I'm curious to know how accurate the civilizations are and the technologies available. Also, how accurate are the moves from Dark Age to Feudal Age etc. in terms of the units available. Did anything like this happen in real life? Were some civilizations better equipped than others? I really have no idea.

Since the Mediterranean region was very rich, relatively, and since there were all the colonial powers nearby, including Turkey.

Basically, how did wealth never spread south past the northern coast of Africa?

This came up with my latin professor and he said that various frescos in Pompeii show some similarities, but he, not being an historian, wasn't qualified to answer. So I thought I'd ask here. I looked through the Popular Questions but couldn't find a satisfactory answer. Thank you in advance for the reply.

It has overlapping claims from India, Pakistan, and China. Where did all these claims come from, and who has the best right to the land from a historical perspective?

[This is copied from a comment made in another thread. It was suggested that I post my questions as a new dedicated question.]

I believe I read recently something to the effect of: there are some academics who do not view Christianity as having been borne from Judaism, but that Judaism and Christianity both arose concurrently. I'm assuming that this refers to Rabbinical Judaism and Christianity, and it seems to imply that Rabbinical Judaism is as different from the Judaism being practiced pre-diaspora as Christianity is.

Is this true? To what extent did Judaism evolve as a direct effort to differentiate itself from Christianity, if at all? How different is Rabbinical Judaism from post-exile/pre-diaspora Judaism? And (I'm sorry if this sounds like a loaded question), without centralized temple sacrifice, what makes modern Jews "Jewish"? What's the justification behind no longer performing those rituals?

I've heard half a dozen versions, and I have yet to read one in detail that doesn't contradict the other. So, what was the gun powder plot, and why did Guy Fawkes attempt to orchestrate it?

Typically, when one thinks of an Empire, they think of an Emperor or Empress at its head. But the British styled themselves Kings and Queens. Why is that?

If the Roman military deliberately ignored archery, why? What impact did this have on their wars? Would foreign archers be hired?

Did they consider human sacrifice abhorent or barbaric? It appears that many contemporary societies (such as Germanic Pagans and Carthaginians) found it normal.

I know Jet Li's "Fearless" is also based off it (and also his film "Fist of Legend", but what are the facts?

Any stories or evidence of warriors from these two cultures crossing over?

So in grade school in America, we're taught that when America formed a democratic government, it was seen as so radical that many of the founding fathers thought it was hopelessly idealistic. But isn't parliamentarianism democratic? Citizens all vote for their representation and such? So was that just an American myth, or was American democracy truly radical? If so, how did it differ from British parliamentarianism?

Correct me if I'm wrong, but before Germanic people became a centralized nation they were kind of nomadic and travelled in tribes. As a result, their warfare resembled that of guerrilla warfare where they would attack in smaller numbers for the purpose of gaining wealth. They lacked centralized leadership and attacked as loose bands of people instead of as a united force. I recently read that they made up a large number of the mercenary force during the 18th and 19th century.

I may be making a large leap here in asking this question, but was this at all linked to Germanic tribes' history of being raiders and having a lack of centralized leadership during their warfare? In short, can we link older Germanic culture to Germans being predispositioned to being mercenaries later in history?