Here is my question. I read that there is evidence Neanderthals were seafaring because of tools found on some islands. My question is how do we know these tools, or other tools are artifacts found at some site are were really left there by who we think we were? How do we know that they weren't just left their by some other ancient person who "found" these old tools and collected them only to leave them in a different spot? Is there a term for this?

A common theme heard today is "we stole their land". Without getting into the legalities or nuances of that, at some point after stealing the land, the government decided to give some land to the Indians. What was the motivation for doing so?

I was just watching a documentary about the life of Sayyid Qutb and the history of radical Islam in general (which the film maker believes Sayyid Qutb was very influential in). there a bit where they show his picture in the University of Northern Colorado's year book. I noticed that like half the other pictures were of east Asian looking people

How much did they know and what did the state media tell them? Also I would like to know what Soviet citizens knew as well if possible. Thanks.

I know it started at the same time in the Indus and China. Buy why on earth in the desserts of the Middle East? Why not Italy, or Egypt, both of which had great farmland and were known for it during the time of Rome.

I'm a medieval knight in full plate armor, dismounted, in the middle of a battle. An enemy knight walks up, rears back and smashes me full in the chestplate with the blunt end of his heavy iron war hammer. What exactly happens to my armor? What effect does the blow have on my body?

Note, I'm currently trying to design a realistic combat system for a videogame I'm working on. The game involves several types of weapons, including some blunt medieval style weapons like war hammers, sledgehammers, maces... I need to figure out what kind of damage these sorts of weapons cause, and how they interact with different forms of armor.

Thanks in advance for any help.

I was reading "If a Pirate I must be" by Richard Sanders, and a main thesis of the book was that the rapid and dramatic deflation of Royal Navy around the 1710's lead to large amounts of unemployed skilled sailors. This surplus of capable and desperately unemployed men turned to piracy after the Royal Navy downsized. If this argument is true why didn't the major wars like the Napoleonic Wars or WW1 or WW2 create large pirate fleets like the early wars in the new world did?

I've quite recently became interested in ancient battles and currently I'm focusing on the Battle at Cannae, but I have a few things is unclear to me and I was hoping for an answer here.

• Who is telling the more accurate story, Polybius or Livy? The numbers differ quite a lot between those two

• Is there any other source from that era who I can look up? Seems like most people either follow Polybius or Livy.

• Is there any evidence where the current battle happened and is there a certain area where it happened?

Thanks beforehand!

I have a distinct memory of reading a passage in a class on the Roman Empire that attributed differences in size and intelligence between the different peoples of the world to temperature. The cold of Germany made the Germans big and stupid, the heat of Egypt made the Egyptians small and cunning, and Italy was just the right balance of hot and cold to make the perfect person.

Who made this claim. I thought it was Tacitus in the Germainia but when I reread it recently I couldn't find the passage. Are there any scholars of Roman history who can help me? I have a nagging suspicion that it's from one of Tacitus' more minor works but I could be completely off.

Thanks Roman history scholars, or gratias tibi, rerum auctores Romanus!

I get that he is considered an excellent general and soldier so I do understand his reverence. My confusion is why he is given a statue by those he fought against? Do any other countries have a statue or memorial of a general that fought on the opposing side?

Historicly, the Dutch were always disunited, small duchies, who didn't have much naval power, until Austria came by

Where did the ships the Dutch used in the revolt against Spain come from?
Where were the major shipyards these constructions took place (I presume Antwerp?) What would the Naval force of a smaller independent Dutch state have been like in the 15th Century (e.g. independent Guelders or Friesland) How did the Dutch take control of the Austrian ships?

If so, why did you refuse ?

And if you weren't proposed yet, would you accept to become a default subreddit ?

I saw that /r/history became a default... and it led me to discover that /r/history was actually pretty far from being "serious". I don't think I ever saw one serious thread with people who seemed to know what they were talking about.

And in fact, even in /r/badhistory, subreddit specialized in debunking historical misconceptions on reddit, there actually is a lot of bad history, even from flaired user.

So it led me to wonder why /r/askhistorians, unparalleled subreddit when it comes to quality of discussion and moderation, probably one of the only, if not the only, place on internet where you can have such quality discussion about history, wasn't a default subreddit yet.

My only real guess is the fear that getting too much new users would mean a downgrade in quality, but I think /r/askscience, default subreddit, still make a pretty good job.

Im really interested in mythology, Norse in particular, and I want to know what kind of influence it has on American culture, other than the obvious Thor franchise of course.

During the Second World War, did food rationing in Britain extend to the countryside? If so, couldn't they just circumvent it by buying directly from farmers?

Was it a metaphor for a parasitic leeching human being? It would make sense, having to ask them in, the only way to get them out being to break their heart or something.

I'm working on a research about the movie 300 and it's historical relevance/correctness and historiographical correctness. And I was wondering what the historians on reddit think about the movie.

The paper is based on the first movie from 2006 and the battle of Thermopylae

I'm interested to know what you think

I know most of the continent is mostly desert but parts of it are fertile especially in the east. Why didn't they develop any further in these areas until the Europeans came?