The Viking raids into England and France are both very well known but I haven't heard much about their raids into Germany.

I've heard 2 different reasons for this;

1. Germany was too poor and the raiders preferred the richer west frankia and England.

2. The German way of raising troops still relied on armed freemen and peasants and so could muster defenses much faster and could repulse raiders.

I'm not sure which is closer to the truth or maybe Germany faced just as many raids as France and England and We're just subject to the Ango-French bias of medieval history.

From what I can find, it was built during the reign of Hadrian but functioned for only a century because it had to be incorporated into the walls built against barbarian invasions during the crisis of the 3rd century.

I have three questions regarding this, to which I could not so far find the answers:

When exactly did this incorporation happen?

Why did it necessitate shutting down the amphitheater completely?

What does "incorporation into the walls" mean in practical terms?

Even one of those questions being answered would be of great help.

I am working on a play based upon the character and life of Russian tsar Peter the Great. I am especially interested in the All Joking, All Drunken Synod of Fools and Jesters, which seems to be some kind of absurd criticism on the state and church, created by the head of state himself.

The bibliography of the wikipedia page leads to barred articles mostly, I am looking for any kind of information about Peter's inner circle, personal life, and drinking habits. I have read a history of drunkenness and the biography written by Robert K. Massie is coming my way.

Any leads are appreciated, movies, docuentaries, articles and books, everything.

We all know they cross the Indus and reach the Hyphasis river, but then his solider refuses to go onward...

Do we have any information about what happened?

Also, my uneducated guess would be war elephants or something similarly scary, but I don't know if they were used for war before this... (Carthage used them around the same time, that is pretty much all I know.)

Thanks in advance, I love this sub

I have a text about islamophobia and it was made clear that I need to write about Islamophobia in our current year and islamophobia in the past but I can't find any text about islamophobia/Islam hate before 9/11

I ask this because I'm curious if something similar didn't happen in other colonies run by Catholic imperial powers, or it's just not being reported as much.

I'm not sure if it was documented (or even inferred to happen) in Spanish Latin America, let alone the Spanish Philippines which in many places was run de facto for the most part by Catholic religious orders (and had a lot of native children for the "taking"). Maybe broadly there was a similar system in those places, but I can't be sure, and even then the names and specific policies and operations might be different, but I just want to know if the Catholic colonial powers (eg. Spain, France, Portugal) were ever known to forcibly grab and educate native children (and tear them from their families) in their other overseas colonies too.

(I guess the Canadian example counts if we go back to French colonial settlement but I understand this really became a bigger problem when Canada was already an autonomous British Commonwealth government.)

NOTE: I am not denying any cases of it happening outside Canada or the US if there's proof, of course, but as it is I know very little on non-Canadian/US examples.

This question has always bothered me

And did any of these converts serve the Christians in battle?

I was reading an article about when Hitler became anti-Semitic and it said

“Historians usually date Hitler’s becoming a radical hater of Jews to his tumultuous years in Munich following World War I, a period when anti-Semitic sentiment raged in the city. Jews were blamed for the conditions under which Germany agreed to end the war, as well as for the economic ruin and political upheaval that followed.”

Is there a particular reason this conspiracy theory was so popular? Were any Jewish people involved in the treaty negotiations at all?

It was known as the “economic miracle”. I was wondering how this was accomplished and what actually took place to turn a capitulated nation into an economic powerhouse.

I’ve seen two competing theories, one where the men stab at each other with their spears and another where the two phalanges clash and push together (the Othismos). How would the latter not cause the front ranks in both armies to be crushed to death by the men behind them? For which theory is there currently more evidence?

Thank you in advance

I was watching a video debate by French Baguette Intelligence. In one video one of the people talking says that the Haitian revolt was a genocide against the french. I commented that I disagree as the reason to my knowledge they killed people was because they were enslaved. I'm Haitian and so I really want to know. (Parents are Haitian I haven't been to Haiti or anything. I would be a little disappointed I guess if it turned out it was a genocide as Haiti being the 1st black republic is really cool.)

I enjoyed the film, but at several points found it a bit striking that the U-boats seemed to be doing things that made it much easier for the Americans to attack back rather than the kind of hit and run tactics I'd have expected. Did they really go after escorts so aggressively, and in ways that exposed themselves not just to depth charges but direct gunfire?

On a recent episode of "Tides of History" Dan Jones talks about writing his upcoming book about the 100 Years War with all the style and clichés of modern war films (e.g. Jarhead, Apocalypse Now). He talked about how Edward III faced opposition when landing on what we now know as Omaha Beach (e.g. crossbows and trebuchets). I've been wondering if most armies faced in this time.

Today almost all scientific output is published in English. However, the rise of English is a quite recent phenomenon. While it makes sense to me that german went on a decline after both world wars and the science boycott of the Entente, I'm not sure how french dropped out. Partly probably due to the cold war and the rise of russian science (it would make sense to rally behind English).

But did journals, for example, encourage french speaking scientist to publish in english? And why would they comply? If I'm sufficient in french and did publish all my prior work in french why bother switching to English?

I'm especially interested if there were guidelines or recommendations that somehow forced scientists to abandon french?

We all know how colonizers brought diseases to North America that ravaged the indigenous populations. I even remember reading that European dogs brought diseases that killed off many NA dog species.

I’m wondering if there were diseases that were introduced to the colonizers by indigenous people. And if so, why didn’t they have such a drastic effect?