Hi everyone.

I'm researching as much as I can about the First World War and the Eastern front. Now I'm looking for diaries of people who were there or memoirs. I was hoping someone might be able to at least point me in the right direction for some English translations. I'd love to get hold of a Russian Soldier's/German Soldier's diary. I know this might be nigh impossible but I want to try.

I've managed a handful so far:

Florence Farmborough "Nurse at the Russian Front: 1914-1917 A Diary"

Alfred Knox "With the Russian Army 1914-1917"

Otto Feldmann's diary

Any more would be amazing.

While there were 'Empires' such as the Mayans and Aztecs neither seem to rival the old world's many empires and dynasties.

Both were part of the Roman Empire; how "Romanised" was North Africa? What was culturally distinct about it, if anything?

[deleted]

Was Justice Served?

I recently learned that Nye Bevan, essentially the founder of the NHS, stood for the leadership of the Labour Party after Attlee but did incredibly badly.

Considering he's regarded as almost a saint of Labour Party history today and a key part of Labour's Golden Age I was surprised to see Labour members at the time gave the more right-wing Gaitskill their support.

Did Labour members think the welfare reforms had gone too far? Was it just a personality thing? Or something else?

There were attempts on his life such as the infernal machine from the royalists but how much was this a fringe group of radicals and how much was this a significant organised opposition. I have read that by estimation, his plebiscites would have passed even without vote manipulation but taking into account the low turnout and public vote system, was napoleon really that popular? were people happy to have him as an almost dictator? How strong was the opposition from the left and right?

thanks

Did the locals only provide encouragement or were some also actively involved in helping to overthrow the Visigoths?

Oh, and a follow up: Why were the Visigoths so unpopular then?

In Europe there are colleges and breweries that are nearly 100 years old. In Asia there are institutions that date back millenia.

However I don't know of any that old in the Americas. Why? Were they all destroyed by colonialism? Are there some that I just don't know about?

Since forced collectivization failed to increase agricultural yield, what means did Stalin have to fund rapid industrialization during the first five year plan.

1) why did king George have such a dislike for Winston Churchill

2) what was Lord Halifax role before Chamberlain resigned? Why was he so respected? What did he do after the war?

3) did FDR really offer to provide tanks to England via horses in Canada?

4) why did it take the US so long to back up England in the war?

5) what was Churchill's role before PM? Why was he the next choice for prime minister when clearly Chamberlain, the king, and so many others thought he was a constant failure from previous battles?

6) what event took place to change the British public in mind, to state that he was the right minister for war but not peace?

7) finally, what occurred after the war that made the people turn on him?

Cheers

I read a post on another subreddit around the effectiveness of AA, which sounded dramatically worse than I imagined (using the Bismarck as an example) - what was the reality of the effectiveness of AA?

And conversely how effective were airborne attacks at bringing down ships? In some video games I play you can hit ships with dozens of bombs and 5-10 torpedos and still not sink them. Is that realistic?

How did both AA and airborne attacks on ships evolve over the course of the two world wars?

During the battle of Zama, Hannibal's infantry significantly outnumbered Scipio's, while Scipio's cavalry significantly outnumbered Hannibal's. Early in the battle, the Roman cavalry drove the Carthaginian cavalry off the field.

It seems like a forgone conclusion that the superior Roman cavalry would have returned to the field at some point -- either by defeating the Carthaginian cavalry or by breaking off the chase. Therefore, Hannibal was essentially working with a time limit -- he had to defeat the Roman infantry before the cavalry returned, or the battle was lost.

From what I've read of the battle, though, Hannibal didn't seem to be looking for a quick resolution. As I understand it, his plan was to attack with each of his three lines in succession, in order to wear the Romans down. This seems like it would be an inherently slow process.

Why didn't Hannibal, for example, try to use his numerical superiority to outflank the Romans? Or, towards the end of the battle, when both armies had paused to reform their lines, why did Hannibal wait for the Romans to resume their attack, rather than pressing the attack himself? I'm no expert on military matters, and I'm sure Hannibal had a reason for conducting the battle in the way he did. What might those reasons be?

I’m teaching a lesson on the effects of conquest on the peoples of America and can only seem to find sources from the European perspective. Did indigenous peoples (15th-16th century new world) document their experiences with European settlers/invaders?

I'm looking for more works about the Crusades that would have the readability of Thomas Asbridge or even George MacDonald Fraser.

I've read The Greatest Knight and Steel Bonnets by the aforementioned authors, I'm reading Peter Heather's trilogy of books on Rome and the Migration Era, to give you an idea of my interests and what I'm looking for. I'm also about a quarter of a way into Smith's new biography on Rasputin.

I like in-depth contextualizations and cultural overviews like you get of the Germanic tribes in Heather and the reivers in Fraser, and I do like the sort of "off the beaten path" biographies like Asbridge writing about William Marshal.

Right now I have my eye on God's Wolf by Jeffrey Lee and The Faithful Executioner by Joel Harrington, I was wondering how they would stack up to Asbridge's biography of Marshal in terms of historicity and readability for a layman.

And really anything on the knight orders and/or crusades in a broad survey with a good bibliography akin to how Fraser covered the Border Marches would be in my wheelhouse. Also to relieve any concern, I am not interested in or looking for conspiracies or freemasonry or modern myths about the knight orders. Just straight up history.

[deleted]