Specifically, in the prologue to the Wife of Bath's Tale in The Canterbury Tales she says "Bet is to be wedded than to brinne", translated to Modern English as "Better to be wedded than to burn" after talking about remarrying as a widow. Is there any possibility this is a reference to the ancient practice of Hindu widows jumping into their husband's funeral pyre? I'd also love to know more generally about these cultures' early interactions as well, as the title says. Sorry if this is a dumb question, and thanks for any response!

I hope I got the Shakespeare quote right, don't hate me if I didn't please.

Let's say right after the Battle of Manassas, does the Confederacy stand any chance of drawing a negotiated peace or were they doomed from the start?

What were they? Did all classical fall into one category? How was it called?

I understand that the cross has significance in Christianity due to the passion of Jesus, but has it always had the same widespread use as a symbol since the resurrection? Were other symbols used before it was adopted?

[deleted]

edit: I know that Stalin having Trotsky assassinated played a part, but the conflict between authoritarian and anarchist communists predates the assassination, and that also doesn't fully answer why the conflict is so persistent.

I'm doing some research for a project and I figured I could ask here for some answers or at the least some links to information.

So anyway, what was the day to day life for a German soldier and/or German citizen? What did they think of the war and other nations in general, did they mostly go about their lives as normal, how did their conditions and quality of life change throughout the war?

Thanks.

He is sort of explaining the pathway from Inferno to Purgatory as if he is approaching the southern hemisphere via the center of the planet. Was this not frowned upon by his peers and especially the Church?

There's no John II, Richard IV, or Henry IX, for example. Given how common the name John is, it seems strange that there was never a second King John. Is this more because he was the last king from the House of Anjou, or because he was such a notorious ruler? If the House of Anjou had continued on for a few more generations, might there have been a John II?

The same seems true of Richard III. Notorious monarch, but also the last king of the House of York/the Plantagenet line. Henry VIII? Infamous, and the last of the Tudor line to produce heirs.

Maybe it's just a coincidence, or maybe I'm half answering my own question. It just seems strange that in the eight hundred years since his reign, not a single monarch has said, "Hey, John's a nice name. I'm going to name my firstborn son John." Henry, Richard, and John are still acceptable (and common) names for everyone else, after all.

Additionally, why was a civilian intended to head the department, as well as heading the successor department of defense?