My set in History A Level is preparing a "re-enactment" of the trial of Louis XVI and I am on the defense's side. Basically what I'm asking is there anything that we could argue which would allow us to win the debate because the re-enactment isn't 100% by the book. Currently we are trying to play the king off as a friend of the people and attempting to force a feeling of pity of the king, is there anything else we could do?

I know that this is a complicated question, but I've heard it argued both ways. Did the Empire basically subjugate and exploit other races and nations to the latter's detriment, or did it benefit the colonised in the long run, up to the modern era?

What did the participating countries benefit from this?

With the ten plagues AND the death of every first-born male, I would assume that there would be many Egyptian records or folk tales to back it up.

Based off of the evidence we have outside of the bible, what does the evidence (if there is any) say happened?

Are there records in Medieval European literature, (hagiographic literature, chronicles, legal records and philosophical treatises. etc..), of supernatural events attributed to God or particularly saintly individuals? This can include acts that have later been interpreted as natural phenomena as well as any that defy a clear explanation.

I believe it was because of the space race, but I am not sure. What apects of life made americans design things and forsee things of such capabilities?

In a way it seems a little counter-intuitive. The whole endgame in Europe was the destruction of Nazi power, so why would they set up a form of government that would hypothetically let another extremist party gain influence in the future? How could they be sure that Germans would vote for moderate, anti-military parties?

I recognize this may seem inflammatory, but it seems that there are quite a few cases where we see behavior that would be considered heinous by today's standards. For instance:

• Mary was approximately 12 when she was impregnated with Jesus.
• Muhammad married his wife Aisha when she was 6, and "consummated" with her at age 9. This would almost certain make her pre-pubescent.
• Not sure about this one, but according to another user in a previous thread the Greeks had a god that liked women and "non-bearded men" a.k.a. younger boys.

Are these isolated cases, or part of a larger sociological worldview that looked at children in a different way than we do? Interested in any explanations or insight.

A family relative of mine recently died and he was a World War 2 veteran. He was in the MP so I assumed he was at the rear doing stuff like checkpoints. However, he never liked talking about it at all. Which makes me wonder, did MP's serve on the front with the regular troops, and did they go to the concentration camps any? I wonder this because he was a real nice and caring person, and that tends to be the personality of those who had liberated the concentration camps and seen the horrors inside.

I really hope this is in the correct subreddit. I was reading a book that mentioned the date of the invention of the magnifying glass and knowing that the telescope was invented in 1608 in the Netherlands I wondered why there was such a large time difference between the two. Thanks in advance!

First of all, I looked in the FAQ list to see if something was asked there, but I didn't see it. If I missed it, I apologize.

I'm not sure if my title makes sense, so let me try to explain.

In movies and books, a common narrative is the righteous commoner vs. the abusive lord. The lord disregards the safety, health, and well-being of the commoners and forces them to work harder than is healthy, pay more taxes than they can reasonably afford, etc, letting the peasants under their protection starve to death while they feast.

Obviously, aristocracy like this did exist, but were they the majority, or even particularly common? Did the governing system (feudalism, etc) affect how often this occured? How many examples to we have of benevolent lords that were very invested in the well-being of their subjects?

I'm also interested in answers for non-european societies.

I'm not sure how to ask google specifically what I was looking for, so I figured I'd ask you fine folks. What kind of environment did the first homo sapiens originate from? I've read that they lived somewhere in central Africa, but did that area look anything like it does today, or was it closer to tropical forest? Thanks!

We (Present day people) call them the Aztecs, Inca, Mayans, Cherokee, etc. Did they refer to themselves this way, or did they have names for places, like we have Germany, America, China, Mexico, etc?

I've seen both spellings in books and online. Why are there two spellings and which is correct?

While we're at it, I read somewhere that the name means 'Hawk castle'. Does anybody know where that came from?

What's their argument?

I have a vague memory that Alan Bullock described Stalin as being afraid he would be arrested in Hitler and Stalin: Parallel Lives, but I don't believe he discussed any possible plots.

Were there any confirmed plots to overthrow Stalin during his tenure as leader of the Soviet Union?