Was there anywhere where people lived with relative autonomy, or where indigenous people might not have even known they were subjects? If it was effective at governing, how did they manage to exert control over remote and hard to reach areas?

This has occurred for well over twenty years and continues today. Many people wouldn't even recognize the original "Stars and Bars", while the Naval Jack is ubiquitous. Even the blood-stained banner flag isn't flown, just the Naval Jack. How did this happen?

Queer histories. Totally a thing, at least since Chauncey’s “Gay New York” came out in 1994. How about asexuality? You’d think European medievalists would be all over this. Academic articles and books equally welcome.

Noted that alot of the operation names sounded cool and exciting and very often not based on the theme

Examples such as Operation Neptune Spear Operation Overlord

One of the few exceptions were like Operation Desert Storm where it was in Iraq and the place would have alot of desert like areas.

Couldn't a mission be named something mundane like Operation Soup Can?

Who decides the operation names and how did it started?

Was there some way to show which side a person was on, or were battles mainly a free for all before uniforms were introduced?

What year did people say they were in during the B.C.E years? Since we count down those years did they do that also?

I’m doing research for a Western genre screenplay and I’m trying to find out about the reliance on horses by the cavalry and dragoons of the Mexican army around 1840-45. Just pre-Mexican-American War era.

I’m particularly interested in the amount of horses they had, where the horses were housed, what infectious diseases the horses contracted in close proximity, if they were any outbreaks in humans transmitted from the horse diseases? Just how important horses were to the Mexican Army and how the Mexican Army would manage if a large majority of horses were out of commission?

Any help in finding out where data or information on the Mexican Army and its horses could be located would be most welcome. I’d love it to be in English but if there are Spanish sources that detail such information I’d be interested in that as well.

Did this sort of disciplined, methodical search for the past start with the modern era, or did people in previous eras dig up ruins and seek out old manuscripts for the sake of understanding earlier ones?

Inspired by seeing some live Joy Division performances where they look like office workers - a far cry from, say, the Sex Pistols show where the band originated.

I'm watching The Lord of the Rings: The Two Towers at the moment and it's well known that the Rohirrim was based on Tolkien's love for Anglo-Saxon history + his love for horses. And in the films there's a large number of horse archers in the warbands.

So this made me curious about how common archers were in the various germanic armies of the early medieval period. Would you see archers popping shots during the clash of Shieldwalls? ^^^(RIP Harold 1066 Never Forget)

Was archery primarily a hunting activity and rarely employed into battle until much later?

Lately, I've been curious about learning about history from various countries myself, something I've never really done before. In college I had a professor who used to say that no commentary about a primary source would ever be as insightful as the primary source. However, I'm a bit troubled about this statement, specially concerning ancient history documents. Let's say I'd want to learn more about the trojan war, and I read the Illiad, or about the Warring States period and read Romance of the Three Kingdoms. Without a doubt, they would be a priceless cultural and literally experience, but from the point of view of history, they probably wouldn't be so trustworthy, right?

So, what's your opinion on the matter? It's it worth reading the primary sources of unclear periods and documents as the examples I gave, or would it be better to jump straight into more contemporary and documented sources? Thank you all

The Byzantines considered themselves Romans and it was the same state as the Roman Empire. I also know that the name “Byzantine Empire” was a name that was given to it after the fact and was not used by the Byzantines themselves. So would your average Western European in, say, the 14th Century have considered the Byzantine Empire to be the same state as the the Roman Empire of Augustus and Constantine?

My question is basically if it goes too far with the revisionism as some reviews seem to indicate.

*Their sorry I don't English well 😅

Was Germany worried that they had awakened a giant?

What triggered Leon Czolgosz willing to sacrifice himself to murder one of the most powerful people in the era? Who or what group did they associated (though was never involved with the attempt) Leon Czolgosz before his assassination?

It's well known that in classical Greco-Roman civilization, (male) homosexuality was considered entirely normal and healthy, albeit weak and emasculating if you were the bottom. After the rise of Christianity, however, sodomy became seen as a sinful and deviant crime. Was this something Christians believed in before they were the dominant majority? Or was it a belief that developed within Christianity later down the line? If so, what underlying social factors could've caused it? Did STDs get worse towards the end of Antiquity? Did war or famine cause a decline in birth rate, necessitating men to direct all their sexual energy towards reproductive intercourse?

I've found it rather difficult to do research on Francis Bacon, half the battle seems to be sifting through conspiracy nonsense online that relate to him. But I would like to learn more about his life and how he contributed to the scientific revolution.

What are some good books or other resources for continuing to learn about this man?

Or am I way off? My question is how did a population that was drilled for decades in Nationalism-Fascism-Nazism ideology suddenly champion the Soviet Communist ideals?