Basically what the title says. Would your average serf in Portugal or Spain or England have known what the americas were at the time of their discovery by Europe? How about in non-colonizing countries like Austria, or even further out in Poland or Russia? If not, when did their existence become widespread knowledge?

I'm aware that he didn't leave the Eurasian continent, so my question more has to deal with maybe a kind of river or lake based assault, or even something as small as troop transport. It's interesting to me just because he was such a notorious horseback warrior. Thanks for your time!

I've read that farmers actually built the pyramids but popular opinion is that the Isrealites did it. Where did that notion come from?

Is there any significance to the elephants shown frequently in the barricades during mid-19th century revolution in France? Is there evidence that there really were elephants?

one of my professors once told us that making memorials for large scale losses was difficult because they just ended up being ruined by the sense of tragedy. I don't really understand what he meant and he just dropped it in passing and didnt go back to it. Does any one know about how memorials were designed for big wars and what my teacher might have meant by that?

It seems like a very simple invention, yet from what I can tell, they only were developed circa 500 AD. Why did it take so long, given how beneficial they are to cavalry and how long the the horse had been domesticated?

Considering the frequency with which personal unions occurred in Europe (the Hapsburgs being the most obvious but also in Poland, Britain, and Scandinavia to name a few) and the seeming lack of personal unions elsewhere I was curious if there were certain political, religious, cultural, or economic reasons for and against the occurrence of personal unions. I will admit that this question was mainly inspired by EU4 so it is highly likely I am simply misinformed.

This subject came up in another thread and u/CrossyNZ mentioned that the discussion should really be in its own thread. So I have made a separate thread for it. I am interested to hear what people think of his ideas as they apply to the study of history.

I'm fascinated by how the Greeks colonized half of the Mediterranean and Black Sea coast during antiquity.

How were they able to build all these colonies? Weren't those lands already inhabited? I can't imagine that the Mediterranean coast was just empty land all over? Or were the population numbers back then so low that they could just find a completely uninhabited spot?

I am sure this has been discussed before, but every prehistory or neolithic or even bronze age folks have ochre at their center.

This may be an artifact of what is available, graves etc. But for example the kurgans were thick with ochre. And by no means unique.

So what is the deal?

I'm learning Social at the moment, and we're taught that communism teaches that EVERYONE is considered equal, and eventually, the government will fade away after communism has been established.

Obviously, Stalin was a very strong believer in communism, but how did it affect his daily life? Did he live in luxury at the expense of his people, or did he subscribe to the idea of equality and not live in (relative)luxury?

From dictionary.com, "1780, from bath + room (n.). Originally a room with apparatus for bathing, used 20c. in U.S. as a euphemism for a lavatory and often noted as a word that confused British travelers. "

The word "Toilet" has a french origin.

Edit: Great contributions! Unfortunately I'm not rich so I'll take some time to sort through all the books and podcasts and such.

Russia evolved in the twentieth century from a system based around soviet institutions and factory councils to a single-party dictatorship controlled by one man.

How was Stalin able to sustain his power?

How did social circumstance, Bolshevik ideology, and the backward nature of Russia factor into this evolution?

As I am reading a bit of local Chinese history I am struck by the extent to which the government structure is familiar to that of 1995 (wink wink). For example, the administrative boundaries haven't changed all that much beyond adding a new level with the Township (xiang). More strikingly, the actual administration seems quite similar in its quasi-federalism, as officials are appointed centrally, but they have a high degree of personal initiative within their locale. The similarities between the gaokao and the Imperial examination have also often been noted, albeit somewhat ironically.

So my question is to what extent these are real streams of continuity, if so to what extent it was a conscious decision (on the part of both PRC and ROC) to co-opt the old systems or if it was simply a "don't fix what ain't broke", and whether there was ever a serious attempt to change them.

I'm a graduate student in Southern American history and wanted tips from someone who's been doing this longer than I have. My research has produced hundreds of cell phone photos of documents and PDF files of microfilm images. It's extremely difficult to find things I need. How do you manage and organize your primary sources?

Were they forced? did some want to go? (I've often heard of a kind of 'war addiction' among combat vets) Any and all info you can provide is appreciated.

For the Mods This is a repost because I never got an answer the first time and am still curious