First of all, greetings.

I am starting to do a deep research for a personal project I'm working on and I really need accurate and specific info on these topic.

What did soldiers wear, eat, do when not in combat?

What did sailors/privateers wear, eat, how where their living conditions, etc?

What kind of ships were used for war and for trading? What were the ranks of the Royal Navy at that time? Basically, how was life at sea for both sides during that turbulent period? *What was the currency used at that time for both americans and british?

How was life for the average american throughout the conflict?

As you can see, I have many questions, but I don't know where to find appropiate answers for them, so I thought that I could start in here. If you people could you suggest me any books, maps, even movies, something that can help me with that, I'd be very, very grateful.

As far as I'm aware, the New Zealand treaty of Waitangi is either unique or one of very few examples, where colonial Europeans sought to come to a fair agreement with natives rather than just going to war with them.

Did things like this happen in other countries?

African-Americans had the black panthers, the Irish rebelled, etc. Have women ever created a militant group?

During the last ice age, there was a stretch of land connecting Great Britain to continental Europe called 'Doggerland'. It gradually disappeared under the sea, but are there any known references to it in the folk memories of Northern Europe? I've heard that the Australian Aborigines have names for mountains that disappeared under the ocean thousands of years ago, but I've no idea if that's true.

Obviously the music industry doesn't have a problem doing it still in other ways (see Britney Spears, etc), but we don't hear songs flat-out admitting that they'd like to get with a minor on the radio nowadays. Were the kinds of lyrics below a holdover from earlier days, before the invention of adolescence, when mid-to late-teens was a perfectly acceptable age to get married and have children?

For example:
The Beatles, 1963: "She was just seventeen, and you know what I mean"
The Zombies, 1968: "What's your name? Who's your daddy? Is he rich like me? Has he taken any time to show you what you need to live?"
Even Gary Puckett's "Young Girl," (also 1968) while admitting that sexualizing an underage girl is a problem, treats the issue in more matter-of-fact way. I doubt modern lyricists would even go there.

I've always been a fan of samurai warfare and history. Recently I've become fascinated with the history and warfare of the Mongolian Empire. Both seem to have emphasized mounted archers on the battlefield. I'm not asking who would win a fight. I'm interested in knowing how similar and different they were, and any other interesting analysis people can provide.

I know he viewed Slavik people as inferior, but did he hold any such views of other European races? Did he consider Germans the only Aryans and the elite white race?

I think a better starting question would then be what did Hitler consider an Aryan to be? Was it anyone of German ethnicity, someone with blonde hair and blue eyes, or what?

Do we know around when it began, and when it stopped happening?

I was watching Ken Burns' The War, and one of the former soldiers told a story about a German who knew really detailed info about the city the American was from in Connecticut. The German said he was part of an administration which would be responsible for governing America after the war.

Could there be truth in this? Did The Nazis have concrete plans for governing America? How much do we know about these plans/how specific were they?

I was having a discussion on reddit about the two secular sources of Jesus (not a theological one) and mentioned Tacitus, which ethnographers seemed to believe is genuine.

Nero substituted as culprits, and punished with the utmost refinements of cruelty, a class of men, loathed for their vices,27 whom the crowd styled Christians.28 Christus, the founder of the name, had undergone the death penalty in the reign of Tiberius, by sentence of the procurator Pontius Pilatus,

It was proffered that there was some modifications (Richard Carrier, PhD proponent of Christ Myth theory) on Tacitus, when indeed the Chrestians were followers of Claudius:

Like Benario, Van Voorst mentions (most relevantly) C. Saumagne, “Tacite et saint Paul,” Revue Historique 232 (1964), pp. 67-110, and Jean Rougé, “L’incendie de Rome en 64 et l’incendie de Nicomédia en 303,” Mélanges d’histoire ancienne offerts à William Seston (1974), pp. 433-41. Van Voorst also argues (as have several other scholars, only some of whom he cites: pp. 43-44; Benario names others) that Tacitus originally wrote “Chrestians” and not “Christians,” which was corrected by medieval Christian scribes back to Christians (there is indeed some evidence of this).

I am increasingly convinced that Van Voorst (and his backers) might be right about that. Which creates a problem they overlook. If Tacitus originally wrote “Chrestians,” then it becomes possible he was originally writing about rioters who were following the Chrestus who had ginned up riots under Claudius (Nero’s predecessor) as reported by Suetonius (Claudius 25.4), and that later Christian scribes inserted only the line about Christ (that he was killed under Tiberius by Pilate), thus coopting a passage about a completely different group, turning it into a passage about Christians. So when Tacitus says the people punished for the fire are the ones “the public calls Chrestians,” he may have been referring to his treatment of the Chrestian riots under Claudius (which must have been covered in the lost books of Tacitus that covered Claudius’ reign from 41 to 47 A.D., as the date of the Chrestian riot could have fallen in that period, and it is indeed odd that Tacitus does not otherwise mention it: Van Voorst, pp. 31-32).

This makes the possibility of interpolation substantially more credible. This would also explain why no one else mentions this event (for centuries), and no other historians of Nero’s reign (like Pliny the Elder) were ever quoted or had their histories preserved (as we would normally expect if they had mentioned Christ or Christians–which fact supports the conclusion that they didn’t, which then entails Tacitus didn’t, unless he was repeating what was by then a Christian legend about the fire at Rome, about a persecution that never actually happened, and not anything actually recorded by historians contemporary with the fire).

Is this even slightly accepted within the historical community? That the riots and subsequent fire were from Claudius reign vs supposed Christians (followers of a religious movement)?

Why not simply defend your own borders and not go around killing innocent people?

I've always been curious about this. Growing up in Australia, I often hear anecdotes about how close we became to being colonized by the French. I am curious about how true this is, and what impact this would have had on the Australian way of life (apart from the fact that we would probably all be speaking French).

I am preparing a report based on the book Im Westen nichts Neues (All Quiet on the Western Front). My thesis is something along the lines of: Many problems associated with the re-integration of soldiers after the war can be attributed to intercultural conflict as soldiers had established new social identities during the war that are different from that of the civilians.

I don't really know where to start with this in terms of Academic Research. Can you all suggest books, articles or authors who discuss these kinds of themes?

If my thesis is way off, call me out. I am interested in the First World War, but I am by no means a scholar... however... there is only one way to start down that path.

I've taken plenty of American history courses, and you can't discuss the Cold War without mentioning McCarthyism and the Red Scare. My question is, did anything like that occur in the Soviet Union? Were the USSR and its citizens paranoid that American spies had infiltrated their government? Were there any public trails? Any moral outrage at "capitalism"?

All of these things seem like a very American response to the Cold War, but since I have little to no Russian history experience, I thought I'd ask. Thanks!