Ive heard diffrent accounts of what he did. I heard that he had a mental breakdown and left moscow. When The rest of the USSR leadership came to get him he though that they where there to arrest him for failing his duties but they have actually come to ask him to return to moscow. I also heard that story was a myth. So which is true?

Any good recommendations for media/literature that breaks down the history of our nation’s ages? (i.e. gilded, progressive)

Was Victoria the first queen regnant that succeeded to the throne following her contemporary laws of succession? My point is Mary I/Elizabeth I got to the throne by right of conquest, it can be said the same about Mary II and Anne. I don’t count Mathilda nor Jane.

It won’t allow me to attach the picture here but I got this bandanna. I got it a hippie commune and it had a picture of an eagle/Shiba or Buddha. I’m not sure, but if anybody that knows about that kind of stuff that can help please message me.

These were, after all, World Wars for a reason. During World War II at least, most of South America stayed neutral and took no part. So did Spain, however, Spain still suffered because of fascists Hitler supported.

Also, the greatest economic powers in the world (USA, British Empire, France, China and Russia) all took part in both of these wars - most of the neutral countries in both World Wars were economically and socially less advanced, and thus dependent on trade with these larger superpowers. I imagine economic crash and destruction after both WWs must have left an impact even on the neutral parties.

Like, obviously, I realize a Quechua native living in Bolivia during 1930s and 1940s was spared the absolute worst a Serb in Croatia or a Chinese in Manchuria was forced to live through (if they would at all). But I cannot see how a Quechua native wouldn’t have his life change in any possible way because of the War.

This is, of course, just a hypothetical example I made. But did neutral countries (not just in South America) suffer despite their neutrality?

Thank you in advance!

Not a heavy hitting question here, but a bit of a mystery. I have ornaments handmade by my German grandmother with ‘1887’ written on them. Googling this leads to a bunch of other ornaments with the same mark, but no explanation of the origins. My grandmother is unfortunately not around for me to ask her. Any ideas? A lot of them seem to be Germanic in origin but that’s all I’ve got.

I know they would have male slaves in the house and such but I assume it would be the slave of the family or a male. But could a female actually own a male slave for themselves as like a bodyguard or even just to bang. I know noble women would pay to sleep with Gladators but I assume that was behind closed doors.

I’m writing a story and I thought it would be interesting if I just took a bunch of “lost kingdoms” and put them on the map and see how they all interact with each other. Names, approximate size and location is enough but any extra detail would be appreciated.

I'm sure there must be many. I'm looking for a book or in depth article that is relatively accessible. But basically looks at different economic policies that have been implemented over the past 100 or so years. To see what has had the desired effect.

For example, looking at how Keynesianism or Hayeks ideas actually worked in practice. Or indeed many of the other theories I'm not aware of that have influenced chancellors, presidents, prime ministers and national banks etc.

They later hated him? Respected? Both?

Yeah, I know the answer is yes EVENTUALLY, but assuming he doesn’t die of malaria and kept campaigning, was there someone that could’ve stood up to him?

My only thought is maybe fledging Rome? But they’re far too small at that stage to be much. But, who else?

I am not sure if this is well studied, but I am curious to know if there is like one thing that usaully depicts who will win a war before it starts, is it usually who has a bigger economy, more men, or better technology? I know its likely a mix of factors, but is there one that stands out?

You can rank civilization too like mayan which doesn't exist anymore

In America, we are taught that the Wright brothers were the first to achieve flight in 1903. However, I was taught in college that that is a nationalist American narrative employed to strip the French Montgolfiers of their glory for their hot air balloon flights in 1782. Does this really just come down to nationalist propaganda or is there meaningful differences between the two modes of flight that nullify the Montgolfiers’ achievements?

I've been watching Dune: Prophecy which takes place 10,000 years before the events of the movies. It really seemed silly when the main characters had surnames of the main characters from the movies and have the same family allegiances and grievances.

I get that it's fiction, but it's hard for me to suspend disbelief here. Even if there are people alive today that can trace their lineage back 1,000 years, they probably wouldn't have the same surname or titles, property, social status, etc. as their ancestors. Even the British Monarchy is currently a family house established only about 100 years ago. And looking at it as something futuristic, since they're a space-faring feudal empire and all, it still seems weird because like there are no Disneys around anymore, and the Waltons don't run Walmart, and Elon Musk has like 50 kids who all hate him. Dynasties don't seem to last.

