So I'm aware that in ~14th century most of the medieval armies were made up of either nobles or levied freeman/peasants, however I can't find any reference to private soldiers or guards of nobles.

Who would these nobles use as guards for their house or when travelling? I'm assuming that they would have a small number of armed men for general purposes and I keep seeing references suggesting it was the case but nothing definite. I know wealthy nobles and royalty employed knights to work in their household but what about lower nobility who can't afford such expenses, such as landed knights?

Why do the Netherlands consist of two countries, Holland and Belgium and why are citizens of Holland called Dutch?

I'm trying to get a general idea of the development of arms and armour throughout history. Not just the types of armor used. That I can find with a simple google search. Rather what caused the evolution and all kinds other factors.

Such a question alone, breaks this subs rules. Recently I made a try at narrowing down a timeline and geographical area. Backfired somewhat. So I'm wondering.

How should I approach this? What kind of timeline and geographical constraints should I place for the questions?

My world history education glossed over this among many other topics. But it seemed in the past 2000 years Cuba was only brought to prominence post WW2. So what happened in post WW2 era that made Cuba such a heated topic leading up till recent political changes between the US and Cuba.

During this argument over the removal of the Confederate flag, I've heard the argument that the civil war wasn't mainly over slavery.

I am currently studying world history and a major part of that is understanding the agricultural revolution and the transition from hunter and gathers to a more sedentary lifestyle with farming. Now, the neolithic era brought on division of labour, settlements, etc, but historians and many people know that castles and large stone cities were erupted all over Europe, the Middle East, and parts of Northern and Eastern Africa. Now, I know that the agricultural revolution happened around the same time all over the world, the Olmec, the Mesopotamians, and the Shang Dynasty all started around the same time due to the neolithic revolution happening around the same time. So why is that when you look at Mesopotamia, Europe, Africa, and Asia we see see castles and large stone structures, but when looking at North America, we see natives were still using wood, leaves, mud, and sand for their structures.

P.S. I am aware that in South America and Central America, the Aztec and Incas did have large stone structures and cities, which were marvellous, but I want to know specifically about North America. Why did the European settlers not arrive to see Stone castles in New England, as they were so used to in Europe?

I'm an amateur Classical art historian who does Classical Art competitions, and recently I've been finding material on tests that I've never studied before. Can anybody recommend a book that shows the art and styles of antiquity with pictures? All the books that I find are either too vague or have long pages of theses and history without any actual pictures or examples. I need a book that hits all the pieces and buildings with short, but specific explanations.

Were hundreds of thousands of cart-horses, war-horses, and farm horses suddenly irrelevant and out-of-work? If so, what happened to them?

What factors determined the evolution?

How much of an effect did technology or the lack of it have?

Were some manufactoring processes standardized?

How was mass-production handled?

What sort of materials were used?

What caused the transition from one type of weapons and armour to another?

How long were weapons and armour of a certain type used for?

What effect did the socio-economic structure have?

I'm trying to understand knighthood and the breakdown of its order and history, but these questions are on my mind and I just want to know these and also why they died out. This may sound very ignorant but I'd like to learn, if possible. Thank you for any and all responses!

So I was in bed last night watching Kingdom of Heaven and the line "Go to where the men speak Italian, then continue till they speak something else." never really clicked in my head until now. In the crusades the European Army united in one goal to fight the Muslim armies in the Holy Land, I also understand the Pope was the reason why this came about. That being said, seeing as how France and England and the Holy Roman Empire, etc. were all on the same side, how did they communicate with each other?

1. Was it common for important leaders of that time to speak multiple languages?
2. Or did everyone speak Latin as a second language and used it as the conduit in their communication?
3. Or perhaps they simply used translators like we do today.

Thanks in advance.

Following the horrors of Word War 2 its understandable that the country would be exhausted and done with war. How did the country react to being sent over to the Pacific once more? How was the government able to rile up the nation? How did veterans from WW2 feel about being sent to war again? Was WW2 still fresh on the minds of the nation?

I posted this on /r/askreddit and someone suggested I post it here for a better response.

Were some fleets worse off than others? Baltic vs Black vs Pacific vs Northern...