I consider myself well versed in most things American History, but until recently, I had never even heard of the Barbary Wars... What was the build-up to, the concurrent view of, and resolution to the Barbary wars? Who were the Barbary Pirates? Where they calling for/living by Sharia Law?

And, on a side note, why are the Barbary Wars largely ignored in the education system (or alternately, is my experience unique in never having been taught about them?)

My grandfather, who passed away before I was born, fought for Canada in World War 2. From what I've gathered, he never talked about his time fighting. Never ever. All I know is that his chest was riddled with bullet holes, and had been hospitalized several times throughout his tour.

Do any of you historians and history buffs know of a resource where I could possibly trace his military career? I would appreciate it very much. 45 years ago today Canada declared war on the Nazis, and I really want to know how my family was involved in the conflict!

During the Vietnam Conflict, the NVA never really won any battles that I'm aware of. They harassed the US forces in the field, used up a nearly endless supply of cannon fodder, and supplemented the Viet Cong after it was destroyed.

Given the repressive NV regime, it's not like it would be hard to keep an army together. Funded by the Chinese and Russians, I see the NVA as little more than a clothed Khmer Rouge. It's not like the Vietnamese conscripted had anyplace else to go in SouthEast Asia. "Charlie had only two ways home. Death, or victory."

Where am I wrong? Giap just lasted, is that an achievement (sure it is, but many others have.)

Giap was probably not that great of a general, or we will never given it was asymetrical warfare?

Can I hear an example of a manuever he pulled off or exploit of his that would qualify him as a great General? Or was his achievement more administrative/strategic/leadership?

I think the United States press corps over-estimated the NVA, particularly Giap. They whined and cried after Tet, when it was clear within a couple of weeks that the US had annihilated the Viet Cong, re-claimed Hue at extreme cost to the Vietnamese Army and VC, and essentially destroyed all the forces used in the offensive except those used to tie up troops out in the field. The NVA used in pitched battle were defeated.

I understand the diplomatic aspect of getting the Western press worried about US victory, but is this really a military achievement?

Edit: Thanks for the excellent answers redditors.

I was asked by a mod to submit this as a separate question.

There is a lot of misinformation, even from contemporary sources, about just went on in Ancient Rome.

It seems difficult to talk about Rome without stumbling across descriptions of orgies and horrendous banquets where people ate animals stuffed with all manner of things, that give a view of a wanton society with no morals. But was it really as bad as all that?

Of course it wasn't actually that way. Or was it? Did the Victorians put their own moralizing twist on Roman society like they did on knights? How would the personal life/sex life of an average Roman compare to the picture we have today- centered on the aristocracy, and assuming that anything goes?

I read somewhere that he's considered the richest man in history, but I can't find any detail about his wealth.

How rich was he? How does it compare to today's money?

Because I thought that paternity would have to based on the truthfulness of the person claiming male parentage...whereas maternity would be unarguable...

(did I use the correct terms?)

We're all well aware of the death toll for the first and second world wars or any other large-scale conflict, but what about the Cold War, which seemed more of a psychological game between nations? It spanned decades and involved political machinations and espionage and an incredibly paranoid environment of fear and distrust in the halls of the powerful in the major powers during the middle part of the 20th Century, but how many deaths can be directly attributed to the Cold War itself? A handful of assassinations and suicides I can guess at, but were there any larger conflicts or massacres that were could be classed as an event in this category?

I have a very, very rough idea of how a combination of Lutheran ideals (Cuius regio, eius religio) and Prussian values ("Lerne leiden ohne zu klagen'" bravery without self pity) contributed to German submission to state if you will, but can someone expound on that?

Why did the Germans in particular seem to put such emphasis on these ideals when other Europeans nations (France for example) were so revolutionary and "people minded?"

Why is "the" added into his name? Not like there was William the Wallace

It must have happend some when after the middle ages. But I am just wondering how it came to be. That the most well known fancy tea lovers where viewed as that.

I'm somewhat aware of the fact that there were a large number of explorers, conquerors, and settlers throughout the past few centuries, but I'm curious if it was common for presumably wealthy individuals, groups, or families to travel across continents for leisure.

To what extent did people travel simply for the sake of travel? Were seasonal "vacation" homes common outside of the Roman summer villas I have heard about? Did these folks keep a "home base" in their native country to return to? Were there notable periods when individuals could not even travel safely from country to country?

