Looking for more information on what warfare looked like during this period. A few questions:

1. What were the arms and armor for the average infantry-man?

2. What about more prominent citizens?

3. How does this period of warfare compare and contrast to the previous Mycenaean style and later warfare of Classical Greece?

Bonus: Where does this fit into the Iliad? Is this the "Heroic warfare" we hear about, or is that more related to Mycenaean?

I was debating with a friend on what he thought about socialism, and said there WAS a communist (or socialist idk) revolution in the United States in the 20th century. I tried searching databases in American history and controversies, but I couldn't find anything about socialism in the US.

Given the Maginot line's reputation as some impenetrable defense, it seems strange that it protected all of France's eastern border except the part that Germany already invaded through in the previous war. I understand that Belgium was avowedly neutral, but was there any sense at the time that it was inadequate for the job? Or was it a calculated weakness intended to lure Germany into invading through neutral Belgium in order to ensure British assistance in any hypothetical war?

Primarily I'm curious to know if the average Roman citizen's diet benefited from the empire's vast trade routes, or if they were stuck with local fare for their meals. I'm also a foodie at heart so if there's any unique dishes or recipes from that time you'd like to share then please do so.

Only 25 countries recognize it as genocide .Is this for political reasons?

[deleted]

I'm interested in all aspects cultural/societal norms, economic/political climate, religions, I heard Mecca was a central for all the tribes idols and Mecca was conflict free and essentially a "tourist" attraction

The Dark Ages is an era in history I don't know a great deal about.

What was average European life like at the cusp of the Dark Ages? And during?

What causes and events led directly to the plunge into the Dark Ages? Was disease a factor at all?

What were some key developments or "things" lost as a result? writings? technology? culture?

Which area of Europe was affected the most?

Thank you if you can help me understand this era better! I also plan to embark on my own endeavor to understand and learn this period in history.

My knowledge of historical dueling comes mainly from fiction, and there are two circumstances that I am curious about the historical accuracy of. Both of these are from fiction set in the Napoleonic wars, in duels involving military officers.

The first is from the film The Duelists. The combatants fence with smallswords, and one wounds the other seriously, but non-fatally. For some reason, the characters in the film see this as a draw, and arrange to fight again another day. Is this historically accurate? You'd think that was a complete outcome. (For those of you who have seen the film, there are several other ways their duels end in a draw which I'm not sure about, if you wish to comment on them, but this is the one I am most interested in.)

The second is from the book League of Dragons (which is fantasy, but the dueling scene has no fanciful elements). The combatants are preparing to fire pistols across a field, when one shoots early, badly wounding the other. His second takes his place and fires a return shot, then asks for a second exchange, and severely wounds the other man.

Is this how an accident/cheat would have been dealt with? If the early shot had been fatal, could the shooter be charged with a crime?

In general, my questions are circling the questions: What counted as a victory in duels of this period, and how were the rules of the duel enforced?

Thank you.

Let's pretend I'm one of the first people to land in Australia. How did the natives receive me? How did we communicate? What kind of interactions would we have had?

To narrow the time down, I would say the Norman conquest.

It seems this is a tactic/technique requiring well-drilled, well-disciplined troops. My understanding is that most of the men who went a-viking were not professional soldiers and did not typically fight in well-drilled formations.

Im having a debate with my friend but since neither of us are historians, we thought we'd get a professional opinion.

So i keep getting the same google links over and over, i figured i would just ask you guys. My first question would be, do we have any information on what hannibals elephants looked like? Were they dressed up for war? Was there a wooden structure on their back? Or was it just a single man riding the elephant?
~
Also, when did Rome start using the eagle for their standard? Would they have used the eagle during the 2nd punic war? If they didnt, did they have anything similar to this, but just another animal or image?
~
Also does anyone have any battle plans of Cannae? I can really only find 2 set pictures of how the battle went and those are from wiki. Is there any place that would show how the battle progressed little by little.
~
Thank you if anyone answers. If this doesnt make sense im sorry i just woke up so im sort of scatter brained.

Why did nearly all civilisation adore gold? why not other metal that may be even rarer in their area?

Are there civilisation that absolutely didnt care about it?

Before Christ in the West and Muhammed in the East (I know Muhammed was not more Eastern than Jesus but you know) philosophers talk about logic, rhetorics, nobility, politics and all that. After that philosophers - at least the famous ones are talking about religion.

Is this the right perception of what happenned? If so, is there any explanation of why is that? Were classical philosophers less pious?