Why didn't the government just take the gold for itself and use it on buying resources and stuff wouldn't that have been a better idea?

Since they simply had to not lose, why was lee so aggressive?

In hindsight it feels like generalship 101 error.

[deleted]

I'm reading Humble Pi by Matt Parker (definitely not a historian!), an amusing book about how mathematical errors have affected various things in the world, and in a chapter about calendars he writes this:

Our main modern calendar is a descendant of the Roman Republican calendar. They had only 355 days, which was substantially fewer than required, so an entire extra month was inserted between February and March, adding an extra twenty-two or twenty-three days to the year. In theory, this adjustment could be used to keep the calendar aligned with the solar year. In practice, it was up to the reigning politicians to decide when the extra month should be inserted. As this decision could either lengthen their year of ruling or shorten that of an opponent, the motivation was not always to keep the calendar aligned.

A political committee is rarely a good solution to a mathematical problem. The years leading up to 46BCE were known as the ‘years of confusion’, as extra months came and went, with little relation to when they were needed.

And on the Wikipedia entry for the year 46BC

This year marks the change from the pre-Julian Roman calendar to the Julian calendar. The Romans had to periodically add a leap month every few years to keep the calendar year in sync with the solar year but had missed a few with the chaos of the civil wars of the late republic. Julius Caesar added two extra leap months to recalibrate the calendar in preparation for his calendar reform, which went into effect in 45 BC.[1][2] This year therefore had 445 days, and was nicknamed the annus confusionis ("year of confusion") and serves as the longest recorded year in human history.[3]

And in the article about the Roman calendar, under the Republican heading:

Gnaeus Flavius, a secretary to the pontifex maximus, introduced a series of reforms in 304 bc.[31] Their exact nature is uncertain, although he is thought to have begun the custom of publishing the calendar in advance of the month, depriving the priests of some of their power but allowing for a more consistent calendar for official business

All very interesting but I'm most interested in the statement that politicians may have messed about with the calendar to 'lengthen their year of ruling or shorten that of an opponent,', my cursory Googling hasn't revealed anything. So did this happen? If so were there any repercussions or reactions documented? And does this pose any problems for historians trying to date events?

Also, I know that the era of Caesar is quite well documented thanks to various primary sources, so was there anything written about reactions to 46BC the year of confusion? I would've thought that a 445 day year might have raised some eyebrows amongst the people.

Hi

I'm interested in learning more the history of the Indo-Europeans. What are some great books for someone looking to learn more about history of the Indo-Europeans?

Saavedra sounds Sanskrit like to me but he is of course Spanish.

Were they Middle Eastern people were they Hellenic Persian where did they really come from

I need to find multiple schools of thought/interpretations by different historians on the cause of the French Revolution yet I have only found Marxist and Revisionist ideas. Are there other historians with different interpretations?

I just got done with Hell to Pay by DM Giangreco and I really enjoyed it, any recomendations for books in a similar style?

I was playing Skyrim and I thought to myself were fire arrows a real thing.

All I seem to find on is UFO, and conspiracy theory stuff, would like to know if there is anything generally agreed upon regarding their origin, or are they just a hoax.

During the Renaissance period, its my understanding that it was a rediscovery of "the classics" meaning the philosophy, art, texts, etc. of the Greek and Roman culture. So my question is, what was "the classics" to them? Was it the Egyptians? The Sumerians? What ancient texts or philosophies did they look back to with admiration?

This may be a difficult/controversial question but i saw a meme on r/historymemes and it got me wondering. Was the bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki necessary? Why, why not?

I've been reading John Terraine's "To Win a War," which focuses on 1918 primarily on the Western front. It gives some attention to the AEF where needed, but I'd like a book that goes into great detail on the American forces. Terraine raises a lot of American shortcomings in terms of supply and tactics, so a book that addresses these larger areas as well as the battles themselves would be much appreciated.

Thanks for any recommendations!

After (or even during) the events of The Battle of Frankfurt, what were civilians doing? Did majority leave the city or stay?

What about their jobs? Houses? Were there curfews and certain rules set by the Americans? Any information around this would be great.

I am curious about the longevity of documents; do we know how long a document (written on paper or some other perishable medium) can survive?

I read on wikipedia that one manuscript of Ibn Battuta's Travels that still exists is believed to be Ibn Juzayy's original- which would make it almost 700 years old! Is such a thing possible?

I’ve always wondered why you don’t hear much about this in documentaries and history books about the Cold War. This was the border shared with the two biggest rivals in the world. Wouldn’t that make it easy for spies to cross borders? Or was it too cold for any conflict to occur?

I'm researching this topic for a book I'm writing and i basically explained everything it the title.

Because of their more 'relaxed', nomadic lifestyle, I would imagine that perhaps views on homosexuality among Travellers could potentially have been more tolerable/accepting/not as judgemental as opposed to what the majority of the population in early 20th century Britain thought of homosexuality (ie against god, wrong, a criminal offense...). Am I completely in the wrong here?