I've heard conflicting stories, some saying that the USSR was just too big, and USA lend-lease too much for the Nazis to ever triumph in the East. On the other hand, I've heard that Soviet troops (and Stalin himself) nearly evacuated the city in the battle of Moscow - Surely losing Moscow would mean the end of the war, as the Nazis could just stop there?

What makes them different compared to Asian, African, and Americans?

u/mustaphamondo had a good post about Japanese citizens realizing that they were losing WW2 despite government propaganda declaring otherwise. The first half of WW2 was a long series of setbacks for the allies, when the allies started regaining ground was it a popular conspiracy theory that it was just lies and propaganda? Were government censors and sources ever called out or discredited for misleading the public?

What was the theological origin, and what are the earliest examples? How did it begin practically speaking? (Did someone just round up a bunch of Christians to live together?)

What are some amazing books written by early explorers in which they account their experiences and adventures? To give you an idea of what I am interested in, a good example would be Charles Darwin's Voyage of the Beagle.

Just to clarify, I am not attempting to imply that slavery shouldn't have been abolished in these states. I am inquiring about whether the North engaging the South in a Civil War was justified considering how their original motive was to keep the union together? How is this case, considering the Union's attempt was mainly to quash a rebellion, different than Great Britain's attempt to keep the American colonies as their colonies after they tried to rebel? I could be misinformed, but from what I know: the south did not feel as if they were being represented in the Federal government anymore; therefore, they seceded in order to have control once again. Furthermore, I could be wrong but slavery did not seem to become an issue until the North used the idea that they were fighting evil, the establishment of slavery, to gain support from foreign nations.

Sorry if this is not the normal format of an /r/AskHistorians question, it is my first time on the subreddit.

Looking for weapon training manuals from 1700-1900 for personally study at the HEMA club I'm with. I'm the only one looking into this period so the material available to me through the club is very limited.

I have a couple of manuals from the late 1800's. One that covers basic British Naval Cutlass and two that have Saber fencing.

Thanks in advance.

Hey gang.

I was curious to know something. In the historical texts, they talked about "Raising the Dragon Banner" Which signified that they would show no mercy to the opposition.

It was used by Edward Longshanks against the Scots a few times for example.

Do we know what the banner actually looked like? I am looking for a reference picture for a protect.

Was it just an evolution of the plazas/squares or did it have an indepedent origin?

Particularly before New World crops became very common in the area.

I've frequently heard that the ultimatum was designed to be impossible to accept, thus forcing a war. When looking up details though, it doesn't seem all that harsh in my opinion. From what I can tell, it required Serbia to allow Austria-Hungary to open an investigation into the assassination, forced Serbia to stop anti-Austrian propoganda, and required Serbia to go after anti-Austrian terrorist organizations. This seems like a fairly reasonable response, so I don't see why Serbia wouldn't just give in to the demands to avoid war?

Feel free to limit to men or women if somethings split by gender. What about 1500, 1000, or 500 in, say, England?

It's my understanding that in the Middle Ages landed gentry were treated as military leaders by default, today Prince Harry is in principle a normal officer, how did the one situation transition to the other?

I'm reading "A Spectacle of Corruption" by David Liss which is a historical mystery series acclaimed for it's accuracy. One of the characters makes a comment about a situation being akin to communism, and seems to be using the term as we understand it today. I'll go find it in a minute to add to my question, but was communism as we know it even a concept in 1722?

Wasn't psychiatric medicine still in its infancy and not well accepted as a treatment in 1945?

I remember hearing back in middle school that they seemingly disappeared and we really don't know what happened, has this changed? Do we have a better idea these days? They've always fascinated me quite a bit

As an American, I feel almost all of my education that involved context was in the European theater. How did nations like China, Korea, Australia, and the smaller ones react to us dropping the bomb?

Would he have been on the level of Caesar and Pompey at the time? Did he have any large influence on Roman Politics of the time?