I've read a comment somewhere saying that there was no evidence that greatswords were used to disrupt pike formations and that got me thinking:

-Is this comment true?

-If not, I think they needed to be in front of the formation since swinging that thing takes some space, so can someone really deflect attacks from around 10 pikes for enough time for the rest of their soldiers do something like that?

-Would they do anything outside this specific situation?

Thank you for your answers and english is not my first language by the way.

So you have the mounted knights that may have been the equivalent of tanks, but I've heard that there where instances where unmounted knights where used in battle throught the middle ages.

In this case:

-Was it something common to happen?

-How would they fight regular infantry that have more numbers and are in a formation, would they be in a formation too?

-Would they use more "knightly" weapons (hammers, maces or pollaxes) or use more standard spears/polearms?

-We have many manuals teaching them on how to fight in armor against an armored oponent using grapling, would this knowledge be only intended for duels?

-And also what would knights in general (mounted or not) do in a siege?

Also english is jot my first language so sorry for possible errors.

Hello,

I am taking a course on Middle Ages history from 1000-1600 and covering topics such as the crusades, Latin kingdoms, Byzantine Empire and Islamic nations and their respective cultures and interactions. I was wondering if anyone would have an audible book recommendation so that I could listen and familiarize myself with this time period?

Thank you!

Why is Mosquito Coast part Of Honduras today when it was never a Spanish colony and instead an English one. Was it sold?

Renaissance paintings of Greek philosophers and other ancient figures seem to depict them wearing togas, or something very much like a toga. I always assumed this was an anachronism.

But once the Roman Empire had conquered the Mediterranean, did it spread the toga, along with Roman culture, to the far corners of the empire? Would the provincial elite, and city councilors have worn togas?

It's pretty clear that contact with European diseases after the 1490's decimated populations of indigenous peoples in the US, Caribbean, and Canada (namely Influeza, Smallpox etc.). Most native populations fell to a fraction of their pre-Columbian levels due to disease.

However, to date in places like Mexico, Peru, Brazil. Bolivia, Guatemala etc. there are still very sizable populations that identify as indigenous. Indigenous languages are still widely spoken by these groups. Why did the indigenous groups in such places fare much better than their North American counterparts? I would assume both regions had not built up sufficient immunity to diseases, so what caused the large discrepancy in population decline?

I know that regions like Peru, Mexico, and Bolivia has substantially higher population levels than North American tribes, but is population the primary reason, or are there other factors as well? Does the fact that civilization was more developed in Central and South America play a factor?

*Side Note: Apologies if the wording of this is incendiary or if the terminology used is not proper (or politically correct) I'm trying to not be offensive. I'm fairly unfamiliar with this topic, and I'm just really curious and can't seem to get a good answer from googling online.

They had some pretty advanced shipbuilding at any given time when compared to the Mediterranean. I know they couldn’t have been Hjortspring or Nydam ships since those came around several hundred years afterwards.

If I recall correctly, the Sea Peoples used different types of weapons than other Mediterranean civilizations. I’m not sure if that applies to the ships themselves as well.

It’s just a thought that popped into my head and I’m curious if it’s possible

It has always puzzled me how classical Greek society could be so sexist and at the same time regard female goddesses in such high esteem. Classical Athens, for example, is a textbook example when discussing patriarchal societies, yet elected a female goddess as patron of the city. This fact is not that odd if we think about christianity, which has promoted a traditional sex role for women for centuries and at the same time erected so many sanctuaries to the Virgin Mary all over the world.

But what baffles me is the belief in goddesses that perform tasks and activities which no classical greek woman would have performed in real life in that period, like wearing an armour and fighting (Athena) or hunting (Artemis). I know about the legend of the Amazons, but the fact that someone in that cultural context invented a myth about a legendary army of fierce female warriors living in a distant country actually tells us that this would be considered something wondrous, not something ordinary.

I accept that myths are fantastical in many ways and a lot of unbelievable stuff happens all the time, but if, for example, I wrote a fictional story with a female Pope or a female catholic priest as a character, I would provide the reader with some explanation of why this came to be, I would give at least some backstory, or otherwise this would raise a lot of eyebrows in contemporary audiences.

So, my questions are: did this actually raise some eyebrows, and did thinkers from that period try to explain away this apparent contradiction? Has any classical or hellenistic writer commented about this?

