And were they aware of how vast their land truly was??

The current situation in Afghanistan got me wonderting about other similar situations in military history. Specifically, were there other times in (preferably ancient or at least pre-modern) history when a technologically superior army lost a war and the less militaristically advanced nation benefitted from what the retreating army left behind? How did they benefit? Either in directly using that weaponry or resources, or through learning and progressing as a result of access to say, new construction techniques, scientific advancement, tactics, or inventions to not just utilize the items left behind, but to essentially receive a scientific or industrial leap forward to a new starting point for further development?

Was it around when we realised the world was round? Nowadays we can just use satellites but when was this realised? How did we deal with it?

Recently, a Chinese friend of mine asserted that unlike other world powers, China does not start wars of aggression, and that all military actions were defensive in nature. For this question, we can (probably) avoid complications like what constitutes a "war" vs. "police action" vs. "operation" etc.

I've tried to do my best to research the topic on my own, but some specifics are hard to pin down. I've read about some general information, from the killing of King Charles XII, through Morgan's Rifles, the British light rifles and Green Jackets, and the volunteer rifle regiments during the American Civil War.

My problem is that most of the articles don't cite any sources, or have only the vaguest of details, and I have a personal curiosity for more information.

What sort of ranges were these early sharpshooters engaging at? What sort of accuracy were they seeing? What sort of equipment and weapons were they using?

I apologize in advance in the question is too broad and rambling. I'd appreciate even just some more detailed sources I could read myself if no one feels like breaking it down in detail.

Ok,

I don't know if this is a stupid question.

I would like to know if there is a book that could give me an overall view on the history of humankind.

The history that I studied is eurocentric, and I studied the history of other people and countries only when they encountered europeans people and their expansion in the world (for example: history of Africa before colonisation, history of Native Americans before Columbus, history of the East before XIX century).

Now, you can say to me: "just take a specific course on the history of other countries!"

Ok, but I would like to have a complete understanding of all the events that happened in a specific period of history. Not a very detailed study, just a general view.

For example: what happened in the XIV century?

• Europe: Black Death, Hundred Years' War;

• Asia? What happened in the meantime?

• Africa?

• America?

Thank you very much in advance!

How common were medicinal herb gardens in family homes in Medieval Britain (esp Scotland) and Ireland? Did all families have them or were the herb gardens mainly in monasteries?

What would be grown in them?

Who looked after the plants and knew how to use them effectively? (Was it a 'women's job'?)

And was (too much) plant knowledge ever linked to being in cahoots with the devil / witchcraft?

Any answers or suggestions for reading would be great. Thanks!

Narrowing a question I made yesterday.

At the time of the crusades, all (Western European) participants were Catholic. I'd be interested in knowing if perspective on the crusades shifted with the Reformation. Did later Protestant historians appraise the crusades differently? And did this interpretation differ from the perspective of historians in Catholic countries?

The US Civil is one country split right down the middle, divided by limited issues, with near identical gov’t’s, no religious/ethnic dimension, no foreign intervention, and then the war ends and the country reunites under the original government.

Were there recorded methods of making one's breath smell better?

I remember reading up on him back in the day that his army used to be financed in big part by pillaging. To a point that it turned away some of his Protestant allies in the Thirty Years' War.

However, I cannot find much info on it online. Instead I found a mention that he was actually lobbying for so called humanitarian war ( so without hurting / looting / raping civil people ). Was it really him or one of his successors? And if it was him how good he was at enforcing it?

Can you confirm / deny what I wrote here?

I’ve been reading “Roughing It” by Mark Twain where he describes his journey west during the 1860’s, in it he describes an incident where he leaves a cooking fire unattended and it spreads into a large forest fire. Twain was known to emblellish which makes me doubt it was as large as he described, but do we know anything about this fire beyond what he said in the book?

I took the loaf of bread, some slices of bacon, and the coffee-pot, ashore, set them down by a tree, lit a fire, and went back to the boat to get the frying-pan. While I was at this, I heard a shout from Johnny, and looking up I saw that my fire was galloping all over the premises!

Within half an hour all before us was a tossing, blinding tempest of flame! It went surging up adjacent ridges—surmounted them and disappeared in the canons beyond—burst into view upon higher and farther ridges, presently—shed a grander illumination abroad, and dove again—flamed out again, directly, higher and still higher up the mountain-side- -threw out skirmishing parties of fire here and there, and sent them trailing their crimson spirals away among remote ramparts and ribs and gorges, till as far as the eye could reach the lofty mountain-fronts were webbed as it were with a tangled network of red lava streams. Away across the water the crags and domes were lit with a ruddy glare, and the firmament above was a reflected hell!

Every feature of the spectacle was repeated in the glowing mirror of the lake! We sat absorbed and motionless through four long hours. We never thought of supper, and never felt fatigue. But at eleven o’clock the conflagration had traveled beyond our range of vision, and then darkness stole down upon the landscape again.

How did neo-nazi groups become prevalent in places like Russia and Ukraine? For obvious reasons you'd think they'd be some of the most anti-nazi countries but there seems to be quite a few relative to western Europe and North America. On top of that you'd think a few generations being educated to believe class struggle over racial struggle would also make these groups less likely to form. I would imagine the soviets would have dealt with neo-nazis swiftly and harshly. Did these groups exist during the days of the Soviet Union? When did these groups start to form and was there something or someone that kicked it off?

I would imagine the simplest explanation is that they formed during the economic crisis that accompanied the collapse of the soviet union.

Someone suggested that I use the subreddit for my query.

Just curious on this topic as as some very questionable internet sources point to 'Operation Cherry Blossoms At Night' as a main reason that the Hiroshima and Nagasaki bombings went underway. I did my own independent research and failed to find any sources that has information on the relation between 'Operation Cherry blossoms At Night' and the Hiroshima and Nagasaki bombings.

So to reiterate my question. Was the US government aware of 'Operation Cherry Blossoms At Night' prior to the Hiroshima and Nagasaki bombings and if they were aware, did their knowledge of Operation Cherry Blossoms At Night' have any impact on the government's decision to bomb Hiroshima and Nagasaki?

if you could include something about the us government being bias in documenting and this teaching this ( this was a long time ago) i just don’t know when.

I understand the honour side of it, and that it stopped revenge killings, but surely a lord would have a lot of samurai loyal to him, so it would be a lot of people killed unnecessarily, and couldn't they just start serving the eldest son? Why would they have to kill themselves when they could stay alive and stay loyal to their master's family line?

This will be an odd one, and I'm not sure if I'll get the answer. My grandfather is getting old and I asked him to tell me some stories, one of them was just a simple tale of how he and his brother in Italy would find downed planes from the war and disassemble them, and the pipe attached to the exhaust valve in the engine was made of what appeared to be copper (all of this is according to him) and how if they sawed the pipe the inside would have some sort of coating that they would scrape off. According to him if it was added to water it would be quite the sight. Not entirely sure what he meant by that.

I understand this is a long shot, but I am trying to figure out what it was so he can do it at least one more time, and I can't think of any other community that might have any clue how to answer. Thanks in advance for any help you can provide

I have been trying without much success to find good sources on this data. Specifically, how effective where the turret guns that were prevalent on bomber/strike aircraft in the second world War? I have found data regarding kills claimed, but much of it has been tagged by historians as suspect/unverified, and I know one of the primary purposes of these weapon systems was to deter attackers rather than kill them, which is a harder thing to numerically quantify. Were the big bombers with many guns effective? Did the small 2 seat planes with a tail gunner find that the tail gunner added good value? Is there any good analysis on this that goes deeper than just kills claimed?