In football, rugby etc. England and Wales compete as own teams but in like swimming these compete under Great Britain. Why aren't it any Scottish flagged sprinters?

I'm aware of the various Jewish and Christian persecutions, the Empire wasn't all that tolerant. But what convinced the ruling class that their religion must be the religion of everyone in the empire, therefore paganism had to be outlawed?

While reading Herodotus 'The Histories', I noticed that he often mentions 'God'. Does he mean 'the gods' or is he referencing a specific deity? An example of this is in 1.31: "'Croesus', replied Solon, 'I know God is envious of human prosperity and likes to trouble us; and you question me about the lot of man.'"

It'd be interesting to see both sides of the same story.

Did the commanders of each army get along well or did they not trust each other, did the troops themselves have falling out?

*Most populous city in the world in 1000AD, if I didn't make it clear in the question sorry

Hi guys!

I'm trying my best to locate the building where the provisional government of the free french was based in 1940 and later, in 1944 when it re located there from Algeria.

Is there any way someone knows where it was?

I'm interested in why this regime crumbled and gave way to the very different system under the Third Reich.

I have seen lots of discussions of how women dealt with personal hygiene and menstruation in lots of other eras. But I couldn't find anything specific on Workhouses or Poorhouses or indeed prisions of the 18th and 19th centuries. Women here were of a poor background but obviously they, possibly unlike their contemporaries outside institutions lead very prescribed lives. Often they had uniforms. I know that Workhouses became very obsessed with keeping inmates and new residents bathed and clean. So what did women do?

Is there any documentary evidence for materials like pads that would have been provided? Or did women have to improvise? I've been to my local Workhouse Museum and couldn't find anything on the subject. Does anyone have any further ideas for where I could find out about more?

Why do people recognise the Egyptian claim to Gaza and Jordanian claim to the West Bank, without mention that these lands belonged to Palestine in 1948? Why does Israel get flak from other countries for occupying lands that belonged to Palestine initially but taken by Arab states following the 1948 Arab-Israeli War? Wasn't Palestine supposed to have Gaza and the West Bank? Can't they then form Palestine from these lands that was given to them in the UN Partition Plan, if the Arabs were their allies?

What sort of things would a Chinese noble looking for the best education available learn about? How would it differ from a contemporary European education?

I was thinking about this after seeing a scene of a group of soldiers in full armour next to a camp fire. I'd assume this is very unrealistic and any medieval soldier would be out of their armour by the time the sun is setting.

But how much did they actually wear their armour? Did it make sense to travel in armour, in case of ambushes etc.

I'm specifically interested in casual situations. Pilgrims, bodyguards, other kinds of travellers without a direct military purpose. But information about travelling in military situations is also fine.

There's large African-American populations in the South due to slavery, and in the North due to the post-war migrations. But how about the West?

And how did it work?

How did the Soviets justify the division of Poland with the Nazis after the war once Poland became a Soviet satellite state?

Did the Polish or Russian government try to justify the pact after the war? How so?

Thanks in advance.

Hello everyone,

What were the tanks that the British and French tanks from the Early Second World war (invasion of France)? What was their armament, quality and how were they used? How did they stack up against German units?

Granted, I'm responding to my own experiences somewhat, but: university professors promote this idea that "X could have gone otherwise" or "there's no reason X had to be this way."

I took two American History electives in which the instructors kept repeating this sort of talk, like... obsessively. Why? I thought we were supposed to be interested in what really happened instead of what might have happened if some other prior factor had been different.

Rolling back the recording tape of history is not an option, so why is it important to keep potentials--that didn't happen--in mind in a study of things that actually happened?

Edit: dp = do, in title... damn reddit limitations

I just read Hyperion (a sci-fi novel, I highly recommend it), and there is a scene where a character relives the Battle at Agincourt. One thing that struck me was a small detail that heralds were discussing between themselves of what to name the battle that just occurred. Was this a common idea, and how was it conducted? I feel like allowing enemies to discuss what just happened would be an issue.

[deleted]