I mean the fire bombing of Tokyo was far more devastating than the atomic drops. So why give up the notion of defense to the last survivor?

Just curious. Also curious if slavery was legal in DC at the time. I forget a lot from history class.

I'm guessing around the time of the development of professional armies and the use of firearms, since nobles probably weren't expected to go to war anymore.

First and foremost, Im sorry if this is not the right place for this question. But hey, I might as well give it a shot.

Okay, so I was looking at a bit of my family tree. And around the great (x4) grandfather, his headstone says, "GAR Co. H, 3rd Reg." I have no idea what that means, and my question is simply: What is that?

Any help would be much appreciated!

Believe it or not, over in /r/zen some kind of sectarian conflict has almost broken out! In a nutshell - various users are adamant that Zen was, historically, an entirely separate, pre-existing line of thought that has been mislabelled/co-opted/misinterpreted as an offshoot of Buddhism.

Are there any historians of East Asian religion (or even general East Asian history) that can offer a definitive case for or against this assertion?

Have a bit of an obsession with Alexander the Great. Recommended reading?

What happened to the dead bodies in a huge battle? Did they just leave them for the wolves or whatever, or were there burial rites/battlefield cleaners?

Did defendants receive legal representation and a generally fair trial?

I'm predominantly thinking of prior to the 1980s, starting from the very beginning. I can be more specific on what I'm looking for if need be.

I apologize that I don't have a source in front of me, but in my reading of many books about the American Civil War, I've read of European military observers at the time, and historians later, commenting that the American militaries were poorly led and drilled: that officers at all levels generally didn't have a good grasp of tactics compared to their European counterparts, (especially compared to the armies of the Napoleonic Wars,) and that enlisted soldiers weren't nearly as well-drilled.

People saying these things will usually say that this is why American Civil War battles were almost always indecisive compared to say, Austerlitz or Waterloo. (Even when two big armies of each side fought, one could never totally rout the other. They just sort of fought and bled a lot until one retreated. There are exceptions, like Chancellorsville, but even then, that would be indecisive compared to a Napoleonic battle: the Army of the Potomac was not destroyed.)

This is also applied to explain why cavalry were relatively ineffective in Civil War combat; unable to decisively turn the tide of battles with charges.

Is there much truth to these sorts of claims? Or did the advances in technology between 1815 and 1861 make the nature of the battles different?

Thank you for any insights!

Hello all,

I've asked a very broad question, so I'll list some example questions of what I am looking for. I've always been curious about employment in a system where the government owns everything.

To what degree were wages equal in the Soviet Union?

Did everyone with the same job class earn the same amount of money (For example, did a bus driver in Moscow earn as much as a bus driver in Novosibirsk)?

How did job-to-job compensation compare to America (i.e. teacher in the USSR versus teacher in America for example)?

Did people have bargaining power over their wages?

What were the highest compensated and least compensated professions?

Was there unemployment in the Soviet Union? If not, what did the people who would have been unemployed in a different political system do? If yes, what was unemployment benefit like?

What would be some good reads for someone interested in jobs in the USSR?

How did you obtain the job you obtained? Was there flexibility to change careers?

What were working hours like in the Soviet Union? Was there a concept of overtime? If so, what was overtime like?

Was there "retirement" in the USSR?

Thank you in advance for time spent answering this question.

You see this amazing feasts of kings and knights in the great halls. How would the best of these compared to modern food, and restaurants now.

Edit: I can't believe how good this sub is. Thanks for the well-thought out responses all! Seems like it was good to be the king.

It would be fun to learn about some success stories happening in the middle of all that chaos (if there are any success stories).

I recently stumbled upon and read J.H Patterson's accounts of the man-eaters and am not convinced. It seems insanely unlikely, for instance, that the lion could enter a trap and be allowed to escape only by the wildly inaccurate shots that of the Indians who were posted as bait that severed some bars on the other side of the trap.

It's obviously a fascinating story, but is it corroborated by other sources? Were there really two cunning and murderous lions that held up the construction of the Uganda railroad or something else?

This may not be the perfect place to ask this question, but I think it'll work.

Even since I've had my first legitimate suit, I've known that you are not supposed to fasten neither the bottom button of your blazer nor your waistcoast, if you have one, reasons being both that one King of England was simply too fat to do so and it became the fashionable thing to do, and because, simply, your waistcoat will ride up when you sit down. Of course, rules also state that you are supposed to undo all of you blazer's buttons before you sit, lest you ruin it.

However, in several images I have seen recently, both of gentlemen in the early 20th century and of advertisements for tailors and their clothes, all buttons are done up; including the last.

So . . . what is it? I am very curious; it seems that this rule is a more recent thing than I thought.

Thanks!

I'm very interested but I'm also kinda too poor to buy books.

Many blame current problems such as the immigration situation in Europe on the so called" mess " left behind by colonisers, so what was the situation when they left and has it caused such problems?