So how reasonable is it for two family lines to continue over several thousand years with the same name and identity and general social status? Are there any family dynasties that we can point to today and be like, "Yeah, you're a direct continuation of what your ancestors in the Dark Ages were up to." rather than just so-and-so is a descendant of Charlemagne?

In honour of a certain pardon carried out today, I thought I’d ask which rulers are famous for incidents where they chose justice over kin? Ideally a direct descendant or close relative.

Hello everyone,

I’m working on a project for school that involves analyzing how U.S. newspapers discussed immigration after two key historical events: the Haitian Revolution (late 1700s) and the Mexican-American War (mid-1800s). Specifically, I need to find two newspaper articles:

Haitian Immigration (Post-Haitian Revolution): I’m looking for articles from the early 1800s that discuss Haitian refugees or immigrants coming to the United States, particularly focusing on those arriving in New Orleans, Charleston, or other southern cities. These articles could highlight the political, racial, or social reactions to Haitian immigration after the revolution.

Mexican Immigration (Post-Mexican-American War): I need articles from around 1848 to 1860 that cover Mexican immigration into the United States, especially after the Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo and during the California Gold Rush. Articles that discuss how Mexicans were framed or portrayed in newspapers from places like Texas, California, or New York would be great.

If anyone has suggestions on where I could find these types of articles or if you’ve come across relevant resources, I’d really appreciate the help! I'm focusing on both positive and negative portrayals of these immigrant groups, so any sources discussing themes like race, labor, or criminalization would be especially useful.

Thanks in advance for your help!

A lot of conservatives claim that Republicans freed the slaves, hence Lincoln. If this were the case, was there ever a time where blacks and non-whites predominantly voted Republican? I know that today most people of color vote Democrat.

Hi, I'm a fifteen year old writer who is writing a fantasy book with the monarchies and governments being modeled after old english monarchies. I have a family that is concidered a noble family, though there is no actual royal family (lil confusing Ik, but its a weird world). Anyways, the families heir is the eldest brother Amnon, who has two children Cain and Eden who are the youngest of the family. Amnon's little brother Abel had four daughters who are all older then Cain and Eden. If Cain, the heir, is disinheirted, who would become the next heir once passed on? Could Amnon name his daughter as the heir (expecially if he marries her off)? Would the title go to the eldest female cousin? or one of the cousins husbands? They don't really have any other family and they don't want the house to no longer exist. Its tradition for the heir to pass on the title to the next by the time they meet a certian age or the next heir reaches the age of fifteen because by then the previous heir has already been ruling over the house for a while, the heir typically gets married age 15 to 20 and it gives time for the family to decide if they are a good heir before they reach seventeen at which age it cannot be reversed.

Any answer you can give I am very grateful for!!

EDIT: I'm thinking of having Eden married off so the line is passed to her and her husband, so Amnon can still have a lot of control of the family being her father. The reason I am questioning just giving the line to Eden is because in the world they are taught male heirs are the most important thing and are way above any female relative (AKA their sexist)

Hi, I am not really sure where to ask this but I am currently doing an art series honoring women who were abused, betrayed, neglected, assaulted, etc by their own father (or even just a father figure). I was actually going to focus on women who were specifically sexually abused by their fathers but I can’t find any, so I’m broadening it. I know there are so many women out there who have suffered from this, but why are their stories so hard to find? I have found a couple of criminal cases and fictional women who fit the bill, such as Iphigenia, but not many. If anyone could help point me in the right direction I would very much appreciate it!

Meaning a massive global power like Rome or any top dog power where they were toppled or nearly toppled in what was or could have been totally changed timeline going forward

Was there some kind of political/economic advantage? Or was it simply an aversion to new things, with the Chinese establishment trying to preserve the present social/class balance? Or was it really an ideology held by the Qing government that anything that wasn't Chinese was lesser?

I'm working on a comic book set during the 17th century, and currently the characters are taking a boat in the Thames, but I'm not sure what sort of ships would be sailing there besides rowboats.

I'm wondering if there is any prolonged conflict where one side was very confident, and perhaps the other side were like "we doomed" but the end up winning still.

I'm guessing they varied from looking rlly tall and rlly black, almost like the south Sudanese, to looking like those ''light skinned black people'' with straight noses and small lips, like some Ethiopians.

Also, I must clarify, that even though I am interested in their physical appearance. I am also interested in; Their economy, their institutions, their culture, their warfare, their religion & their relationships with Egypt & Kush.

I want to start a club at school for year 9-13 (ages 12- 17) and need some questions, as topics for the sessions

So far I got some ideas:

• who is the most evil person in history?
• what was the worst event to ever happen in history?