I was reading about king Harald Hardrada of Norway and the battle of Stamford Bridge. Someone referred to them as “Vikings” and that didn’t really seem right to me. Not only were they Christian, but they were there as an occupying army, not a group of pirates. That got me thinking: what even is a Viking, anyway? Am I right in my skepticism, or completely off the mark?

If the Trojan war supposedly took place in late Mycenaean Greece how come Zeus is addressed as the chief god in the Iliad when Poseidon was the chief greek god in Mycenaean Greece? Furthermore how come the pantheon of gods in the Iliad has more in common with classical antiquity than it does with Mycenaean religion. To my understanding the Iliad and the Odyssey were both memorized for hundreds of years rather than written in fact Homer was a blind bard who was just telling stories he memorized and they were eventually written down. If this is true and the stories were told over centuries is the lack of Mycenaean religion due to the possibility of the stories being altered over time to be more in line with Greeces views at the time or is there another answer I just haven't been able to find.

Hey all, I've tried googling this for maybe an hour, even skimmed "Freedom's price - serfdom, subjection and reform in Prussia, 1648 - 1848" for answers.

I'm just curious if we have any figures of prices that serfs paid to gain their freedom. Adjusted for inflation would be the cherry on top. Thanks!

Was it more like "we're escorting you out of the city right now", or "you have until the end of the month to sort out your affairs and leave"? Could they settle in another Roman settlement? How could they make their livelihood?

Hello all. I’ve been looking into the Battle of Britain as a potential research project and I am trying to find sources or a general summary of the historiography.

From what I can tell, one leading argument for the Luftwaffe’s loss is the transition from bombing airfields to major cities, thus giving the RAF a break but I can’t find any sources on where this argument first was formulated.

Another argument is that the loss was inevitable because of rising aircraft production in England, but one counter is that the number of aircraft wasn’t the critical factor, but rather the number of pilots.

And of course, there’s the discussion to be had on Czech, Polish, and other nationalities fighting in the RAF.

What I’m wondering is where all these arguments are formulated in the historiography; did they take hold immediately after, or during the conflict or did it take several decades to form these? What are some current debates regarding the battle? I thank any and all replies.

The lyrics that made me ask this question: "You came down to this southern town last summer To show the folks a brand new way of life But all you’ve shown the folks around here is trouble"

Does Robbins refer to activists coming to rural towns and promoting left-wing ideas? Did these people exist and did they have an impact on the public opinion?

And does this concept have any meaningful connection to the European colonial empires we think of when we hear “colony” today? Of course, European colonialism had already begun in earnest by his time.

I am an Indian Reading up on Canadian History.

Why weren't there weren't more English settlers in India? (In comparison to the other territories the British Colonised like the US, Canada and Australia?)

I would love to know as much as possible as I am not familiar with Japanese history and i enjoy learning sociopolitical stuff in order to have a better overview of the world in that specific period and a bit further.

If you dont mind share some links to further read into it as i understand and do not expect you guys, spending much of your valuable time, to give me a precise and thorough overview (ofc if you want i wont stop you and would appreciate it deeply)

Edit: as this is considered the medieval era of japan and as that era propably isnt 1500-1600, I dont mind getting information from the late 1400s as an intro to what im looking for.

Alternative Question: How much truth is to the claim that the British did let the Axis sink certain ships on purpose in order to hide the fact that their codes had been broken and that the British thus decided to hide the Ultra Project in order to not make their population angry about this?

I was watching the podcast behind the bastards. They had an episode about antisemitic conspiracy theories, the host mentioned off hand that there are churches still in Europe that depict stained glass scenes of Blood Libel. Was this a common depiction for the medieval church and can anyone provide any specific churches where images like this still exist?

I feel like so many films shot in or around the medieval era look way too obvious on just how modern the actors look if that makes sense.. Not just in appearance but the way in which they carry themselves

Thinking about the Italian city-states. Venice has a nice position on the sea, with the bays and islands. Genoa also has great sea access. Same with Naples. Pisa is fairly close to the sea.

Florence and Milan don't seem to have sea access. I've read that Florence leveraged it's wool production to become important, and after it was important enough from that industry it was able to move over to banking. (Paint me slightly skeptical, seems that sheep could have been raised in pretty much all of Italy. My family raised sheep for a time so I do have a little bit of knowledge here. Even if Florence had an excellent landrace of sheep, they could have been bought and hauled elsewhere)

So let's say I DO buy that the sheep around Florence combined with the land around Florence was so good that for some reason no one else could really compete in the wool game. That still leaves Milan. What did they leverage to become an economic powerhouse?

(calling them city-states isn't 100% precise, but gets the idea across)

In places where it never snows or freezes, such as SE Asia or equatorial Africa, did residents have any concept of ice? If so, how?

I mainly relate this to the famous Epimenides quote "Cretans, always liars, evil beasts, idle bellies", which is said in the context of the Creatans thinking that Zeus had died, while Epimenides insists he was immortal. Another lead is that "Asterion" seems to be an epiphet of Zeus too. I did not find any interesting sources on this theory yet.

I always read stories of poor medical practices taking place in the medieval times i.e. drilling a bore hole into someones head to fix mental health issues. I was wondering how effective medieval doctors actually were in the medieval period?