Were there any documents written on the subject or was it just ignored?

To clarify, I'm talking about men such as Alexander the Great, Julius Caesar or litterary characters such as Achilles and his love for Patroclus.

I remember seeing a map of the positions of all Allied and Soviet divisions in May 7th of 1945 and noticed that there was an insane number of Soviet divisions in German soil, while there were very very few Allied ones in comparison, which of course was expected but it still blew my mind the sheer vastness of the Red Army. I can't seem to find that map though.

Can anyone recommend any good titles that relate to an overview of medieval Irish society? Books, and peer reviewed scholarly articles welcome.

In light of the listening to the soundtrack of the musical "Hamilton", I was wondering if Alexander Hamilton had owned slaves. In the soundtrack it is stated (sung?) that he wrote against slavery and was against it. So did he own slaves? Was he actually against slavery? Also sorry if this has already been asked before I'm fairly new to reddit.

In the United States, there are many published books about the history of towns, counties and cities, which cater to the interest of inhabitants about their local history.

Similarly, many towns, cities, and counties have Historical Societies or Historical Commissions that rely on interested volunteers. These societies are often engaged in efforts to preserve historic properties, erect memorials for significant local events and persons, and historical outreach to the community.

What do these societies teach us? Does approaching the history of small communities give us a different perspective than we would get when viewing things from a national or continental scale? Do we appreciate history differently through the preservation of buildings and artifacts, rather than as a written narrative?

I imagine there was more to it than simply 'line up and utilise superior firepower', but what were the specifics?

How effective were the tail / under cockpit gun bubbles of WWII? Are their many examples of enemy fighter planes being taken down by them? Was it possible to become a "gunner ace"?

How much did it really change them? Could one describe it as revolutionary?

If someone was a protestant from Belfast say, who moved to the US in the 1800s or 1900s, would they have been viewed as white? Would they have faced the same anti-Irish discrimination as someone who was catholic? And what about those who were earlier descendants of Ulster-Scots people (sometimes called Scotch-Irish)? To my knowledge there were quite a few presidents of Ulster-Scots descent.

Can someone explain this to me? Provided both regions are outfitted and equipped with similar troops and similar battle tactics, why did West Francia struggle against the Vikings like they did?

I recently read Ferguson's The Vikings and was struck by the notion that the legend of Fimbulwinter has its origin in Procopius's "year [when] the sun shone like the moon", and that the legend of Ragnarök likewise in stories of the depopulation of the Mediterranean basin by the Plague of Justinian. It's not a theory I've seen elsewhere and I'd like to know what support is available for it.

Unfortunately for me, given that I have very little Swedish, the only source I've been able to find for this very interesting notion is a 2007 paper called "Fimbulvinteren, Ragnarök, och Klimatkrisen år 536-537 e. kr." (Bo Gräslund, Saga och Sed). Which I can't read.

Does anyone know of an English translation of this paper, or if this theory has been properly discussed otherwise in an English-language publication? Can anyone speak to it from their own scholarship?

Or do I need to just finally buckle down and learn Swedish?

So it's the Year 1200 (or thereabouts) and my King (let's be French if it matters) has ordered me to go clear across the country on a mission of some import (let's say delivering messages if it matters)... but I'm not exactly the richest guy in the country. Does the King have a way for me to expense my trip?

The standard narrative of Nobunaga's rise is that he was the leader of the small Oda clan, and when the powerful Imagawa marched through his territory he wins a stunning upset at Okehazama. After this he marches on Kyoto, installs Ashikaga Yosshiaki as puppet shogun, fends off the anti-Oda alliance, defeats Takeda Shingen, subdues the Ikko Ikki, etc. I feel this misses a few steps, though, because even after Okehazama he was still just the leader of a minor clan. How exactly did he gain enough power to do all the things in my second sentence?

I tried several online searches to find anything about this story, but I couldn't. I ran across this on a blog shared by someone on FB and it immediately struck me as suspect, I was hoping if there were any actual sources (blog provided none, surprise surprise) that I could get them here.

The story:

"On December 7th, 1941, just before the attack on Pearl Harbor, the crew of the USS Nevada was gathered for the presentation of colors.  The crew saluted the flag as the Star Spangled Banner played on a bugle.  It was just like any other day.  Midway through, however, the first Japanese planes appeared and the attack of the “day that will live in infamy” began.  As enemy fire tore through the flag they loved, however, the crew was unmoved.

At a time any of us might have ignored tradition and run for cover, these sailors stood firm.  Even as hell rained down on them, they were determined to show the flag the respect it deserved and would not be shaken.  Only when the anthem was over did they man their weapons."

The story smells to me of pure nostalgic propaganda, but if there's an indication of its truthfulness I'd love to find it.

A standard definition of the word "fascism" often includes it being a far-right ideology. However, the Nazi (National Socialist German Workers') Party was, by definition, a socialist party, which is a far-left ideology. So my question is, how is it that Hitler is often described using opposing political extremes? People often try to pigeonhole their opponents into fitting in with an unfavorable definition, like "fascist", but I'd like to gain an accurate understanding, partisan politics be damned.