As in were there any peoples that didn't recognise the correlation between sex and pregnancy? I don't mean an implied understanding of the biological processes involved, simply sex = baby.

If so, what were their theories?

1. How a young man could become a midshipman?
2. How large was a captain's salary compared to the average income in Britain? Admiral's?
3. If a leutenant or a captain get discharged from the navy, what jobs did they take on the shore?
4. Since the appointment to the admiral was done entirely on seniority, does it mean that every captain in time became an admiral?
5. Who is an Admiral of Fleet? In the "The Last Encounter" Hornblower mentioned that he is one, yet he is 72 and retired. He also mentiones that it was the ulimate pinnacle of navy career, but I always thought the highest position within the navy was the First Sea Lord.
6. Throughout the saga there are lots of mentiones to the Lords of Admiralty. I know of only one - First Sea Lord, who are the others?
7. How a person could become the First Sea Lord? Was it entirely on merit or was it based on with whom the new Prime Minister went to Eton?
8. Hornblower became a peer and a Lord. Yet, as far as I know, there is no title of honour called Lord, I thought it was more of an honorific, like "sir".

Compare Netherlands and China. China had vast resources: territory, minerals etc, while Netherlands was a comparatively minute country with very few resources.

Yet, during much of the Age of Exploration, Netherlands had colonies over the world and was a major economic power (to the best of my knowledge). Yet, China was both technologically, politically and economically dominated by colonial powers.

The same can be said about Great Britain, Spanish Empire etc.

• So are there any historical theories that explains the factors that make a nation with very few resources become economically and politically powerful over the rest of the world?

What made the allies win on the western front after years of trench warfare? Did they just outproduce the germans? Or was it because of new tactics, tanks etc?

How did the US strategy in Vietnam work? Years ago I heard that the US had outpost( fire bases) where our artillery and other goodies all over south Vietnam with interconnecting fields of fire. As our air cavalry and other units patrolled between outposts, if they hit any problems one or more fire bases could rain down hell. But I haven't been able to find any supporting info on this as most stuff on Vietnam is vague. Any maps would be awesome too.

We've discovered lots of Sumerian documents, but I understand that there is some debate as to chronology which means we aren't sure what year, exactly, any of them were written. What is the earliest document where the year of writing can be determined with certainty?

For bonus points, what is the earliest document where we can tell the exact day it was written?

I listening to Dan Carlin's Wrath of Khans series some time ago and I've been wondering about this. Was the cultural shift already happening or would have happened eventually anyway? Or is the premise of the question incorrect altogether?

From what I can remember the major components here were the rise of Mameluks and the fall of Baghdad in the hands of Mongols. Is this correct?

EDIT: also I meant 11th century, not just 11th. Sorry about that.

What stopped the triple alliance or the triple entente from taking countries such as Switzerland? Why didn't the Allies or Axis use this country to their advantage?

^read the question above and help me try to understand. Thanks!

I have seen an unsourced claim that the Roman Republic encouraged a sense of pride in the governmental form of the republic, and that the old pride was still encouraged even when Rome became an empire.

Was there ever a point where some Romans said, "We used to be a Republic, but that changed with Caesar, and now we're in a new period of history"?

In a broader sense, is there a general historical term for this phenomenon of a new form of government pretending that there is no break in legal authority between itself and the pre-existing government?

Need help with this question on my homework, literally the only book that even mentions it on google ebooks is limited and pg 41 can't be accessed and that's the page I need. So if anyone happens to know, it would really help out.

Do we have proof of any comedians in, say, ancient Rome, or Greece? Maybe the middle ages?

William King was his vp when he came into office, but from 1853-57 he had no vp.

Countless historians have shown how the Cold War led to the rise of modernization theory and its overriding influence for U.S. foreign policy in the Global South. But what about the Soviet Union? Is it more accurate to say that Americans viewed the USSR as a competing form of modernity rather than the clearest example of the unmodern?

My google-fu is weak. I can't seem to get a straight answer to this question. Most results are about short-range field telegraphs. It seems that commercial power plants weren't built until much later. What were the means of generating power? Steam & fuel? Windmills? Waterwheels?

Was reading about him earlier today and it was stated that he was not just an accomplished tourney knight but a very good Captain/Marshal. My question is just how important was he?

Hi!

I´ve heard on Radio-Canada that the only two "No´s" in a legit referendum were Quebec 1980 and 1995, but I´m not sure how many other referendums there have been.

Cheers!

I only ask, because I have seen New Zealand national team do the Haka.

Thanks