Pretty much what it says in the title. Eisenhower highly praised Zhukov, but what do you think about his generalship?

As for myself, I trust Eisenhower could recognize a good general when he saw one, and I think Zhukov is seriously underappreciated in the west.

When people talk of "the wes"t, it usually means Europe plus USA, Canada, Aus and NZ.

Indeed all these countries often act together and have very similar views and culture.

South America however is entirely separate, despite being colonised in a similar manner by a European country.

Is it because South America was settled earlier? Or maybe some environmental factor?

The Romans used lead in their pipes their eating utensils and to fortify their wine, but eventually the Incredible works they created fell into ruin and chaos as the empire tumbled down around them. Corruption and madness inflicted the romans, could a buildup of lead in mankinds biology have reduced our intelligence through poisioning like can happen in ecosystems exposed to harmful buildups of chemicals leading to loss of knowledge and heavy dark ages fanatical action?

I want to get a jump on my friends for No Shave November and I've noticed that facial hair has come and gone in our society. The Civil War for instance was a time period of impeccable facial hair. Just wondering a historian's perspective. Thanks!!!

By peasant, I mean someone living in one of those small villages I always see in the movies, which are seemingly in the middle of the jungle. How, if at all, did life change for them after the north won?

Really says it all. What type of instruments, is there any written music, what did it sound like, was it only related to religion or practiced outside religion?

Okay, so maybe a little more than the title.

I have heard a lot about Soviet commanders ordering men to their certain deaths, and a general "human wave" attitude that did not aim to mitigate losses.

How true is this? If true, was this a necessity or a choice on the part of the Soviet command? How would the casualty numbers / course of the war be different if more conservative doctrines were used?

I've been reading Suetonius' "Twelve Caesars" and it mentions several times about "dark cloaks" essentially being sketchy as hell. Why is this? Were dark cloaks the hoodies of the Roman period?

The phrase and concept pops up all the time in reference to the English in popular culture and seems to have been embraced by the English themselves. How, where, and when did this perception get its start and come to be regarded as a quintessential quality?

Aside from the Windtalkers, has US military strategy ever appeared unique to its foes and was this due to its experience with fighting constantly with the Native Americans? I'm very curious because it seems like the US was created in a very unique environment.

Compared to Germany and Britain how was France able to maintain low population growth? Were they practicing abortions or using contraceptives?

The Crusades have always been seen an an important event from the Christian/European side of the conflict. It seems like they were involved in the formation of the ideas of 'Christendom' and of 'Europe', and they've always loomed large in European history, whether they were viewed as heroic adventures, imperialist invasions, or just groups of hoodlums run amok.

Are they seen as a major event on the Islamic side? Were they always seen that way? It seems like they could have been dwarfed in Islamic history by the invasions of the Mongols and Turks, internal infighting, and other wars on other borders. Relative to the size of the Islamic world, the Crusaders could have been seen as a bit of a side show.

Is the 'importance' of the Crusades inflated in Europe? And, possibly, inflated elsewhere by the subsequent spread of European culture and therefore their version of history?

It seems like I'm asking a question of degree (I'm sure the Muslim world didn't forget the Crusades, after all...), so let rephrase the question: an average educated Westerner would have a pretty good idea when and where the Crusades were, what they were about, etc. That would also have been true in, say, 1800. Would the same be true for an educated Muslim, both now and in 1800 (ie. before exposure to 'Western history')?

I half remember that in Medieval Europe there was a collection of nine or twelve notable mythical/historical characters that was a collection of pagan and christian characters. They were made into statues in churches and King Arthur and I think Charlemagne were members. Does this ring any bells for those medieval historians out there?

I'd imagine grown nails wouldn't fare well while working farm tools or holding a sword. Did they have ancient nail clippers? And when were the first nail clippers invented?