How did the Union and Confederate cost their armed forces? Did they budget well or were there significant over runs?

Would it be possible to work out what the annual cost (training, upkeep, food, medical care, weapons, etc) of a union versus a rebel infantryman was? Cavalry would, I presume, be more costly.

Has anyone done this ?

I've heard that the classical Latin we read was only used in writings and orations and that nobody actually spoke like that normally, instead using vulgar Latin. To what extent is this true? Take Cicero's orations for example, did he actually speak like that to the public, or did he speak more vulgar Latin and did he just 'classical Latin'-ise the text when he wrote it down to make it seem fancier for future readers? What about discussions and politics? Would Cicero talk to Caesar in vulgar Latin or literary Latin? Would the senate discuss in literary Latin? Would they even be able to hold a proper conversation in literary Latin?

On a related note, how much did vulgar and 'proper' Latin differ? I have read that Catullus wrote vulgar Latin, what are some examples of this? I have read some of his poems but the language always seemed quite proper (except for the occasional weird quirk to fix the rythm).

While two sides were fighting on the battlefield, were fallen comrades simply stepped over and ignored, trampled or dragged back into the lines?

I've heard that there were some time when people would go to a church and ask the priests to be protected from gangsmen, enemy soldiers (at war) or even law forces. Is that actually true? Did people actually respect the priests' decision? Did people appeal to that very often? There were some kind of requirements? When did that start to dissapear?

I am curious about the role of the six nations that made up the iroqios confederacy in the American Revolutionary War and most specifically curious of how the Revolutionary War affected the confederacy. I am aware that the war itself split the confederacy apart as far as which side to back, but I am unaware of the specifics.

As far as I know, most of my understanding of First Nations around this time and place is at the periphery of historical context that I am aware of. So other than knowing that they generally took whatever side was against the colonist, i can't say I know so many details although, understanding that this war tore the confederacy apart means that some huge nation-shattering drama obviously went down that I'd like to be aware of.

I'd also appreciate if you cited some stuff as I'd love to be pointed toward some books.

I am looking for specific political decisions made by him that lead to the tensions in early 20th century and world war 1? I know that he was building up the army and was very aggressive, which made other big European powers to build up their own armies and smaller countries to seek alliances with them.

If you guys could point me to some sources that describe my question, or just anything that explains how Kaiser Wilhelm II was responsible for ww1 and tensions leading up to it.

Very interested in him at the moment but for some reason I have not been able to find any solid answers for these questions. Does anyone here know the truth?

Obviously the revolution happened and I know "what ifs" are not allowed I am not asking what definitely would have happened just if their was a plan if the Czar-to-be died while young since he had health problems.

Also, were other weapons commonly used? How about unarmed?

I'm quite interested in the Euopean warfare in the late pre-industrial era. One thing that really confuses me is why captains or general back in that time prefer to use the line formation for their musketeer infrantry? I agree it maximums the damage inflicted upon the enemy, but the same time, the same damage could applied to yourself.

Did they really didn't care about the casualties, and were there some other attributes that made such stategy viable?