So I know the Hanseatic League was basically a confederation of German merchants that wielded a lot of political and economic power. And they kept the roads and seas safe from bandits and pirates. But what I don't know is what their military and navy? Did they have an organized army and fleet or did they hire out mercenaries and privateers to protect their routes and interests?

I read that ancient China* used to be matriarchal, which I've read was determined in part because of the fact that men would move into their wives' familial homes, but be buried after death in their family's homes.

This seems like a somewhat...tenuous conclusion. Is there more evidence to support the assertion that China used to be matriarchal? If so, why did it change?

*This would be more than 5000 years ago, so I honestly don't know if you can say it's "China," but yeah the people living in the area that we refer to as Mainland China today.

Salutations. I am about to start teaching twentieth-century US foreign policy to a group of 17-18 year olds. This is not my period, so while I have a basic understanding of 'the facts', I am missing 'the story'(/'stories'), as it were.

What are the seminal works of historical interpretation I might look to for inspiration here? Are there any historians of the period who you think write in a way that might be more accessible to teenagers? Not 'dumbed-down' per se, just engagingly written.

Thank you very much for your time!

I've been wondering about the connection between Roman law and medieval serfdom. Roman laws placed certain restrictions on agricultural workers called coloni, including restrictions on leaving the land in some circumstances.

But did medieval serfdom actually develop out of this Roman system, or are we connecting two institutions that only look similar on the surface?

How much of medieval serfdom was inherited from Roman law, and how much emerged later because of changing landownership and the growing power of landlords after the Western Roman Empire declined?

I'd be interested in what historians think about this, especially any good books or sources that discuss the connection.

The college sports system in america is quite similar to what you see in Germany or Spain. Universities like UCLA and USC have multiple sports, can never be moved to another city like a professional american franchise does once in a while, its identity purely local, and community oriented instead of vying for national and global appeal for the sake of profits.

Yet this athletics is based around schools instead of neighborhoods.

Assume it’s 1812, napoleon is basically at the peak of his power. By this point enemy armies have suffered major defeats to the French. I imagine hate was widespread towards napoleon and his army.

- Baghdad fell to the Mongols under Hulagu Khan in 1258 CE.

• Al-Andalus came to an end in 1492 CE, when the Emirate of Granada surrendered to the Catholic Monarchs, Ferdinand II of Aragon and Isabella I of Castile.

Over the 234 years between these two events, did any Andalusian scholars or chroniclers write about the fall of the Abbasid Caliphate? How did the people of al-Andalus react to the fall of Baghdad?

I haven't been able to find much on this subject, except for the possible writings of Ibn Saʿīd al-Maghribī (1214–1286 CE), but that alone is certainly not enough.

I get that they were flex pieces and showed off wealth, but I'm curious about the actual logic. Were they mostly for the church and clergy, or did nobles display them differently? Seems like a lot of effort for something so few people would ever see.

I've just read Madonna in a Fur Coat by Sabahattin Ali, and in that novel a Turkish character has a child with a woman whose father was Jewish. He was unaware of the child until a decade had passed, is not present in the child's life, and, the mother having died in child birth, the father of the child is unknown to the authorities and the child's guardians. The novel was published in 1943, and is set from the early 1920s to the early 1940s. I was wondering if this child would be persecuted under Nazi racial laws considering half of its known grandparents were Jewish.

My Grandfather (RIP- from his discharge papers) served in the Pacific Theater in WW2 as Pharmacists Mate 3rd Class from 9/21/1943-4/8/1946 and served on the NTS Farragut, Idaho; HCS Farragut, Idaho; USNH PSNY Bremerton. Wash; USN Mobile Hospital #10; US Fleet Hospital #110 and #111; and then back to Bremerton to close out his service. Family lore is that he supported the naval landings at Iwo Jima and Okinawa. Hard to find information on the fleet hospitals. What was that role and where did the fleet hospitals serve?

Hello 👋🏼

I’ve always been fascinated by WWII and what was going on at that point in history. I’m sad that I never got to really converse with anyone about what it was like to be alive during that era and was wondering if anyone is still around for me to talk to them about it?

Especially someone who was living in Germany or was involved in the war or camps. I’m just curious about what it was like to serve in their military, what civilian people were thinking or doing when the Nazis came to power, and what it was really like to be in the camps and how they survived.

Most especially I wanted to know how people moved on or how they adapted to changes once the war was over. How do you move on and recover from something like that if and when you realized how wrong it was to treat people so poorly because of their race & religion?

What about if you were at any point held prisoner in the camps? The same question would apply. How do you move on and recover?

Did they feel like a woman? When you search for them online most articles use female pronouns for Chevalière. Would those pronouns have been used to describe them back then?

I recently read about a Protestant church office in Germany that collected information on religious and ideological groups and shared material with the Gestapo. Its postwar successor’s own historical account acknowledges this cooperation.

What surprised me was the complicated history, the Nazis shut the office down in 1937, but a successor institution established in 1960 had personnel links to the earlier organization.

How was that earlier cooperation examined between 1945 and 1960? Were those involved investigated through denazification or church inquiries? Did the office’s later conflict with the Nazis affect how its earlier actions were judged?

I’d appreciate historical research on this, especially anything explaining how responsibility was assessed when someone had both cooperated with and later opposed aspects of the regime.

