I was reading history books as a kid and I remember this one thing that stuck with me, even until now, that was written in one of those books. It talked about how the Wright brothers actually met a man who had either already started building a working aircraft, or had already completed it (my memory is hazy). The Wright brothers then bought it and made it their own for a good while, until they finally released it with no mention of the help from this other man. I can’t seem to find any mention of this man. Even though there is a lot of debate on who really flew first, none of them match the description of this man. Does he even exist?

I was reading through the metamorphoses and noticed that a fair amount of the myths have one of the characters being turned into either an object or an animal, examples being narcissis being changed into a flower and Io into a cow. Why was it that so many greek myths feature shapeshifting of some fashion? That is also to include the gods, who frequently change their form.

Was Japan, especially the Navy, ever in a position to beat the US? Both at sea and in general?

My reading group discussed this book yesterday, and it came up that it's now considered outdated. The one detail that was brought up on that subject was the omission of the fact--possibly known even at the time of writing--that Toussaint was himself a slaveowner. I knew nothing about the the man or the revolution he helped lead before reading this book, so I'd like to know how the current understanding of him and the conflict differs from James's.

It seems to me they were "federalized" to help in state surveillance and extermination actions, but I don't want to jump to conclusions. Sources and book recommendations would be nice.

Hello everyone! I am Dr Megan Hunt, Teaching Fellow in American History at the University of Edinburgh. My interests are in the African American civil rights movement, and the American South more generally, as presented in educational materials and popular culture - particularly Hollywood film. I have written on films such as Selma, The Help, Mississippi Burning, and To Kill a Mockingbird, and am currently working on a book about civil rights, race, and religion in Hollywood cinema. I have also explored how civil rights is taught in the US and the UK, and the significance of educational standards to public memory of social activism. I am happy to answer questions on the movement itself or its representation in cinema/television and schools. I will be back to answer questions at 3pm GMT.

EDIT: Thank you so much for all of your questions! And I am very sorry that I have not been able to answer them all during the AMA.

From A Life of Erwin Schrödinger page 236.

Early in 1938, portents of disaster appeared in Austria. AN intense auora lit up the sky so that in many districts fire alarms were sounded. The plague birds appeared in Vienna, albino sparrows with russet splotches like dried blood on their wings, and little girls were recruited by Nazis to distribute pornographic broadsheets to passers-by.

No citation.

I know Native Americans crossed over from Russia, but how did Russians (or whichever nation was in the Eastern most part of present day Russia) not sail to Alaska in the 4000+ years following? Even the Pacific Islanders managed to make it to Hawaii, so I can’t fathom Russia or Japan failing to explore to the northeast.

I remember seeing some old European maps (probably from the Middle Ages, but I'm not sure), and East and West where on the vertical axis, so I guess someone at some point just decided that north is up and south is down and everybody just dealt with it? I think it's pretty obvious why they were put on the vertical axis, but is there a reason why they aren't inverted? And when did that became the standard?

I often hear it said that the cost in lives and resources to successfully invade the Japanese home islands was so high that dropping the bombs was the best option. If this is so, how clear was it that the bombings were the right decision? Also as a followup, what alternative strategies were the allies looking at besides the bombs?

It's been a little over 24 hours, so I'm throwing this back up here.

I was wondering how the Roman Republic was able to maintain a nation built, as far as I can tell on military conquest, together for centuries without it being in constant revolt.

I'm mostly interested in early Rome before it expanded outside of Italy, but more information would be appreciated.

So:

• How did the Romans keep people in conquered places from revolting or declaring independence at the first opportunity?
• Were conquered people better off when ruled by Rome? If so, what made Roman rule superior to "barbarian" rule?
• What potential weaknesses were there in whatever system Rome chose? What were the strengths?

I think this question falls within this sub’s purview. I was just wondering what early computer viruses were programmed to do. And how did those viruses get installed or run on unsuspecting computers?

He may not have had the title of emperor, but neither did Augustus. (Imperator just means commander) He was Dictator for life and had great religious power as the Pontifex Maximus.