I am very interested in the history of the Turkish Republic and particularly on the period of war starting with the Ottomans in the Italian War of 1911 and culminating in the Turkish War of Independence ending in 1923. There are a lot of books covering the dissolution of the Ottoman Empire through the end of WWI. However, what I have noticed is there are almost no books on the Turkish War of Independence that don't also contain the name Mustafa Kemal Ataturk in the title. Similarly, many books that have a major focus on the Turkish War of Independence are titled after Ataturk. Here are a few examples:

Ataturk: The Biopgrahy of the Founder of Modern Turkey - Andrew Mango

Ataturk: Rebirth of a Nation - Patrick Kinross

Mustafa Kemal Ataturk: Heir to an Empire - Ryan Gingeras

Mustafa Kemal Ataturk and the Republic of Turkey: The History of the Ottoman Empire's Collapse and the Establishment of a New State

Eternal Dawn: Turkey in the Age of Ataturk - Ryan Gingeras

On the other hand, I don't know of any common English language books with just the title The Turkish War of Independence.

It would be like every book on the American Revolution being titled George Washington. Yes, I certainly understand Mustafa Kemal was the pivotal Turkish figure in modern Turkish history for many reasons, but he was not the only important figure in the war (Ismet Inonu, Kazim Karabekir, etc.).

So why is this? Thank you.

I mean, quite obviously the indigenous peoples of the Americas were the first to discover maize, and learned how to grow it, grind it, nixtamalize it, and cook it.

...but did they pop it? I mean, it seems like they had all the ingredients and know-how to do it. Fire, little bit of cooking oil, corn kernels.

Did they actually believe there where monsters there? Where there sightings? Where they there to be avoided? Any other reason? This has always intrigued me. I can imagine some huge ass whales might seem like a sea monster for some but there are so many different types depicted...

Between 1913 and 1933, there were six amendments made to the Constitution, one less than the nearly 120 years before it and the same number that have been made in the 87 years since.

Was there something unique about that time period that made Constitutional amendments more common than we've seen in any other period of American history?

I'm specifically interested in social and economic history, I've heard he pushed for Industrialisation in Egypt etc.

Thank you.

How realistic is this, and let's say in some universe this happened, how would the allies respond?

I'm writing a backstory for one of my characters and I wanted to be sure that I'm making it generally historically accurate (as much as it can be while also being a fantasy/fiction writing) so I had a couple questions regarding war and battles in the medieval times. I'm thinking about it mostly being in England but just as a general for Europe.

First off, if a peasant is sent to war/a battle as a foot soldier, are they chosen/ordered to do such or do they go of their own free will?

Second, say that the peasant returns after the battle to inform the king that the battle was lost and he was the only one who had survived, what would happen to him? I know there was honor suicide but I'm not sure if this would also be applicable for the specified location(s)/time?

If the outcome of the previous question is in the peasant's favour, would it be possible for the peasant to be granted knighthood after the battle?

Last, this one is less on the subject of war but still in medieval times, is it possible, if a king is unable to produce his own children, that he can will the crown to someone who is close to him?

Sorry for so many questions and thank you in advance for your help!

This is one of my personal favorite history books, but I'm unclear about the veracity of the claims she makes. Specifically I want to know if the relationship between Stilwell and Chiang Kai-Shek was truly as bad as Tuchman portrays it in the book, and if Chiang Kai-Shek and the Nationalists were really as incompetent as she makes them out to be. Specifically she is critical of their focus on air power, corruption bleeding away most of American aid, and the idea that Chiang Kai-Shek didn't want to commit resources to fight the Japanese and was instead hoarding them to fight the Communists

If yes, what would the punishment likely be? Were these laws same(as restrictive) for both sexes?

If no, would I get a different treatment in the society on account of being dressed alike to the upper class?

I read that lard was universally used in US before invention of vegetable oil. But prior to that, when animal meat etc was very expensive, what did people cook with? Like what did people in India and China cook with before oil? I read that despite the fact that Chinese eat lot of pork today, it was once very expensive and was eaten only for occasions feasts.

Do mafia members just sit idly by at construction site. Is this the "no-show jobs" they keep talking about.

Do labour unions tolerate their fellow construction workers getting beaten by mafia member.

We've got instances where Grand Duke Mikhail of Vladimir having to remain at Sarai for 2 years from 1313 to 1315, so it got me thinking what entertainment or other sorts of pastimes did it offer residents, also what kind of architecture did it boast, did it have communal places like baths or anything of that sort, what buildings did poeple live in, was there a big market, were there any annual events or other social gatherings, was most of the city common people or was it primarily the residence of the ruling elite, what was the people's ethnic makeup, what kind of places of worship did it offer, were there Buddhist temples as well etc.

And what would be the kind of additional information that we would we probably have?

That war reparations from the first world war were still being paid into the early 21st century feels like a geopolitical dinossaur, especially after all the events that unfolded after the treaty, including WWII and the formation of the EU. Was this treated like "it is not worth it to get into this subject again, let's just pay and move on?"

I realize that my question is overly broad, given the diversity across the African continent. But I'm hoping that by casting a broad net there might at least be a couple of specific examples that have been studied.

There's also the implicit assumption in the question that at least some newly independent nations did base their new structures on uniquely African traditional government, so please correct me if that is incorrect!

I would be interested in reading some primary sources on the Ming Dynasty, specifically the reign of the Yongle emperor, but lack classical Chinese reading skills.

I have found many secondary sources referencing the Ming Shilu, but cannot seem to find the document itself in English.

Apologies if this is an inappropriate question for this sub.

There are a great deal of similarities between western (originating in Anatolia, spreading from there) coins and Chinese coins that I can see - circular, made of metal, etc. They both arose at around the same-ish time period (between about 700 BCE and about 350 BCE). Theoretically my understanding is that "western" coins originated somewhat earlier (around 700 CE) and Chinese coins a bit later (350 BCE).

Is there any sort of cultural transmission going on here, or was this sort of a "convergent evolution"? I tried to look into this and I can't really find anything that answers this question.