I watched a series on the Nuremberg Trials and it seemed to me as if they were implying that many in the leadership didn't know or at least pretended not to. Was it just the top leadership? Did most leadership know? Did all SS soldiers know?

In my History class before my teacher retired, he told us about how during World War One, there was a battle where supposedly the army tried to take the enemy trench while "baaing" like sheep. Is there any evidence of this? And if there is evidence, what battle was this from?

How could people eat/make frozen desserts if there was no electricity? I get it that you can have ice and snow from mountains even in places you don't think about, but how could it not melt before being able to use it for anything? Was it a suer expensive dessert?

I'm not sure if this has been asked before but I've always been curious to how we were to come upon milk. Was it from cows or a different animal from back then. This to me is one of lifes biggest mysteries.

And as a smaller note, why did they burn it down?

So, in many movies/shows where there are battles between the British and the Americans in open fields, it is generally depicted that the highest-ranking generals would meet in the middle to discuss some things before the battle. Is there any merit to this? I feel as if it wouldn't make sense since they could just kill each other right there.

To piggyback on this, what was proper 'etiquette' here? What would stop some random British soldier from simply shooting Washington in the head? (or vice versa for the Americans)

Pardon me if I'm totally wrong about any of this.

Anyone who has ever watched an old black and white movie has probably noticed the strangely cultured accent that the actors affect. I know that this was something that was taught to actors during that period (maybe for purposes of proper diction?), but where does it come from? How was this accented way of speaking developed? Is it something that was supposed to make Americans sound more refined? Did people start doing it ironically to mock the British, and it just stuck somehow?

I always loved the games as a kid and am becoming an English and History teacher, so I actually thought it would be good to clarify. I've heard that they are quite accurate historically. If they are they could be a great tool for kids learning, and if they aren't, they could be used to help kids learn how to research for accuracies in historical narratives.

If anyone knows this would be greatly appreciated!

Is this just a myth? I have heard people tell me that wings used to be dirt cheap compared to any other parts of a chicken before Buffalo wings drastically increased their demand.

Was the popularization of Buffalo wings starting in the 1970s really responsible for the increase in price of chicken wings or are they unrelated?

So, I'm writing a Regency-style romance with the main character being a seamstress in roughly the early Victorian age. As someone who grew up with someone like that, I was used to the term "stash" being used to describe the obsessive collection fabric or yarn in hopes of using it "some day". For example, my mother's yarn stash was a room and her fabric is two.

Assuming that obsessively collecting things isn't a recent invention, I'm looking for the right term or terms to describe a large collection of fabrics or yarn. The specific year is less important and more of the rough period (I'm happy with terms that are close that period also).

I looked at Google's ngram, but it shows usage before and after the 1800's but not during. Nor does it helpfully tell the usage (a collection) or its replacement.

Thank you.

I tried /r/AskAnthropology with little luck, so I'm hoping you guys have some interesting information on the subject.

To clarify, I know that sex slavery exists/existed and was mainstream basically in a lot of societies in the past but I'm more interested in consensual behaviour.

I recently encountered the story of Lèo Major in a TIL thread. After reading about him on his Wikipedia page and several other easy to find websites, I read about accomplishments that were amazing, almost too amazing. The stories sometimes sound more like exaggerated war stories than actual occurrences, but I'm extremely under qualified to make that judgement. So my question is, how accurate are these stories? Did individual soldiers really accomplish such amazing feats? Thank you in advance!

I mean, at the beginning it was just Bohemia and Austria. What caused nearly every European power to involve itself in the war?

Take the battle of Guagamela for instance. Alexander the great had something like 47,000 soldiers and Darius III had anywhere from 50,000 to 100,000. I know Alexander was an excellent leader but couldnt Darius just have his army charge Alexanders army and simply destroy them through sheer numbers? While the phalanx was a very good defense surely it couldnt stop 100k soldiers and archers from a charge

While studying James and Charles, I came across the significant public opposition to religious innovation towards arminianism; arguably being a significant motivator for the civil war.

How is it then, that Henry was able to make such a drastic change without opposition. Or perhaps, having not studied Henry VIII's reign, I am mistaken and he did face much opposition?

I keep pondering this question. What were the French thinking (their perspective) about Napoleon that would warranted them to disband from the restored Monarch and welcome Napoleon back as their Emperor? I could guess that they were unhappy with the way the restored Monarchy was running things.

please give a source if possible

Thanks!

Granted, I live in the South, but I have always learned of him as an elitist adulterer who got himself shot. I had no idea about Jefferson's private scandals, for example, but learned about Hamilton's plenty.

I've been working in /r/worldbuilding on a science fantasy project that involves Anglo-Saxon mythos. However I've finished working on my main world and am trying to working out the history of the actual humans and how they got to that planet. But i realized I don't have accurate names for prominent stars or the different planets in our solar system.

Do we have a record of what they called them or are they lost to history because Google didn't answer too many things for me.