*sub Saharan not south

I know this is a speculative question, but I am fascinated by ripple effects through history. Is there a chance that indirectly, the Mongolian's conquering of competing civilizations, paved the way for Europe's rise and (skipping many, many steps), ultimately to the great world wars?

Thanks!

Hi Guys.

I'm a writer of fiction looking to hear about how a person in ancient Rome or Greece would have expressed displeasure/pain.

If you slammed your hand in the door or cut your finger open today, you might say "shit," "fuck," etc.

What would the romans have said after experiencing pain or extreme vexation?

Can you give me some sentences they may have used?

Thanks!

I understand that Diocletian split the Roman empire in two halves, was there a "main city" or capital in the eastern half until Constantine the Great moved the capital to Constantinople?

Wikipedia just states "prosecutorial misconduct" without any more detail. The citation is the case itself - "United States v. Banks, 383 F.Supp. 389 (D. S.D. 1974)" but I'm not exactly one to decipher legalese there. So I'd love to get a bit more information on this, and I guess the overall aftermath of the whole thing.

I'm interested in the rise of communnism in Russia, its spread across the world, and its decline.

Specific questions of interest:

My understanding of russian communism seems to make it more of an oligarchy where a relatively small group of individuals had absoulte power. Is this accurate, and if so why/how is russian communism considered as a reason socialism is "bad"/not viable?

How did communism begin in russia (marxism,russian revolution)?

How did communism spread throught the world? Was it forced on weaker nations by the russian government or did the citizenry decide they wanted to adopt socialist policies?

In ammerica socialism seems to be viewed as a "evil" alternative to democracy, what were the major factors that led to this perception, and why wasn't the posibility of democratic socialism (as in the nordic model) ever considered?

If there is any good book/resource that goes into all of these topics I would greatly appreciate it!

Thank you.

This may be an odd question, but it dawned on my the other day that you never really hear anything ever mentioned about large European wildlfe. I assume there is some, but was wondering if the effect of two large scale wars in the span of 30 years had a major ecological impact on native European fuana, or if this is something that has even been studied.

John 19:29 says (in the New International Version), "A jar of wine vinegar was there, so they soaked a sponge in it, put the sponge on a stalk of the hyssop plant, and lifted it to Jesus' lips."

Anyone familiar with Roman toilet habits would admit that this is reminiscent of how Roman's would wipe themselves after defecating (by wiping with a sponge on stick, cleaned off in water, and kept in a jar of vinegar as an antiseptic). Now obviously we (probably) can't be absolutely certain of it, but was this sponge on a stick supposed to be alluding to Roman toilet habits, by the writers of the New Testament, or was there actually some sort of tradition of giving individuals being crucified a drink?

I myself being Serbian, get the "you started world war 1 you bastard!" remark thrown at me quite often. It doesn't bother me, it's merely a joke. I am curious to see what the majority of people believe.

Like when JFK was assassinated, it was a big deal because the US had a thing against Catholics, or the fact that it used to be illegal for the British PM to be Catholic. Why?

I read that the Qing opened their homelands for Chinese settlement only in the late 19th century. Why did they allow this after blocking such population movement for centuries?? thanks in advance

Related: How many US presidents are known to have killed people? Edit: sorry I didn't look for other similar posts

I just finished Dan Carlin's latest podcast on WW1. At one point, he mentioned that if the war ended in 1917, America and Japan would be the "winners" of the war, largely from an economic standpoint.

This made me consider that if something similar were to happen today, I would expect many conspiracy theories around how the Americans or the Japanese were somehow helping foil peace plans and perpetuating their war profiteering. Perhaps the theories indicate that these powers influenced the wartime generals to encourage them to continue their "meat grinder" tactics, despite complaints from the civilian leadership. It appears that Wilson would have been dynamic enough to attract all sorts of theories. I expect that there are always crazies who can come up with conspiracy theories, but did any have considerable public support?

If such allegations existed, has any real evidence been found to support them?

I tried a bit of research myself, but searching for "war conspiracy theory" in Google provides more entertainment than education.