I've heard people say Hitler was a crazed mad man (of which I'm inclined to definitely believe). Others have said that he likely didn't buy into his own antisemitic rambling wholesale, and that it's an example of political scape goating.

The apparent statement is from around the 11th september 1914. I don't understand what he meant with it. Would he have been executed for causing the war?

The book is quite interesting but I think Strachan jumps from place to place too much and sometimes he doesn't provide sources making it a bit confusing to read.

Edit: Well I misunderstood it. I thought he meant that Franz Ferdinand would have been killed if he were not dead.

I've seen this theory from a lot of people that people in primitive societies didn't know how babies were actually conceived, with most of the evidence not really being concrete and based off speculation. One of the main arguments is that after the advent of agriculture, males found out their role in pregnancy and therefore started to create different religions wherein God is a man and he can reproduce through ludicrous parts of his body (armpits, forehead, mouth, etc).

This seems to indicate that fathers didn't even exist back then, and that fatherhood in general sort of started out as this strange realization about how basic human biology works. I wouldn't call it an "envious attack on mothers" which researchers like Sebastian Kraemer claim, but I'm still skeptical. Can anyone explain?

[deleted]

It's a known fact that, by the end of the XIV century, Greenland's Norse colonies were suffering economically and socially as a result of worsening weather, shift of trade routes, possible conflict with the Inuit and other issues. By 1380 the Western Settlement had already been abandoned, but in 1408 - when the last known account about Norse Greenland was written - the Eastern Settlement seemed to be alive and relatively well.

Then the Norse just seem to vanish from Greenland.

I've read some sources here and there claiming that some archaeological findings, such as the ones at Herjolfsnes, lead to believe that the Vikings inhabited in Greenland at least until around the mid-XV century - which wouldn't answer my question, it would only shift the time limit. There are also other sources, like Seaver's The Frozen Echo, which seem to have much more information about Greenland in the 1400s than what is available to the public. I've even read a story about an Icelandic sailor known as Jon the Greenlander that was blown off-course to Greenland around 1540 and happened to find the dead body of a Viking in a house near the beach.

I'd like to know how much of this is true. Is it possible that the Vikings just died of cold and hunger in complete isolation? Has the archaeological research progressed any further in the last years?

Wikipedia states that the English walked out in order to put down a raid by Xantrailles and La Hire, but I'm pretty sceptical of this? Monstrelet says that the English just upped and left, and I imagine that there was just no way to reconcile with the French demands that the English forgo their claim to the French crown? Plus, of course, Bedford was dying elsewhere and his and Burgundy's friendship had cooled since Anne of Burgundy died in 1432...

Perhaps I'm wrong? Does anybody know any more about this?

I saw the influx of Ancient Greek questions, and it got me thinking about this. Thanks in advance, for any questions answered.

Clarification: asking about propaganda FROM the Soviets intended to destabilize the U.S.

I read a little bit about the legendary Guan Yu. I know he is like a god for many people, but I have a question about the spelling of the name. Is Guan Ti = The god and Guan Yu = The human ? Thank you :)

I know it was run by privateer-turned-pirates, but were there any specific men or "founding fathers" of the Republic of Pirates?

I mean in most movies/comics/whatever you see/read that the persian casualties were massive. but could those few spartans really do "massive" casualties to the persian army?

Hey, I'm looking to read books that focus on this period only because I want maximum details. I've already looked at the recommendations of AskHistorians but I didn't quite find what I was looking for. I've narrowed my search down to: 𝘈𝘯𝘤𝘪𝘦𝘯𝘵 𝘙𝘰𝘮𝘦: 𝘍𝘳𝘰𝘮 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘌𝘢𝘳𝘭𝘺 𝘙𝘦𝘱𝘶𝘣𝘭𝘪𝘤 𝘵𝘰 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘈𝘴𝘴𝘢𝘴𝘴𝘪𝘯𝘢𝘵𝘪𝘰𝘯 𝘰𝘧 𝘑𝘶𝘭𝘪𝘶𝘴 𝘊𝘢𝘦𝘴𝘢𝘳 by Matthew Dillon and Lynda Garland,

