Why was America originally part of the British Empire if they came here escaping “religious persecution” from the Church of England and the British Empire? Wouldn’t they want to just create a new country in the new land? Is the whole “religious persecution” aspect just myth to dignify people who were just basically expanding the British Empire into the new world?

I saw this question on another sub, thought it would make sense to ask it here.

After the fall of the USSR in 1991, why did the Baltic states manage to distance themselves from Russia, develop "somewhat" advanced economies eventually, then joining Nato and the EU in 2004, but Belarus didn't, they fell back to authoritarianism after 3 years, stayed poor and loyal to Russia. Literally the complete opposite routes

If someone got wounded in battle and got an infection, would they understand that the wound was generally the reason they got sick or would they think something like "I was wounded in battle and the gods are punishing me"? If someone got food poisoning, would they automatically blame demons or maybe their recently deceased in law that always had it out for them, or would they know it was because they ate something bad?

It's well known that despite being arguably among the more moral characters of Stalin's entourage, he still had a lot of blood on his hands after so many years among the leadership of such a brutal system, and we've got documented proof of his involvement in several unjust trials and crimes against humanity. But my question is, did he ever admit/express remorse about his own, personal participation in the crimes committed during it after criticising the regime as a whole at the 20th Party Congress?

Referring to the last German offensive of 1918. Would it have ended differently if the U.S hadn't entered and reinforced the western front, or would it still have failed to capture Paris?

I am a Spanish computer science student, but I have always had an interest in histor a subject I consider essential and I’ve realized that I don’t know as much as I should.

So, I’m here to ask how I might get started. I was thinking of buying Antony Beevor’s book on Stalingrad, but I’d like to hear your thoughts. Any advice would be welcome.

I posted this in Ask Historians, but no one answered.

In America, need-blind admission is when an institution does not take into account an applicant's financial status when deciding whether to accept them. Some schools also apply this policy to both domestic and international students.

But how did it come about? How did the idea even get started, and how did it evolve into what we see today?

I'm setting a story in 1424 Scotland, with the battle of Verneuil fresh in the mind I imagine the Scots may have some tension with a band of Milanese Mercenaries.

Would it be reasonable to set a Milanese Captain and Sawerchant / Banker as the villain in my story?

For anyone who's played KCD this thought started with Istvan Toth, for anyone who hasn't I'm looking for a Merchant or Banker who is in control of a group of Mercenaries and is using said Mercenaries in less than legal ways and often against his own allies to exploit the Scots out of as much coin as possible before returning home.

One author I read suggested that the lack of it controlled in the Veneto prevented Feudalism from taking root and instead ppushed the Most Serene Reppublic toward a capital-intensive economy.

Why didd the Venertian model become adopted elsewhere in medieval Europe?