Also, I understand that Geoffrey Boothroyd convinced Fleming to switch from a Beretta to the Walther PPK. Do we know why he suggested that particular firearm?

My family owns a very old house (built in the late 1700s), and it is filled with many priceless books, war memorabilia, and paintings. This house was home to many US generals and was used as a base in the war of 1812. Many of these items are probably worth quite a bit of money or would be of interest to a museum. We are in the planning stages of setting up an inventory database of everything in the house, and I would appreciate any advice a historian may have concerning both the handling of historic items as well as our potential next steps.

I've been searching for a map that shows where the allies were on the day Germany surrendered but can't find one, obviously I know that the Soviets were in Berlin but how close were the other allied countries?

I've tried looking up what a Persian warship looked like but every time I google it, it just links me things related to the greek ships at the Battle of Salamis.

Specifically, I am interested in the Sassanian era, though any information would be fantastic.

Thanks a lot.

My research says crew sizes were at least a hundred men, often two, for a large ship such as a Spanish galleon. Why was this? What is the absolute minimum size a crew could be to get a galleon running? What did the crew do when they weren't at their stations, with a hundred and something men aboard?

I understand Russia eventually become the sole possessor of the nuclear weapons after the breakup, but what else of significance did they receive? Did they inherit all of the USSR's debt? In what ways were they held accountable for the USSR's past transgressions?

I've read on Wikipedia that this happened but there's no detail. What law allowed this to happen, what was the perception at the time and could this happen today?

Thanks!

To clarify, I'm looking for information about the Kuomintang and their presence in Indochina.

America meaning what would eventually become the USA

Things such as a soloist's instrument breaking mid-performance, chandeliers falling from the ceiling, a performer's hair catching fire, the conductor falling off the podium, etc. Something that had a significant impact on the performance, with the critics giving it a 0/10!

Also, I'm thinking mainly of performances by the more known composers (J.S. Bach, Mozart, Vivaldi, Handel, Schubert, Haydn, and so on).

I've heard this story told in my family many times, explaining the etymology of my grandmother's maiden name, Breitkopf (German for "widehead), and how it may be an indicator of poverty (as opposed to a name like Birnbaum ("pear tree"')). Doing some research, I'm having some difficulty much on it. Some discussion of German and Austro-Hungarian states requiring Jewish people to take on a family name. Is this story about buying last names true?

Thanks.

I'm studying History at the University of Manchester, in my 2nd year. I'm sure I was told at school not to write "this essay will discuss", "in this essay I will be seeking to explain" etc., and yet many of the scholarly articles I read on jstor.org and the like use this language in their essays. Is it then ok, if professional historians are doing it? I feel like it would help make my introductions more succinct but don't want to get marked down on it. Many thanks!

It seems that they are very close to one another in their methods, and their beginnings. First off, science began as natural philosophy, so historically they are one in the same. Furthermore, the scientific method is just a refined Socratic method, in that it is used to deal with nature, rather than the more abstract things that philosophy deals with (ethics, metaphysics, religion, etc). However, even though the questions of philosophy (at an academic level) is more relevant than that of the questions of the sciences (at an academic level), as philosophy deals with moral decision making, while science deals with the physical properties a black hole has, the latter is more popular than the former. I don't mean to discount science, but I am interested in the history between the two, and how science ended up on top. So, my question is, why did science become more popular than philosophy?

I have noticed that european castles have been made out of different materials and I realise why this was done (stone would be a lot harder to get than brick in the Netherlands, for example) but I was wondering which would be "better" against a siege involving, for example, catapults and so on.

The comment I first saw spoke of walls of solid rock being better than thinner walls of rack with loads of rubble in-between but is that true?

How well would a castle made of brick respond to such abuse?

Have there been documented sieges using such weaponry against brick castles?

Any additional information on Andrew Jackson and his presidency is appreciated.