Looking at the globe Hawaii seems to be floating in the middle of the Pacific. How did the precursors to Hawaiian aboriginals know there were islands there, and how did they get there ?

It seemed that Italian artists liked nude figures more than northern artists. Someone mentioned that it's simply due to difference in weather.

Could it be market driven? Just like in our time, violence and sex sell better on TV.

There were even so many nude figures on church walls and ceilings in Rome. One would think that the Church should be quite conservative in its taste.

How did the current Pope react when he was told of the printed Bible/s? Is there anywhere i can find more information on it?

Maybe this sounds like complete garbage, but my history teacher's family is from Belgium. Somehow his grandfather got pictures of what look like rockets/missiles with cockpits. He took the photos towards the end of the war. I just remember him saying they could never find any other record of the missile things. I also don't have the pictures, but I was just wondering if any of you know anything about this.

[deleted]

For example the various Chinese dynasties. How does one power overtake the previous one? Is it a long drawn out process or is it just like "Oh we have a new king who isnt related to the other one" and people just accept that? Or am I mistaken? I just dont understand how one dynasty succeeds the other. Is it through conflict? Or another one starts in another area and the other fades so there are simultaneous dynasties in power? Etc

When did the professional standards for sports come to be - formal umpires, written rules, and the organizations (NFL, NLB, NBA, etc.) that enforce them and create rules for trades, contracts, and business practices as well as rules for playing the sports?

My friend just showed me his old Lutheran bible that was passed down from generation to generation in his family, and I was wondering what the odds are of that artifact still being around today.

So I see client states mentioned often in reference to Rome. While I understand they were states that were essentially subservient to Rome without actually being part of the empire I'm curious what they actually provided the empire with.

Were they taxed? Did they just provide political support? Were they just a buffer against hostile armies? Were they just left independent because the politicians at the time couldn't think of a good excuse to annex it?

Irish Celts in particular, I guess around 58 BCE when the Romans invaded Gaul?

I know the stereotype of them wearing blue, green and red tartan but how did they wear it? as tunics, separated pants and shirts? what about cloaks and shalls? Tattoos, hairstyles (For men) Jewelry if any.

Also what materials where they made of? how did they dye their clothing?

The title is a little blunt, but I couldn't quite figure out how to word it.

I'm a history student at a UK university and my main area of interest is early modern Europe. I was having a discussion with another history student about Philip II of Spain. He argued that Philip used religion as a sort of facade to justify his political goals. I disagreed (and my tutor agreed with my side) saying that Philip was deeply pious and religion played a huge role in his life, often guiding his political ambitions, not the other way around.

Nowadays it might not be so difficult to look back and imagine someone use religion as a facade to promote political goals, but I've come to believe that this wasn't the case in the 16th century. God/religion really was a huge part of people's life, from the peasants to the prince. HOWEVER what I don't understand (I admit because I've not studied in depth) is how powerful religions figures like the Borgia Popes (and others) could so blatantly use their position of religious power for their own gain.

My question is if God truly was important to everyone, how could people, even Popes, justify doing unholy things for personal/family gains if they believed they would go to hell for such religious crimes (such as fraud, murder, simony etc).

I'm under the impression that the shield is pretty standard or at least used fairly often in other East Asia empires like China and Korea throughout their respective histories. Is there any reason why there seems to be a lack of shield usage in Feudal Japan besides those fixed bowmen screens? Especially given how prevalent bowmen and matchlocks were in that era.

There wasn't a czech nation state for a long time in history, and afaik the only thing that would come close is the kingdom of bohemia.

Would the language/culture from that time be called bohemian then? Or what was the situation. (Also hoe about not just the english name for the language/culture in the past, but also how it was called in the german regions or bohemia itself.)

I'm reading Command And Control by Eric Schlosser, a genuinely fascinating General history of nuclear weapons in the Cold War. A general theme emerges, to whit, nobody ever successfully grappled with the problems of keeping and using nuclear weapons.

A very specific question intrigues me however- when planning for nuclear war at the time when the B-52 was the prime weapons system- during chrome domes hey day, or at the peak of the Cuban missile crisis to be specific, what was the plan for the bombers and their aircrews? How did the planners at SAC think it was going to play out? Was it just an overt suicide mission, or was there a real prospect of returning to a base somewhere?

I have read a lot of memoirs by B-52 crew members, and it doesn't seem like they had much faith in it working out well for them.

Is anyone able to shed some light on this (admittedly esoteric) area for me? I have read and read around the issue, but classification and the nature of it make it a tough nut to crack.

My thanks in advance.

Louis.