[deleted]

The Greeks, Persians , Japanese, Chinese, Slavic, Brittons, Welsh... just to name a few all have dragons in there mythology, is there a root dragon that they all took inspiration off? How on earth could the Chinese and Greeks both have a version of dragon without ever contacting each other? Dragon existence confirmed?

What was the reason he was assassinated and why did his death trigger a world war ? The country where I live never taught ww1 much extensively, so I am bit confused

[deleted]

Hello, I've never posted here, but I've read the rules and the FAQ and whatnot so hopefully this isn't out of place.

What I've read so far from Mussolini by Jasper Ridley and The European Dictatorships by Allan Todd, as well as his own autobiography, was that he worked for a socialist newspaper before doing Il Popolo and then from there he seemed to gain followers, then he "documented" and published his war experiences, and stepped into politics upon his return... I feel as though I'm missing something though. What I'm specifically looking for is: what was it about Mussolini that made him so charismatic? How was it that, before he became a dictator, he managed to garner enough support, even from the King himself, to pull off the march on Rome?

If I'm wrong about these details, then, obviously, please correct me. While I'm still interested in how he was viewed in his dictatorial heyday, what I'm specifically looking for was how he gained a sort of celebrity status as a newspaper editor, and with such a loyal following. In short, what made Mussolini so darn charismatic?

I just recently finished watching the boy in the striped pajamas, and it hit me hard. Now I understand the holocaust is a very controversial issue, and I am sorry if I offend anyone. But how would an SS officer react? The SS, especially those who worked at the camps and were high ranking enough to be the commander of a camp were ruthless. Now, I'm sure the soldiers involved would be executed or something similar, but did the training of the SS or the protocol of the camps prevent this?

The ultimate ad hominem attack in politics is always some variation of “that’s what the nazis said!” Liberals day the nazis vilified immigrants while conservatives say that nazis called themselves socialists and frankly I think it’s more a matter of ritual than real examinations of history with no one interested in finding out the truth

So my question is: what did the Nazis promise? What did their propaganda say what were their speeches covering and what did their opponents say in response.

Can anyone recommend any books on the subject?

[deleted]

Also, were newsreel studios considered like we'd think of a newspaper or news cable network (ie, people had preferred newsreel sources, talked about their 'leans', etc) or were they thought of as more or less interchangeable?

I’ve read that American volunteers (the Abraham Lincoln Brigade) were commonly discriminated against and while many joined the U.S Army for WW2 but were denied officer positions due to their Communist alignment. If American volunteers were treated like this in the U.S what was life like for the German and Italians that fought for the Republicans in Spain. I’ve heard of the famous Hans Beimler, a German Communist Party member who fled Dachau concentration camp and later joined the International brigades. Was it more common for Italians to join the Partisan movement and the Germans to join the isolated groups that existed, were they generally punished severely by the Fascist governments of their home countries, or was it more common to try and assimilate back into society.

In Hamilton, the duel between Phillip Hamilton and George Ecker is presented as ending before they reach the customary ten paces, with Ecker shooting, and ultimately killing, his opponent at the count of seven.

​

While I understand this is a fictionalization intended to raise the stakes for future duels, and in truth Hamilton and Ecker stood still for quite a while after their tenth step, what would have happened if, hypothetically, one party intentionally fired their weapon, either into the air or at their opponent, before tradition mandated they do.

​

I would assume that, given the intimate nature of duels, with only four men (the shooters and their seconds) witnessing it, it would be treated as any other death in a duel, would it be treated as simple murder even if a duel is perfectly legal, and secondly, would there be social repercussions? Would, for example, the person's name be disgraced in polite company, etc.

Was it absolute, or were there restrictions on certain subjects and laws?

As the question asks, I am curious as to how British opinion (both government and popular) of their own naval status was challenged by the Japanese victory at Tsushima. As far as I know, Tsushima was the first major naval battle involving modern battleships and the first naval battle since Trafalgar that was overwhelmingly decisive for the winning side. The British launched the Dreadnought class battleships only a year later, so I am wondering how connected these events were.

So I’m looking at the US presidential election of 1860 and I wanna break it down into more detailed data sets, at the municipal level if I can, at least for the New England states. But so far I’ve only found data for Methuen, Massachusetts. And then they list the names of the electors and not their associated party or the associated presidential ticket. So I’m just wondering if such data exists for other cities and towns in the New England states, and if so where I could find it.

We now have stemless glasses, but when and why did stemmed glassware become common? Does the stem keep the hand from warming the wine? Is the stem a handle, or does it serve only an aesthetic purpose?

*Wheel

I absolutely love military history and I often have a hard time finding good books about them