Reading a book about Vikings the writer strongly emphasizes how wrong the modern idea of the Vikings is and that they were mostly tradesmen and farmers. Their expeditions were mostly made to explore and collect goods and if they could avoid to contrast and fight other people, they would. This is kind of the opposite idea that people who are not familiar with Vikings have, so where does this misinformation come from? is it a case of bad propaganda made by other people, like christians?

I also read about the accounts of Ibn Fadlan describing his encounters with the Norsemen (which he called Rus is that right?). I read a scene from his journals regarding the funeral of a chief and the killing of a slave girl and another one where he describes how dirty and smelly they were. I had the impression that his accounts were closer to the modern idea that we have about the Vikings rather then the one I read in the aforementioned book. Did the two "groups" developed different habits? or are they exactly the same people and I'm just really confused? Sorry for my English I hope what I'm asking is clear.

Credit to /u/Astrogator and /u/georgy_k_zhukov for suggesting this topic.

In what cases are counter-factual scenarios or "what if?" type questions useful for shining a light on historical inquiry? What authors have used this method to produce thought-provoking works?

On the flip side of that, are there any dangers in counter-factual scenarios?

Edit- forgot to do next weeks topic. It shall be: How do you define power?

I've been doing a lot of research on the Ottoman Empire for a personal project, and something that has stumped me is... I am having an extremely difficult time finding visual references for everyday structures. There is a lot of information on various mosques, bridges, etc. but not a lot on, say, what a house or residential district looked like, what the house layout was, interior design, common household items, etc.

If anyone could help point me in the right direction, I would greatly appreciate it! (Or if there are some resources I may be missing due to not using the correct search terms.)

Of course I realise that this will vary depending on which emperor specifically (I was thinking Maximilian III and Charles V more specifically though) but, generally speaking, how powerful was the emperor? In terms of both military might, and political influence amongst the states of the empire.

I am primarily curious in the actual infrastructure of the matter--what drive, for example, the building of churches and particularly the placement of priests? Was it driven by missionaries seeking to bring religion to the "godless" lands (as is often portrayed in movies)? Or did the towns themselves take an "if you build it they will come" approach? An at what point in frontier development (or closing, I suppose) did the infrastructure of religion develop? Were churches and priests in the vanguard or did they largely follow economic development?

We all know of how the dynamic between Mussolini and Hitler was where while Mussolini was initially successful in grasping power, Hitler was the one who led Germany as the main adversary of the Allies during WWII. I was wondering if there was anything after the period of grasping power that Mussolini was successful in?

History often paints Mussolini as a failure. I'd like to see if there is another side to this point of view.

I have been doing a search about wine in the Bible, looking at it from Hebrew word studies, history and culture. My question is: Did God approve of the use of fermented wine in the Old testament? Please make use of the various Hebrew words (shechar, yayin, tirosh, asis), and support the answer with cultural and historical knowledge of wine-making back then, as well as Scriptural points. For example, priests drank yayin, and yet could not drink it while performing priestly duties in the Temple to differentiate between clean and unclean, holy and unholy (Lev. 10:9-11). Is this an indication that fermented wine was used but not approved by God? Wine was used in drink offerings, and yet this was tirosh wine for firstfruits...so was this the wine that God vewed as acceptable?

At what point did Europe become conscious of Asia's existence? By that I'm asking at what point did they find each other, start trading, communicating, and sharing ideas and fully noticing each other?

I looked for an answer online but didn't find it. All it seems to me is that one day someone said "Let's find Asia!" but obviously this cannot be the case. Any help is good help.

Thanks!

I know about the oldest joke but what's the oldest pun? How would we know it was a pun if we don't have all the vocabulary, anyway?

I know this movie is fictional, but still.

• Did the Nazis have time and resources to go around France "hunting" Jews?

• If so, would they really search this thoroughly? I mean, they're way out in the country, where there's only the one house as far as you can see. They spend a lot of time just talking to the guy, and they're pretty polite to him too. They also are going through records of known people. Is this related to why it's illegal in France for the government to collect religious demographics today?

• If the hider gave up the hiding Jews, would he really be "rewarded"? Would he actually be marked down as someone to watch closely? Would he be killed along with the Jews? What if some of the Jews then escaped like in the movie?

• Is it likely that a French dairy farmer and a German soldier would really have English as their best common language? Since it's an American movie, I wouldn't be surprised if all the dialog was in English with no mention of it at all, but they begin in French.

• Are the clothes and house accurate? What about the Nazi's pipe?

From my understanding Spain was heavily in bed with Napoleon already. The King and his son were under Napoleon's influences and prepared to marry a Bonaparte to tie the two together. It looks like Napoleon would have been able to exert a huge amount of influence over Spain without ever having to invade it. Perhaps it is hind sight, but seizing direct control through a coup just seems foolish.

We're curious about non religious affiliated items (white dresses, wedding bands, engagement rings, groomsmen / bridesmaids, etc.) My new wife and I were curious - thanks!

I've spent some time learning about late medieval Japanese history, and have been fascinated with just how...complex it really is.

The Battle of Sekigahara is one of the watershed moments when Nobunaga Oda was able to more or less defeat half of Japan with his arquebus units; it directly led to the Japanese Empire that participated in World War II.

However, all things in history build upon each other. While Sekigahara, the Meiji Restoration, and the Boshin War are important turning points in the history of that archipelago, I'd like to know about what key battles precipitated those. What prior battles made Japan what it is today?

A list of missions or something? I have some of his papers, but I'm pretty sure they don't mention anything of the sort. I have tens of letters he wrote home to his sister as well, but he generally avoids talking about the war directly, instead opting to discuss the weather, conditions, family and friends.

I recall reading somewhere that many people involved in the English Civil War (ECW) had fought as mercenaries on the continent. This apparently affected the fighting in the ECW itself, as the officers insisting on adopting tactics they'd been trained in under the Swedes.

Is this fanciful rubbish or is there some truth to it? I can't find much about battlefield tactics for the ECW beyond general movements on the field.