Specifically during World war 2. I've been told that he just stood incapable for weeks after the news of Operation Barbarossa. Was Joseph ever declared insane by any of his doctors/childhood figures?

Where would they land or would they meet up somewhere?

EDIT: Since there seems to be some confusion about which timeframe I'm asking about. I'm mostly interested in the cold war area since that was the time nuclear bombers were most likely to be used. Thank you for all the great answers!

I was wondering if anyone here might have any insight into why the Norwegian government was so much less cooperative when faced with German invaders compared, with, say, the Danish government. The Germans, from what I've been able to glean, were for the most part willing to allow both the Danish and Norwegian governments to handle domestic policy.

The Danes chose to cooperate, fearing for the safety of ordinary citizens, whereas Norway's Storting and King Haakon faced the prospect of imprisonment or assassination by defying the Germans. Denmark's government seemed to reluctantly collaborate while Norway's fled and operated in exile.

Clearly, neither Norwegians nor Danes had any particular affinity for German occupation, but the leaders of the countries took very different strategies. Is this a product of the vicissitudes of the particular politicians who were in power, or were there other societal factors at play? Is it simply that Denmark's government could not flee while Norway's had that possibility? Was the Norwegian resistance more active than the Danish resistance as the war progressed?

When Moses was Jewish and his people were also Jewish?

I've done some research and found that ships may have been burned, but this occured on land before a mound was built over the ashes. Are there actually and sources on the classic hollywood viking funeral, or is that in the end the same category as the horned helmets of richard wagner?

Is there a debate over genocide vs. failed economic policies similar to that regarding Ukraine?

When designing the borders of Africa, did the Europeans just choose the borders that gave them the most resources and looked the nicest? Ex. The borders of the East African countries and the democratic republic of the Congo's border with Zambia.

Been reading up a little bit on this event lately, and I was wondering if there were any effects of it on today's society. Is there anything we can see that is a result of it?

China has 56 ethnic groups, I always wondered how some of them resisted assimilation to the dominate "Chinese" culture.

I hope this is the right subreddit.

I'm a student of classics, so anything ancient (especially Greece/Alexander/Diadochi) would be excellent.

However, I'll devour pretty much anything: naval, siege, medieval, early modern, etc.

In reading about slavery in the American south, it occurs to me that slaves had much more freedom in the southern states than they did in Saint-Domingue. So, why was Saint-Domingue so different in their attempts to prevent slaves from traveling from plantation to plantation? My personal theory, somewhat reminiscent of Genovese's Roll, Jordan, Roll, is that the often absentee owners of Saint-Domingue allowed for the overseers to be as violent and oppressive as they wanted. Since overseers were primarily petits blancs, they felt a need to keep blacks inferior to whites, particularly given the societal friction between the petits blancs and the affranchis. Something could also be said for how terribly outnumbered whites felt, but that also seems to have been present in the American south.

Considering Saddam suppressed leftists, I'm not sure why the Soviets wanted to help Iraq?

I have read in a number of novels that Soviet collective farming was terribly inefficient for producing food, but that small private plots for vegetables (potatoes, cabbage, onions, and so on) were the most efficient part of the Soviet agricultural system. What made Soviet collective farming inefficient, and in what ways was it different then say an agricultural co-op?

If so, when did it lose it?

I'm looking for some sources regarding men's attire in the upper class anytime from approximately 1740-1890. Kilted fashion would be a bonus. I'm looking for more formal attire rather than casual. Pictures/drawings would be amazing.

I already have a kilt in my family tartan (Barra MacNeil) and I'm looking for ideas of what to wear with it. My googling skills haven't helped so I thought I'd ask here. Kilted isn't a requirement but would be preferred.

I want to learn as much as i can about Ancient Rome, without the distractions of wikipedia links taking my focus elsewhere. What are some fairly priced books i can find on Amazon that you recommend?