The successors to my knowledge were 30,000 Iranian boys who were basically kidnapped and placed into the Macedonian army as part of Alexander's Fusion Policy. Why did the Macedonian's in the army feel resentment towards them? Were they being directly replaced? Did they see this as disrespectful? Thanks for any help x

I.E. did these wars introduce organisational methods that were either used or exploited by Mohammed, his followers and his successors?

Is there a causal relation between these events?

This is a comment I found under a youtube video. Is it really true that at some point (which?) the American continents were more populated than Europe? Do these figures have any merit?

I just want to get this cleared up, pretty much what I'm looking for is a yes/no answer with evidence to back it up (you can link me to an external resource or write the evidence down yourself and cite it, both work for me). My question is:

Did the "dark ages of scientific repression" exist? I have been led to believe that for nearly a thousand years scientific advancement was repressed by Christianity. Is this true or false? Or is there something here I'm missing?

My class has an assessment coming up. We have to write an essay on the meeting of the estates general of 1789. I haven't really been able to find any articles stating how (and why) Louis XVI and Robespierre both reacted to the meeting. If anyone could shed some light, that would be great.

I think I know that the Troubles were a matter of the Irish trying to assert their independence from the British. I know the Catholic/Protestant split runs pretty deeply through British history. But weren't the British Anglicans? And why was the IRA so deeply reviled by the British, while the UVF and UDA portrayed imagery that most people in the west would consider terroristic? By this I mean murals of them holding guns while wearing balaclavas. I don't think "right" or "wrong" really applies here, or to any conflict, but why were the British so opposed to the Irish asserting their right to a sovereign nation?

How much should I be reading into these names? Like if I encounter the name Liu, should I assume they were descendents of the Han bloodline.

Up until today I'd thought that it was because of the "communist threat," and Nixon/McCarthy had added it to try to find Russian spies' schoolchildren. However, after I looked the history behind it up, I can't find any credible evidence for that theory. Am I looking in all of the wrong places, or is the only reason I'd ever heard behind the change completely fabricated?

(Also, I know Nixon wasn't president at the time of the change, just that type of ideology)

My 12 year old daughter wants to know. I did search google, reddit and the FAQ, but I think I am using the wrong search terms.

I apologize if this is something easily searchable- I'm on mobile device.

I want to learn about history....

I checked out the book list in the sidebar but that's pretty hefty & overwhelming, especially for someone like me who doesn't have a particular part of history I want to learn about.

My issue with history throughout school was it felt like a series of name, date, place; name, date, place... I want something with a STORY. Something with context, something with meaning, something that makes me feel.... And something that doesn't assume much in the way of a background in history. I care less about time period than I do about a book being well written. And preferably available in audio book format since I have an infant now, but that's not a firm restriction.

Appreciate any suggestions!