So let's just say I'm a medieval architect, and I'm comissioned to build a huge fortress (or renovate an old one). What were the main buildings of a fortress (not just military, but every aspect). Which were the main things a medieval architect would focus on?

When were slings no longer used on European and Middle Eastern battlefields?

So, this came up in another thread discussing death by guillotine in general, and I remembered a history teacher at uni telling us (as we discussed R.'s execution and the events that led up to it) that he was so impaired by the blood loss from his self-inflicted gunshot wound he couldn't or wouldn't stay on the table when it came time for his execution, so the executioner, after removing the bandage, flipped him over on his back and held his legs down until the deed was done- the result being that he watched the blade descend until it decapitated him. Is this...did he invent this story? Is this part of the eyewitness reports from the event? Try as I might, I can't find a single source to validate this. Was this just my teacher's way of dressing up what was already a pretty intense tale of R. getting his karmic due? Thanks!

I did a quick search on this sub Reddit first, but nothing really came up. My best guess was because of all the imperial powers and their alliances - maybe someone could expand?

When was it commonplace for people to be treated as adults once they hit the age of 18?

Anecdotally, it seems that modern American military forces have less access to alcohol or drugs than other nations during other time periods. It's probably quite likely that the modern American "sober" military is a product of the "War on Drugs" as well as reaction to drug use by soldiers during Vietnam. I'm sure there are many other reasons that have lead American troops to be, at least ostensibly, a sober force.

At the same time, Hollywood films often portray pre-modern military forces as crude men as heavily reliant on alcohol as food or ammunition.

My question, therefore, is how integral was some form of intoxication to soldiers in different eras and cultures? Alcohol seems to play a pivotal role in preparing soldiers for battle, though the drug's role seems to have waned in recent generations (mimicking the overall US policy towards drugs and alcohol).

I realize this question is quite broad and invites speculation, so I'd ask that you limit your answers to your area of expertise. In your field, was getting drunk on alcohol a standard part of warfare? Did it help or hinder in completing military objectives? Were there long-term psychological effects associated with using alcohol as a short-cut to deal with immediate psychological issues? That is to say, did getting soldiers drunk on the front lines help them deal with the immediate problems, but create more problems after returning home from the front?

While I'd like to open this question to substance abuse in general, I really want to restrict it to alcohol for the time being.

I've never understood what Japan had against China, Burma, Singapore, etc., that warranted such brutality and military aggression in the 1930s. It had to have been more than territorial disputes or a struggle for resources, and Japan wasn't really being threatened or oppressed by all of these neighbor states. It just seems counterintuitive to me considering the isolationism of Japan in the 19th century up until their war with Russia in 1904.

Hi, so I'm hosting a medieval feast this next weekend and I want to make it as accurate as possible. For dessert I'm serving hypocras and am following a recipe from the book Pleyn Delit. The book does describes what some wines like clares were like back then and the regions they came from, but it does not give many modern examples of wines that would be good substitutes.

So, my main question is what type of modern wine should I use to best represent the wines that were used to make hypocras in 13th century England or France? Thanks

Were they bred specifically for warfare by the nations that made use of them?

I'm interested in what kind of technology societies had to illuminate their cities, towns etc. before the 18th century. The page on Wikipedia about the timeline of lighting technology has quite a large gap between c. 1000 AD to 1780.

The 1000 AD event: The first street lamps appear in Cordoba, Al-Andalus.

What I want to know is how this kind of thing became developed. Obviously more places would have become lit up over time, but what kinds of lamps were used? What were fuel sources? How did they deal with things that could extinguish the light, like wind?

Other questions:

Who was in charge of lighting and maintaining?

Did the technology have a cultural impact? Or was it just an upgrade from torches?

Were marriage treaties seen as "weaker", because a single ruler could have multiple treaties, by marrying into multiple families?

I read that the regency of Algiers captured U.S. sailors in years immediately after the revolution, but the Confederation government had no power to do anything about it. I was wondering if anyone knew what happened to these men, or what Algeria was like at the time?

Also curious if what the causes of the counter culture, protests, and the increase in violence.

I got thinking of this yesterday, as far as we know we go back 10k years easy with evidence probably more, what is today's actual date?

This is a time period that has always fascinated me, the fall of (Western) Rome and its effects, giving way to the foundation that would bring the High Middle Ages and the Renaissance. I'm looking for some basic reading to give a good overview and maybe some medium depth stuff.

I've been listening to Hardcore History and I found it odd that the Mongols, in a quest for power and empire, never stopped at India to take it. They went to Kazakhstan, the middle east and invaded China yet no mention of going to India?

Looking back, I never hear much about India only a story in which Alexander the Great wanted to push forward but his army was exhausted. Looking at wikipedia, there seemed to be a lot of in- fighting but never any outside mentions until the spice trade era.

My question, is there any texts that painted India as a mythical place that you shouldn't dare go to? The Mongols, who met met knights at the height of the era didn't even flinch while crushing them. Why wouldn't they head to India?

Many years ago when my grandparents died I found thousands of letters, and other items in lesser degrees like medals, patches, and several Nazi items like pins, armbands, some type of skull flag, and other stuff from when my grandfather was in WWII. My grandmother had five brothers (she was one of 13 and based on the letters there were 5 brothers in various theaters) so I'm not sure what stuff came from who. I do know my grandfather was in the 451st Squadron based on a 1977 directory I have. I believe this is the 451st Bombardment Group based on patches I have and the directory. While most of this is my family history I feel that some items are better donated to a historical society. Where do I start to look for some place that would take some of these items or are they too common to be donated?

Nazi plans for eastern europe in particular, poland, and other locations make mention of "germanization" wherein native slavic populations of Poles, belorussians, ukrainians, etc would be germanized, adopting the cultural, linguistic, and social trappings of german society.

Nazi education and racial theory placed so much emphasis on blood purity and how race is the determining factor of civilization, only to turn around and be content with having large swaths of their newly conquered populations be inducted into the aryan gene pool. There seems to be some missing factor I'm not aware of that would allow them to

1. Believe that pure german blood and the dominance of the german people (distinguished by their blood) is worth waging war for and

2. Being content with having the populations of the people they conquered be integrated into their "pure" german society.

I know nazi propaganda and racial theories changed based on their political goals, so this may just be a matter of it being impractical to deport the entirety of a conquered population. Still, it seems an out of place quirk in the nazi machine, and I'm interested to see if it reveals anything worthwhile about their thought process.