I know john Adams and Benjamin Franklin were among those who went to France, and later Denmark. There may not be a reason, but it seems odd I never hear about any Asian countries or peoples during this monumental time in American History.

Books, orgininal texts, anything. I've got the impression to have learned (up to high school) history as a nice long and overall interesting story, whith sometimes a nice little illustration here and there, but never looked up myself the "raw stuff", that is the documents that the general historical thruths rely on. But in the same time I'm not that litterate, I mean I can't read latin and greek, and if I try to read and understand something a bit difficult like old text in my native language I get bored pretty quickly. But I do believe there must be first hand history documents that must be really interesting. Could you guys tell me any you know about ?

Did someone go through the newspaper subscriptions everyday and cut out everything that fit into their reference headings? Was this someone's job?

?

I have heard from various people that He might have been killed by the NAZI party. Can someone shed some light on the subject?

Ricimer was a Seuvic general who essentially was the de facto ruler of Rome in it's last few decades of existence. During his time, he set up and removed four Emperors in the Western Empire. Why did he never declare himself Emperor, if he was in all but name so?

I've heard of this happening on at least one occasion, but am pretty sure it happened more than that, causing a loss of German sailors in each (some?) scenario(s).

Do we know how U-boat captains were expected to act in this scenario, and would the allies have known about it? I imagine that various conventions probably protect the vessel lending aid, but such a ship would be a tempting target.

How does one society create new words with a new alphabet and find meaning for these words? And how was the first language created?

I was looking to delve a little deeper into the mythology and history of the Late Han Dynasty. I am looking for a Dr. Robert Moss translation of Romance of the Three Kingdoms; abridged or unabridged. Maybe both? Sorry if this is the wrong sub but I figured I'd get some expert opinions. Thank you!

If so, did this have anything to do with the antipope named John, who reigned in the 15th century?

I understand that before abolition there were many arguments for enslaving Africans (inferior intelligence, they needed to be cared for, etc.).

What was the basis for white hatred and violence toward the black community long after emancipation? Events such as the June 21, 1921 torching of "Black Wall Street" north of Tulsa seem absolutely ludicrous to me. Can anyone share insight about the racist mindset?

High-school level history presents Charles De Gaulle as the effective leader of the french, and is largely dismissive of the Vichy government. It goes to great pains to discuss the existence of the 'free french' and the french resistance, and leaves students with the impression that overall, the French remained active allied combatants even after surrender.

This seems to me like its ex post facto bullshit stemming from allied and domestic french propoganda after the war.

Now, I don't mean to deny the existence of the free french or the role of the french resistance - my grandfather was in the OSS and worked directly with the french resistance during the war - but they seem to be the absolute minority, even in military circles.

The main thing I point to is the fact that you didn't see any serious effort to retreat significant military force away from mainland France, not even for naval units that weren't under direct German threat. This lead to the incident at Mers-el-Kebir, where overwhelmingly the French navy seemed fully surrendered.

It seems to me like the French for the most part were largely quiet in defeat, and that the story of the french resistance is overplayed, and pales in comparison to more dramatic efforts in Eastern Europe. Is this correct?

Also, how much of an opportunity did the French really have to resist once their front lines were penetrated (roughly post-Sedan)? For an amateur, it's easy for me to imagine how the French could have looked to defend Northern France much in the way the Germans did when the Allies landed in Normandy, and turned Paris into another Stalingrad or Moscow. It would have been bloody, and certainly the French didn't have the time that the Russians did as a result of the extreme distances involved in Russia, but could it, in any way, have turned into a credible defense?

I know all about the rise of the Ottomans. Muhammad dies, Turkey Rises and takes over what was once the Eastern Roman Empire. But what happened? It seems like during the 1800's it went into a sharp decline, and after WW1 it just vanished and became Turkey. What happened?

Winter break's coming up, and I'd like to do some reading. I recently started reading the Anabasis, and I'm eating through it pretty quick. Could you guys recommend me something else of the like?

If Germany was able to be formed without Austria, why did he need to challenge France for a comparably small amount of territory? Was it the act of being able to defeat a greater power, or something else?

Were many returning veterans kept on as soldiers, or were they expect to return to their families and farms?

What was the largest source of employment for veterans (obviously the state, but what do they have them doing?)?

How many enlisted soldiers in 1945 became career soldiers?

How are they different from other Western countries when their history and culture share the same origin as Canada, USA, etc.

Also, if they are not part of 'Western' civilization, then what is their civilization called?

PS: Why is /r/HistoricalWhatIf a private subreddit?