We are talking about an era where it was cumbersome to mass produce books and newspapers. Were the people, E.G a person from Europe know about what was happening in Asia, able to keep abreast of current events and secondly were they interested in knowing or not? Edit: OK the timescale is from 1000 AD till the invention of the printing press. The region is Asia and Europe.

For instance:

King A has a daughter (Ad)

King A then has a son (As)

This daughter then has a son (Ags).

Who is the heir when King A dies?

Hello im a history student, and in my first year i study the roman empire, but for that i have the sources and good academic books, but on the Etruscan's i dont have any thing, so i would like a few sugestions on books for reacerch, they can be more general, but i will also take academic works

World War II, and the disruption to European colonial holdings caused by the period of Japanese invasion and occupation, is generally seen as a key step in the eventual independence of many countries in Southeast Asia. It also seems that while the Japanese might have been just as hated, if not more so in some cases, by the local populations, they nevertheless did strike an important, if not fatal blow, to the image of white, European superiority that the colonial powers tried to cultivate. As far as I know, none of that is too controversial.

But what I'm wondering is how much that disruption and pulling back the curtain played in the actual coalescing of national identity and creation of liberation movements in those regions. That is to say, was there a real sense of Indonesian identity prior to 1942, or a strong liberation movement present in the years before Japanese occupation, and if not, can we tie its rise to the perception in changed power dynamics?

Additionally, did the Japanese military successes, even if not permanent, have any similar influences within colonial possessions outside of the region that they actually operated in, such as Africa?

In the movie, American aircraft repeatedly strafe the decks of the ship and it's anti-aircraft stations, killing many of the exposed crewman and gunners. It seems like strafing would only be good for killing crewman on the deck as well as attracting attention, due to the heavily armored decks and superstructure that battleships and cruisers had.

Was this just done for the shock factor? Was there any real benefit to strafing?

American football has been really focusing on the long-term consequences of concussions and injuries in sports. And while not anywhere near identical, Australian and european contact sports sort of rejected the pads and helmets like in the US. Was there any reason for the split, were these sports similar at one time, where did they diverge.

It seems like the perfect solution. There was a huge debate over California entering as either a free state or a slave state, but why not just cut California along the line of the Missouri compromise, making the northern half free and the southern half slave? At the time, the question was mainly about keeping balance in Congress, but this solution would not only retain that balance, it would also be adhering to former laws. Plus, it would help avoid the absurdly tough fugitive slave law that was passed in the Compromise of 1850.

Can someone here explain to me why this didn't happen?

There are a lot of stories about people being poisoned but do we have any evidence that these poisons worked? And if so what were they made of?

Was there any kind of collective decision among Albanian leaders to convert to Islam? If so, did this win them favor among the Ottoman elite?

What are the differences between the naginata, the nodachi, and the nagamaki?

How was is that the southern states that seceded from the union during the American Civil War were able to mobilize a force able to take on a professional army so quickly?

Why did people start accepting gold as payment? It doesn't seem to have much intrinsic value to ancient people.

I've heard it repeated that mixed first became popular during prohibition because the liquor was hard to drink, is this true? Also, how would your drink options at a bar be different after prohibition from the menus common before prohibition?

I have been listening to a podcast regarding myths and legends in European history and have gotten to the area going over the Aurthurian characters. I have imagined characters like Uther, Hengist, Horsa and Vortigern with the regard of: "oh, they are from the Anglo-Saxon settlement area and I have no idea what they wore or what kind of "soldiers" they were other than a few references to "clubs", "swords" and "shields" but then when I imagine the "Knights of Arthur" I imagine the look, equipment and supplies portrayed in Monty Python.

So fact, fiction or myth aside, I am curious as to what the "Knights" of the 5th, 6th and 7th century look like. Armor, weapons, equipment, anything. The few depictions that I have looked at come from the 11th-17th century and I doubt that they have much historical accuracy.