in those circumstances instead of taking the time to gather their strength and wait for reinforcements?

Hard to word this right so I'm going to rattle off a bunch of sub-questions to give an idea of what I mean. I'm not interested in the common reasons for a duel (protecting honour etc), more in how the format became popular when it seems like a death sentence for both parties. I'm guessing a lot of this will come down to misconceptions about the format.

How often did both parties get shot? How was cheating policed? (in my head, it seems tough to stop participants turning earlier than allowed, like a false start in racing, and if a fatal shot is fired, there's no second go). Did duelists see it as a skillful pursuit, and is there evidence to suggest that top duelists existed, rather than owners of hair-trigger guns that got lucky a few times?

Finally, the inspiration for the thought, was Alexander Hamilton a total fool to think that firing in the sky could be spotted and reacted to before Burr fired? I read on Wikipedia that duelists sometimes fired at the ground to show courage, was that a common end result and could it possibly happen without a gentlemen's agreement beforehand?

The exact quote is: "In the long run, most Turkish dynasties did become identified with Sunni Islam and with the Hanefi school of Jurisprudence, the one least restrictive of the ruler's discretion and the most accommodating to custom." It's taken from Carter V. Findley's Turks in World History. To clarify on the question, what exactly in the Hanefi school makes it more accommodating to customs and and least restrictive of the leaders discretion than, say, the Shafi school or even Shia Islam altogether?

Asking specifically about Romans in the Western part of the empire, not the Constantinople/Byzantine/Eastern part. When did people realize that their way of life was going away?

I have been cursed to do a lot of work in the bridal industry, which has me wondering what we know about when, how and why monogamous marriage became the standard (in societies where it is the standard)

Why weren't French involved in the first wave at Normandy beach, on D-day?