Reputation
927
Top tag
Next privilege 1,000 Rep.
Edit questions and answers
Badges
6 18
Newest
 Yearling
Impact
~36k people reached

  • 0 posts edited
  • 5 helpful flags
  • 153 votes cast
Jan
20
comment Has there ever been a battle with only a single survivor?
@NathanCooper : by claiming it's sci-fi, instead of religion (or mythology) only shows that you are strongly biased in this case.
Jan
19
comment Has there ever been a battle with only a single survivor?
@T.E.D. : I was referring to the time period when the Jaredites were supposed to live in. I guess you wanted to write 1827, when the Book of Mormon was written, but I was referring to the in-universe time period.
Jan
19
comment Has there ever been a battle with only a single survivor?
(...) What also makes this answer questionable, is that while everyone accepts the existence of events like the Babylonian captivity (from the Bible) and the Trojan war (from the Iliad), and the existence of the ancient Israelites and other ethnic groups from the Bible, the existence of ancient Greeks and Trojans etc., the existence of the Jaredites are, as far as I know, not accepted by most secular historians.
Jan
19
comment Has there ever been a battle with only a single survivor?
@T.E.D. : It is from a time period where history and mythology are strongly intermixed, and sometimes the religious account is the only one which survived. In some cases, for example many major events in the Bible and in Greek/Roman mythology are accepted by many secular scholars as authentic (albeit without the supernatural elements). However, this answer should have at least included a similar disclaimer as in my answer (which also deals with a quasi-mythological event).
Jan
18
comment Were life imprisonment and mental insanity the only reasons a divorce couldn't be granted in early 20th century England?
While a useful info, it doesn't answer the question. The question seems to ask whether a divorce which would otherwise have been granted, would be denied in the case of mental disability. This seems to have been commonplace, for example I know of a story from just before WW1 in the Austro-Hungarian empire, where an abused woman was trying to divorce, and it was almost successful, but then her husband threw a tantrum, had a stroke, and became mentally unstable (he already had mental problems before, but this made it much worse, and he never made a recovery), so the divorce failed.
Oct
22
comment What was the cleanest war ever fought?
except for the later sacrifices, wouldn't this look more like a medieval jousting tournament, which was heavily regulated and casualties were rare?
Sep
25
comment Why didn't Roman emperors have harems?
The fact that they were "accused of" meas that the society found such things unacceptable, so therefore even if the emperors did it, they tried to do it in secret.
Jun
12
comment Why are the “Three Musketeers” called musketeers?
Sorry, but no. The dominant battlefield unit in that time was the Tercio, with separate roles for musketeers and pikemen. Musketeers didn't switch to cold weapons after the first volley, they used a rolling formation with the first rank firing then moving to the back to reload. This was very different from the later flintlock+bayonet warfare. Also, the book depicts the titular 3+1 musketeers using muskets (for example, at La Rochelle, where they participate in actual battles and they do wear full military gear), and they are very good marksmen. However, your first paragraph is still useful.
Jun
12
comment Why are the “Three Musketeers” called musketeers?
Note that they were not fighting with sabers but with rapiers. Most of the movies depict them in the city and emphasize duels, but in the books they do use armor, longswords and muskets when they go into battle. They are even noted to be excellent marksmen, at La Rochelle the four of them (with their servants were reloading for them) defeated two dozen enemies in a gunfight. However, in peacetime, they don't walk in full military gear on the streets, this is why they only carry rapiers (and pistols) for self-defense.
May
21
comment Why weren't North American Indians considered to be property yet to be acquired (slaves)?
Note that blacks were already slaves before they were brought to the Americas. Very few if any blacks were directly enslaved by whites, the whites just bought slaves who were already enslaved by other black tribes or Arabic slave merchants.
May
7
comment How common is nostalgia for the colonial perod in countries which gained independence in the 20th century?
@Voitcus : Please read my sentence more carefully. I didn't say they miss communism because they had fuel and meat, I wrote that those were rare luxuries (so mostly unavailable). You just repeated what I wrote, while stating that I wrote the opposite.
May
6
comment How common is nostalgia for the colonial perod in countries which gained independence in the 20th century?
@TylerDurden : it can be expressed as in how prominently it is featured in the media, if there are politicians or activists discussing the topic, there can be surveys or articles written about it etc., maybe my wording was not the best, but if there is a general "pro-something" or "anti-something" sentiment in the population, it gets recorded and can be studied. Many questions on this site imply whether the population of some countries liked or supported certain people or ideas.
May
6
comment How did Europeans really conquer the Americas?
Note that the colonization of America was not a D-Day landing with the Europeans jumping out from the ships and starting to gun down Natives on the shore. It was a much more gradual process, and it's hard to define sides, as sometimes there was peace and trade, sometimes war, sometimes Natives fought among themselves and sometimes European powers, having Native allies, fought between each other, so it was never a full-blown "all Europeans" vs "all Natives" armed conflict. The alien example is not well suited unless it takes a few hundred years and the aliens are peaceful 90% of the time.
Apr
25
comment When and why did having long hair become associated with women, and short hair with men?
"Prior to the war, both men and women commonly kept long hair" - however, hair longer than waist-length was very common for women, but very uncommon for men. So even long before WW1, even if men had longer hair than the average today, it was still considerably shorter than for women.
Mar
19
comment When did challenging to a duel cease to be a practice in English culture?
This was a surprise for me, because in mainland Europe duels ceased to be a practice only around WW1.
Mar
12
comment Did the biblical apostle James visit Ireland?
@Alex : that would verge on conspiracy theories. No serious historian denies the existence of the apostles and the fact that they traveled to many places of the Mediterranean during the fundation of the early Christian churches.
Feb
16
comment Why did English become Lingua Franca of the modern world?
@SS : If you were sincere with the question you wouldn't put so much weight on the opportunity to make political statements.
Feb
16
comment Why did English become Lingua Franca of the modern world?
@SS : building roads and railroads, constructing factories, investing in equipment and paying workers is not the same as acquiring guns to loot. I never claimed that everything the British did was fair, I just said that you can't compare it to looting. I'm not even British, I wrote only because I hate when people pretend to ask a question on this site but their real purpose is to disguise rants as questions and to hide payloads of political propaganda into their questions. Your question body has not much to do with the question title, and is in fact hate speech.
Feb
16
comment Why did English become Lingua Franca of the modern world?
There is also a difference between "looting" and "investing and then extracting the profits". I doubt that any significant wealth was extracted from India by a way of direct looting and plundering.
Feb
11
comment What forces/incentives drove the Mongols to conquer a much larger land territory than they could comfortably settle or rule?
@Rohit : I don't know, maybe something like the tragedy of the commons? Don't say every nation acts completely rationally given what information they have. Look at our current problems with the climate and non-renewable resources. A lot of countries use methods they know are unsustainable in the long term, yet they use them because it makes more profit for the short term. The Mongols were not the only ones who suffered from the conquest-driven mentality. The Roman and Ottoman empires started to rapidly lose power the moment they stopped expanding.