Thank you for any response

My cousin brought up this point and I don’t think it would have been a better way, I just don’t know why it wouldn’t be

I never got an answer to my question so I thought I'd bring it up again!

From an outsider's glance, it seems there are a variety of benefits from joining the Roman Army as a member of the equestrian class, with opportunities for battle, prestige, and even a chance for political power or in the imperial period, the Emperorship!

Meanwhile, the navy seemed relegated to a second-class service where you'd be commanding mostly non-Romans, primarily fighting pirates (I'm guessing less loot there versus sacking a Persian city), and there doesn't really seem to be a Navy->Emperorship pipeline

So, if I am an ambitious young eques, why would I consider a career in the Navy over the Army? Would certain families or regions groom their young men for the navy? Were the benefits more considerable than it seems?

Much appreciated in advance!

If so, why isn't it part of the "standard" WWII narrative? If not, why might Richard Pipes have claimed this in "Communism: A History?" He frequently quotes primary sources for states of mind and subjective experiences, but he also makes a lot of claims in a somewhat off-hand way.

Were there any US fratricide incidents in the Gulf War that involved USMC artillery?  I’ve looked at all the online sites and reports Google came up with but, of all the fratricide incidents in those sources, none of them seem to have been caused by Marine Corps artillery.

I ask because a friend of mine mentioned that he was involved in one when he was assigned to a Marine Reserve artillery unit deployed in theater. He didn't actually say what role he or his unit played in the incident, so I'm making an assumption it was his unit that fired the rounds, but I don't actually know. He was very down on Memorial Day and he carries a lot of guilt about it. I don’t want to press him for details but I would like to know a little so I have context when he does talk about it.  Sent from my iPhone

First time poster here on r/AskHistorians.

My question is do any of you have any (income earning) side gigs based on your love of history/history degree?

I’m sure I’ll get some part time professors and bloggers, and I know volunteering is an option, but I’m curious to know what options are out there.

I have a non history day job, (BA in History, Masters in Policy) but really want to put my hobby of researching and wanting to writing about history to use.

One of my ancestors is mentioned on a Texas state marker as being the first “Anglo-American” born there. I’d always assumed this was Texas’s way of saying “first white child,” but in my own research I learned this term was supposed to specifically designate someone born in England or of English ancestry. This lead me down a rabbit hole of reading about anglo-saxonism and some other racist ideologies that popped up around that time.

My family was Irish. So … had this just become a blanket term for “white” by then or did the state just decide to call us English?

Later this year I plan to do a tour of the areas of india where Alexander the Great would have ventured and fought the ancient Indian leaders/warriors. I am not a hardcore historian, but I enjoy learning about history. I know very little about Alexander's campaign of India, but reading up a little on it, I am intrigued and want to know and learn more, and especially visit the key locations, both of the battles and where the Indian leaders of the time would have lived. I would love some suggestions on this if you can provide it. Thank you.

This morning, I find myself with a sunburn that makes me want to die covering most of my back, and the thought came to me, that getting sunburnt is something id never considered about living in the past. And, now I'm curious. What kinds of things people in the past have used for sunscreen? This isnt specific to one people or time period. If you have any knowledge on this subject feel free to share it

In 1966, Leopold Genicot wrote: "Crisis is the word which comes immediately to the historian's mind when he thinks of the fourteenth and fifteenth centuries." I was wondering if the general view changed since then. Is the concept "crisis of the late middle ages" still used today? Or did its meaning change?

It's been thousands of years since our ancestors domesticated animals and plants. Farmers and breeders have been producing more "useful" species long before biologists, but Darwin (1809-1882) published his On the Origin of Species as late as 1859. So how was it like before Darwin? How much did they know, and how much they didn't?

After her marriage to Henry VIII was annulled, was it a possibility for her to get remarried? Do we know why she didn’t?

edit: have not had in the title

Did poor people like peasants go to the church for their marriage? What did the process of finding a wife look like? Did she come from the same village? I know something about marriage in nobility, but what did it look like for normal people?