It seems as though the UK and the USA have been allied forever, but presumably there was a period in which the two nations had some animosity. How long did this last, and what were the key factors/events in the two countries patching things up?

So on this sub, especially in the FAQ around Guns Germs and Steel, there are many many posts of flaired users saying how tired they are of hearing the debunked 'myth' of European diseases taking heavy tolls on Native populations in the Americas. Yet I've never encountered that claim outside of this sub.

I'm currently reading a book that recently came out, This Land is Their Land by David Silverman, and he's discussing the heavy toll diseases took on the New England indigenous populations during the first continuous contact in the 1600s. I'm frustrated because there seems to be such a disconnect from this sub and wider literature. Can someone help me understand what the disconnect is?

  Hi, I just finished up my last semester of my bachelors degree in history and I am trying to decide whether a masters is worth it. I stayed home for my undergrad and have no student debt, so I am not too concerned about the cost of it.
  I am not particularly interested in teaching as a profession or even working in a history related field. I can see myself working in public service. I have done a couple of internships for the government in my home province in Canada. 
   As the youngest of 10 grand children and the only one without a masters or higher, I am looking to get a higher degree. It is something I’ve always wanted to do and it would make my family proud. I know a masters in public admin for example, would better suit my careers goals, but I am just not motivated to continue my education with that. Am I foolish to get a masters in history just because I want to have a masters?

Hello,

I'm preparing a historiographical essay and have been stumped with my sources. I'm looking for authors that specifically shaped the way history was viewed regarding the "industrialists of Nazi Germany". Currently I have a big few names: Henry Turner, David Abraham, Peter Hayes, and Gerald Feldman. I'm looking for more names that were important to the discussion of the industrialists in Nazi Germany. Would anyone here have any good recommendations for authors that published scholarly works regarding the industrialists in Nazi Germany?

I understand there are many regional accents (both in the UK and US), and I understand Quebec got its accent from rural France and evolved further on its own.

I’m wondering for the US, when did the accents from Britain (since the days of the colonies) start develop on its own and how?

Hi and thanks in advance for your help.

I'm doing a bit of creative writing and wanted to source something I heard of once, but I'm not getting anything on google.

Back when I was in seminary years and years ago, a professor said something that, though I don't remember word for word, the jist of which stuck with me.

We were in a New Testament Exegesis class, and he made an offhand comment along these lines of: "And how did the Britism Museum get it? The way they get everything. They stole it!"

He went to explain how in a certain monastery on the continent, some very old fragments of the New Testament were lent to representatives of the British Museum (they were trying to be good academic "sports"), fragments that would have been hand copied by monks of the same monastery centuries earlier.

Supposedly, the British Museum has never returned these manuscripts. The way I remember my professor tell it, there is a door in the monastary with a letter posted on it: a letter from the British Museum stating when the document would be returned.

Anybody have an inkling of what I made me remembering (or misremembering)? If so...

1. In that monastery in what country might this have happened?

2. What was the text borrowed (as in, was is *John's Gospel)?

3. In what year did this happen?

4. Was the loan for free or for a price?

This for a book I'm writing and, though it's fiction, I like to have my research ducks in a row.

Again, thank you historians!

I am trying to research buildings and roads that existed in 17th century England. Does anybody know what resources are available for that? Any help would be appreciated, thanks.

Or is this an ahistorical impression?

I'm super interested in the rock interregnum that took place during the early '60s in the U.S. What accounted for the "death" of rock and roll during that period? Is it simply nothing more than Elvis' stint in the army? Why the sudden popularity of idiotic novelty songs and movie themes during this time? Is there any cultural or history signposts that point to the resurgence of the popularity of guitar-based rock in 1963/4?

Could anyone explain the 1948 intra-European payments agreement within the Marshall plan clearly, I’m writing about it for a paper but I keep confusing myself

From what I understand European countries amounted massive debts with each other and the USA allocated funds as part of the Marshall plan to facilitate multilateral trade but only member countries of the OEEC were eligible

So the US gave aid, in the form of dollars, to a creditor member country for the amount that they were owed, with the rule that to receive the dollars they had to give the equivalent value in their country’s currency to the debtor member country;

but if this happened then the creditor/ debtor relationship would be destroyed but no one would be better off. Couldn’t the whole of the OEEC member countries just have agreed to write off everyone’s debt and they’d have the same outcome? Am I missing something?

Were they independent of the city state that founded them, effectively making them just a new city, or was it like imperial colonialism of the industrial European states where the original sponsor controlled it from afar.

Here is Cicero from De Legibus:

“For it appears to me that among the many exceptional and divine things your Athens has produced and contributed to human life, nothing is better than those Mysteries. For by means of them we have been transformed from a rough and savage way of life to the state of humanity, and been civilized. Just as they are called initiations, so in actual fact we have learned from them the fundamentals of life, and have grasped the basis not only for living with joy, but also for dying with a better hope.”

So Greece created democracy, philosophy, and whole lot of great art, but the thing the Romans appreciated most was whatever sort of experience they had at the temple of Eleusis outside Athens?

Lots of ancient sources talk about whatever it was that they were doing there vaguely. An inscription from Eleusis reads, "Beautiful indeed is the Mystery given us by the blessed gods: death is for mortals no longer an evil, but a blessing," so the experience seemed to take away a fear of death.

When the Christians started trying to destroy the temple and end the Mysteries, Vettius Agorius Praetextatus, who had been initiated at Eleusis, said destroying the rites “would make the life of the Greeks unlivable” and argued that the temple was the one place that “holds the whole human race together.”

Marcus Aurelius was no spendthrift, and not given to flights of fancy, but when the temple of Eleusis was destroyed by a barbarian raid into Greece, he paid to have it rebuilt immediately, and went there himself.

Do we know why Cicero and so many others ranked the experience they had at Eleusis so highly? Why did they think it was so important to keep it going? Why did they view it as a civilizing force? What exactly went on there?

Things like the Wendigo or SKinwalkers have become a popular horror movie/story theme. Did Native American folklore influence the early settlers and lead to new horror stories, or is it more recent appropriation?

Could someone please tell me how it was possible that Belgium became independent after the London Conference if 3 parties (Russia, Austria and Prussia) opposed it and only 2 (Britain and France) were pro?

Thanks in advance

- Confused student

Were they generally supportive or against the Austro-Hungarian government?

I would assume that there would have been refugees as the Byzantine Empire was slowly losing its influence and I think that it would have been a difficult task to find refuge in the other major Christian kingdoms as they were Catholic (except for Russia).

And what about the Byzantines who remained in Constantinople and surrendered to the Ottomans, what happened to them? Were they converted, executed or simply allowed to live but without the privilege of being called Romans or members of the Orthodox Church?

The Crusades were meant to be a united religious attempt to reliberate important Christian kingdoms while also to limit the spread and power of their main opposing, the Caliphates and later the Ottomans.

And as time went by, the attempts to liberate these cities were less successful than desired and even led to other disasters like the Battle of Zara and the attack of Constantinople which were both Christian cities.

Given that this was a divide between powers that were both Christian and did not want to allow the Islam force to spread as the Byzantine Empire was slowly losing its influence and strength as time went on, where there any attempts of either the Roman Catholic church, or the Orthodox Church to unite the two Churches after the East-West Schism in an attempt to unify against a common threat?