From the first urban households to receive power through rural electrification several decades later, how did consumers pay their electric bill? Was there even a fee for the service in its infancy?
If you have any information on how people were convinced to pay for the new service, that would also be very interesting.

Hello Everyone!

Today we’re going to be having a workshop to go over some pointers on formatting a submission to better ensure that it gets visibility and the kind of answer that you are hoping for. We get hundreds of questions a week, and having yours stand out can go a long way to getting the response you are hoping for. While these aren't hard rules about structuring a submission for this subreddit, and violating them generally won't result in the removal of your post, in our experience, these factors can make a big difference.

TITLES

The most important thing is the title of course! The best titles put forward a clear question that will tell a potential respondent not just what you want to know, but the period and place you are looking for (Who, What, When, Where). If you have multiple sub-questions, throw those in the body of the post. A few examples of good titles:

During World War II, how successful were Japanese codebreakers at deciphering American communications?

What was the reasoning behind the Western Roman Empire’s decision to allow such massive German immigration?

How did Anthony Comstock become such a powerful figure that his name became a verb?

After opening their borders to foreign trade in 1633, why did Japan change course and close them again only a few years later?

And some less than stellar examples:

Tell me about Rome! (Even if the body text includes information to narrow it down, the title doesn’t advertise what you are asking)

Is my friend wrong about this? (Even more vague. You can talk about why you asked the question in the body, but should keep it out of the title, and use that space for what you are actually asking about.)

Status of women in Athens during the "Golden Age" (Gives a general sense of what you are asking about, but not a question, per se)

How much leave home could a British soldier expect to get during the year, if any? Did it vary for officer v. enlisted? Did the point in the war matter? How many went AWOL when home? (Cluttered list of questions that should have been in the body, with the first one being the title by itself!)

did gengis khan realy knock up haf of asia (While we are understanding of the fact English isn’t everyone’s first language, attempting to use proper grammar, spelling, and punctuation can make a big difference.)

Body

So you have an awesome title for your post, but you can still add some body text. It is by no means required to do so, especially if you have a nice clear title, but if you have any background information - Why you are interested in the question, what you have already learned about the topic, relevant image, etc. - or if you have subquestions to include, this is the place for them! To use one of the example titles, a good body text for the first question might be:

So I recently read about the Battle of Midway and how the US intelligence played such a key role in the fleet being ready to take on the Japanese. It got me wondering how successful the Japanese were in their own efforts. So a few questions on the matter I’d love to see answered!

• Were the Japanese able to break the American codes?

• If so, how aware were the Americans of this fact?

• Did they enjoy any success against other Allies powers in the Pacific, such as the UK or the Netherlands?

• Were there any notable successes in the war that could be attributed to their code breaking?

Keywords

While this rehashes much of what we’ve already gone over, as some of you know, many of the flaired users on this site subscribe to an alert system that will tell them if a question has shown up in their field! It works by doing periodic searches for words or phrases that they have specified. So if you are asking about the Civil War, make sure that you have “Civil War” in the title or the body of the post. Again, as a rule of thumb, “Who, What, When, Where” should all be readily apparent to the reader and any potential respondent (unless of course one is totally not applicable).

A Note on the “I Am A…” Question Style

Many people like asking questions in the first person - “I am a French peasant in 1789. How does the Revolution affect my daily life over the next decade?”. And while it is very possible to write a question like that and follow all the suggestions I've made previously, it is amazing how divisive opinions on that phrasing can be! People seem to either love it or hate it. Now, I won’t tell you not to ask that way if it is what you like, but I will include a note of caution that it has the potential to turn away some potential respondents, as many feel that it places an unnecessary constraint on the answer. And generally when they do answer them, more often than not they will just ignore that and rephrase it in their mind anyways - “How did the French Revolution affect the daily life of peasants?”.

So that is all for today folks. Please feel free to flood us with your questions! We're here to help!

I think it's obvious how it happened in Russia or Germany, but what about countries like Spain, France or Great Britain?

Aztecs carried out human sacrifices to appease their gods. The Roman Catholic Church had the Inquisition, tortures, witch hunts, Galileo's trial, etc. Islam has the jihads. Many wars and other atrocities have been committed (and still are) in the name of religions. Since I am Greek, I have been given the impression that Orthodox Christians were always the good guys, the martyrs, the persecuted, the victims. Have there been any generally considered "crimes"/atrocities that are attributed to the Orthodox Church?