I was specifically thinking of the album Straight Outta Compton, which was released in 1988, although there was of course similar stuff around by this time. However, if this ever did reach the East, how did people react to it? Was there perhaps even locally produced rap? For this question I wouldn't count classical hip-hop, funk and related genres that preceeded gangster rap.

I'm starting to get nervous, he's nowhere to be seen.

Other, lesser engineers and mechanics have built steam engines before, but mine own is clearly far superior. In fact, so superior that thousands have been built across Britain and the Continent, enabling multitudinous new developments in industry and commerce. Even those rebellious hayseed Americans have begun to acquire them! Clearly there must have been both a great advancement in design as well as an underlying societal condition that enabled such a development. Pray tell, how did this wonderful new order come about?

The Anglo-Saxons practiced Christianity and accepted the authority of the Roman Catholic Church, yet the Pope gave his permission to William the Bastard to invade England to "advance the Christian religion." What practices in the Anglo-Saxon Church caused them to gain the scorn of the Pope?

Iam trying to understand and piece together that part of history,

Prior to the development of the press, it was common practice for the copying monks to scrape the parchment and re-use it to write a different book.

I also remember Galileo, in The Assayer (1623) describing the printing of a book as something like "striking the paper multiple times with hot iron, leaving the page really hot" (I could search for the exact reference, but I know it's part of his athomists arguments in the book).

My questions are:

• were early methods of printing more permanent to parchment paper than handwriting?

• Was this at all discussed or am I being too anachronistic?

• Was the value of a printed book high enough that it outweighed the possibilities of the reusing the material?

• was the scraping of books largely confined to monasteries and didn't affect the beginnings of a book production?

Sorry for the many questions.

Edit: grammar and formating

I just got back from Gettysburg and I noticed that almost every marker/monument reporting casualties used "missing". I can see a regiment like the 26th North Carolina having lots of "missing" after the assault on Cemetery Ridge (one would assume these would all be captured by Union Troops). I can see missing at the Railroad Cut debacle.

But I noticed even Union Troops that engaged from static defensive positions have plenty of missing which doesn't seem to make sense. Does missing mean the same as it does today?

Is "Missing" - missing from last major roll call (perhaps June?) - is it all 100% related to the battle? Is it paperwork errors?

Was straggling so common? Did men "disappear" from exploding shot cannon fire or were lost to difficult topography (Devils den, Plum run).

Was capturing common even in battles where the attackers could take prisoners from a fixed line (Little Round Top, Culps Hill etc..)

Thanks for any help - I tried researching this but got nowhere.

It's not the model of the grenade, so is it maybe the manufacturer? Not sure, but if you guys knew that would be great!

Lincoln is remembered for fairly obvious reasons, he was the first president killed and lead us through one of the worst periods of our history. JFK was relatively unremarkable in his achievements yet his assassination is still present in popular culture and the minds of Americans. Comparatively nobody really cares about Garfield of McKinley. Is this just because a lot of time has passed (and they weren't Lincoln)? Were their assassinations seen like JFK's in their respective time periods?

at first glance having elected politicians be responsible for leading the army seems kind of stupid, how did the Romans do this?

Also, is there a way Yugoslav leaders could have navigated their exorbitant IMF debts in the Gorbachev-era to maintain their explosive (to my knowledge) growth or at least stabilize the economy, or was it a doomed situation?

[deleted]

For example, Julius Caesar was killed in 44 BC. What year was that in the Roman calendar?

So, I was recommended to try here from r/history . My question is about the Code Duello. It was written down in 1777, the American Revolution was between 1775-1783. Would these have been the rules patriot soldiers would have followed when they dueled? Where there other rules put down?

So I know that the Dutch rebelled and fought Spain for independence but HRE mostly stayed neutral during the war.

What I am confused about is that Spanish Netherlands fell under the Bergundian Imperial Kreiss. So that means the Dutch paid taxes to the HRE and contributed to the defense to the HRE. To me this would make the Dutch under Austrian Habsburg not Spanish Habsburg.