Is Empire of Romania just a vague translation of the Latin name or are there official papers with that name?

I've heard many times that the image of trench warfare is not all there was in WWI. In the early days and on other fronts from the western, combat was very different. I've never heard exactly how different though. Was combat during the early stages of the war before the stalemate set in more like that of the 19th century or more modern? Did units still fight in lines? How active was cavalry? What about the eastern font? What would the battle of Tannenburg, for example, look like?

The movie takes place in an alternate history where the Confederacy wins and conquers the North, and eventually Mexico and South America.

and how functional were they?

Doesn't have to reflect the siege of Jerusalem itself, but any siege that could have happened at the time. I've found many questions and answers on the movie, but none on the siege itself.

Many thanks!

This might be purely anecdotal, but it feels that everyone collectively considers 1940-1970s America "safer" than the America millenians have grown up in. I've heard stories from both urban and rural settings that talk of a time where parents let children walk wherever they want.

I was just wondering if there is any statistical or historic accuracy to this belief. It seems hard to believe; there have obviously been criminals, rapists, pedifiles, etc since the beginning of time. And I can only imagine that prevention was even tougher with less advanced technology and more prevalent discrimination. Any insight would be appreciate, thanks !

From Wikipedia: "Though Cretans could be theoretically outranged by Rhodian slingers, they were widely recognized as being amongst the best archers in the ancient world, and as such found employment as mercenaries in many armies, including Alexander the Great's and those of many of the Diadochi. During the Retreat of the Ten thousand following the Battle of Cunaxa in 401 Xenophon's hoplites were able to hold off pursing Persian troops, with the aid of the Cretan archers who formed part of the Greek mercenary army. On this occasion the Cretans, cut off from supplies, were able to gather and reuse the spent Persian arrows while seizing bowstrings from local peasantry.

Following the conquest of Macedonia and of the independent Greek city-states, Cretan archers served as auxiliaries in the Roman army under the Republic and Empire. Crete remained part of the Byzantine Empire until seized by Venice in the aftermath of the Fourth Crusade. During much of this period the island was a Theme (military province), providing both archers and sailors for the Byzantine forces.

In 1452 Venice granted specific permission for Byzantium to resume recruitment of Cretans. One of the last occasions on which Cretan archers are known to have played a significant role was as part of the garrison defending Constantinople against the Turkish army of Mehmet II in May 1453."

Since Wikipedia is an unreliable source, I'd like to know more about this and what ancient sources we have on them, like if some ancient historian mentioned them or something.

For those that have read both of these books, how exactly do they differ? Am I wrong to assume they are interchangeable? I hear that Guns, Germs and Steel by Diamond has copped a lot of criticism, so perhaps is my best bet just to go straight to Sapiens by Dr Harari?

Before I read either or both of these books however, I plan to read Bill Bryson's "A Short History On Nearly Everything", and a few of Richard Dawkins books. Then from there I will venture into more specific parts of history. Is this a good plan?

I'd like to know the legal history of labor unions in the U.S.A. Has the constitutionality of labor unions ever been challenged? If so, which amendment or amendments allow their existence? How were the first labor unions established and recognized under law?

Was the language and traditional ways of learning suppressed? Did the catholic church take an active role in suppressing native beliefs and ways of life? I know that many of our sources on the Aztecs are spanish codices, that would seem to indicate that there are few native accounts to draw on. What's the story here? I assume that stuff was lost, but how much?

EDIT: Wow, thank you for all the amazing answers, discussion and for the links! I will definitely go through them all during the weekend :)

Let's say before the fall of the dynasties, how were homosexual relationships usually seen as or viewed? What were the legal and social rammification of being "out"?