I realize this question is a bit goofy, but I was curious. Nobunaga liked to call Hideyoshi a monkey and referred to him as a "bald rat" and other unflattering terms in correspondences.

Why would he treat one of his more useful subordinates like this? Was it some sort of playful ribbing, or did he have genuine disdain for him? Was it normal in this time period for lords to be casually disrespectful toward their subordinates, or was Nobunaga unusual?

I've read about this figure, that supposedly was in the car with the Emperor and had the duty to whisper "you are not a god" just in case he forgot. Is this true, or just a myth?

The first thing that comes to mind is the Native Americans and the Euopeans.

Also why are there still to this day some uncontacted tribes that live in huts and use only simple stone tools?

How can any civilation exist for thousands of years but not have technologically advanced at all?

Thanks in advance!

I know that King was made COMINCH after pearl harbor, and later took over both roles after Stark was transferred to England, but what was the difference in their duties when they each held one role?

Further, how did King's responsibilities change after he took over both roles?

Thanks in advance!

That is, adjusted for the length of the war and the number of soldiers fighting, how did the casualties compare?

I randomly remembered something that my high school history teacher said about the way that the signatories of the Washington Naval Treaty tried to evade following the spirit of the treaty (that being disarmament). He said that America developed ships fast enough to dodge cannons (and therefore did not need as much armor), and that the British developed "clips" onto which more armor could be placed on their ships in the event of war. I tried to find out more about these topics the other day, but couldn't find anything about these topics.

Was what I was taught correct? And if so, where could I learn more about these approaches?

Did say rich Romans go to the beach to relax on the weekends?

In Erik Reinert's "How Rich Countries Got Rich... And Why Poor Countries Stay Poor", he says that "an important reason for the 1776 fight for independence was that, as colonial masters have always done, England had prohibited manufacturing industry in the American colonies." (2008, p. 25)

Is the statement that the American colonists fought for independence (among other) to have a manufacturing industry true?

What about that colonial powers (let's say the English and French) prohibited the colonies from having a manufacturing base? (I know that was not the case in Belgian Congo).

Thanks,

-styx

Apologies if this breaks the rules but I'm looking for good documentaries to watch on the subject of apartheid in South Africa. Looking for stuff that deals with that specific era, so nothing on the aftermath as interesting as that is. Also, just watched The Whites Last Stand so not that. Anyone any suggestions?

I asked this question three days ago and had zero responses. Thought I would try again. Maybe with better phrasing.

I am looking to learn about Old Saxony. The history of it and the culture. I am looking for some literature to read about the subject more than what I can read on wikipedia.

As a follow up question, I am wondering what are the primary sources we use to determine our knowledge on Old Saxony.

Thank you for any help.

[deleted]

I don't have a complete understanding of how medieval wars were carried out. I understand this would require a lot of typing, but I'm just wondering if anyone could provide me with an outline of medieval European war using an example. If someone could provide me with a basic outline of how the war was conducted, some of the major events, factors and causes, as well as results of the war, that would be fantastic and would really help me I think. I'm not bothered which war is used, though I'd like it to be something less mainstream than the wars of the roses or the hundred years war. Thank you so much to whoever decided to put the effort in to answer this!

The Indochina region, Indonesia, Borneo, Philippines, etc., Southeast Asia is a very water-centric, and if anything, sort of strike is as a not dissimilar arrangement to the Mediterranean region, replacing that body of water with the South China Sea, the core difference being many, many islands and archipelagos as opposed to the solid, Near East/African coast line.

So by the middle of the first millennium, CE, how well developed was that region in terms of maritime interconnectedness? Was there slight contact and a vague awareness of peoples in other parts of the region? Strong trade routes throughout the various islands and mainland? How influential was China in the trading of the region?

How developed was the shipbuilding trade there at the time? Was crossing from, say, modern Vietnam to the Philippines dangerous or routine?

[Late Antiquity] - [Southeast Asia] - [Ships]

Comparatively speaking, could you judge the education levels of ancient times against todays in a general sense?

I know that there's an understandable gap in what was taught, but are the skill levels about the same?

Why did the Germans put all that effort in exterminating the Jews while engaging in an all out war? Were they that committed to an ideology? Wouldn't it have been more rational from their perspective to win the war first and then exterminate the Jews?

There were many Popes with military inclination, who were hungry for power, and had connections with powerful monarchs, and had notably large coffers. What were the main reasons that there was so little territorial expansion in the Papal States?

Many Asian-Pacific myths share the theme of the heavens being to close to the earth and needing to be raised. Is this simply a metaphor or does this tell us something significant about that period in time? The theme of the great flood is shared by Noah's Ark and the Epic of Gilgamesh and we have found evidence to support that there was an actual flood. So it seems if there is a shared theme in myth across great regions then there was some fact in the myths.

I'm writing a novel in which one of the characters in a doctor in Whitby. The novel is set in 1891 and I was wondering whether he would have had access to The Lancet, a medical journal established in 1823, via subscription and whether or not he would have been able to access this from Whitby. Would it have been distributed across the country or just in London, where the publishing house was? How was The Lancet distributed?

I don't remember the exact documentary that I saw that from, I'll try to dig it up if people are interested.

I always assumed that it was a post-destruction of the Temple thing, but reading more, it seems this isn't true, and it's more of a Middle Ages thing. So how did it happen?