I love history. I learn about it for fun, but have never studied it in a college setting. I would very much enjoy doing something related to the study/teaching of history for a career but don't know what if any options might be open to me.

Figured those of you who do have jobs/degrees in the field might know what positions I should be looking into.

Any good books on Australia's involvement in 'Nam?

[deleted]

Also applies to why 'Western Civilization' is called Western instead of Eastern?

Hello historians of reddit! I am due to start a piece of academic work very soon and I was wondering whether you could provide me with some starting points. I am looking to research the opinons and perceptions of Hitler, and his party, and how they changed/ remained from when he became Chancellor in 1933, to the outbreak of ww2. To do this I shall be focusing mainly on the UK and newspapers and similar forms of media. However I would appreciate any information from any geographical location. Thanks for any help!

Greetings, Recent question regarding liberated survivors made me look into my search again. I have tried Genealogy to no avail.

My question is I have been searching for my girlfriend's grandfather. He was Soviet born, fought in WW2, was imprisoned spent some time in concentration camp at or around Berlin, worked as an ambulance driver during that time. When the was ended he was liberated by the American side, he was given a choice to go back to Soviet Union or stay on the European side. He decided to stay in Europe. Was moved to displacement camp in Italy at or around Kalian. Later, married an Italian woman and moved to USA.

I contacted the German side regarding prisoner of war records, I was directed to Russia. Due to all records have been moved to Russia. As a Russian...well that was a dead end for me. People said they couldn't find anything or requested to actually physically go there (I'm on the other side of the world).

My question is there way to track the soldier down from the other side. There must be some documents regarding him in the displacement camp or how he was able to get permission to move to USA (He was sponsored by a Catholic family, with whom they stayed for couple of years).

Any and all help would be appreciated as I have been stumped and unable to continue with the search. Thank you for your time.

I've wondered similar things about more recent periods of immigration, like how common it was for Gentiles living in and near Jewish neighborhoods to be able to carry on a conversation in Yiddish like James Cagney, but I know a lot less about social conditions during the colonial period, so I thought I'd take my chances on that question instead.

[deleted]

To my understanding, the best way of defending against a cavalry charge is with a wall of pikes. In addition, when it came to push-on-pike engagements, if one side had longer weapons they would generally win a decisive victory. Contemporary military expert George Silver even wrote that the pike was even one of the best weapons for one-on-one combat. So it's not surprising that by the 17th century, basically all of the European infantrymen who specialized in hand to hand combat were pikemen.

So why was it so rare for pikes to be used in medieval and ancient warfare? Some of them had massed spear formations, but rarely were they using the 18ft monstrosity that arrived later. Also, what about armies in Asia, why didn't they rely on pike formations?

I know that the USSR valued science pretty highly and I'm wondering if life for those scientists was pretty normal or if was regularly disrupted by government officials.

That is, allowed to walk around villages/towns unsupervised, while still being owned, as in developing countries.

So, suppose that Hitler died of natural causes. What was his backup plan? Do we know what he/his counselors would've done? Would a hypothetical child of his just assume power, like in a monarchy? Or would the next Fuhrer be voted by the people, like in a democracy?

"Attempting to imitate a harpsichord" seems incredibly contrived to me, yet the semi-detached style seems to be expected. Where did it come from? Why did it stick?

Semi-related, who decided the tempo of Bach? WTC in particular...did he mark those?

From what I understand the Chinese and Persians have maintained relations since the Parthian timed and trade occurred but war never really happened other than the battle of talas. What are the reasons for this ? It would make sense that the two of the world powers would eventually clash. As a follow up question, why has Persia never tried to invade China or vis versa ? My hunch is that it has to do with the Himalayas and the steppe tribes of the north as natural barriers but I would like to know a more informed opinion. Thanks.

I've heard it argued that the atomic bomb was necessary in part to ensure that Japan's oppressive colonial rule would end on Allied terms. Is there evidence to back that up?

I was reading about Robert the Bruce the other day and his exploits in Ireland and was wondering - why did a strong king emerge in Scotland (which is very similar to Ireland in language and culture, even more so in the medieval period) but not in Ireland or Wales? It seems to me that those nations would have better resisted English conquest if they had more than ceremonial kingship. What were the differences between them?

The infamous three fifths compromise of the US Constitution required that both representatives and direct taxes be apportioned by counting the whole number of free persons, and 3/5 of all other persons.

But while the representation part of that certainly hurt states with large slave populations, the direct taxes part may not have helped, if Congress didn't in fact levy direct taxes.

My understanding is that most Federal taxes back then were tariffs and exice taxes, such as the ones which sparked the Whiskey Rebellion. Were these subject to the 3/5 compromise? Were there other large direct taxes which were subject to it but don't get talked about much? Did the compromise blow up in the faces of slave states a bit? Or am I missing something else entirely?

In the beginning of the Yeltsin period there was a big hope that a NATO-Russia partnership would be formed and that they would align themselves on most issues. In practical terms this never happened, only low key stuff could be done by both sides. Who was the reluctant party that made the partnership impossible? Was the geopolitical interests and differences simply too big to justify NATO-Russia partnership?

i know there's a lot of people who they declared definitely went to heaven, and many they regard as sinners; but has the Church ever directly stated someone certainly went to Hell?