I'm taking a Research Methods in History class this semester. Essentially it guides you through writing 18-20 pages of original history over the course of 13 weeks. I don't know anything about the Old West that doesn't come from Clint Eastwood movies and Red Dead Redemption. Additionally, I've never put any thought into writing a culinary history before. With that said, I figured I would turn to the experts for some pointers on what to look for. My goal is to investigate the confluence of many different immigrant and native cultures into "Western" cooking. My instructor pointed me towards the state (Nebraska) historical archives and said that it may be fruitful to look for cookbooks, restaurant menus, and the like.

Any style, any era. What are the techniques used to build a castle?

After all weren't there Greeks and Armenians and all sorts of other groups rocking it up in the Anatolia A.D.? did they just pick up every man woman and child and move, or did they mix in with the natives?

I'm reading From Plato to Nato by David Gress, out of pure curiosity, and am having trouble understanding the concept of a grand narrative. If it helps, here's the context in which Gress uses it:

Liberty grew because it served the interests of power. This apparent paradox was the core of Western identity. It was obscured by the conventional account of that identity, the account that I have dubbed the "Grand Narrative." This account rightly saw liberty as a fundamental to the West, but mistakenly defined liberty as an abstract, philosophical principle, which it then traced through a series of great books and great ideas divorced from passions and politics back to classical Greece.

Through Googling, I'm interpreting it as a perspective that historians/scholars see how the Western world (ethics, morals, identity, etc) has formed. Am I right?

Or,

is the Grand Narrative a history of Western civilization accepted by most historians/scholars?

I'm a 90's kid, but I do have an understanding and appreciation for world history so you don't have to explain to me like I'm five, just to save you the trouble.

Thank you in advance for reading my concern.

Edit 1: Provided additional information. Edit 2: Grammar

The book is supposedly a meditation on the decline of empire as reflected in the fortunes of a fictional clan, but it's likely written sometime in the era of Kangxi-Qianlong which was a period of prosperity. Why would such a book be written at such a time and why would it elicit an adoring response from its audience? Why is there a cottage industry around the book that's survived into contemporary times?

Can apply to any purchases of land between two nations.

Were they deported? We they allowed to do whatever they wanted? Did they become citizens of the nations they were now in?

Wouldn't any regular soldier working at these camps be completely disgusted.

I was in a book shop today looking for something to read, when I came across the History section. There were all this books about different topics, but I wasn't sure which authors were good, so I end up not buying anything.

The topics I'm interested are:

·The middle ages, and history of Europe in general up to the XX
century.

·Accurate Historical novels from the greeks, romans and onwards.

Thank you guys!

Why does English language etymology seem to show so many words with Latin or Greek origin? Perhaps I just don't notice words of Germanic roots.

And/or more generally in and around that area and time period.

Cadences, the oft raunchy and sometimes macabre but catchy tunes that the US Army personel sing whilst running have fascinated me for a good many years now, but I have never wondered as to where they come from. If anybody here could answer this query, that'd be swell.

When the factories' exhaust, horse dung, and general lack of regular bathing/deodorant are combined, I have to imagine that cities of that era didn't smell very nice. How bad would this be compared to the way cities smell today? Are there any well-researched resources detailing how cities dealt with these problems?

I have been listening to Dan Carlin's podcast about the mongols (Wrath of the Khans) and it's really getting quite silly. It's like a novel written by a 10 year old (not the way Dan tells the story, but more about what the story is about). "And the mongols were the BEST at this, and the BEST at that, and they had spies and engineers and horses and were the fastest and then one time in this battle they got outnumbered 20 to 1 but they won anyway because they're the best" - i am exaggerating but you get the point. They are described as being vastly better than any enemy they face and there's -nothing- that can stop them.

Did the mongols have any weakness?

Certain commanders of the Second World War (Patton, Monty, Rommel and Zhukov come to mind) are practically household names today. I'm wondering how famous they were during the war.

The troops under their command all knew who they were, presumably, but what about other troops or people at home? Would civilians recognize them at a glance? Today, Patton is probably more famous than Marshall, but would rank have made Marshall more famous at the time?