I have often heard that the Great War (WWI) was where the widespread adoption of specialised weapons (e.g. hand grenades, light machine guns) and roles were introduced at the platoon level was introduced for the first time. For instance, a standard British platoon in 1917 was divided into four sections (a machine gun section, a grenade throwing section, a rifle grenade section, and a rifle/sharpshooter section). Prior to that, platoons were largely organised such that every member was a rifleman and the specialised weapons were organised at higher levels; with the company being the basic unit instead.

​

With that in mind, my question is this:

How widespread was the training of the specialised weapons/roles - be it formally or informally? Was every soldier given a degree of training in operating things like the light machine gun, grenades and trench mortars irrespective of their role in the platoon or was it just reserved to the soldiers who would be expected to operate them? If the latter, how did the military account for attrition? For instance, the loss of a gunner in a machine gun section would severely impact the efficacy of the platoon in contrast to the loss of an ammo carrier in the same section.

​

From the phrasing of the question, my interest is primarily around the British Army (which I think has more accessible documentation) though I'd be interested in all factions from the war. Thanks in advance.

How did the invasions, and colonization efforts of generations of Scandinavians affect the region of Scandinavia during the Viking era?

Inspiration for this question: playing eu4, reformation started in England and barely spread out of it, no country is protestant and yet still the reformation branches out in Provence (I'll imagine these are the Waldesnians). I was wondering why such a reformation which started in isolated island England would succeed while Lollardy did not.

Thus far, my formative reading on this was has been Anthony Beevor, who left me with the following impressions:

1. The Red Terror was hyped by foreign press hostile to the political forces behind the Republic.
2. The Red Terror was generally a short, sharp expression of disorganized, popular anger against the clergy and wealthy classes, and unsanctioned by republican/leftist political leadership (some of which sought to curb or stop the violence); The White Terror was a coldly calculated purge of politically and socially undesirable elements, directly ordered by Nationalist leadership.
3. The White Terror killed more people than the Red Terror

Apparently, though, Stanley Payne thinks Republican/leftist leadership was directly involved in the Red Terror, and intended it as a Soviet-style purge.

Any thoughts?

Wikipedia says that Richard was "considered prone to the sins of lust, pride, greed, and above all excessive cruelty," without elaboration, other than another part that says he is known to have "taken women by force", again with no details.

What do we know of the negative aspects of Richard's character?

I asked this question entirely forgetting about the rest of the world, since my main focus was on Western Europe. But hey, even the reasons behind that were answered!

[deleted]

What was the education of Gregory of Tours? Did people like him know Greek? Did they know classical philosophy / literature / history / Roman law or were they taught mainly Christian thought?

EDIT:

Also - bonus question. Was he a rural, post-Roman noble / aristocrat? Did his family own post-Roman latyfundia? I know Gregory of Tours claimed that many of his family members held the office of bishop of Tours. I would assume that this title would require education. And education would require money. In this case - stable supply of money throughout many generations. Was it frequent for nobles ( at least Roman nobles in post-WRE successor states) at the time to pursue Church career?

Which battle really sealed the deal in the Eastern Front? Or was it ither factors, staryegy, supply limits, the western front that made the difference?

It just seems logical that there would've been diseases in the Americas that the Old World had never encountered, but I've never heard of that happening.

As everyone on the internet is happy to tell you these days, every army in Europe was still reliant on horses for, well everything that moved until the retaking of Europe and the introduction of the American industrial machine. How did European nations ensure the supply of millions of horses? Were there nationalised horse farms? Horse specifications?

It seems that every picture I see from around 100 years ago up until the WWII era the men are always in slacks, a button-up, and are wearing a tie. Was this really the epitome of casual wear for so long? When did it change?

Historically it’s been a symbol of peace and things like that so I’m just curious why they chose that to represent a regime that’s primary goal was genocide

Would War of the Roses battles, particularly in the politically split Yorkshire, have been fought mostly by troops living mere miles away from one another, or would they consist of thousands from around the country rallied together?

EDIT: Relatedly, I'd like to hear about any accounts of the first people to exercise their rights under the Civil Rights Act and Voting Rights Act.

It seems we know a fair amount about Roman and Greek views on homosexuality but do we know anything about how the peoples inhabiting Northern Europe felt about it? Do we know if any of them openly practised it? Condoned it? Hated it? Do we know of a gay chieftain or famous gay warrior?

1660's is the general time frame im looking for but later stuff can also be used.^((its for a character,no need to be 100% accurate))

If you know resources those work too

1.) Did the Allied forces know the full extent of the rounding up, and systematically killing the Jews, gypsies, and disabled?

2.) Were the general public in the Allied counties also aware of the full extent of these atrocities?

3.) Did Japan know the extent of it as well?

Another way of asking: where does the idea of a Dungeons & Dragons-style dungeon (an underground, windowless jail) come from?

Were there equivalents of rationalism in ancient Persia, India or China? By rationalism, I mean a belief system that rejected religious revelation and required reason to be the basis of thought.

If so, how developed and influential were they?

I havent read anything about everything about the Enigma, but I watched a movied called the imitation game and they found a common sentence with in all the messages which was "Heil Hitler" which Turning and his crew and fix the computer which in turn helped decode the Enigma.