I was reading in an older thread on this subreddit that the Ottomans, in the midst of the Tanzimat reforms, saw Japan's successful modernization as a kind of beacon of hope. What I'm wondering is whether any other developing nations looked to Japan for guidance. Would Japanese advisers be sought after in much the same way that countries looked to France and Prussia in order to modernize?

As a bonus question, would poverty stricken countries look towards modern Japan or study the Meiji period for guidance?

Was there a migration of Muslim peoples into Turkey? Did the central government exert pressure to become Muslim? I just read that the Ottomans were fairly tolerant of the Orthodox Church, and that only a minority of churches were converted into mosques, so I'm trying to figure out how the area that is now Turkey became Muslim.

To be honest, I am fairly ignorant about the mechanisms of the process by which the empire was deconstructed and the Balkan states were constructed, but Russia is composed of many different (generally spread out) ethnic groups, parallel to the Balkan states, and I was wondering why it was not broken up.

I don't mean full Jared Diamond or anything, but something more like a comparison about what similarities there were between island nations like England, Japan, Indonesia, etc. or those that lived in more arid climates or highlands or what have you. In what ways did these geographical features influence these peoples and are there any noticeable similarities between their cultures, politics, and social structures?

I've been getting more curious about the naval aspect of WWII lately, specifically engagements between the IJN and American Navy.

My understanding is the main types of warships used were destroyers - agile offensive ships, cruisers - which were mobile anti-air platforms, battleships - essentially slower, powerful destroyers, and aircraft carriers, which lack the ability to effectively engage in 1-on-1 ship battles, but were needed to facilitate air support for the fleet. You've of course got other types of ships like subs, landing craft, patrol boats, etc. I might be wrong about some of these descriptions, this is just my layman knowledge.

I'm curious as to how the IJN and Americans went about deploying these assets on a tactical level. How many of each ship type was in a typical fleet? How greatly would fleet sizes vary under different circumstances?

If these units are engaging in battle, what was assumed to be the most effective deployment? I'd assume there'd be a large number of destroyers creating a perimeter around an aircraft carrier or battleship, but I'm sure it's more complicated than that. Was the approach different for the Japanese and Americans?

Any insight would be appreciated!

I am curious in theories on "whether the history is destined or happened because a series of random events", discussions on "what if Hitler/George Washington/etc was never born, will the history be different?"

Do you have book recommendations for the casual enthusiast of history?

Hello all, I am looking for books on a few specific subjects:

• How terrain and geography have been used in medieval warfare.

• Medieval military tactics.

• Medieval combat and fighting styles.

• Medieval philosophy.

• Any of the above in regards to different cultures, not just European.

Anything would be appreciated. Even better if you could direct me to cheap (and possibly free) books.

As I wrote this, I just saw the side-bar that said "Books and Resources List". I feel silly now, but I would still appreciate some handpicked books/essays that you may have found interesting. Sorry.

Thank you in advance!

My knowledge of history is pretty limited to the US unfortunately. At face value, Stalin was responsible for more death than Hitler. I know nobody sees Stalin as like a good dude, but Hitler is always made out to be like the most evil and as such, people always try to relate him to their political opponent on fb. Why is that?

So I watched Les Misérables for the first time the other day, and something that caught my attention was the reason that Jean Valjean was sent to prison in the first place - 5 years for stealing a loaf of bread.

That got me to wondering - was that the actual penalty for stealing bread in 1795 in France (during the French Revolution - I don't think Victor Hugo actually says when during the year though). I know that bread riots were very important in Paris, and that they had bread distributions there. It didn't seem to me like something that would have happened during that timeframe, given that it was within ~1 year of the end of the reign of terror - and a 5 year sentence for stealing bread seems like it'd make people fear the return of the terror.

So my question is: was the prison sentence that Valjean received "accurate" for what would actually happen for stealing a loaf of bread in 1795, and if not, what would likely have been the punishment?

Thanks for any information!

From what I know, at least in the early years of the war, the British Army seemed to lurch from one failure to another, at least when fighting German forces. How did the quality of British training, leadership and equipment compare to that of their axis adversaries?

This is still something I find myself arguing over with people now and again. How did this idea start? Why did this idea start? I guess this is a question about the history of history but maybe someone could shine some light on the topic for me.

I know that many Confederate veterans founded reactionary pro-Confederate groups like the Ku Klux Klan, but were there actually militias that took to the hills? I remember guerrilla war was threatened but most backed down after General Joseph Johnston surrendered in North Carolina, essentially accepting General Lee's surrender throughout the rest of the Confederacy.

Edit: Sorry the American-centric language, but these answers have been absolutely great. Have a new list of books to read.

I asked this question a little over two months ago, and while it gained interest, it ultimately went unanswered.

In addition to the questions asked in the title, these questions would be specific for 12th Century Europe: How would royalty held for ransom be treated? Would they be allowed to roam the grounds? How closely would they be guarded?

The Birth of a Nation is quite often said that it restarted the KKK as a movement. I assume the KKK was an integral part to initiating the Great Migration, but to what extent did the release of a single movie have upon the great migration? Is it possible to state that Birth of a Nation is the movie with the largest effect upon history?

Did any of the forces that fled Spain at the end of the civil war join the British or French armed forces to join the fight against Nazi Germany or Italy?

I've been looking for a bibliography of texts available in Europe between the ninth and fifteenth centuries but have had no luck. Specifically, I need to know what texts were available where and starting (ending) when. For example, how quickly after the Arabic>Latin translations of Greek texts began in Toledo were those texts available in Avignon? Paris? Trier? Moscow? How easily could someone have gotten their hands on a Greek NT or Hebrew OT in particular cities at particular times?

I've googled the internet dry and even cold-emailed medieval specialists, to no avail. Any help will be appreciated.

Why does Canada's dialect sound closer to American English than dialects in England? Australia and New Zealand and english South Africans dialects sound a lot closer to England than Canada does. Why did this happen? Is it solely due to American influence in Canada?