When I look online it only describes how peasants "did" pickle much of their food, but not the containers they used. Did they use glass, barrels, ancient alien technology?

Greetings all.

Recently I was at a conference and someone mentionned briefly at a glance that Germany in the 1920s was heavily restricted in terms of military personnel as we know. But the goal of the head of the army (?) was to give more adequate and higher level training to have people be able to do function 2-3 higher than theirs, in order to have a force capable of increasing rapidly without loosing competence in the higher ranks/functions.

Is this accurate ? If this is so, what was the actual training strategy/plan/program that Germany used for it ? Who was the man in charge, where did his thinking come from and how did he do ? Did it worked ?

Thank you

Just finished the Cicero book series and wanted to see how accurate it was in depicting Julius Ceaser's plotting and manipulation of the Republic

I can understand staged pics for propaganda purposes, but why did nazi authorities allow the pictures taken of human mass graves, people hung, shot etc when it was these same pictures that would later be used as evidence to convict them at trial?

It seems like an advantageous tactic for a military between the 1400s-1800s to employ a Roman style shield wall in unison with line infantry firing from the cover provided. However I do not think any military ever employed this tactic effectively. Are there any anecdotes of experiments involving this? I imagine there must be unforeseen complications that make this tactic unfeasible. Too much weight? Too awkward? Limited effectiveness?

As I imagine it would be pretty hard to find any documentation of this specific topic, a broader question would be could shields even be made to effectively stop early gunpowder weapons?

Any insight on the topic of use of shields in a gunpowder dominated era is appreciated. I am aware that riot control forces do use this tactic regularly. I am interested why it can’t and presumably never has been applied to broader military applications.

I haven't really found where Hayek got this quote from. Someone linked an Italian speech but I didn't quite get an English translation that had it.

What I mean by this is, was the assassination of ferdinand merely an excuse for war by Germany/other euro powers?

My dad wants to write something with me set in the Spanish Civil War. I have been dabbling with historic fiction set in another time and place, and have assembled an incredible collection of books for my research that are totally irrelevant to the project dad wants to do.

I'm not an academic - my preference is for autobiographical work or "People's History" genre stuff that is accessible to the masses, like Pierre Berton. I can get through dry academic text books but it takes me forever. I'm particularly interested in the lives of the working / fighting classes, including women, and not as interested in the lives of rulers and generals.

Can you help me?

Whenever I view military firearms of many Asian countries throughout the 20th and even the 21st century. So many things seem common to me. Military weapons for primarily Southeastern Asian countries like Japan, and China, even North Korea, have Type and a number as the designation.

Like the US, there’s the M1 Garand, M4 Carbine, M1A1 Abrams, M4 Sherman, etc. L for the UK, like the L85 rifle, L96 sniper, and more.

I wonder why Type for China/Japan/North Korea?

For example, Imperial Japan has the Type 99 Arisaka, Type 100 SMG, Type 96 LMG, etc. this extends to the Cold War/Present Day era with the Howa Type 64, and the Howa Type 89. Even tanks such as the Type 97 Chi Ha, Type 74 MBT, and Type 90 MBT.

China (mostly PRC) has the Type 56 AK, Type 81 rifle, Type 64 pistol, even for tanks yet again like the Type 99 and 88 tanks.

South Korea doesn’t seem to do this. But North Korea has a similar thing like China like Type 88 rifles and Type 59 tanks.

Why is Type such a common designation between these three countries? Especially since it seems like coincidence they all use Type as a designation.

In WWI you hear accounts of soldiers on opposing sides fraternizing, a common sense of sympathy for the men on the other side, and of course the renowned 1914 Christmas truce.

Why was this not the case in WWII? Things seemed so much harsher, with much more animosity between sides.

Did they always have learned translators and mediums through which interactions were aided between the two kingdoms? What was it like when Alexander conquered so much of Persia and Asia? How did the commoners understand the invaders, their new overlords? Do we have a lot of ancient texts about these translators?

Forgive me if this has been asked before or if it sounds stupid, please don't down vote me to Hades.

The ancient civilizations that I love the most are the Greek, the Roman, the Egyptian and the Nordic. But many of them did horrible things, such the way the Romans expanded its empire through the violent domination of other peoples, the way that the Greeks treated their women, and other things, the absolute power of Pharaoh, and etc. How can I reconcile my love with these civilizations, even knowing their worst aspects?

To detail a little more, i am looking for books dealing with three main categories.

1. Books about mythology - myth(s) of creation, pantheons and mythical heroes.

2. Society and (basic) politics - social hierarchy, how pesants lived, how nobles lived, clans and life in the cities and in the villages ( bonus points if it describes arhitecture for exemple how did the basic house look like, what materials were used, how a castle looked like and so on ).

3. Some introduction on samurais. History, role, status, training and famous warriors ( bonus points if its about female warriors )

My only plea is the books to be easly digested by a layman. I do love history and read my fair share of books, but i do not have proper education in this field.

(Not the same as Tatars

​

"Tartary (Latin: Tartaria) or Great Tartary (Latin: Tartaria Magna) was a historical region but up until the late 18th century it was known as a vast country[1] located in northern and central Asia stretching eastwards from the Caspian Sea and from the Ural Mountains to the Pacific Ocean, inhabited mostly by Turkic peoples."

It appears on several ancient maps, had it's own flag and is even referenced in Frankenstein (lol).

​Both countries have had very active electronic scenes since the 80s and until today: many of the best known DJs are still from Holland. And it seems that there were/are not only mainstream electro musicians, but also important underground scenes with raves etc. that led to some of the styles I mention in the question. I'd suppose that there was much British influence esp. during the 90s but would be interested to learn more about either or both countries' music scenes. A lot has been written on UK and German (techno) electronic music, but at least I haven't seen much on those two so far.

I have read that France had one of the largest armies in the world at this time. What happened to the surviving service members after the German invasion? Were they forced to fight for Germany? Or were they taken prisoner? Allowed to go back to their families?

And after the liberation by the Allies, did the French armies regroup and join with the rest of the Allies in the fight against Germany?

Where did they first gain the cannon? And more importantly, how was it that the Ottomans surpassed their contemporaries in the field of gunpowder?

I’m an AP US History teacher and I’m trying to find some kind of digital collection of Cold War propaganda posters. I can find a lot of the Russian ones but not many of the US ones. Is this because there weren’t a lot? Does anyone know where I can find some? Thanks in advance.