I'm assuming for example that they wouldn't refer to the Kingdom of Jerusalem using the term Al-Quds.

I was reading about the battle of Agincourt, and the text said that the heralds off both armies watched the battle together and agreed it was an English victory and reported as much to Henry V. This all sounds all to civil, where heralds provided special protection was this an isolated incident?

First of all how many were there during slavery, just before the civil war, also what states had the most free black men?

Interested in the history of the region as I'll be visiting it soon. I've heard some claims of Armenians massacring Azeris and want an unbiased report (as most of the books here in Armenia are likely bias).

And was it found with the same frequency as today (if such a statement can even be evaluated)?

From what I have read, Napoleon soundly defeated Prussia and entered a three way negotiation with Russia, Poland, and France after Prussia's defeat.

But those negotiations were mostly between Russia and Napoleon as Prussia was decisively defeated. At this point, Napoleon could have either divided up Prussia with Russia (Polish partition style which Russia had success with).

Another option would have been to either annex Prussia or put someone else on the throne and make it a puppet state. It doesn't seem like there was much Prussia could have done about it.

Instead, Napoleon took some of Prussia's western lands and bullied Prussia around for a bunch of years. But Prussia was still kept around as a political state, and this would hurt Napoleon years later.

Was there good reasoning for leaving Prussia intact?

The U.S. purported to not want to get involved in the conflict in Europe at all. They were essentially drug into the Pacific theater after the bombing of Pearl Harbor (or at least given a good excuse to enter), but why did that necessitate getting involved in Europe at the same time as well?

I know Japan was officially allied w/ Germany and Italy, but could they not have been treated as separate conflict?

If you ask some of the communists on reddit their answer is that lenin and Stalin were together to the very end and everything was awesome.

But I always heard that Lenin and Stalin had a falling out and Stalin removed Lenin from a bunch of pictures and removed him from the Soviet Union as much as possible. What happened exactly ?

It seems strange to me that people would lose interest in man's exploration of the moon after only 6 successful missions. I have often wondered if politicians were the true catalysts of the program's demise and simply used the line as an excuse. What was public opinion like towards the end of the program's run? How did people feel about space exploration at the time? How did it come to such a definitive end?

I've done some reading on the topic (namely I've read Thucydides' account), but I don't really understand how Athens lost the war, they were the superpower and Greece, and it doesn't seem to make sense to me. Any help on the subject or advice for further reading would be greatly appreciated

I don't mean the the price difference that comes from logistical problems (e.g West-Africa is closer to the Americas than East-Africa).

Were some ethnics considered to be more hard working and therefore more expensive? Were some ethnics considered to be lazy and uncontrollable that they were cheap or not for sale at all?

My grandfather knew his brother had earned medals that he didn't receive so he called to get them for him. While he was on the phone he gave his info and some medals came after he passed. Is there a website or physical location I can go to find out the battle or incident description resulting in the medal?

I'm curious if there is a history of groups who themselves claim to be on the side of evil?

I hope my question is clear. Thank you!

I know there's a lot of myths about Ragnar. Are they just assuming the myths are all true and putting everything into this TV show or is everything based on what we know is true based on real history?

I should know this, but I don't. Very confusing topic for me.

Mostly asking about all the tiny, tiny Holy Roman Empire states or the minor Italian states here. Many of them seem to lie "in the way" of the major powers. Did they just move through them, without any repercussions? Did any of the minor states fight back in any way or did they just give in to their fate?