I'm trying to research on the last German Kings who were still pagan till their death. I'm mostly compiling for each major tribe (Frank, Lombard, Alemanni, etc.)

I really can't find sources nor solid information on the religious beliefs of them. Hence why I'm asking the more learned people on here.

Some information that I did find and Please correct me if I'm wrong:

Last Pagan King of the:

Franks: Childerc I c. 440 – 481/482

(his heir/son Clovis I was baptised, and united the Franks under a christian banner)

Lombards: Audoin? 546 - 560

(states when the lombards crossed the alps into Italy, converted under Alboin)

Saxons: ???

(Can't find anyone, only that they resisted during the Saxon Wars against Charlamagne.)

Anglo-Saxons: Arwald ? - 686

(Last Jutish Pagan Island of Wight, died during Christian imposition)

Alemanni: Gibuld ? died 470

(Clovis I defeated and subjugated the Alemanni at the battle of Tolbiac)

Ostrogoths: Athanaric?? died 381

(Can't find much information. He feared Christians might destroy gothic culture and was defeated in battle and his successor Fritigern was baptised)

Visigoths: ???

(Don't know, they became Arian some time while marching into Spain)

Vandals: ???

(I know there were some Arian Vandals, but maybe no Arian Kings?)

Burgundians: Gundobad 452–516

(Possibly had secretly converted to Catholicism?)

Frisii: ???

(They fell to the Frankish Invasions.)

First, I'd like to thank all of the contributors to this sub-reddit that help make it an absolute pleasure to follow.

I AM aware that the premise of my question might be flawed, so feel free to correct that rather than address the question. I also understand that the question is subjective.

To add some context to my question:

The narrative surrounding the Cold War, from the American perspective, seems to be that the United States was trying to prevent Communism from spreading, while the Soviet Union was seeking to export the proletarian revolution. Of course, nationalization of industry is at odds with capitalism so the West had a vested economic and political interest in preventing a cascade of socialist revolutions.

The idea behind my question is that I am curious if the policies of the United States - and the West in general - contributed to the downfall of the Soviet Union. And if so, what initiated or caused these policies?

(This part veers into 'what-if' territory so feel free to disregard) Would the Soviet Union have had the potential to achieve, or at least 'progress towards' a socialist utopian future? Or was it doomed from the start?

Seeing as the black homelands had their own governments, political parties, police and armed forces, it seems as though there must have been a fair few people with a lot to lose if they were reincorporated into South Africa. Was there any serious resistence by their leaders or populations against losing their 'independence'.

Also, whilst looking for the answer to this, I kept coming across the fact that Transkei cut off relations with South Africa for a while in 1978 - but I can't find anything that says why they did this. Anyone know what happened?

Now that Catalonia wants independence I'm interested in its history and if it did contribute to colonizing at all.

I've always found it quite difficult to wrap my head around how trench warfare actually worked on the lowest levels and I've got a few questions.

The main one:

Given that (in my understanding) troops were expected to walk in a formation for much of the distance between the two lines of trenches would the presence of a machine gun firing at them generally have ensured that none would make it to the enemy's trench? How effective was artillery generally at clearing machine guns out?

And a couple of follow ups:

How common would machine guns be along the lines?

Would an attacking soldier only really have seem combat once he was inside the enemy trenches or would they have been able to effectively engage while still crossing no-mans land?

Would soldiers commonly have used craters as cover (with the support of their officers) or was that generally only done when the assault had begun to falter?

For example, the US, Russia, France, UK, Australia, Chile, etc.

Any good history of the origins/details of the conflict and some good analysis- type stuff will do. The recent events have made me want to bone up on my history.

I've heard the Cultural Revolution and Second Sino-Japanese War cut educational opportunities for men and women to around 5 years total on average, is this true? What were the educational opportunities for men and women during this time period in China?

Duration of training before combat? Different exercises? Ect.

Why did the French fight so long and hard to hold onto Algeria, even to the ending viewing it as French (de Gaulle called the Algerians "Muslim Frenchmen")? What distinguishes Algeria (which was administered similarly to the way French Guiana and Martinique are today) from Tunisia, which was given independence comparatively easier?

I've been reading a lot lately about Sumerian civilization as well as other very ancient peoples. I recently realized I knew barely anything about the actual people. Of what I read The Epic of Gilgamesh came the closest, but it's mostly archaeology.

If the answer to my question is "not a lot", I'd be interested to know when in history we start to get some sort of idea about personality and psychology.

Apocryphal or not, every Christmas and Easter I have some smug friend who claims as revelatory "well, you know we only celebrate it now because it used to be Yuletide..." etc. It seems to be fairly accepted that Christianity took key 'pagan' dates and 'Christianised' them. Did Islam do anything similar in their beliefs/practices/rites and festivals?

The mesolithic bridged the time between paleolithic hunter-gatherer societies and more sedentary neolithic communities that practiced agriculture and animal husbandry. It came after the last ice age, which in Europe gave way to landscapes of forests and swamps, IIRC. People continued to make stone tools and archeologists have recovered some human figurines from this period.

This is basically all I know. Do we know anything else? Is there any particularly educated speculation?

Earlier today, I needed to replace a broken beaker in my research lab. It took me about thirty minutes from realizing the equipment was broken to being able to replace it. The item I ended up replacing it with was produced in Germany. This got me thinking: how long would it have taken for me to get a replacement for a piece of precision scientific equipment 200 years ago, especially if it were made in Europe (I am in Canada)?

Were there "lab" scientists in the New World in the early 1800s? If so, when and where did they start setting up? Was their work respected or even accepted by Old World scientists? I would imagine there was a lot of exploratory science being performed, identifying new flora and fauna, but I'm mostly curious about fields like chemistry or physics, where the work could have been performed just as easily in Europe.