𝘛𝘩𝘦 𝘙𝘪𝘴𝘦 𝘰𝘧 𝘙𝘰𝘮𝘦 by Anthony Everitt,

𝘛𝘩𝘦 𝘗𝘶𝘯𝘪𝘤 𝘞𝘢𝘳𝘴 by Adrian Goldsworthy,

𝘛𝘩𝘦 𝘙𝘰𝘮𝘢𝘯𝘴: 𝘍𝘳𝘰𝘮 𝘝𝘪𝘭𝘭𝘢𝘨𝘦 𝘵𝘰 𝘌𝘮𝘱𝘪𝘳𝘦 by Boatwright,

𝘛𝘩𝘦 𝘉𝘦𝘨𝘪𝘯𝘯𝘪𝘯𝘨𝘴 𝘰𝘧 𝘙𝘰𝘮𝘦: 𝘐𝘵𝘢𝘭𝘺 𝘧𝘳𝘰𝘮 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘉𝘳𝘰𝘯𝘻𝘦 𝘈𝘨𝘦 𝘵𝘰 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘗𝘶𝘯𝘪𝘤 𝘞𝘢𝘳𝘴, 𝘊𝘢 1,000-264 𝘉𝘊 by Tim J. Cornell

𝘢𝘯𝘥 𝘍𝘳𝘰𝘮 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘎𝘳𝘢𝘤𝘤𝘩𝘪 𝘵𝘰 𝘕𝘦𝘳𝘰: 𝘈 𝘏𝘪𝘴𝘵𝘰𝘳𝘺 𝘰𝘧 𝘙𝘰𝘮𝘦 𝘧𝘳𝘰𝘮 133 𝘉𝘊 𝘵𝘰 𝘈𝘋 68 by H.H. Scullard. I've thought of reading the Tim J. Cornell then going to Goldsworthy and then reading Scullard, or just reading Matthew Dillon and Lynda Garland. Are those books good enough or do you have any better books to recommend?

I'd like maximum details, so I don't know if reading just one book about this period would be a good idea, so which book should I read first and which books should i follow it with?

Also, if you don't know of any better books and you think reading Tim J. Cornell or Everitt or and then Goldsworthy is a good idea, which book should i follow it with for the late Republic days? Just looking to get a thorough understanding of this period. Keep in mind that I do want to read the Goldsworthy book about the Punic wars because people say he covers this period well. Sorry for the long message and thanks for your patience :)

Edit 1: I'm looking for modern books in general that don't feature dated and untrue information, I'm not sure if I should trust Livy or the other ancient historians much

I'm doing quite an important history project soon and I was thinking of doing it on Przemyśl. It's a rarely covered event it seems so I think it would be a good choice, but sources solely dealing with the siege are nonexistent from what I have searched, so any suggestions at all would be welcome, even those that only partly deal with the siege

What I have now is:

Ring of Steel : Germany and Austria Hungary at war 1914-1918 - Alexander Watson

Attrition - Fighting the First World War - William Philpott

The Great War 1914-1918 - Peter Hart

But I don't know if these are the best

Often two enemy trenches were very close to each other? Who dug them? Were soldiers killed while they were building the trenches?

I am reading A Night To Remember and there doesn't seem to be any mention of the ship breaking into two pieces like the movie depicts. I remember something about this being a confirmed theory but the book doesn't give any hint that it happened.

So I am a fan of the total war series and something which always boggled my mind was, is that archers who, doesn't matter on which said, are able to fire over the wall which seperates them from the enemy and hit them.

They have to do that pretty much blindly or get guided by sound or have someone who can see the enemy guide their shots.

So do you guys know anything about this?

I would really like to understand how our ancestors figured out how to make metals so many millenia ago.

How did they figure out which stone to use? How did they even come to the idea to melt said stone? How did they get temperatures high enough (was someone just testing if they could melt rocks)? How did they find out that mixing tin and copper - two very different metals - made bronze - a stronger metal?

Thank you for your answer!

(TL:DR at the bottom.)

Hello, I've done my research on WW1, WW2 and Communism and I have a few questions.

From my knowlege, I can see that West Germany was given aid by the West in case of a future WW3 where West Germany fights East Germany.

What I also found was that Germany after WW1 was treated like dirt in the sense that it couldn't neogiate, until 1930s where some of the restrictions were relaxed.

This question was inspired as seeing Germany in it's current state especally after losing two world wars makes me wonder that was it the funds and aid that the West given to West Germany that made it powerful?

TL:DR

1. How much aid did West Germany receive?

2. How much aid did East Germany receive?

3. Was Germany punished for WW2 as much as it had been punished for WW1?