How powerful was the Kalmar Union compared to other European powers (Was they a force to be reckoned with?), and how did other countries view them?

It's estimated about 150,000 Jews were in the Nazi German army. How were they treated? Were they given the same quality of equipment as the Pure german solider or were they sent on suicide missions? How did other Nazi soldiers react to fighting with a Jew?

Edit: Got the number wrong

The early american presidents are infamous for being absolutely ruthless to each other in the press. Is there a particularly good source of evidence for these sorts of things or had any good monographs written about it?

I've done some googling, and have found that the idea dates back to the Odyssey. Is there any other information about exactly who first imagined it and the reasons behind it?

How did Luther, Calvin, Zwingli, and their constituents view the conflict? Was the subject as controversial/sad as it is today?

Was africa mainly just a bunch of tribes, or were there many advance civilizations similar to europe at the time?

Me and my dad were discussing alexander. Would Alexander have been considered greek by the greeks?

As one of the only surviving sources from the period of the fall of the western roman empire, does anyone know Marcellinus' view on the collapse, and where these texts can be found?

It seems like many elected leaders these days are expressing this type of sentiment. The most blatant comes in the form of something like, "we won, you lost, shut up." A more subtle example is how, at town halls, if someone says they are a Republican, their criticism is responded to more earnestly, while someone who doesn't identify their political affiliation is automatically dismissed, even if they have a similar criticism. I saw Lindsey Graham, for instance engage in versions of both types of expression.

Where did the belief that seems to indicate that politicians only represent people who voted for them come from? Is it new, or has it just gotten worse? If there were times in history when polticians sought more consensus, what do you think were the conditions (electoral system or otherwise) that better facilitated that kind of discourse? How were those conditions put in place?

[deleted]

I don't know if this is the right place to ask, but I need legitimate and helpful sites to find primary source documents for a project. I'm the only one I my team working on it seriously, and I'm struggling to find sufficient documents. Help? If you need more, I'm primarily looking for 1914-1942 documents about U.S. Foreign policy.

After reading Lenin in Zurich, I've decided to give August 1914 a crack at. I understand that the books are framed as fiction within a non fictional frame, but I'm curious to know whether Solzhenitsyn portrays these events fairly. There's quite a few posts on this sub about The Gulag book, but nothing really on his Red Wheel books. Wikipedia mentions they are controversial without really saying why!

Another user that has watched History Channel's "Vikings" Tv-series.

Became fairly interested in this part of world history after doing some googling. Everything that I've read up on so far (not much) shows the vikings as always being on the offensive, always attacking some group or nation on their home-soil.

So a couple questions that are likely one in the same:

• Is it historically accurate that the Vikings were always on the offensive?
• If so, is there a reason that their victims did not retaliate on their own home-soil of Scandanavia? (I'm expecting this to be broken into different nations, could be surprised though)

For example, from my amateur readings I was surprised that the English Kingdoms of Wessex/Northumbria had not planned and executed counter-attacks towards Denmark and Norway. Sames goes for the mainland European states.

[deleted]

[deleted]