after viewing the question by /u/monkey_paralysed, I tried researching the question I posted above and was overwhelmed by the depth of the response. I am hoping someone here may be able to put the above question into proper context for someone who has very little familiarity with Bronze Age history.

I read about this some time ago and only remember a few details. I think Hannibal was one of the generals present. Basically two armies had been facing off for several days. Every morning each army would form up and essentially have a stand off. Then after staring at each other for some time they would simply break formation and go about their business. This went on for several days or weeks. Then one morning one of the armies formed up in the fog with a completely different variation in their structure. The opposing army formed up as they had been the whole time, unaware that the opposite army had altered their formations. They went to battle, and were then defeated because they didn't see the difference in their opponents battle formation which gave them a large tactical disadvantage.

Sorry if this makes little sense, but any insight to this would be much appreciated.

in reading up on Civil war Generals i stumbled upon the name of Samuel Cooper who by date of rank was the highest ranking CSA General, and whom id never heard of, his Wiki states " One of his last official acts as Adjutant General of the U.S. Army was to sign an order dismissing Brig. Gen. David E. Twiggs from the army. Twiggs had surrendered his command and supplies in Texas to the Confederacy (and was shortly thereafter made a Confederate major general.) This order was dated March 1, 1861, and Cooper resigned six days later. He traveled to Montgomery, Alabama, at the time the Confederacy's capital, to join the Confederate States Army." which leads the question; who else did such a thing as Twiggs? there must have been others given the time?

What were the logistics involved? I'm unfamiliar with mid-1800's banking practices/capabilities, and considering the plight of Native Americans at the time, it seems incredulous to me that such a thing took place. I assume that the Choctaw people learned of the famine through newspapers. Upon deciding to assist, how was the money raised? Did Native Americans typically utilize United States money/banks at that point in history? How was the donation transferred to the Irish people? TIL leaves me with more questions than answers today : )

While doing research for an English paper on the topic of women and the clergy's opinion on them in the later Medieval Ages I came across an interesting tidbit on Patheos that stated:

Traditionally the Church taught that women were not created with the same degree of perfection as men, unable to reason as well or reflect God as fully. While this conception of women, explicitly laid out by St. Thomas Aquinas, is no longer taught, many modern Catholics believe that the Church's current teachings remain subtly informed by it.

When is it that the Catholic Church stopped teaching Aquinas' view of women? Was their some Papal pronouncement for it?

Beyond that how did this opinion of women go down with the nuns of Catholicism & among the clergy of the Orthodox churches?

[deleted]

[deleted]

I am currently an overwhelmed teacher assistant at a middle school who has been tasked with creating an entire unit on Reconstruction. I have not looked at much of this content since high school and I definitely could use some help. What are some topics, concepts, or events that are integral to the study of this time period? What do I really need to talk to my students about to help them better understand this era in American History?

For example some were called Claudius, Nero, Trajan etc. while others were called Antonius Pius, Marcus Aurelius, Septimius Severus etc. Why is there this inconsistency? What value does saying "Septimius Severus" instead of "Septimius" have?

How did some colours get preference over others when choosing a last name?

So as far as I know, legionaries used to carry two of these javelins - longer one, pilum, and the shorter one, dont know the name.

But after the battle how were these difficult to manufacture javelins replenished when army is for example campaigning in a foreign land ?

I want to build a working replica of a 10th century forge. However, despite there being plenty of mentions of archaeological remnants of forges being found, I'm having a tough time finding a solid enough description of one. Ground plans, lists of objects found, or indeed any coherent description would be helpful.

(If it turns out that there just aren't such descriptions of 10th century forges, I'll adjust to later centuries too.)

In popular culture I'll hear it referenced that Native American were matrilineal in nature with husbands joining their wives clan. I think in reference toward cultures on the East coast. I'm from Minnesota where most of the Native Americans are Ojibwe and I know their clans are patrilineal. I'm wondering if there is a regional basis for this divide or a historical context/background reason.

In studying untranslated languages or old documents, how does a historian our linguist control for the possibility of spelling errors leading to misinformation/misunderstandings?

The British Empire used over 800,000 Indian soldiers in combat roles in the First World War (as well as over 400,000 non-combat personnel). Were these soldiers deployed to the most dangerous areas of the front so as to ensure white, British soldiers (or other Allies) would take less losses?

[deleted]

I'm really fascinated by the Kuomintang forces that ended up in the Thai/Burmese/Laotian border area after the Chinese Civil War and what an odd international situation they created. I think I've got a decent grasp on their arrival in the area and the beginning of their involvement in the drug trade, but could anyone tell me more about what happened after Li Mi left?

I know that there were some incursions over the Chinese border and that there were at least some troop withdrawals over the years, but as far as I can tell this army spent the better part of two decades aggravating the local Thai, Burmese and Laotian governments while becoming deeply involved in the blossoming drug trade and provoked an attack by the Royal Lao Air Force in 1967. That doesn't sound like something a government would be happy about its soldiers doing, but I don't know anything about the workings of the RoC government and their relationship with this army.