And, finally: could myths regarding female goddesses like Athena and Artemis be remnants from a distant past, in which there existed a Pre-IndoEuropean society in which women did indeed fight or hunt?

I have heard that when Caesar was kidnapped by pirates they demanded a ransom and Caesar demanded they double the amount of silver because he was worth more. I’ve also heard that he read his poetry to the pirates and that they all became close before he escaped and had them crucified. Was this accurate? Why would he raise his own ransom unless he was just extremely arrogant?

I really want to get a tattoo that is authentic to what a Greek musician or soldier would have in that time period. I haven’t yet seen anything online that answers this question.

I was reading ''Arab states of the Persian Gulf'' on wikipedia and this was not included, how come? and why is iraq included? Isn't it part gulf arabs, part levantines, part kurdish etc so very mixed races and some of the smaller countries (bahrain, kuwait) with iranian mix etc? ara levantines semites or is that just the gulf arabs if so then why do jews from israel are considered semites when they are levantine race?

as the question may have suggested, i am very interest in Southern culture and native american history, you could even say that i'm in love with them, as i'm with history in general. i'm a 15 (almost 16) yo guy so it's not for school or work, i just wanna study it for myself. i watched a lot of movies, tv shows and read a lot of things about the good ol' west and the south, and i've always wanted to start studying it seriously, but never actually did. thanks for taking the time to read this, and thanks to those of you who are going to give me suggestions.

Please excuse me if the question is stupid. I need this for a story I'm writing. If during more or less peaceful times the army itself was in barracks were the generals with them at all times or did they have a different place of residence?

For around 6 years now I've been trying to find the famous 'dying words' of Marco Polo (I did not tell half of what I saw, for I knew I would not be believed) but in his native tongue. Obviously I'm not just going to trust an online translator and the original copies of all his books are long gone. As is the language they spoke. If there is anyone that could help/have a discussion about this, I would be really appreciative

China has only been disunited in times of Warring Periods and around 20 years after the Jin Dynasty. It was also disunited during the Great Jin dynasty.

India rulers have newer conquered the southern tip of India and mostly remain to the northern regions while Chinese rulers conquered most of the western portions (Tibet, Qinghai, and Xinjiang)

India broke up into more states than China and never really unified into one for a long period

Why is that the case?

I’m a huge history nerd. Maps on the walls, dozens of books on the topic, and I’ve got about a hundred hours of history documentaries under my belt. However I can’t help but feel like a dilettante. So I was wondering if there were guaranteed ways outside of a college degree I could get an advanced education in History? Whether that be some kind program, a combination of different resources, or maybe even just a well educated mentor. I want to deeply study the subject for 2-3 years so if anyone has any help along the lines of what I mentioned earlier feel free comment below or dm me!

I am in possession of a Bible from the late 1800s. It was a family bible I acquired at an auction nearly twenty years ago (estate sale), and I don't have current intentions of selling it.

It is fascinating to me because it is filled with other documents, often seemingly used as bookmarks, such as early phone bills (one is for $0.17 around the 1930s if I remember correctly). There's a handwritten record of deaths in the family among others. Looking at the edges of the book when closed you can see it is littered with these things.

My question is this: I am a grad student at a university that has a pretty big history department (I'm in a different department). I was considering contacting them to see if they wanted to use the Bible and it's secondary documents for any sort of study or other academic purpose, but I didn't want to waste their time. Would something like this be of academic use?

My friend was watching the Netflix show Bridgerton, which I plan on watching but have not yet done so, and she was complaining about the fact that the women had no understanding of reproduction or sex. I was of the opinion that that was likely accurate, I didn’t think that women were taught anything about sex until they were at least engaged if at all. My friend also didn’t like the fact that the men seemed to know all about sex/reproduction and that they were teaching the women. Besides the complaint (of my friend, again I have not yet watched the show), that it is uncomfortable because she believes it takes on pedophilic view of sex Ed., (the experienced male and the wide eye innocent girl) would women actually have been taught anything about sex, specifically during the regency period (which I believe is when Bridgerton is set)? And what would the sex education look like for men at the time?

(I realize Bridgerton is fictional and that liberties were taken and the writers likely wrote the sex scenes in the show without regard for their historical accuracy but I am genuinely curious and if anyone has any information or insight into this question I would love to hear it. If you don’t know about the regency period specifically but have information on any historical sex education I would also be interested in that.)