I'm specifically looking for material which analyzes specific conflicts and series of battles in great detail. Particularly step by step accounts which explain the formations they took and why. The psychology of the battles is equally important: How the Generals went about securing the advantage through ruses, spies, and innovation.

I am fascinated by such figures as Alexander, Napoleon, and Hannibal. I also have studied The Art of War by Sun Tzu and would love to find similar books, I recently acquired the The Prince as well.

I am writing a novel, and I would like to bring some degree of knowledge to my fiction. Examples of other fiction writers who do well at this would be great too.

Any and all help is appreciated.

Hi guys, I've recently discussed the main cause of military casualties in the First World War with my history teacher. He believes that the machine gun was the most deadly weapon, but I am quite sure it was in fact the artillery fire that claimed most lives. The sources I’ve found to support my claim are not completely bulletproof. Can you please help me out on this one and cite your sources? Thanks in advance!

I'm the thinking primarily of cultural exports in the form of film, television and other mass media. Presumably America's success at exporting its culture is due to the simultaneous development of mass communication and the apogee of American world power. To what extent are there precedents prior to the 20th century in terms of nations that achieved similar success in exporting their culture?

The duties of an ascending vice president were solidified by precedent, but there were 16 vice presidential vacancies before 1967. That's almost 38 years without someone to break a tie in senate.

I know it is not so black and white as the question seems, but on a general level should I look much further than the ideological east/west clash? Any advice on historiography for this issue would be great. Thanks!

That is, if such records ever existed.

EDIT: To be specific, I mean trace their lineage back to specific Roman families or clans. Not just that they had people living in the region that was once Ancient Rome in ancient times -- although that would be of interest to me, as a start.

I'm aware that accents change over time. I'm watching Gone with the Wind for the first time and wondering if the lack of accents is because it's hollywood or because it's a more modern thing.

I'd like to get some reading done on the holydays :)

I've read several times that the modern presidents, post Reagan, have opted to keep their papers private. Does this mean that historians don't get access to them or that they get access only under certain circumstances or only certain documents? Who makes sure only those with proper access get to peruse them?

Why would someone do this?

I've just been reading a biography of Vera Nabakov, and it turns out that she carried a gun that perhaps she was hoping to use to assassinate Trotsky. I know he was ultimately assassinated on Stalin's orders (thanks Wikipedia) but certainly the Nabakovs weren't Stalinists.

Since Otto Von Bismarck was a champion for Democracy in Germany, which Nazi Germany attempted to turn into an evil, and also hated Socialism arguing that Socialism would be the downfall of Germany, being known as being extremely conservative, did Hitler antagonize him to the german people since hitler was more of a champion for socialism in Germany, and since he was against democracy in Germany. Also in the nazi germany 1940 film "Bismarck" they make him seem more like a villain, and turn him into this very sneaky and back stabbing character while the people in the film opposing Bismarck are painted as heroic knights for the german cause. I could not find ANYTHING about it on the internet, and I'm really interested in the topic so it nice if someone with good knowledge of this could explain. It just seems like Bismarck would have really hated hitler besides the whole conquering the world stuff. (excuse my poor english i happen to be german)

A random thought came to me, and it was about time. I started thinking about how its an absolute fundamental part of our society. It is now a worldwide phenomenon. However, it hasn't always been like that, and it got me thinking about whether Time itself had a history. So my question is, as said in the title, does Time have history?

Which Classical texts, available to us now, would have been unavailable to me then?

Which Classical texts, lost to us now, would I have been able to find?

Would monasteries already be the chief repositories for books at this point, or would other centres of learning still be open?

Hello all, im currently writting a paper for history and im in need of some primary sources in Europe during the plague, there seem to be no shortage of secondary sources so im okay there. Any assistance would be greatly appreciated.

Is it true that US professors were employed by the US government to spy on other nations (or other political purposes) during the Cold War? I was rereading my copy of Bitter Fruit by Stephen Kinzer and I knew that universities were often employed to do development projects under the Agency of International Development.

Were universities players in a larger political game to roll back Communism?

It was my understanding that Triumphs and more broadly triumphal forms were only used to mark victory in foreign wars. Thanks.