Correct me if I'm wrong, but Spain had a huge empire and were extremely rich in the age of discovery (16th-early 17th century I think). Yet, after the Napoleonic wars they weren't even included in the concert of Europe-What led,to this decline in power? Was it something to do with the 30 years' war??

Does anyone have to recommend to learn more about carthage

Nowadays, we have all the fruit we want, whenever we want it, in the supermarket. But did people eat fruits in winter, in countries where it was frequently freezing?

My understanding of their difference is limited as the SS was party's private army while Wehrmacht was national army. Was there any difference in equipment, doctrine, recruitment, ideology etc. besides the "SS was more elite" and the SS marched alongside Wehrmacht during the war?

Thanks.

I don't know all that much on the topic so I might be confused as to how exactly the recipe was 'lost' and maybe I don't correctly understand the interaction between the West and Eastern empires. Thanks for taking the time to read this.

Everybody in England loves St. George and he is a source of great patriotism but from what I can see, he shouldn't have anything to do with my country? Please explain, I'm befuddled.

Thankyou!

Oh man embarrassing grammar in the title - can't work out how to change..

edit:

I know I gave example of atrocities in the thread title so this is what most people are replying about: I am also interested in any historical issue where there is a consensus amongst non western countries not accepted by the west. I also don't want this topic just to be about scenarios where historical events aren't accepted on nationalist grounds.

I feel western historians probably all have certain things in common. They have centuries of similar intellectual traditions; from capitalism, liberalism, christianity, the greek/roman canon, philosophical ideas, scientific ideas, etc etc...features which no doubt inform their thought, even subconsciously . Western historians come from countries which have dominated economically, have (or have had) dominant relations with the rest of the world ( i.e. colonialism/empire etc). I am interested in how these events have shaped western historians views, and whether non-western intellectual traditions/experiences have shaped different views of events.

I would expect differences in social and economic history particularly..

edit2: Sorry mods for all the work..

Did they have different tactics before Peter the great? I'm really interested in Russian colonization, because so often we only look at the Europeans form of colonization but it's not commonly known that the Russians colonized as well

Is there any evidence showing that the Central Powers could have been successful if the U.S. hadn't gotten involved.

Living in the modern world, the only depictions of Jesus I see are of some white guy or pictures explicitly meant as a reminder that he didn't actually look like that. Are there any surviving renditions from before he was white-washed?

Thank you all for the responses. But my query was more India centric in the sense that what conditions led to so much fragmentation in the Indian subcontinent in terms of language, culture etc. (this is my first post on reddit so pls excuse me if I'm not doing it right)

In particular, the Middle East

I've heard that it was divided into British, French, American, and Soviet zones, much like Germany, but not much else. Could someone give me some more details about the economic, political, and social history of Austria after WW2?

I've been doing some reading on here and it seems that at various points in history, Russia was allied with many different western European countries. When did it start becoming more distant with the West? It seems it started happening before WW2, but I know that wasn't the first time Russia had friction with Western powers.

I always see in movies where the generals/kings/leaders are along side their army, in the thick of the action fighting along side their soldiers. Now I know to take movies with a grain of salt in terms of historical value, but did this actually happen? I just can't seem to picture kings getting in the action of the battles. Are there any accounts of very highly ranked individuals, even royalty fighting with their army?

It's not like they didn't have contact with us before that, and it's not like you need to wear a neck tie to use a revolver or build a steam engine

I have tried for a few years now to find a photo of a castle my grandfather was stationed near during WWII with no success. He is getting older and I am running out of options, it would mean the world to him. He was in the 22nd Infantry Regiment of the 4th Infantry Division. He remembers being near this castle but not allowed to visit it. He believes it was in Germany and near a rail line, there was also a creek/stream at the foot of the hill it sat on. I thought it was Altenberg Castle near Bamberg, Germany but he claims this isn't it. Does anyone know the path that this regiment took through the war and what castle(s) it could potentially be?

The Korean Conflict is still very much going on, yet most people can’t tell you squat about North Korea. Except that their Leader looks like the guy from Gangnam Style. Why do most classes not discuss The Korean conflict and the implications that it has caused.