Hi i am doing a history project on causes and first days of Chernobyl disaster and need a good book source aswell as 2 documentaries

Thanks in advance

I got into a big argument with friends over dinner. We were talking about a statue of a German general in Tanzania. One guy said the German colonists were viewed in a favorable light in former German East Africa whereas the Germans did "less than laudable" things in former German Southwest Africa. I'm a history teacher and said if any of my students would write such BS I'd give them an F. I took special offence over the wording about the atrocities the Germans committed in the colonies in western Africa since nobody in their right mind would describe the genocide of the Herero and Nama as "less than laudable".

However I unfortunately wasn't too informed about the specifics of the situation in former German East Africa since as a German history teacher there is unfortunately a lot more I have to teach. Plus there was wine involved and I have three little kids so I was overtired and not in the best debate position. He's also 20 years older and has travelled extensively in Africa. I'm wondering if I'm missing anything.

I tried to read up but didn't get to what I wanted to learn. Here are some things the guy said that I didn't have great answers to:

1. The Germans basically ended the slave trade in their colonies.

2. The "rulers" before the Germans were much worse.

3. The other European countries were much worse. - I hate this argument because in my opinion it only tries to shift the blame.

4. The Germans honoured Swahili more than other colonists. - this seems correct but I'd think it was a matter of convenience rather than them honoring traditional languages.

5. The Germans built the railroad. - again, I would think this was for convenience in order to be able to exploit the colonies faster.

My questions are: does anyone really view the involvement in German East Africa in a favorable light? Do his arguments number 1 and 2 make sense?

I'm planning on having my seniors do their own research and then discuss and maybe even write a letter to him arguing whether they would view an F justified if they wrote this in an exam.

I hope someone can help me. Thank you all so much!

By the end of the Napoleonic Wars Russia was the preeminent military Land Power in Europe. Their regular Army and Imperial Guard Regiments gaining a fearsome reputation for their hardiness and bravery. They also were able to learn from their mistakes after repeated losses.

After the Napoleonic wars tho there seemed to be a steep decline in their fighting prowess, tactics and quality, the Crimean war being a prime example. The Cossacks aside, their cavalry, which was excellent in the Napoleonic wars, became known as being "as bad as it could be". The Imperial Guard, their record being extemly impressive in the Napoleonic wars, is in the later years described as useless.

What the hell happened here? What lead to this decline from one of the most powerful effective fighting force to a tumbling and bumbling giant?

I've been digging around on my own and have found a thing called "Operation Matchbox" where Britain shifted several dozen German scientists around to Canada and Australia however

I had to go to several different little articles from sites that I never heard of (except the guardian).

It seems too "conspiracy theory" on those sites but I don't doubt it happening. Can't have the US and Soviets take the whole German chocolate cake without getting a piece.

In "Empire of the Summer Moon", S.C. Gwynne mentions that the Comanches had very low birth rates, due at least in part to a trend of horseback riding-induced miscarriages. Modern medicine does identify riding as a risk to the pregnancy... but how great was this risk for people like the Comanches, who could travel long distances on horseback almost daily, sometimes for weeks or even months? Do we have any knowledge of this same issue in other populations with similar reliance on the horse (such as other Plains tribes, or even Central Asian nomads like the Mongols or Turkic peoples)? Were there any cultures who had ways to mitigate this risk, or was it just accepted that some pregnancies would be lost?

I remember watching this live on TV as a kid, and it was remarkable split-screen moment but what puzzled me was that no one really seemed to say much about why both events were happening on exactly the same day, in real time, in fact within minutes of Reagan taking the Oath of Office.
I have since read that immediately on Reagan taking office, $8 billion was released to the Iranian government, so I assume this was in the works since the election. How was this carried out mechanically? Was it arranged in advance, and if so, how? It seems like it was scripted to go off automatically, just waiting for the formal moment of the Oath being administered. How did the incoming administration accomplish this?
What did the Carter administration have to say about it, and how did the Reagan transition team accomplish this bargain when Carter had been unable to for more than a year?
How did it proceed during the final days of Carter's time in office? Did Carter just step aside?
Finally, I'm going to assume the timing of the two events was not a coincidence, so what planning exactly led to this?

You'd be surprised at some of the places in Belfast you find murals. Mostly depicting political and paramilitary figures they're plastered onto the sides of houses and the end of streets. Bobby Sands near the Carnegie Library and the King William at the end of the Sandy Row are good examples.

I know they've existed for years but what are they for? Now that the Good Friday Agreement mostly brought an end to the Troubles, why do these murals still stand?

All the books I've read contain names of a ton of male philosophers -- even the minor ones -- but absolutely none of female philosophers. From what I know, Greece was an intellectual powerhouse, so it's hard to believe that there were absolutely no female philosophers at all.

Did anyone document them? Or were socio-cultural conditions at the time not conducive for female philosophers to be open and public about their intellectualism?

(Note: I'd posted this on askphilosophy before, but just realized this is a more historical question, so thought might get a lot more answers here!)

In the movie "The Game Changers" they claim gladiators had a diet primarily based on plants. One would think they had to have meat in their nutrition to compete in the arena. How true is this ?

I am starting a new course, constitutional law. In my country originalism is not followed in the slightest. I'm not well versed in other countries' constitutions (nor my own if we're being honest). My constitution is described as being flexible, whilst rigid constitutions are seen as unfit in the long-term. This is obviously a view not shared by originalists. How wide-spread is their belief? I only really know of the US where they hold a lot of sway. Are they the exception or is my country the exception? And if so, why are the US the exception?

It really doesn’t seem like a very difficult work of imagination or engineering.. Are there any steps that were necessary for the bike to be invented? Steps in maths or sciences, or steps in socio-cultural / political developments, without which a bike could not be conceived of?

It is said in the Bible that Jesus carried the cross to the place he was going to be crucified but was that really a practice at the time? Did people carry crosses?

How exactly were the hieroglyphs spoken/pronounced/understood? Had every symbol a meaning similar to the Chinese language or did they represent syllables that could be connected like Japanese or was every symbol like a western letter that could not stand without other symbols?

The German Romantic period(not sure of the actual name) occurred in the mid-1800s and saw a sort of revival of art and stories from the Middle Ages in Europe. The Grimm Brothers and Wagner compiled and presented old folk tales and mythology and brought it into the public eye once more, and as I understand, other mythologies were being explored and popularized at this time as well.

Considering Tolkien, he was a master of literature, language, and mythology and he sought to create his own mythological world. This might be an extension to the works of Hans Christian Andersen who created his own fairytales very much in the style of the Grimm tales.

Is this a correct assumption? They seem quite similar to me but maybe I am ignoring more relevant sources of inspiration.

I have read that Fascist Italy brought back Latin as a national language in fascist Italy. Were there any calls from specific people or groups to replace Italian with Latin completely?

After all that I have read on these wars it came as a shock (to me at least) to realise they were going on at the same time.

• The American War of Independence: 1775 - 1783
• The First Anglo-Maratha War: 1775 -1782

Could I please ask:

1. To what extent (if any) did these contemporaneous conflicts affect the course (and outcome) of each other.
2. Why might it be that they are not mentioned together more often? (I haven't been able to find any reference to one in a history about the other...)

Thank you in advance for any insight.

See geese around my home constantly and wondering why people, in the US anyway, rarely consume it.

Christmas Goose was apparently popular at some point. Why did people stop consuming it as a holiday food and why?

How long have people been nodding for yes and shaking their head for no? Is it a relatively newer thing? Is there any evidence/ references of it in history? When was the first notice of it?