There seems to be a sentiment that war drives technological progress and that it is also beneficial for the progress of the civil society. I know that war isn't the only driver and maybe/probably isn't even the main driver. One may still argue that wars or threat of war during the 20th century was a driver of technological progress, beneficial for civil society, with Landsat and other satellite programs as an example.

Was this sentiment true during roman times as well? Is there examples of war driving technological progress during the Roman period?

I don't know exactly what he's referring to. I tend to mentally shut off as soon as he starts talking about things I presume are stupid. I know he thinks that embargoes and political pressures, etc, were in play and somehow Hitler was just being reactionary. There's usually a kernel of truth underneath every stupid conspiracy theory. Is there any accuracy to this?

In medieval Europe.

I've just finished up a history of the crusading period, and it struck me as a little odd that all of the massed crusading attacks came from the west. Though I realize the Levant was considered something of a Muslim frontier, moves were made against both Egypt and Damascus. Was there ever discussion of a sort of counter crusade to threaten France, England or the like? Or even a hard surge up the Iberian peninsula?

I'm trying to find statistics on the effects of Reaganomics by different denominations. Without implying anything, I'd like to know if anyone can point me in the direction of information regarding employment and other such aspects pertaining to races and sexes during Reagan's administration. Great thanks to anyone who can help, and I hope this is the right place for this.

If he decreed something, was it instantly followed? Things like that.

many people think that university of bologne (1088) was the first univesity in europe (the word "university" was used there first time). others think that was salerno university (It was founded in the same century but earlier). what is the true? why should we think that salerno is the first or not? then, as i know, the high school that was built by constantine IX (emperor of the byzantine empire) in constantinople in 1044-1047, was called university too and it is older than bologne and salerno. i have the same question about the university of constantinople thank u in advance

Some movies portray executions of Nazi guards out of anger after seeing what they had done during the liberation of concentration camps. Is this historically accurate or did the Allied soldiers allow them to have proper trials?

I have also seen it portrayed where liberated Jews kill the guards and Allied soldiers allow them to. Did this ever happen?

I was wondering what Shakespeare would think of the modern English dialect, and it led me to think of this question. Would today's English be understandable in Shakespeare's time? Would it be before/after?

From places, countries etc.

The Babylonians removed them, Spain did in the 13th century, a English king in the 16th. Hitler wanted them gone and shipped some out. But how many times in history has it happened. Either from people or power.

Apologies for the crude title, but felt it was the best way to get the message across.

Thanks.

Looking back, obviously we consider it to be a pretty big deal, but were those involved aware of just what they were involved in, or was it mostly value assigned to that year after the fact?

Assuming the answer is no, at what point did people, in hindsight, start to point back o 1054 and say "that was it!"?

Additionally, assuming there were effects, whether immediate or drawn out, was this felt very much at the local level, or was it something that your parish priest would mostly have been ignorant about, and the impact mostly constrained to the higher levels of Church leadership?

First of all, i don't want a podcast or wikipedia.

Hi. I want to "get into" Napoleon, as in, i don't know much about him and the events surrounding him. I am looking for some books friendly to newcomers. I was hoping to find a book that gives a general overview of everything.

As i said, it's ok if it does not go into detail on everything. I plan to get an overview of the Napoleonic age then find books that specialize in the things i found most interesting.

Thanks in advance, sorry if wrong sub.

EDIT: I have heard about a book called "Napoleon - A life." Is it any good? It's important to me to get the facts

Hi there.

I posted this to r/history, but the mod suggested trying r/AskHistorians, so here goes!

I am trying to write a book about a soldier who gets injured during WW1, and sent home.

He struggles with depression and PTSD.

The book would be set from between 1914 to roughly 1945.

I am currently reading "War and Progress" by Peter Dewey, for the social and economic context for my book research.

However I am really interested in society's, the governments and military's attitudes to soldiers suffering with depression and PTSD during this time period, as It was not a medically diagnosed condition at that time.

Any help or information would be greatly appreciated!