If there is are there historical instances that can be proven? What about before this period or after?

Did they really think they were going to beat the rest of the world? I tried googling it but can't really find a concise answer.

It seems like nowadays everyone sees all the major highlights of the major sports thanks to all the countless television channels and websites dedicated to sports.

Besides newspapers and box scores, how were people informed of crazy or odd occurrences of a match? What about routine highlights? Would people only see local sports highlights or national highlights?

I'm sorry if this is a dumb question. I was born in 1993 and have always wondered how sports information was reported en masse before the internet and dedicated sports channels.

I watch a lot of MLB Network, which often shows clips from the 70s, and I wonder if most people would knew that Joe Whoever hit a game winning home run during some (relatively meaningless) game in August, or if only the local people of the team would know.

Thanks!

I'm sure it varied from place to place. But, what kinds of currencies were common?

I'm watching The Pianist and it got me thinking - how bad was it for non-opressed people who were living in country occupied by Germany? It's obvious that Jews, gypsies and such had awful times back then, however I've never really read much about "regular" citizens. Could someone tell me what a regular day for Jew and non-Jew would look like (in say 1942)?

Thank you!

Hi all, something I've wondered for a while, with a few specific sub-questions:

What was the motivation for and process of the Japanese decision to form their SDF?

What was the international community's response, particularly America's, Britain's, Russia's, Germany's and China's? If there was any negativity/obstruction, how was it overcome?

I did a quick search for "self defence force" and "SDF" and found nothing, apologies if I missed something and I'd happily read any previous answers if someone recalls any. Thanks!

Someone recently sent me a video of how Thomas Edison used a circus elephant to show the dangers of alternate current, which in itself was a total surprise.. This led to me asking a ton of questions about why we use direct current vs alternate current, especially after knowing how Tomas Edison proved his "point" by practicing on animals. Was told that a lot of the outcome was based on the payoff that JP Morgan provided. although alternate current would most likely have been the better option. Would just like to understand this better!

If so how was it imported.

And when did they become self-sufficient if they were not at the start of the war?

In contrast to the plethora of scholarly works and first-hand accounts of German occupations in countries during World War II, there seems to be very little material out there on what the German occupations of Belgium, France, etc. were like during World War I. Does anyone have any information on this period?

I'm a South African, and I'd always hear my parents and other adults talk about the war in Angola as something very important that happened and that is was a big focus point during the Cold War and that many countries were involved in it.

I'd like to know why did a war specifically start in Angola(not a well-known country in my opinion) and why were so many countries involved? I can understand why the USSR and USA were involved, but why Cuba and specifically South Africa? And what happened at Cuito Cuanavale that made it so important?

I have read that many claim that Machiavelli's (in)famous work is a satire, as the prologue of the book he states that the work is dedicated to the Medici family and any prince who wishes to govern his principality efficently.

But i have also heard there was a dislike between the Medici family and Machiavelli. So, my question is: Was Machiavelli's work a genuine guidebook of sorts to princes and autocrats, or was it irony, satire and a attempt to make princes/autocrats make blunders?

In Spanish class I am learning about Costa Rican culture, and as part of that I had to do some research about Costa Rica's neutrality and absence of a military. However, I couldn't really find that much satisfactory information. Why is it that Costa Rica, a country surrounded by many other unstable Central American countries, has been able to abolish their military and (seemingly) have no consequences?

How does a popular language go extinct that no one even remembers how to use it. For example the hieroglyphics used by the Egyptian's was completely undecipherable until it was decided.

Imagine this: The battle of Leipzig/Waterloo/Gettysburg is in full motion. The scene shows the command of the French/English/Union/whatever army. Cannonballs impacting left and right, suddenly the faithful aide to the general/member of the staff, whose funny quips won the hearts of the audience, jerks and falls to the ground, as if struck to death. But, oh luck, a smile appears on his face and he produces from inside his jacket a tin of snuff tobacco ('his fathers blend')/a golden pocketwatch ('a present from his loving wife') or something like that, with a visible dent where it deflected the bullet which otherwise would have pierced his heart.

How feasible is this staple of a lot of movies about historical battles? Wouldn't the bullets and musketballs of that era be powerful enough to pierce such an object, made out of metal? What would it take to realistically stop the bullet, like modern ballistic/bulletproof vests do?

So this came up because my wife found a reference to a presumably spectacular cat's eye that belonged to the "King of Candy".

Google has gotten me this much info: There is an island named Ceylon near India, it's interior was ruled by "the king of candy" until 1815 when the British took the interior by force.

References seem to completely gloss over who this person was, or the origins of the title. The name "candy" is probably entirely coincidental to the English word, BUT I MUST KNOW. Can any one give a good summary of who this person/place/title was?

Were nuanced stories common in that time? I've also heard a lot of the quirks in the Iliad (huge lists of heroes and ships with their cities of origin and repetitive phrasing) being explained as crowd pleasers for oral performances. It doesn't fit to me that one second the crowd would be cheering because their city was mentioned and in the next having warm fuzzies for Hector and his son.