The USA is older than the Republic of France. Why then is France still considered to be an older nation? Is it because the idea of a French state is older? Is it because people have identified as French longer than American? How would long established American Indian groups affect this idea? I am not trying to diminish the age and history of old European countries, I am just interested if there is any contention out there or a standard to measure a nation's age.

Specifically his role in the Vietnam War. The film seems to suggest that he was a voice of moderation, advocating troop reductions and the like. Is this accurate?

Usually, when we hear about the "greatest" rulers in the time frame of ~1100-1700, it's because they did something prestigious for their country or their dynasty. Whether it's being part of a famous ruling family, having interesting political intrigue, financing expeditions to the new world, winning a key battle, etc.

I don't often hear about rulers that worked hard to insure the happiness of not only noble families, but also the common people. Did any exist? Were there any medieval rulers that would be considered "populist" by today's standards?

I was recently watching Ken Burns' 'The Civil War' and two things stuck out to me. It said when Grant took over as overall commander of the federal forces, he was in control of the largest army in the world. And that from the first time the Ironclads went into battle, every other navy in the world was obsolete.

So my question is, given its size, experience, and technological advances, were there any other nations in the world who had the strength to possibly defeat the Union army as it stood at the end of the American Civil War? Could any other navy have overcome the US Navy and its Ironclad(s)? How much more dominant was the United States to the military forces of other nations? And how long did it take the rest of the major world powers to catch up in terms of military strength?

Gene Kranz was one of thousands of Apollo workers, and a handful of high-level managers and flight directors. However, pretty much anything I've seen about Apollo includes him — I couldn't name any of the other flight directors save Chris Kraft. Was it Kranz' work in saving Apollo 13 that bought him into the limelight, or something else?

I'm not sure if this qualifies for a Meta tag or not, if so I apologize.

I've been wanting to get into WWI for a long time and, following the book list, I bought John Keegan's The First World War.

My question is how am I supposed to read it? Cover to cover and then going back to specific points? Take notes on each chapter, and then following up on them if I have questions, putting the rest of the book on hold? Or something else entirely?

I know this is a personal preference thing, but I would appreciate any input you might have.

I am partially concerned about the sheer logistics of the matter--while two decades certainly is a lot of time to develop military hardware and the bombing campaign on Laos lasted longer, I can't quite grasp how an officially unacknowledged side campaign managed to produce more explosives than the entire military might of the industrialized world.

Secondly, while I understand that there was a high degree of operational inertia and that the poor and rural Laotian population was easy to write off, did anyone in the US military argue that things were going a bit overboard?

Hollywood can dilute actual facts about the human race so I'm hoping my question is rather simple: Did humans exist at anytime the traditional dinosaurs were around? And also where/when did the term 'caveman' originate?

There were questions on this sub about the veracity of Jesus being a carpenter, but I could not find anything about what that would entail.

When animals died, did Romans believe they had a similar fate to humans where they went to the underworld? I realize Romans didn't really see animals like we did today, they saw them more in terms of protection and less in terms of companionship I assume, but surely they must have realized that they were alive and that they died like humans?

Welcome to Monday Methods

Today's topic and additional questions come by request of /u/hcahc.

What are the specific challenges and opportunities of digital scholarship. This can encompass drawing on digitized works for research, but feel free to go beyond that and explore the role or publishing your scholarship in a digital format.

What are some guidelines on how to do responsible digital scholarship?

If you are strongly opposed to digital scholarship; what are the fundamental problems and challenges you see in it?

Next week's topic will be Counter-factuals as a tool of historical inquiry

I have recently become interested in the history of the Basque people and the Basque country, on both sides of the Pyrenees. However, my sources on early modern Spain barely mentions the Basques, focusing more on Navarra as a Kingdom.

So I ask now, what are some good reading material on the subject? Is the popular "The Basque History of the World" a good starting point?

Thanks in advance!

Hey Guys, I'm looking for a recommendation on a good book that deals with the development of the English Football League during it's pre WW2 days. The league is pretty unique in it's incredible depth and roots in England, practically every reasonably sized town in England has a football team and thousands turn out to watch their teams every week, even as far down as 5th division football while other footballing powers such as Germany and Spain struggle to put together two well supported leagues. I can't think of any other professional national sporting league which has such a widespread national representation/participation other than College sports in the US. Also the way it grew out of the Industrial Revolution and became one of the first national sporting leagues alongside the baseball leagues in the United States is fascinating to me from a social history perspective.

I've had a look around on the internet but not found anything that looks like it's the definitive guide, some self published stuff, some very old outdated stuff, some single season guides, loads of league table histories and the odd compendium of interesting facts but nothing that looks to be a good historical analysis of the growth of the game, it's social role in Victorian and Edwardian Britain and it's links with regional identity and city identity in England. So does anyone have any recommendations?

Sorry if this fits better in a different subreddit, but I figured this is pretty historical.