From what I’ve read so far, I haven’t found evidence that those involved were punished for this cooperation. Instead, some appear to have held influential positions after the war. Am I missing research that explains how their past involvement was assessed?

I tried asking this in Ask Historians but I didn’t get any responses. I’m wondering what has happened in societies where law and order have collapsed entirely. How did people act and treat one another? What was the end result of a society with no rules or effective governance? TIA

Hey everyone,
I’m trying to prove a point to someone about public perception versus historical facts, and I need your honest, unfiltered opinions to help me settle this.
I have a specific question for you all: Do you think America won, lost, or did neither in the Vietnam War?

CRITICAL RULES BEFORE YOU COMMENT:
DO NOT GOOGLE IT! Please do not look up the answer or check Wikipedia before answering. Just give me your genuine gut reaction, what you remember from school, or what you've always assumed happened based on movies and media.

If you are a history buff or expert: If you already know the deep history and political outcome of the Vietnam War inside and out, please wait and do not comment or answer right away.

Right now, I am specifically looking to hear from regular people who don't study history deeply. I want to see what the general public, everyday people, and casual media consumers honestly think happened based on what they've picked up over the years.

(To the history experts: Please give it a few hours before you jump in and break down the actual historical facts. Let's see what the initial wave of responses looks like first!)

Thanks in advance for helping me settle this debate!

• What were China, Japan, and Korea’s individual reaction to westernization? I know that China wanted to utilize western technology/military with Chinese values (and suddenly went back to preaching Confucianism? iirc) and Japan fell into this social Darwinist mindset, how did each of these countries implement westernization (?) and how did it reflect in their societies?
• How did the “common people” of China, Japan, and Korea react to the increased number of foreigners in their countries after they all started opening more ports? I know that some rebellions arose (Boxer Rebellion, Sonno Joi) but did anything happen in Korea? 
• Did all three countries kinda go through a period in which they wanted to return to Confucianist values and “the old way”? Like Japan did during the Meiji Restoration and the Daewongun tried to in Korea? 
• When did Korea start receiving Western influence? Was it when the US got extraterritoriality?
• Where does the line get drawn between “modernization” and “westernization” for these countries?
• Right before Korea was taken as a colony of Japan’s, was hangul considered a “low-class” language? Bc I recall official documents being written in classical Chinese. What kind of people were against Hangul (or viewed it as lower?) and why?

Standard history taught in the school system says that a significant portion of the native population of the Americas were wiped out by diseases brought over by the European explorers. I've heard of discovered evidence that Vikings, and possible the Chinese, had reached American shores before then. Is there any evidence of them starting pandemics as well?

Edit: Or would the lack of disease spreading be proof they didn't reach American shores?

I've been going down a rabbit hole on people who just could not be controlled, the ones who said or did the most unhinged things with zero regard for consequences. One I can think of is Werner Herzog. I want to know your niche picks though.

I’m not really looking for world leaders because that just feels like cheating (something crazy is bound to slip out if every word you say is broadcast), but if you really feel a world leader is worth a mention, please educate me.

I’m curious if the opposite of most heroic movies was feasible. Would it have been possible for a soldier to have been deployed to Europe or the pacific, but basically nothing notable happened to them? They missed out on every battle, never had to fire their weapon, never saw atrocities. Just kind of existing and then went back home and basically said 🤷

Most of the independent kingdom’s history comes from a time when Protestantism didn’t exist at all. Lutheranism was brought to Norway only by Denmark. There was also real Catholic resistance, led by Olav Engelbrektsson. How do Norwegians today view this part of their history and cultural heritage?

When they find human remains that indicate unnatural death, how do they decide whether it's ritual sacrifice, or execution, or murder, or died-in-battle, or accident, etc?

Recently been reading about Achaemenian empire and their real names. Cyrus was Kurus, his father was Kambujiya, mother Mandana. Their family traced their lineage from Sakha-muni (Haxa-munis/Achaemenid). Region was called Parsu/Parsa. People called themselves Ariya. Kuru killed Mada/Mara king, who later transformed in to a multi-headed serpent in Armenian mythology. Mar also means snake in old Persian.

Compare them with Mahabharat time names. There is Kurus. There is Kamboj. There is Madra; Madri, Pandu's second wife, claimed to be from Madra kingdom (Bahlika). Gandhari is from Gandhāra. Sakya-muni is epithet for Buddha, which sounds similar to Sakha-muni (though means completely different). Not to forget entire Krishna birth story is copy/inspired from Cyrus birth story (or Zeus birth story).

Wondering if there has been confusion about location of all these kingdoms? And, incidents which inspired initial Jaya story (old Mahabharat) were based in Iran?

Or, these names were imposed later?

Note: It is about names and cross references. So, pls don't throw Indo-european common language root for similar names. I would appreciate if there are other literature sources which can collaborate Mahabharat interpretations. Achaemenian Kurus have multiple inscriptions while Mahabharat has none!

Do we know anything at all about the guy who shot Henry V in the face? Do we even have any legends about it?

There's history and myth about the guy who shot Richard I, stories about the death of William Rufus, and plenty of tales for the early deaths of other English kings. We also know about the guy who saved Henry's life.

So, what about the guy that nearly took out Prince Hal?