I once again stumbled upon some stuff about the Mongol conquests and the terrible massacres that they did everywhere, and then it struck me:

"How on earth could they massacre hundreds of thousands of civilians, when breaching the walls of a city?"

Seeing how the besieging armies were sometimes outnumbered up to 100:1 by the civilian population. After all, even a peasant with a stick is dangerous when fighting for his life and his families' life, and when there's 20 of them for every Mongol soldier. I just don't see how it'd be possible. Or do the estimates for the massacres consist solely of old women, cripple and children?

It's not like the usual 'paralysing fear', that often prevents prisoners from resisting, is applicable when the enemy is straight up running through the streets, entering houses and killing everyone in sight, either... right? You'd have to fight.

Extremely curious to hear on the matter from an expert. Cheers!

Please answer what would happen for both wife and husband, and whether there was consequences for the third party.

Also in extension the status of open marriages or polygamy

My question is pretty much the title, but to be more clear I was wondering what happened to the kings of conquered countries. As in, if a king was defeated by an attacking force were they usually captured, killed, or something else?

I am a U.S. citizen and the way I was taught about the American Revolution really demonized the British. Where they actually huge jerks or is that just nationalist teaching?

I know FDR did, and Teddy Roosevelt tried, but was there a general consensus among the electorate/parties that running for a 3rd term just wasn't the right thing to do?

I have a friend who claims that pluralistic views of the truth were the default 'pretty much everywhere' before Christianity. I find this difficult to believe, but I lack the expertise to be sure. Do we have surviving records of pluralist views expressed or widely accepted in other ancient cultures?

Edit: to clarify, I take him to mean by 'pluralist' something like 'relativist' - e.g. that something might be true for me, but false for you.

So I recently heard a song on the radio about "Saxon Candy," and it got me thinking what types of preserved sweets similar to candies the Saxon inhabitants of England would have had without sugar.

Are there any examples out there?

Sure wanting to conquer all of Europe is a pretty big deal but was his regime necessarily "evil"? From what I heard he loosened restrictions on Jews and promoted Education and really the only thing vaguely hitlerian about him was the complete and utter hatred of the English but even then he didn't want to wipe them off of the face of the earth? So why is he grouped as such a big dictator?

Especially given that I have read that Romans were aware of the toxicity of lead around the time of Julius Caesar's rule - Vitruvius wrote about it in Book VIII of De Architectura.

I have had an interest in metallurgy for quite some time now. I have also had an interest in history for as long as I can remember with feudal Europe as my primary interest.

I hope I can help answering this broad question by being a bit more specific. 1: What made the blacksmith decide what to make? For example: Did the lord give him an order or did he made what the citizens or villagers in his surrounding had demand for?

2: How did the blacksmith acquire ore and fuel? Did he buy it on the market, or from villagers finding ores in the forest or at river beds? Did he go out to find them himself or let his family find it?

3: How did the selling take place? Would he have a stall at a market or would he have a stall right outside the smithy where people would come by and buy something? Or would the customers come by, made an order for example: "Fix these horseshoes." and come by when the order was completed?

4: What kind of forge would be used most frequently during this period? Were different forges used for different goals?

5: Was there a big range from poor to prosperous blacksmiths during this period? If so what kind of blacksmith was expected to be more prosperous?

I hope these 5 guide lines helps you answering. I appreciate the help. I should note that in this example I assumed my blacksmith is a man. I'd rather not add /her /she everywhere. Thank you for reading!

For example, English and Scots are very similar languages but are there components of the Scots language that still resemble Old English rather than Modern English?

Hello! I'll preface the question by adding that my knowledge of Rome prior to Julius Ceasars rule is limited at best & I'm not a native speaker, so I apologize in advance for any grammar mistakes.

My question is as follows, having read large amounts of Adrian Goldsworthy's work with regards to Augustus, how did the perception of a dictator or emperor change between Caesar being appointed dictator for life & Augustus becoming Princeps civitatis?

Was it simply the case of Augustus being the "better" ruler in terms of keeping the ruling class in check, that allowed him to hold power where Julius Ceasar had failed, or were there other factors at play?

Sidequestion; It is my understanding that the title Rex was more controversial than being proclaimed half-god or god, is there any known reason why that is? To a modern person it is rather perplexing because of the perceived power that the word "god" has.

There was a thing--a religion, a book, a business, a country. It belonged to someone. Then it belonged to someone else. Tell us what happened in between!

[deleted]

I study modern history at high school, and we've recently learnt about how Von Papen was essentially vice chancellor to Hitler. The only places in the syllabus he is mentioned is in 1933, and then in 1946 at the Nuremberg Trials, so I was wondering what happened to Von Papen after the Enabling Act was passed?

Sorry if my formatting isn't great, this is my first ever post. Thanks heaps

I know that similarities include parallels from the Flood Story of Gilgamesh/Enuma Elish to that of Genesis, that Gilgamesh and the Huluppu Tree is thought to have some parallel to the garden of Eden, and God is referred to as Elohim in Genesis 2, while the chief deity of Ancient Caanan was El. Are these parallels thought to be mere coincidence?