It seems to my knowledge that the 'famous' battles of the period lack this quality, and the tactic also seems to be at odds with the various tenets of chivalry and 'honor'. Were European knights and rulers generally entirely dismissive of deceit and surprise in warfare?

What would have been made of the records of the likes of Hannibal and Scipio (assuming that is that they were widely known) at the time?

Is there any evidence at all about how such methods would be viewed?

I am especially interested in Northern France between the 9th and 13th centuries, but the question stands for other centuries and other parts of the world : how were borders between two states (or equivalents at the time) drawn in Medieval times ?

Did they follow rivers (if so were they to be significant rivers, as in navigable ones) ? Mountains (if so did they follow summits, crests...) ? Valleys (even without rivers) ? Other geographical features ? Did they follow already established borders, such as old Roman Empire provinces ? Or borders that were still relevant, such as Catholic church dioceses ?

Or was it somewhat random (as in "so this river is ours, this river is yours, and the border is somewhere in between") ?

Something a friend always said and I wondered if there's any truth in it?

Was the adoption of Latin more by the elites while the population at large retained their native language or a mixture of the two?

Was official business required to be done in Latin?

Would the adoption of Latin indicate a broader acceptance of Roman culture or would those newly conquered territories retain their culture while mixing or losing their language?

Was there a stigma for or against speaking Latin in certain territories/the empire as a whole?

I realize that these are pretty much five distinct questions so feel free to answer whichever you best feel prepared to answer.

Some cathedrals took a century or more to complete. When was a cathedral complete enough for Mass to start being held?

I'm writing a paper about Unit 731 and want to focus more on the medical/scientific information. However, most of the books that I have found describe the horrendous "experiments" (most of which seems like it was just torture) that were done and not if anything was actually learned from these experiments or how scientifically reliable this information was. I'm also having trouble getting my hands on primary sources. If anyone knows anything about this and/or could point me in the right direction I'd really appreciate it!

Hi! I am doing a paper on the Marshall Plan and I cannot seem to find if Asia received any aid from the Marshall Plan. And if they didn't, why didn't America include them in it? I would assume the U.S. would want to stop the spread of communism into Asia. Thank you in advance!

I recently read a fictionalized account of the youth of Miyamoto Musashi. In the book he says that the samurai top knot is worn to help balance the helmet during battle. Is there any truth to this? I would have assumed that helmets would be shaped to the head with padding so as to ensure tight fit and comfort. Any information on the hairstyle or on Japanese armor in general would be greatly appreciated.

To me it seems like the Germans had some tremendous success all the way up to 1942 but at the same time it feels like their success wasn't assured and it could've gone easily wrong. I guess I'm asking that with hindsight was the German success probable or was it more a case of them getting lucky with their enemies mistakes?

I'm writing a story that takes place mostly on Minoan Crete under the reign of the mythological king Minos. Now I know that the Minoan civilization got its name from Arthur Evans who named them after King Minos, but I have roughly narrowed down the time when the myth of Theseus and King Minos was suppose to have taken place, which is around 1200 BCE. Why would Evans name an entire civilization that lasted from 2000 - 1450 BCE after a mythological figure that "existed" 250 years after their collapse? That would make King Minos a Mycenaean.

I have a feeling that most of the time people just went over the side. But, I have no idea if that is correct or what the exceptions are. Did size matter, the country the ship came from, what kind of cargo it was hauling, time period, etc.

For example, in one of Trajan's monuments there is the following inscription:

MARTI ULTOR[I]

IM[P(erator)CAES]AR DIVI NERVA[E] F(ILIUS) N[E]RVA TRA]IANUS [AUG(USTUS) GERM(ANICUS)] DAC]I[CU]S PONT(IFEX) MAX(IMUS) TRIB(UNICIA) POTEST(ATE) XIII IMP(ERATOR) VI CO(N)S(UL) V P(ater) P(atriae) ?VICTO EXERC]ITU D[ACORUM] ?---- ET SARMATA]RUM

----]E 31.[2]

It seems to me that much of it is guess work, as many of the words are barely there.

Currently I am doing a history paper on Nazi Germany and some of its infamous people. I know Joseph Goebbels was the Minister of Propaganda for the Nazi Party, but was his job title and description kept secret from the German public, or was he widely known and accepted in Nazi Germany?

For example if he ever appeared in rallies or in the media did the German people know that it was literally his job to spread propaganda, half-truths, etc to influence the people for Nazi causes since I don't think he would publicy say "My job here is to only say things to help the Nazi's and it may or may not be true."

With the northern lights in the news recently, I was curious how they factored into Norse mythology (if at all). Was there a religious explanation of some sort, or was it merely filed into the same bin as an especially pretty sunset (or something else)?

I'm a Canadian, so basically, I think that we won. My backing is that Canada is still Canada, and not America. Thanks in advance

I read somewhere that it was because of the soviet communistic ideology that preached equality between the sexes. However, just asking here, did the soviets really practise equality between the sexes to a big extent before the war?

I was reading about the emperor Charles V of Austria and his rivalry with Francis I of France, and how though his election as HRE was likely a near certainty, he was still apparently in competition with both Francis I and Henry VIII of England.

I know that for much of the later period of its history, the imperial crown was almost a hereditary possession of the Habsburgs due to their power and commanding position in the empire. But at any point in its history, did the electors ever actually choose monarchs or nobles from outside the empire itself?

What impact would this have had on the HRE? Would it have made diplomacy difficult for someone like the French or English king to ostensibly be the defender of the empire and the commander of the imperial armies? Would elements of the empire itself (like the Habsburgs) have resisted the election?