I can't find a good answer to this on the internet no matter where I look. One I am trying to find out most acutely is the Treaty of Fontainebleu 1814, but any treaties of that era will do if no-one knows the answer for that.

For the sake of discussion, some follow up questions you may want to answer:

How well do treaties of that material last?

How important is the preservation of the original document in international law?

and

Is the ink an important consideration when considering material and conservation?

[deleted]

I'm trying to find what kind of equipment people carry to battle for protection during these centuries on Northern France, Denmark, the Netherlands, the British Islands, and North-western Europe in general.

Thank you.

Does this apply to modern China? Sorry I can't remember the source.

If models are needed, go with the Browning FN M1910

Were the Jews particularly worried about the Nazi's before they were elected? We're they expecting things to get as bad as they did? Did Jews still consider themselves German during the Nazi regime? Are there any specific accounts from individual Germans that I can read over?

I've gotten a recent desire to delve more deeply into Soviet history, but given the highly politicized nature of the subject matter and often fuzzy historical details due to poor record-keeping, it has not been easy to sort out fact from fiction.

My main curiosity is about the Soviet political system. How powerful were local Soviets (i.e. workers' councils)? Did they provide a genuine voice for communities at higher levels, or were they basically functionless placebos? To what extent could non-party members participate in the political system, and how easy/difficult was it to become a party member? How easy/difficult was it for those in positions of power (mostly Stalin, but also other top officials) to implement their agendas? How important was the "top-down" structure of the Communist Party?

Finally, and this is admittedly pretty broad: How much power/leeway did the NKVD and KGB really have? That is, how much of a repressive force were such policing organizations? Were they as formidable as generally portrayed?

For simplicity's sake, I'm limiting my questions to the Stalinist era.

Also: I visited the Soviet political science section of my university's library and found a vast amount of (mostly old) books on the Soviet Union, as well as collections of Soviet records and journals (mostly in Russian, unfortunately). What types of books/documents would be most useful to study? Is there a good litmus test for bias in either direction? (I mean, I kinda figured that Великий Советский Народ might at least be a little biased, but it's not always so obvious)

Thanks!

I remember many years ago visiting a museum in Gettysburg that listed the number of casualties by state and for each side. If I recall correctly (and I am not sure I do, hence asking this question), the number of casualties in the Southern states listed under the Union army was surprising high (maybe 50% of the Confederacy's levels). I am an amateur student of history and particularly the Civil War, and have since never come across anything in my reading that noted a high participation rate of Southerns in the Union Army.

Hey, so I realize I'm about 2 months late to the huge Civil War panel (don't worry, I've already scoured it, so I won't repost any of those questions) but I still have some questions of my own. Any and all input is much appreciated! Thanks, guys!

1. How did the army deal with soldiers who died on the battlefield? Assuming they wouldn't just leave them there, but how would they bury so many at once? Did they have battlefield funerals?

2. How were nurses treated in the camps? Did they have their own tents? Was it considered socially inappropriate for them to eat/chat/interact with the soldiers?

3. An oddly specific question, but it's related to Sherman's March: how would the soldiers have gone about destroying a factory? Would they just start smashing crap or would they torch it? And in terms of the whole town (especially Atlanta), how many of the total buildings would have been made of wood compared to brick, stone, and other materials that go up in flames? When Sherman came through with his men and their torches would the whole town have burned to ashes or would many of the structures be left standing?

4. What did people generally have as valuables? There are many records of Georgians burying their valuables as the soldiers came through their towns. When the soldiers dug some of that up, what would they have found specifically? Some kinds of jewelry, some watches, some family photos maybe?

5. What was the Union army's stance on foraging and pillaging? It seemed like the army was pretty against pillaging, but how did they handle foraging? Where did they draw the line - was it okay to take some livestock that someone had abandoned, but not if the owner was still living there?

6. How often were food rations handed out?

7. Did Union soldiers drink alcohol during their service? If so, what kind, how did they get it, and what was the army's policy about it?

8. How hard would it be for a woman to secretly enlist? What troubles would she face in keeping her identity a secret and/or not getting booted out of camp?

9. Was there a lot of ideology in the common (Union) soldier? As in, did a lot of them have strong abolitionist and/or anti-secessionist views or were they just trying to do their duty for their country or did they just want the money (though it doesn't seem like the army was a good way to get rich, it seems that there would have been many poor people happy to take the job)?

Wow! I guess I'm really bombarding you guys. Thanks again for your help!

You think about where most of the cars you see on the road come from. Here in the US, that's mostly domestic/America, Japan, Italy, and Germany. Is that linked to their industrial build up in World War 2? And if so, why are there no major Russian car manufacturers?

What happens to me immediately after the arrival of the Allies?

Where do I go when I leave the camp? How do I get there?

What do I do once I get there? How hard a time do I have reintegrating with society?

Do I face any prejudice or racism? Does the German government (or any other government for that matter) offer me any assistance?

Am I able to reclaim my property? What legal avenues are available for this?

The American Revolutionary War was also the nation's first civil war, and roughly 15-20 percent of colonials vowed to remain loyal to the crown. Although many Loyalists left the U.S. after the war, many stayed. Even the ones who left often had deep ties to what became the United States. Benjamin Franklin's son, for example, led guerrilla raids against Patriots. Correct me if I'm wrong, but I've never seen Loyalists accorded the same respect as Confederates.

For example does the idea of "religion" exist in every culture in approximately the same way or do concepts of religion differ drastically? For example did Chinese and Indians view Confucianism and Hinduism the same way Christians and Muslims viewed their religions? Did they understand the distinction from one religion and another, such as Confucianism or Taoism? Do connotations of "religion" differ elsewhere so that they view religion as essentially different entities altogether from what we mean when talking about "religion" in English?

That was just a partial quote. The full explanation went something like this. For context, this is a fourth year Canadian undergraduate class on War in the 18th century, taught by a military historian. Essentially, since it is early in the year, a student asked the professor to explain the reason why soldiers, in say, the American Revolution, marched at each other in lines, seemingly all in futility. He went on briefly to assert the benefits (and yet also noting how this was an oversimplification and not always the case) of this kind of marching; mobility, morale, a line of command, resistance to cavalry charges, the importance of fire density, etc. And then came the quote in question:

"If you ever find yourself wondering why militaries of the past seemingly made use of such stupid tactics and strategies, stop yourself for a minute and remember this: Armies, commanders and soldiers almost always, across continents and millenia, waged war in the most efficient and effective way possible. Innovation was always necessary in war, and chances are they knew something you don't. So if you were to bring a modern military mind back however many years and put them in the same circumstances, with the same terrain, limitation and tools available to them, quickly you would find that not much would have changed. Our ancestors always did the most with what they had."

It isn't verbatim but it's certainly close enough to what he said. He went on to note certain exceptions when it came to religious or cultural aspects outside of battle, such as taking enemy soldiers prisoner or funerary rites (such as in Aztec or Greek war, respectively). Alongside the American Revolution he also noted briefly how some people have the same wrong ideas about warfare in the First World War.

Sorry for the long-winded explanation, I just wanted to get the full idea across. So, does he have a point? Or were there many cases throughout history of entire methods of warfare being based on faulty notions?

from a historical perspective, are their any records of him that is not attributed to the bible?

I'm reading Hommage to Catalonia by George Orwell and I was wondering why Europe waged a war against Nazi Germany and Mussolini's Italy but leaved Franco alone.