Apologies in advance if this is too meta and/or personal for this forum.

It's just that I'm just a guy, trying to be a web developer, who took a couple upper division history classes in college but nothing much more than that. All the flaired users just write such good answers, and I just really want to know how I can get to that level of knowledge. More specifically, do I have to obtain a Master's or PhD to have that level? Is it possible to do so outside of academic courses? (I really want to go beyond just reading Wikipedia articles on a nation's history or wars, for instance.)

I know the Soviets often held up the racial civil rights and liberation movements as examples of people struggling against the western systems of capitalism and imperialism, but what did they think of the feminist movements? I have the impression that women had a more equal position in Soviet society, is that correct?

I know that on 15 October 1337 (Gregorian), English King Edward III officially laid claim to the kingship of France, effectively "declaring his independence" (an anachronistic phrase, I admit) and obviously refusing further homage or tribute to the French king. Was this vassalage to France the only time that the English monarch was forced to pay homage to a foreign power? If there were other times, when were they?

I've heard that modern Chinese homophobia* is due to European influence, but I'm sceptical of that claim. So I'm interested to know how homosexuals and homosexual acts were viewed before westerners started dominating China in the 19th century.

*I don't mean that all Chinese are homophobic, I'm just referring to homophobia in China today.

I feel like my knowledge of human history is very focused on the past several hundred years. I'm looking for five books (or less) that will take me through the most important periods of human history. I am looking for something that will provide historical facts rather than analysis (I often see through the biases of the author and I'd rather save myself from their opinions). I'm not opposed to textbooks as long as they aren't too dull to handle.

Thanks for your help.

Obviously many people were led to believe that transition to a free market democracy would bring usher in immediate prosperity in the early-1990s. What were the major socio-economic concerns once countries realised that transition was not going to be such a smooth ride?

His work seems completely different from other work of the same time period, although my knowledge of the time period is admittedly limited.

a co-worker and I are debating the origin of the middle finger, he claims that it originated with medieval trench archers ofdering their draw fingers as a sign of defiance. Can AskHistorians offer any insight?

Are the first nations immigrants?

In Book V of The Histories (Aubrey de Selincourt translation) Herodotus notes:

The Parians, whom the people of Miletus had chosen out of all the Greeks to settle their disputes, managed the business in the following way: their best men visited the place, and when they saw the widespread ruin there they asked to be a allowed to make a thorough inspection of all the land. This they did, and whenever in the desolated countryside they saw a bit of well-cultivated ground, they made a note of its owner's name. Of such farms, however, though they examined the whole Milesian territory, they found very few. After their inspection the commissioners returned to the city and lost no time in calling a general assembly, at which they announced their decision to entrust the government to the men whose land they had found in good order - for there was no doubt, in their opinion, that such men would manage public business as efficiently as they had managed their own. The other Milesians were told to take their orders from the new government.

Are there any other accounts that corroborate with Herodotus on this?

I assume that he isn't referring to the farmers who actually worked the land, but the landowners who owned the farmland. Are there similar instances throughout history where governance was placed in the hands of people due to the upkeep of their agrarian estates?

Watching Peaky Blinders (not sure how good their accuracy is) and couldn't help but notice the cops and government seem to be really worried about the Communists in their country. And I remember somewhere learning about in America people, mostly the elite, were very worried about the Communists and Unions in post ww1 society. Did they ever have a chance of making a headway or progress in those capitalist countries during that time?

EDIT: When did pockets come into popularity in Western Europe/America and what drove the necessity? from /u/gaqua

I know he was both, but was he a Communist who loved his country, or more a Nationalist who happened to be Communist?

EDIT: Sorry for the lowercase Chi, autocorrect.

I may be over complicating this, but I have been trying to figure out when the first restaurant health inspection occurred and what law/act was passed to enforce them.

I read about the 1906 Pure Food and Drug Act, but from what I could tell, that act was only for processing plants with meat products. I also read about the 1938 Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act which seemingly was just a more in-depth analysis of the food's ingredients.

SO: What act or law was passed to permit and enforce health inspections in restaurants?

EDIT: For a bit more elaboration, I would like to know specifically about when the United States implemented health inspectors into restaurants.

(This is my first question, if I made an error in the format, my apologies.)

This is what I don't understand. The Great Wall is over 5,000 miles long. Surely it would have been a nightmare to defend?

Firstly, how many troops would be needed to constantly man the wall? Some rough calculations I did is that, even if you had 100,000 men constantly on the wall, presumably a huge amount of troops for the time, you'd still only have one soldier every 80-100 metres (on average). This doesn't seem enough. Surely attacking armies can simply concentrate a force and overwhelm the few troops within a few miles.

Secondly, even if it were to be effectively manned, this just spreads your army thin, doesn't it? If an attacker concentrated their force onto one part of the wall, it would be far too long to communicate to other parts to redistribute forces. Any breach would be unknown by troops on the other side of the wall for days, or even weeks, meanwhile the attacking army is pillaging its way across the countryside to the capital.

My knowledge of ancient far-eastern military tactics is lacking, but I simply don't see a wall of that length as being logistically useful as a defensive structure. Surely it would be pointless, and a simple single mobile force would be better?

I keep coming across statements saying that "barbarian" is derived onomatopoeically (thanks Google autocomplete and copy/paste) from the "babbling" Greeks heard when listening to outside languages. "Bar-bar-bar."

This sounds like bullshit folk etymology to me.

The Latin word for beard is barba. Is this where "barbarian" comes from? Or is the "bar-bar-bar" thing actually correct?

If it is, then is there any relation whatever between "barba" and "barbarian?"

As the title says, I was wondering if pirates ever came across cannabis in their time.

I am guessing it was in the early 1700's during the rise of classicist's. Was Gottfriend Leibniz the guy who started the trend?