I'm curious and want answers for some questions.

1- How often did officers wives accompanied them, was it allowed?

2- In what sort of accommodation did the officers have during campaigns?

3- Did infantry commanding officers ride horses?

Edit: Removed unnecessary word

A Sword, by the Name of "Ulfberht" was forged from excellent steel with a very low content of sulfur and phosphorus and up to 1.1% carbon. The type of steel was known as crucible steel, and it wasn't made for another 1000 years.
How did the Vikings learn to make it, and how could they get a forge hot enough (Over 3000 Degrees Fahrenheit) when at the time, and for the next 1000 years, nobody else could.

It seems like he was just a crazy megalomaniac who tried to bite off more than he could chew, but was there any merit to his plans?

In Citizen Soldiers (by Stephen Ambrose) a statistic is cited claiming that Americans in German camps faced a 0.7% death rate while Germans in American camps faced 1%, it also went on the describe that American POWs faced atrocious conditions due to widespread shortages in Germany, while German POWs had much more agreeable conditions, with rations equal to American soldiers (as required by the Geneva convention), and generally fairly simple and/or menial labor taking the place of Americans off in the war (in contrast to American POWs cleaning up in the wake of bombings). So why did the Americans fair so much better in deplorable conditions than the Germans in conditions so comfortable they dreaded the end of their "imprisonment?"

If I have posted any false information or assumptions please let me know for future reference.

If he did have plans of controlling europe or whatever why didnt he just wait it out for germany to recover from the first world war and stock up on everything war related in the mean time. IIRC he had a firm grip on germany so he shouldnt have been worried about loosing his power. Even if they started killing off jews in their own country i doubt that the rest of big powers would care enough to risk so much.

Was there any type of resistance from those who preferred the old system. What do we know about the major contributors on each side of the argument?

Were any Americans prosecuted for fighting on either side of major foreign civil wars in the 20th century? Were they convicted or acquitted, and if so, on what grounds?

I'm thinking specifically of the Spanish Civil War and the Russian Civil War, but I'd be interested in other examples.

I just finished the Richard J. Evans trilogy ("The coming of the Third Reich", "The Third Reich in power" and "The Third Reich at war"), which I am thoroughly impressed with. It makes me curious as to the perspective of the British or Allied governments and generals of the time on the rise of the Nazis and the war that followed.

Can someone recommend further reading? It would be very much appreciated.

I've read that fortifications were a mathematical formula in the legions that X number of men = Y size of fortification and scaled it up, how accurate is that? And how long did it take for them to build a fortification?

Particularly in Mediaeval Europe, Catholics and the Orthodox in particular seemed to carve up a lot of saints. I'm on holiday in Macedonia just now, and was reading about St Clementine of Ohrid, who has body parts in pretty much every major Catholic and Orthodox country. He was risen to the position of Saint in the 16th century. Whose job was it though to start chopping off heads and hands and fingers from a holy body?

I know the trade in relics was a major money spinner for church authorities in this period, but is there any documentation of who did the divvying up? The archbishops Physician? Some poor monk?

Going into WWI France's military philosophy emphasized the offensive, and as a result they suffered mightily against Germany.

Going into WWII France's military philosophy emphasized the defensive, and as a result they suffered mightily against Germany.

Going into the Cold War (and a hypothetical WWIII) France's traditional German enemy was partitioned into occupied buffer states and France was under the umbrella protection of NATO and the USA, staring down their counterparts of the Warsaw Pact and USSR.

How did France's military reorganize itself in response to these new conditions? Was the development of their own nuclear arsenal considered vital? Did they renew focus on the European front or on colonial conflicts like Vietnam? To what extent were they relying on/expecting/receiving American assistance in all these area?

What would the new recruit/conscript have been taught in terms of both military protocol and battlefield tactics?

while at it what are the extent of training of infantry during the time?

Very odd and...specific question here. When I was in 8th grade learning about colonial history my history teacher once told a story that George Washington swore so beautifully that he made grown men cry. I didn't ask him what his source was at the time, but now I've been trying to figure out what this could be possibly be referencing to...haven't found anything thus far. Does anyone know what my teacher was referencing, or was he just making it up?

Thanks.