I have always been curious as to what warfare may have looked like in earlier days. I tried googling around as well as searching through this subreddit, and most resources seem to be very low quality.

I know Gustavus Adolphus's tactics are considered innovative for the era, but the only visual aid I've seen is a gif of squares. I can't imagine what the Prussian goosestep looked like.

Are there any good resources of pictures/videos/images of medieval and early modern warfare (say, from 100-Years'-War to the Napoleonic Wars)? I mean both individual combat as well as tactics and strategy.

Although there are of course fringe elements in Japanese and Italian society that support a return to the glory of empire, Nazis have an international following, and "Heil Hitler" and "88" remain bywords for extremists. Why does the Nazi mystique and clout survive beyond that of other similar regimes?

I know that there are a ton of Dred Scott posts on /r/AskHistorians, but I haven't seen a good explanation of why Dred's non-citizenship stripped him of standing. I believe aliens (i.e. non-citizens) can sue and have sued in US courts over things that happened to them on US soil and/or things that happened overseas but that were caused by the US. Did the ruling effectively declare Mr. Scott to be a non-human, or am I missing something?

Obviously the wealthy had access to them well before the common man, but when did salt and pepper become ubiquitous?

Yeolha Ilgi, a diary written by a Korean ambassador to Beijing in 1780, records two discussions he had concerning "the Living Buddha." (explicitly said to be a lama from Tibet; maybe the Dalai Lama though I wouldn't know) I don't have the book right now but here's what I remember. I might be misremembering parts but the gist of it should be accurate.

In the first, the author talks with a Chinese scholar who emphasizes the magical power of the Living Buddha, such as his magic mirror that showed the nature of people it reflected on. The scholar also claims simply looking at the lama could cure people of evil.

In the second, another Chinese scholar claims that the Living Buddha is a gluttonous charlatan (writing the character 貪 covetous to emphasize his point), a fat man that eats everything, including pork, beef, camel, dog, even entire donkeys, although, it is conceded, he is not interested in women. However, the author finally notes that he did not encounter another man in China so opposed to Buddhism.

So, which view would have been more prevalent within Beijing at the time?

Just curious what the mood was like. Were there folks saying violence doesn't solve the problem? Or were the citizens generally ready to go to war?

Specifically, I'm interested in what the laws about dueling were (if any) under Tsar Nicholas II? Was it legal or illegal? If illegal, were punishments enforced or was it sort of winked at?

Also, what would the preferred type of weapon have been? I assume, by this point, firearms would have been the instrument of choice but I'm curious what type of firearm would have been common.

Thanks for any help you can provide.

I feel as though there are only 2 french kings who I can actually name off the top of my head, Louis XIV and Louis XVI, and one of those is just because he was executed. If I think about, maybe also Henri IV (for his conversion to catholicism and nothing else) and Phillip IV (for doing a couple of things, but I can't remember exactly what). Besides those 4 guys, I feel as though I have no real knowledge of most of the french kings. However, I know quite a few English monarchs (Henry VIII, Elizabeth, George III, William the Conqueror, Richard III etc), and important events that happened in their reign. Is this just a byproduct of living in a english speaking country, or is there a historical reason for the french monarchy's forgettability? Why do none of the French monarchs seem to make it into world history classes outside of Louis XIV and XVI?

Edit: I'm from the United States

My family has passed down this sterling silver cup and bowl for a few generations, and now its finally to me. I'm not sure its worth or what it even is exactly. The cup says:

PRESIDENTS TOURNAMNT FIFTH FLIGHT (some sort of emblem) WONEY WmMARKHAM 1912

on the bottom of the cup it says: Sterling A1528

In very tiny light writing it says Davis&Freeman below that.

The bowl just says: REED&BARTON STERLING X771 THE LARK

....in small print on the back. Everything is engraved into the silver and looks very old. If you can help at all it would be so helpful. I can email a picture if needed.

It's on my reading list and I've been looking forward to it.

How is it? How does it go with his own previous work and with other assessments of Philip?

After reading the MLK speech I was thinking about the history of that word and how it has changed. Did the change occur earlier in some countries than others or within different groups of people?

I was just looking on Google Maps and it said that it would approx 24 days to walk from Central England to Moscow and thats assuming your walking 24/7 with no sleep, so it's obviously gonna take longer than 24 days. How would someone in medieval times survive a multi-week long journey?

Also, how easy would it have been to find and hire a translator so you could actually communicate with people in the country your going to?

Not including societies that were once Socialism but are not anymore.

Was it normally from commoners or would a knight be appointed?