I read once that European medieval rulers would use the collapse of Rome as a justification that democracy/republicanism didn't work, thereby further legitimizing their autocratic rule. Is there any truth to this? How much might the average citizenry and the nobility know about Roman or Greek democracy, or rule by an elected body?

I of course believe its important, but seem to have trouble wrapping my head around it. How did the Protestant Reformation change Western Civilization and the world?

How did they communicated when they needed back up, medical assistance or needed to ask for instructions or give instructions?

Am I free that very instant? Do I start working for the same family but for a wage now? Is there any reasonable enforcement of the new laws that prevents the same people from just continuing to enslave me? Can my owners just up and kick me off the land I'd at least tacitly been allowed to live on in exchange for labor my whole life if they don't think I'm good enough to earn a wage? Are there enough protection laws in place to prevent my former master from now arguing that he's paying me more than enough by putting a roof over my head and food in my stomach? Are there any legitimate opportunities for me? Are there any dedicated government or charity structures around to help me hit the ground running?

What was the reason for so many small German states such as Hanover, Schaumburg-Lippe, Waldeck and Pyrmont and so on...

What's the earliest example of helicopters in warfare and how did they change the battles were fought?

I'm reading Polybius' history, and he describes the Romans' initial attempts to build a navy as being troubled because they had no craftsmen familiar with quinquereme design.

They apparently solve this problem by using a beached Carthaginian design, but Polybius mentions that in their initial expedition to Sicily they "borrowed quinqueremes and triremes from Tarentum and Locri, and even from Elea and Neapolis; and having thus collected a fleet, boldly sent their men across upon it."

Why wouldn't the romans just copy these ships?

Were there any differences between the punic and the italian/greek quinqueremes that would lead the romans to prefer using the punic design?

Or is this whole section just mildly nonsensical? Or possibly just a poorly thought out parable about the crafty romans and their adaptability/gumption?

Recently I'v heard people say things along the lines of 'the constitution gives me the right to rebel'. I was wondering if this is actually true. I know in some countries that is the case, but I can't find any references to the US. Thank you.

Did the pre-Norman Saxons buy into the idea that their own vernacular was more barbarous that the Church's preferred language?

I'm assuming when two sets of cavalry met they would both charge at each other, and the guys who got dismounted would end up fighting dismounted enemy troops, kind of similar to how the Battle of Bastards started in GoT.

EDIT: I'm thinking of cavalry engagements during the Punic Wars if it matters.

It's a common observation that people in old photographs aren't smiling. And I've often heard that the story about "it took 30 mins to take a picture" is an oversimplification of the reason why no one was smiling. But somewhere between daguerreotypes and polaroids, everyone decided that smiling was to be the done thing. How come?

What examples are there where councils made rulers into their puppets, or the rulers obeyed the will of a council, or any instance where the council was the real power behind the throne and had the final say within a decision making capacity?

Sorry if this question was asked before but I could not see any post directly questioning the conversion of Constantine to Christianity. As a start, one might delve into what Christianity meant and how one could become a Christian at Constantine's time. How realiable are the accounts telling that Constantine converted to Christianity?

[deleted]

Phong Nhi, Phong Nhat, Ha My, Binh Hoa, Binh Tai, Binh An, Tay Vin... And the list goes on.

Only major incidents for the United States I can find are My Lai and Thang Phong. Why were South Korean troops serving in the country more likely to commit such events?