It's a bolt action rifle. Slow and must of the time you lose sight picture because of changing the bolt. Especially in intense urban areas, bolt rifles seem like the wrong choice.

So school started back and I am in an APUSH class. In the textbook the second chapter talks about Native Americans when colonizers first arrive but it does not mention them when they start talking about when Afircan Slaves were initially brought to the America's and Carribean Islands.

From the past I can recall classes talking about how the kept pushing Native Americans back towards the west and how thousands upon thousands of them died due to hunger and diseases. However I dont know where it is on the timeline.

My question is when slavery was beginning and at its peak what was being done to the Native Americans? What were their status like?

I am asking this question out of genuine curiosity because I know Native American history is not as honored in schools as it is other histories.

I mean, of all people to be allowed to live, why him?

For us, the year is 2020 CE, and everything BCE is counted in reverse. Obviously, people who actually lived during those times weren’t counting down to the biggest new year’s celebration of all time.

Did they keep track of years at all? I feel like counting years is mostly useful for historical record, as practically, it doesn’t really matter what year it is when you’re planting crops and building pyramids.

If they did keep track of years, was it different for different peoples? Say counting from the founding of that particular civilization or the reigning years of a ruler? Or was there a common reckoning they used once empires had formed and international trade/warfare became a thing?

All of this was brought on when I saw something about the pyramids being built in 2450 BCE, and wondered what that date might have looked like for the Egyptians at the time.

My understanding is that she wasn't looking for a pardon; she was going to use the oppression of her rights as a vehicle to take the matter to the supreme court.

Did Grant and Anthony ever discuss these things? The possibility of pardon, a plan, or a way forward?

What was Grant's stance on the Women's Suffrage movement? Was it obvious he did, or didn't, support Anthony?

Egypt at the time was one of the wealthiest places in the world, the population was mostly composed of Sunni muslims and it was ruled by a dynasty that belonged to the Shia minority. Considering that, it would have been both an easy target and a fine addition to the empire of the Seljuk Turks, who had the backing of the Sunni caliph himself and were formidable warriors that would go on to inflict a severe defeat to the Romans.

While not perfectly uniform, English classes today seem to be a mix primarily books from the mid-20th century and some more recent books as well as essential classic books and plays (Shakespeare, Beowulf, etc.) How different was this curriculum 150 or so years ago?

Been curious about this for a while, for some reason or another.

Title basically says it all. Are there notable individuals or times in history when this was common? Why did we move away from it?

Surely he must’ve known the Eastern Bloc existed for pretty well three decades at that point? What was the political motivation behind this statement?

I see this argument on occasion and I have no idea if it's true; I've never read anything to suggest that it is, so I'm hoping someone here can clear it up, thanks in advance :)

My rough understanding is that the NSDAP electorate was very broadly a lower-middle class, primarily Protestant group early on, but by the late 1920s and early 1930s had become noticeably more educated and bourgeois, with young professionals, civil servants, etc. being particularly supportive.

How accurate is the above, and furthermore, do historians consider the demographics of the early Nazi electorate particularly significant to understanding the rise of National Socialism in Weimar Germany?

Thanks in advance!

I am working on a paper with the "Calendar of State Papers and Manuscripts in the Archives and Collections of Milan 1385-1618" as my main source. Having searched the web high and low, all I could find about the manuscripts is the fact that they were first published in 1912 by His Majesty's Stationery Office and were edited (and, presumably, translated) by Allen B Hinds.

However, I need more information for source analysis. It would be good to at least know who created this particular calendar, what was the principle behind grouping these papers together (and are there any more which didn't make it in) and in which archive do they reside. Also, a more detailed account of Hinds' translation and editorial process, as well as his qualification, would be most welcome.

Thus, if you know of any places where I could acquire at least some of the things needed I would be most grateful. Thank you in advance!

As in, was it numbers? Tech? Luck? A bit of everything!? Thanks!

I'm currently playing the latest Total War videogame set during the fictional war for Troy. One of the most controversial units in the game is the chariot, which is basically an infantry smashing killing machine. My question is: is this depiction accurate based on what we know about late bronze age warfare?

I'm aware of the fact that the ways of war depicted in the Iliad are most certainly those in use around the time the epic poem was written, this question is specifically about the role of chariots during the late bronze age in the eastern mediterranean (Greece, Anatolia, Egypt).

Bonus question: were horses used as war mounts during this period and in this geographical area?

Flutes, tubas, trombones, saxophones, trumpets, oboes, recorders... all of these are played only by exhaling, never by inhaling. Yet the harmonica uses both parts of the breathing cycle. Is there a historical, or perhaps musical/physical, reason that this is the case?

The American conservative consensus, as I understand it, is that the founding fathers wrote the Constitution and its first 10 amendments as protections against "Big Government" and governmental tyranny. This tends to align with their belief system of preserving the free market and state power. However, I am curious about how true to history this belief is.

Obviously the Founding Fathers fought against the British because of the oppression Britain brought down on the Thirteen Colonies. However, did founding fathers, unanimously and truly, write the nation's founding documents with the intent to minimize the federal government's power? Or did they allow future generations of Americans the freedom and leniency to interpret the Constitution and amend as it fits their time, balancing federal and state power in certain aspects as it benefits the public good? Did the Founding Fathers anticipate the battle between texualism and purpositivism?

​

I know it's a lot, really eager to learn, however!

I saw a post this morning saying that today is the 2500th anniversary of the start of the Battle of Thermopylae. However, when I looked up the battle I found there are more than one date given for the battle, those dates being August 20th and September 8th. How do we get these dates and Can they be trusted? Dating systems have changed a good bit over time and across cultures, so how can we translate dates from ancient sources into modern calendar systems?