For example, paths, roads, bridges used by ancient empires such as the Greeks, Romans, or Chinese dynasties that are still used today? Like an ancient roman road used to lie but now there is a major highway or railroad? Or bridges that were maintained over the centuries? Was there continued development on these roads even after their empires fell?

Everyone knows the "Doolittle Raid" was the first bombing of Japan and everyone knows that Nagasaki was the last. But what about in between ? When was the second bombing ? From where was it launched ? And what/when were the major islands conquered that enabled frequent bombing ? Thanks in advance for answers.

For example, the UK had to leave its holdings in India, and the Cold War was then 'fought' primarily between the US and the USSR. Why was the USSR not weakened in a similar fashion to the UK by WW2?

Did follows of John the Baptist and other preachers not make the same effort to convert gentiles as early Jewish Christians did?

How noticeable was the change in tactics employed by officers over the course of the American Civil War? Did the Union and Confederacy adopt tactics that suited their advantages and disadvantages or did the war experience change any fundamental approaches to warfare? What lasting changes to American military strategy were brought about by experiences in the American Civil War? What impact did the war have on the global military doctrine of the 19th century and beyond?

Do we have a ballpark? Are there studies that go into these kinds of statistics?

So there's a big controversy among Greeks and Macedonians about whether or not Alexander the Great was actually ethnically Greek or not. The Greek government doesn't like how most people think Alexander was ethnically Macedonian (which is I guess a slavic-type ethnicity nowadays) and they repeatedly decry officials in Skopje for making Phillip II and Alexander statues everywhere.

So who's right? Was he Greek or Macedonian?

My inference is that log cabins would be more difficult to build, yet require less maintenance than a wigwam or longhouse. Was one more sturdy than the other, easier to build, or easier to maintain? Or was the preference simply cultural?

To clarify, I am a high school social studies teacher trying to create a case study around the Panama Canal. This case study is part of a broader unit on how nations interact and why nations interact the way they do. Finding sources from the US perspective has been relatively easy, but I have been struggling to locate sources that are actually from Torrijos, Noriega, etc. If you want any further clarification, I'll be happy to provide it, but any direction on where to find sources would be very helpful. Thanks in advance!

Millions of people died in Europe by that epidemic;but I wonder how much were the people of the Middle East and Arab Spain affected during these years... I doubt there were any rats who spread the plague in the desert but I am still curious.

I stumbled upon this reading "Roskilde Bys historie 1536-1850". A book published by the Historical Society of Roskilde and Roskilde museum.

The quote is as follows "Tilmed havde byen den tvivlsomme fornøjelse at huse Carl Gustavs fjerne allierede: gesandterne fra khanen over tatarerne på Krim samt bidrage til at udruste et helt kompagni tatarer med sabler, pistoler og hylstre dertil (120 rdl.)."

My own translation "Beyond this, the town had the dubious pleasure of quartering Carl Gustavs distant allies, the offices of the Khan of the Tatars of Krim, as well as paying for the armament of an entire company of Tatars with sables, pistols, and pistolsholders (to the cost of 120 rigsdadler)".

The quote is in the context of the expenses that Roskilde endured as part of the Swedish occupation during the Carl Gustav Wars. I can't seem to wrap my head around how and why the Swedish King managed to ally himself with the Tatars, and bring them to Denmark. I can't find a primary source, though the mention of a price makes it seem that it comes from some kind of bookkeeping. What were they doing in Roskilde, how did the alliance come about, are there other sources of their interaction with the Danes and Swedes?

Something I've wondered about on occasion. I know there are variances in culture and "minor" things like basket weaving as a random example, but what about in agriculture or war (weapons or even tactics) and the like?

Quoting from the FAQ: "Europe was in the right place, at the right time, with the right circumstantial history, and the right systems in place that when the Industrial Revolution happened, its hegemony was cemented."

I'd like to know one of the aforementioned right systems and right circumstantial history could be traced back to the Middle Ages and even the so called "Dark Ages". I would be also curious on the importance of the Catholic church in this process. I think that the cohesion of one religion and the competition among many nations gave Europe a good defense against external threats without stalling its development, alas I have not sufficient knowledge to back this idea or explain it further.

In WWII and the Korean War the Soviets and the Chinese were known to give weapons to the first two waves and ammunition to the next eight. With the increase of wealth, education, and technology in both Russia and China, I presume these tactics are no longer used, but about when were these tactics replaced by more modern techniques? Also, what figures and events caused these changes in doctrine?

I am particularly curious about how many people actually returned home. As well as what those experiences were like. Both in terms of journey and readjustment. Do we have any or good historical evidence that provides insight into this on a broader scale as opposed to single stories or anecdotes?

What did they use apart from the usual inspirirng slogans? (for the emperor etc.)

[deleted]

Would it be helpful to have AutoModerator respond to every new thread with a post of the standard disclaimer about the quality rules?

It might alleviate some of the human moderators' workload if it gave people more of a heads up before they posted a joke, a low-effort wiki link, etc. I think posters from outside a community don't always make it a habit to read the sidebar before posting.

It seems inevitable that once a post rises above a threshold of attention that one mod or another will end up posting the disclaimer anyway.