What where the specific details on how Labour won the general election of 1945. After just defeating the Axis powers and Churchill being a national hero, I struggled to understand how the conservatives lost this election.

Troop numbers, population size of member states, etc. Just wondering which, in terms of sheer manpower, was bigger.

How I should read this with the proper historical perspective? I understand the book is both strongly praised and heavily criticized, and in some cases both by the same source. What do I need to know about modern, text-contemporary and historical Japan in order to use the book best and avoid developing misconceptions?

Reading broadly on the word "knight," apparently it didn't come to mean "nobles serving as elite mounted cavalry" until the Hundred Years War. If so, what did different medieval societies use for their term to describe the basic concept of an elite noble soldier before that era?

The Knights Templar and Knights Hospitaller predate the Hundred Years War by centuries, so what were these people called by their contemporaries?

What would a Norman, or a Byzantine, or a Kievan Rus call a knight on horseback? And as a final piggybacking question, how did the word "knight" take on its current meaning, and how did use of the word proliferate?

And conversely, that the transition from Biblical Israel (confederation) to a united kingdom under Saul (federation) is mirrored by the U.S. moving from separate states under the articles of confederation to a centralized government with Washington as its first president?

Or am I just an idiot?

In 1898, 5 boroughs consolidated into one entity that called itself New York City. Was there a place that called itself 'New York City' prior to that, or did each borough consider itself completely independent?

So in 1897, was Brooklyn no more connected to Manhattan in a formal/governmental sense than it was to Buffalo?

Or was there a place called New York City that consisted of some number of the current 5 boroughs?

And if so, was New York City an informal identifier (like New England), or were there government offices actually associated with it?

edit: Also, when did the term New York City first exist? When the English took over?

What was stopping the America's from discovering Europe?

People always make jokes about the horrendous performance of Italian troops, and how the Germans always had to assist them. Is this true? If so, why?

Was looking at US census data and thinking about the ancestry category of "African American." Wondering if people whose ancestors were brought to the US during the slave trade were able to trace their lineage, would they be able to point to a specific country that existed at that time?

Was it really as violent as portrayed in western films? We're shoot outs, bank robberies, Indian attacks, or bandits really common or was that a big misconception?

When I was a kid my mother told me that during the Vietnam War, the Vietnamese would straps bombs onto their own babies and then throw the babies at the American soldiers, knowing that the Americans would instinctively try to catch and save them- resulting in both the baby and soldier being blown up. Is any of that true or was that just propaganda? Was it based on some isolated incident that someone witnessed, or just made up for the sake of making people support our troops? Can someone who knows about the war please answer this?

Sorry if you all think this is such a stupid question. I just want to know where my mother got that from.

Edit: I just called my mother, who is in her 70s now, and asked her where she heard that information. She said that it was “on the news and in the papers” in the 1960’s. She also added that they used babies and young children as human shields. I think it sounds like propaganda, but my mother still believes all of this because “it was on the news”.

I would really like to hear from a Vietnam War expert, who has credible sources, on any instance of these things happening.

First, I understand if you need to know a lot more about the content. Basically we interviewed her mom about her life growing up in rural communist Hungary, what school and work were like. We then transitioned into their decision to leave, and how that process worked out. Asked the refugee camp in Austria and how they got to the US. Her father (wife's grandfather) was very old when she was born, and was born in 1889. He served in both wars according to my mother in law. So we asked a bit about that too but I feel we need to verify a lot of that. We plan on interviewing my father-in-law too.

What makes a personal story valuable for research? Should this mainly be viewed as a family history account, or could it be useful to others? If it would be valuable to others, what types of questions are best, and how do I make it widely available for research?

For example, if a child in classical Greece or babylon asked her mom "where do babies come from?", what would she say?

How did parents explain to their kids what happens between sex and birth? Was this information hidden from kids until they reach a certain level of maturity, or was it just out in the open?

I've been listening to a few books regarding Slavic history as of late and I haven't been able to come across a concise explanation of how the ruthenian city-states (Novgorod, Kiev, etc.) evolved into separate political, cultural, and ethnic identities. I anticipate the answer being complex, however I would appreciate someone helping me fill in this gap in my understanding of the region. Thanks

(Hopefully this is specific enough not to run afoul of example seeking.)

In watching aerial combat footage from WW2, it seems that the dynamics of aerial warfare might have been different if fighter planes could fire back at enemies who were on their tail. I realize it wouldn't have been easy, but I wonder if anyone ever tried to develop this technology.

I ask about this prior to the jet era just because the nature of dog fighting changed with high speed planes and later, missiles.

The Romans wanted to be descended from the Trojans, Geoffrey of Monmouth made one for the British Royalty, and the Merovingians of France did too. I feel I've read of others, but they escape me. What was the appeal of descent from Troy for all these groups?