So all our "haunted" buildings are "haunted" by relatively recent ghosts. I mean, there are plenty of ghosts of Victorians, some of medieval monks, but I can't remember ever reading about older ghosts, ghosts of Vikings, or Romans. Do these stories exist somewhere?

In the light of the recent video of Foley being decapitated there has been a lot of discussion on what effect watching something like this has on an individual. During medieval times torture and execution was much more commonplace, and much more horrific than this video. How did people react to this kind of public display of violence?

Hello,

I understand that development of glass was a big stepping stone in the development of the western civilizations. Did wine have anything to do with that movement? How crucial was, the need to store wine, in the development of glass in the west?

China was big on tea so they never needed glass to store tea properly. So there was no need to develop glass. which cause one of the more advanced civilizations to slow down development.

I believe this was mentioned on Qi I was wondering how true this is? Or were they just speculating?

thank you.

As in, if you go into a British school teaching World War One, they will probably teach the Battle of the Somme - its THE WW1 battle for Brits, if you ask the average Brit to name a WW1 battle they are far more likely to say the Somme than other equally bloody battles like Mons or Paschendale

I imagine its the same with France and Verdun, or Australia and Gallipoli ? The question is, what are the iconic battles for other sides, like Austrians or Italians, Russians etc And why are some bloody battles remembered so well compared to others?

Like what happened after the Iraq war.

It seems to me that the only reason why the Romans never advanced into what is today Scotland is because the cost involved would be too great for Rome. But building a huge wall and manning it with so many men doesn't seem much cheaper. Am I missing something?

On the surface it makes sense: a pike wall composed of tridents would have three times the 'poke' for the same amount of manpower. Or would the weapons be too cumbersome to wield and troublesome to manufacture?

In a lot of interviews and documentaries that I have seen, there are a lot of people who absolutely hate her. I was wondering why they felt that it was a personal attack on the working class and if it actually was.

Or would they have thought Japan was still all wooden houses and funny swords?