Hello /r/AskHistorians, for part of my college course I need to write a 4000 word Extended Essay so I chose to write it on the Punic Wars. I know this isn't a subreddit to be asking for help on homework/college work but I'm here to ask help on finding reliable primary and secondary sources on Punic Wars. I have already found a few myself (books/accounts by Polybius and Appian).

I would be very grateful if someone would be able to direct me to any more sources on the Punic Wars and/or if they are knowledgeable on said Wars what would be useful to write about.

I just finished watching The Pacific and this question kept coming up in my head. For most of the islands the US solders would land and take the island's airfield which was the most important reason for taking the island. While taking the airfields was costly it seemed like the most horrendous fighting came afterwards; the primarily infantry led 'eradication' of the remaining japanese deep in the island who were dug into amazing cave systems in horrible terrain.

What I don't understand is why the US forces couldn't advance just far enough to protect the air field, set up a very strong defensive line and basically just siege the Japanese until they starved. Once the US gained a foothold the Japanese armor and foot attacks seemed ineffective at breaking through a strong US perimeter and the casualty ratio was incredibly higher for the Japanese when the Japanese tried to rush US lines than vice versa. Once the US controlled the airfield the Japanese generally lost naval control of the area and any hope of resupply or air support and without those I don't see how they posed much of a threat anymore as long as they were kept bottled up.

So why did the US military have to make such costly offenses to take the rest of the island rather than just siege and slowly attrition them as they made their costly offensives into US territory or simply starved to death/ran out of ammunition? Am I underestimating how much of a threat the remaining Japanese soldiers on the island were? Would they really have been able to inflict more damage/casualties if the Americans had just played defensively once they took the airfield asset? I understand there would still be casualties in keeping them bottled up, but I find it hard to believe they would be anywhere close to the casualties suffered by going on the offensive and taking out bunker by bunker.

There's a bit in the 2004 Alexander movie where they imply the Greeks had never encountered monkeys before

Hello /r/AskHistorians, this is my first time posting to this subreddit. I am here to ask for help with a research paper that I need to write for a college class. I know this is not the place to be asking for homework help. However, all I need help with is for someone who is familiar with the history of U.S. education to please direct me to some reliable sources which I will read an analyze, and then come here with the right questions. I have done some research but I am having trouble finding reliable sources (my research skills are not the best). So far, my actual questions would be:

How were blacks and Hispanics treated (policy wise) during the first half of the 20th century. My understanding is that Blacks were thought only capable of menial labor, and Hispanics were directed towards technical trades (car mechanics and such) and not allowed to go to university.

If someone could please direct me to the right sources I would greatly appreciate it.

I thank you all for taking the time to read this.

I remember hearing a teacher back when I was in grade school saying something about the United States being either entirely forested from coast to coast or everything east of the Mississippi River was forest. I can't remember which was said (it was years and years ago).

I do remember him saying that it was through the westward movement of settlers, the trees were cut down and prairies were developed etc.

I never heard anything after that one time and I'm curious if there is any truth to it.

I was just studying for an exam for my Greek culture class, and realized that if Herodotus is the only historian who documented the events, not only does he often exaggerate, but he may be missing events that were more important on the Persian side of the war.

So are there any Persian writers who documented the events of the war? And how trustworthy would their accounts be?

I need 2 different events for a timeline inbetween 1960 and 1990, and one recent event that has to do with Canada and promoting human rights.

Thanks!

Was Palestinian land bought by the Israeli people, and did many Palestinians leave willingly, or was it all by force? This poster was saying that it was identical to the Trail of Tears.

Especially the little zaps you sometimes get when touching certain objects or even people.

Historically. How did someone engage in a duel wielding a scimitar? It's really hard to find an answer online about fencing techniques used with curved swords that isn't the fantastic whirling dervish technique.

I've been watching the showtime show, I know there is very little accuracy in it, but I've become pretty interested in him as a person and his life. What is best book that can teach me more about him?

Their numbers must have been great to achieve all their victories, I'm curious how the aftermath of their invasion influenced today's demographics in Europe.

I learned recently that Spain used 'reconcentration' camps during the war, and America had their own version of a camp in the Philippines. I'd like to know if others exist or have existed. Thank you.

If I rolled my eyes to Thomas Jefferson, would he know what I meant? What about the "give me a break" look? Sexy eyes?

I think without understanding Bernoulli's principle, wing design, etc. one could still manage to "discover" flight by experimentation. E.g. holding your hand out when traveling at speed you feel the effects of lift change as you change the angle of attack wind => your hand.

From my understanding, around Jesus's time there was quite a bit of tension between the Jewish population in Judea and the Romans, thanks to uprisings and revolutions against the Romans by the Jews. So I imagine that the Romans would be a bit touchy about Jews arming themselves. Would Jesus's followers been able to buy swords so easily? Would they have had to visit the black market or something? And what kind of sword would they be able to buy?