I often read that Crassus was not only the richest person of his day and throughout Rome, but possibly in history. While listening to The History of Rome podcast, Mike Duncan said that the Emperors personally accounted for about half of the GDP of the entire empire. Wouldn't they be wealthier than Crassus ever was?

With the Reformation sweeping its way through much of Northern Europe and the German states, is it inevitable that England would've been hit by the changing of ideas?

Did the relationship between England and Rome have other issues before the Pope denied Henry VIII's wish of having his marriage to Catherine of Aragon annulled?

Were the populace of England already showing discontent towards Catholicism and was the changing of power away from the Pope a popular view, or was it solely instigated by Henry VIII and his government?

Finally as a sub-question, how was England viewed during the War of the Roses by Rome, and how was Catholicism treated by the Yorkists and Lancastrians?

Is there an exact time frame they are referring to?

I am part Blackfoot and don't know much in the history of them, I know they were the French living in North Africa but that's about it. Two paragraphs to explain it would be fine, I don't need too much detail or links to pages.

This is an excerpt discussing Iranians and Kurds and I'm wondering if it is accurate as a rough summary.

"5 to 7 thousand years ago : Aryan people lived in the region of Siberia in today's Russia.

5 to 3 thousand years ago : Aryan tribes started to immigrate grudually , they split into 3 main branches, one immigrated to India, one to Iran, and 3rd branch went to Europe. Now it's important to understand this immigration didn't happen over night, and they didn't have their final destination already in mind! it happened during thousands of years.

3000 to 2500 years ago, different Aryan tribes settled in the plateau of Iran, they called it Iran meaning the land of Arya.

2600 years ago - first Iranian empire was founded by medians in west of Iran

2500 years ago - Persian empire was founded by Cyrus the great.

So already I think it's clear why comparing the terms "Iranian" and "Aryan" is wrong. Aryan is a more general term while Iran is more specific and it embraces a coherent set of culture /race /land/ language which are in connection with those Aryan tribes who immigrated to Iran.

With this view in mind everything starts to make sense, that Persians/kurds/afghans and many other people who live in Iran's plateau are rightly called Iranian people.

Their language and culture is also very similar and related. Who says Kurds have very different language from Persians? Their languages are so very close and of the same family. In fact if you wanted to choose a lanuage closest to kurdish it would definitely be Persian and vice versa. Same about culture.

Kurdistan is not considered occupied by Kurds who live in Iran. Ever since Cyrus the great established the persian empire persians and kurds lived together and been part of one entity. I mean suppose Medes were the ancestors of todays Kurds, Cyrus himself was half persian half median, his grandfather was the last king of Medians and he raised the persian empire by the help of medians. If you visit the site of perspolis you'll see carved on stone the pictures of Median and Persian soldiers standing next to each other.

So you see the name "iran" is not just about a political boundary which exists on today's maps. And the kurds don't feel they're occupied by this name! in fact they feel not only they're part of it but also they're one of the main founders of it."

Any thoughts on its accuracy?

Obviously i understand the concept of electricity and fancy appliances but if we look at basics.

For example i have an oven in my kitchen would they have one in theirs and use it for a similar purpose? Similar utensils as well? Knives Forks etc

Mum cooks dinner and we sit at the table and eat our dinner and wash our plates after.

I've referred to the AH master book list many times for sources and have yet to be disappointed by any of the books I've purchased, however, certain topics, peoples, or persons are lacking representation on the list so I'm looking for recommendations on the following topics:

• Charlemagne

• The Huns under Attila

• The World's Fairs from 1851-67

• The Reconquista or the war between Christians and Muslims in medeval Europe

• Any books about the political, economic, or artistic history of Rennaissance-era Italy

• Native American tribes in New England or the northeast America either before or after the Columbian exchange

I'm usually a fan of single volume histories a la Osman's Dream or Wilkinson's Rise and Fall of Ancient Egypt but any recommendations would be great.

I'm not sure if this belongs here, but I was wondering if there are any definitive books on prehistoric political systems? Thanks in advance.

My friend came across a small map of Palestine the other day and it had the title of "The Society Of Knights Of Kapharna" i searched on Google for some information about this but absolutely nothing came up. Is there any information about this Society of Knights?

I'd like to preface saying I'm not trying to encourage presentism, so I ask in the ethical frame of the day as to avoid the "historian's fallacy." I'm curious how, as Dr Braun knowingly used ill kept slaves for construction for the rocket projects in Germany, how his contributions and pivotal role in NASA were justified during the time of those knowing, and how it was later received when it became more common knowledge? Also did Dr. Braun have a real choice to both remain as a forefront rocket engineer in Germany and not join the SS, or more-over have influence to discourage slave use himself?

I hope all parts of this question aren't too open ended, and hopefully some are able to be addressed. Thank you.

Background: I'm german, and both of my grandfathers were doctors. I've never met one of them, or was too small too remember in any case. One was a wounded WW1 veteran with rather strict anti-war and anti-nazi sentiment, the other (paternal grandfather) rather conservative and, while apparently not explicitly, possibly at least a sympathizer in regards to conservative values like patriotism, willingness to sacrifice and hard work etc - and, of course, possibly worse. Note that I added the 'possibly worse', both my parents agree on him as far as the possible sympathizing but no more, from what I can gather.

Anyway, the latter was still a doctor during the war, not in any military connection, but privately in a small village in north-eastern germany.

My father concedes the above with only minor reluctance, but offers that he really can't remember more because politics wasn't a subject of discussion at home at the time (he was born in 1938).

However, I've been wondering - weren't teachers, journalists and other professions strictly regulated at least once the nazis came to power? I seem to remember being taught that you couldn't be in those jobs unless you were a party member - and I think that included doctors?

What is the likelihood of a somewhat rural doctor not being a member of the nazi party say 39-45, at least nominally?

Also as related question what happened to the names of the people living in Granada after it was conquered?

And another question from the time period: I've been told and read somewhere myself that when the Arabs crossed the Gibraltar Strait they were readily received by the native population, is it true?

Every time a western movie or really any movie with Native Americans in it, I've noticed that the people act "high" off tobacco. I know the first time I smoked a cigarette I got a buzz from it, but never again. So my question is, are there any historical texts that point to tobacco being stronger in the past? Better yet, are there any that speak on tobacco lessening in potency over time? If so, is a reasoning provided for this? Thanks for any responses in advance.