The Jin, Xia, and Song Dynasties were all incredibly powerful, just like their manpower which (according to wikipedia) numbered into the millions.

They had well-trained infantry, navy, fortified castles, and more than enough wealth to fund the troops. Perhaps most significantly, the sheer numerical advantage, quality of the troops, and the fortresses themselves would have impeded the Mongols' dependence on cavalry.

So why did Khan absolutely destroy these three rich kingdoms so ""easily""?

By Ancient Rome I'm picking a somewhat arbitrary time and place, but I'm most interested in how ancient cities provided consistent illumination before the invention of electricity or gas-lamps. I mean the amount of resources and manpower necessary to continually have torches lit for a whole city seems to be tremendous. So is the answer just "it was pretty dark and you brought your own torch at night" or something in between?

Why did the Allies win WWII as opposed to the Axis powers? I know that technology advances like the cracking of the enigma machine contributed, but that can't be the only thing.

I am interested in learning what getting into college was like in the US before the current era, when the change happened, and why it happened. Could you just get in to any school you applied to? Did it depend entirely on family and societal ties? Did it cost significantly less than it does now?

Edit: I would like to provide a more specific date, but one of the things I am interested in learning here is when this change took place. Presumably that would be around the 70s or 80s, but I'm not really sure.

Hi guys,

First off I want to thank the good people of this sub for being kind to help quench our thirst for knowledge about history, and really love reading and educating myself about our world history.

Anyway, to the question. Based on what we know about Julius Caesar, did he really love Rome and the greater good of the Roman people? Or was is just what he felt he needed to do to sieze power?

Based on what I have read and heard about the man, he had done a number of things to help the less fortunate Roman people, without utterly trying to destroy the upper class. My personal guess, Caesar was from an upper class family that had somewhat fallen from grace. So he had an understanding of the hardships of the lower class and perhaps sympathy, while at the same time being sympathetic to his own roots.

Though I do not know nearly enough to state that with confidence. Based on what we know about Caesar as a person, did he love the people of Rome? Although sometimes his methods were extreme and cruel, did he feel perhaps the ends justified the means if it meant making Rome a better place for everyone? Or was it he was just power hungry and felt he was taking the most effective method of aproach?

Thank you all in advance everyone!

Obviously title was overly general, but it seems like every high schooler in the United States learns about these three kinds of column. Why do they teach this?

Just curious! I know it's always been a pretty enigmatic place, but I was wondering if there is some insight in even more ancient times at all

As in eggs for dinner is strange or chicken and rice for breakfast is weird.

The reason I ask this is because I am researching on the background of a common phrase used today. My teacher says that the phrase can be tied to events from Medieval England, but when I researched it, I keep getting that it originated in Roman times.

What exactly were the "rules" of Chivalry in detail? Or as much detail as possible.

Was there ever an actual contemporary piece of writing describing exactly what it is, maybe even point by point?

To my knowledge, there hasn't been any major country in Belgium as we might know it besides Brabant or other minor states. It seems like Belgium has been under foreign rule (the French, Dutch, Austrians and Spanish come to mind) for most of its existence past about 1500, and most of the population speaks French or Dutch.

I could definitely be wrong on any of this, but thank you very much for any responses or corrections.

In the old days, people took over other countries all the time. William the Conqueror, Alexander the Great, and arguably Ghengis Khan are hailed as great leaders.

In the 21st century, Putin snatches a part of Ukraine that his country formerly controlled and the world goes crazy. What happened? How did this happen?

Did Nazi actions in WW2 make people disprove of ambitious politics like that? Why is ok for the US to take the Phillippines but bad for Saddam to take Kuwait?

I have never really heard tell of cavalry fighting infantry in a melee, all I hear of is them being used as mounted infantry, scouts, and the like.

I know there's been some recent uproar about the practise in ultra-Orthodox communities in the US about the moyel essentially sucking the wound dry, and that it's resulted in a number of infant deaths from infection. Back when folks didn't know about clean instruments or preventing infection, was it common for newborn infants in Jewish and Muslim communities to die from infections contracted from the circumcision wound?

I often hear quotes about how, 300 years ago, there were so many fish/whales/sharks in the ocean you could "walk on their backs". Does anyone know where I can read accounts of how abundant the oceans were more than 2 centuries ago?

You see all these old paintings of ancient Greeks and Romans wearing robes and togas. When did pants become a thing?

EDIT: Thank you for answering my burning question. This is something the world needs to know.