Any good outlines or books out there on the subject? It seems that there is so much material about Ancient Greece, Rome, and Egypt but not that much prominent stuff on Mesopotamia.

I was curious because of several references in The Savage Detectives to Spanish emigres in Mexico City. How many people ended up in Latin America, and what were some of the cultural or political effects?

I'm watching Robert Altman's McCabe and Mrs. Miller when the thought occurred.

I can find the yearly casualties, but I can't find monthly totals anywhere. Was this recorded? Can someone point me in the right direction?

I know they would have eaten quite a bit of mutton, but how would they have prepared it? Roasted it? Boiled it?

Were their any hold outs? Slaves secretly teaching their children about their old religion? Run-away slave communities that kept their religion alive in the swamps of Louisiana?

I've googled this and I can't find a definitive answer, any reply would be appreciated.

I'm really puzzled about how the Mongol Empire still had Khans even after the civil war the ensued following Mongke Khan's death. Were Khans chosen even though there were fights among the khanates, and did they have any power whatsoever over what was happening inside their borders? Why do some say that the Mongol Empire lasted until 1368, even though it fragmented way before. I'm really confused on this subject and I would really appriciate any info whatsoever on how the empire "worked" even after it began to fragment.

Im thinking of reading it, but I haven't been able to find any (historian) book reviews of it, and was wondering if it is accurate?

Is there any evidence that Native Americans had privately owned land (within a given tribe, as separate tribes assuredly had their own general territories)? It just seems like a huge generalization (and a coincidence!) that none of the indigenous Americans that settlers came across had developed this idea.

We know that huge populations of the Americas died from the germs the Europeans brought with them, but was it a two way street?

This passage has since been removed from the new release of FM 3-24 and I would like to get a clearer picture on this.

"In 1948, the Malayan Communist Party, whose members were primarily ethnic Chinese, began an insurgency against the British colonial government. The British first responded by dramatically expanding the Malayan security forces. The police, not the army, served as the lead counterinsurgency force. Between 1948 and 1950, the number of Malayan police expanded fivefold to 50,000, while the British army garrison expanded to 40,000.

However, there was only time to provide a few weeks of rudimentary training to the new police officers before throwing them into operations. Police with little training and little competent leadership were ineffective in conducting operations. They also abused the civilian population and fell into corrupt practices. The population largely regarded the police as hostile; they were reluctant to give them information on the insurgents.

By 1952, the insurgency had reached a stalemate. The British then established a new strategy. The strategy included reforming and retraining the entire Malaya Police Force. First, 10,000 corrupt or incompetent police officers were removed from the force. Then, police officers who had proven the most competent in operations were made instructors in new police schools. During 1952 and 1953, every police officer attended a four-month basic training course. Police commissioned and noncommissioned officers were sent to three- to four-month advanced courses. All senior Malayan police officers were required to attend the police intelligence school. There they learned the latest criminal investigation techniques. Teams of Britain’s top police officers taught them intelligence collection and analysis methods as well. Dozens of the most promising Malayan officers attended the full yearlong course in advanced police operations in Britain. To win the ethnic Chinese away from the insurgents, the British worked closely with ethnic Chinese organizations to recruit Chinese for the Malaya Police Force.

In 1952, the number of ethnic Chinese in the force more than doubled. Although the percentage of ethnic Chinese in the police force did not equal their percentage in the population, the ethnic Chinese saw this reaching out as a sign that the government was addressing their interests. At the same time, some Chinese and Malay political groups were building a coalition to establish an independent Malaya in which all the major ethnic groups would participate. The two efforts complemented each other. Better trained police officers and soldiers led by fully trained commissioned and noncommissioned officers dramatically improved the Malayan security forces’ discipline. Better relations between the population and security forces resulted, and the people began to provide information on the insurgents. Thanks to their intelligence training, the security forces could develop intelligence from that information and act on it. They begin to break the insurgent organization.

In 1953, the government gained the initiative. After that, the insurgent forces and support structure declined rapidly. In late 1953, the British began withdrawing forces. They progressively turned the war over to the Malayans, who were fully prepared to conduct counterinsurgency operations without a drop in efficiency. The Malaya insurgency provides lessons applicable to combating any insurgency. Manpower is not enough; well-trained and well-disciplined forces are required.

The Malayan example also illustrates the central role that police play in counterinsurgency operations. British leaders concentrated on training the Malayan leadership. The British insisted that chosen personnel receive the full British Army and police officer courses. These actions built the Malayan security forces on a sound foundation. By taking a comprehensive approach to security force training and reform, the British commanders transformed a demoralized organization into a winning force. This transformation required only 15 months."- Counter-Insurgency FM 3-24 pages 6-21 to 6-22

It occurred to me that I couldn't think of a Senator or governor who was elected president, then went back to run for their prior office after their term or terms were up. Has this ever happened? If not, is there a law or precedent preventing it, or is it simply that no one wants to after attaining the highest office in the land?

I cannot think of a single leader from WWI, but I know all the main leaders of WWII. Why?

Was this prophecy not widely known in the 15th century? Or was Mehmed just not concerned with 800-year-old scripture?

I know how it happened (aka the assassination of the archduke) but there has to be recorded attempts to stop this domino effect on the world? So how many times did people try to stop the first world war?

What role did the federal government play? In what ways did they facilitate westward expansion? Did the federal government ever act as a barrier?