Don't they basically serve the same purpose? Why didn't they just build larger city walls to protect their cities instead of a castle? Why didn't Romans build any castles?

Any culture's mythology would be fine but I am most intersted in Greek, Roman, Indian (India), Chinese, and Japanese.

Who came up with these ideas?

Did the Romans call themselves ancients? Would a person living in medieval ages have known it was the medieval ages? We're these ideas in existence during those eras or were they created afterwards?

How was did that transition worked? Did people just went to the bank and traded their coins for a paper saying how much it was worth? Also, since there was (I guess) no way of creating hard-to-reproduce patterns, how was counterfeit money dealt with?

I've just joined the Continental Army. What songs will we sing around the campfire or in the tavern? How about my French comrades, and my British and Hessian enemies? Please help, the only song I know is Yankee Doodle! I don't want to be some patriot n00b!

Domrémy (now Domrémy-la-Pucelle) is in the Lorraine region of France which was contested for a long time with Germany. Other than during the occupation of northern France in the Second World War has the birthplace of the Maid of Orleans ever been in German territory?

In his original draft of the Declaration, Thomas Jefferson rants against the King's "wag[ing of] cruel war against human nature itself" by the introduction of race slavery to colonies that wanted no part of it. Later, in the debate over the Constitution, George Mason raises a similar issue, alleging that "the British government constantly checked the attempts of Virginia to put a stop" to the slave trade. Is there evidence to support these allegations?

In other words, why is the bald eagle so often considered the symbol of American liberty? When and how did it become a common symbol? And why an eagle, as opposed to a buffalo, or a deer or something?

I always wondered, what made him so good ? Was it his capacity to quickly devise a plan depending of the situation ? Was it the military units that were good ? Was it a mix of both of these and other factors ? Or maybe that his enemies weren't that good?

In the history of Rome it has suffered some major losses, but one recurring theme is that the empire has always been able to get back up to recruit another army. How was Rome able to recruit these armies whereas their opponents could not? Where did these men come from, how did Rome pay for them, and why were they so willing to become soldiers when their predecessors had not faired any better? Today Italy is not particularly known for its high population, so did ancient Italy have some kind of advantage over other places? Did Italy have better agriculture to sustain higher populations?

I've heard of the Romans losing entire armies and still continuing a war effort, to where the Soviet Union took even fewer than 10% casualties in the afghan war before capitulating.

If era isn't what defines acceptable losses, what historical factors can be used to determine a particular nation's tolerance for military losses?

I have heard many times, in events in remembrance of WWII and in our school books here in Greece, that Churchill said about the Greeks and their fight against the Italians and Germans in WWII: "Greeks don't fight like heroes, heroes fight like Greeks". While this certainly is a nice quote, has Churchill actually said this?