I am reading Noel Rae's "Great Stain: Witnessing American Slavery". In it, he writes (p 55):

[T]he life of sailors on board a slaver was so harsh, and the discipline so savage, that their death rate while at sea was actually higher than that of the slaves - about twenty and thirteen percent respectively.

He proceeds to detail some practices, including crimping.

This seems provocative and counter-intuitive.

• Is it commonly accepted that the death rate was higher for sailors than slaves?

• If so, what accounts for this?

Im sure in the 1700s the founding fathers had an english accent since their fathers and grandfathers came directly from England, but how did we lose that accent over time?

Surnames like Smith, Jones, etc. are very common in America. Why/how did this happen?

And as an addendum, why are they treated differently from dragons, which still do appear in modern Bibles?

In case you're looking for examples, in the Vulgate say Leviticus 11:13 for the griffon, Psalms 21, 28, 77, 91 for unicorn references, Isaiah 13:22 for sirens, and the KJV puts satyrs in Isaiah 13:21 and 34:14.

For example, countries in the Balkans claimed their independence after the political upheavals of the 1990s and Kazakhstan reclaimed its land from the Soviet Union as well. Are there no ethnic groups in eastern Russia that have some sort of claim to Russian land in that area?

In all of the works I’ve read so far covering the Civil War, my impression has always been that if Atlanta had held out until the election of 1864 (a bit over two months more than it actually did) McClellan becomes president in 1865 and makes peace with the South. But reading more about just how far behind the South was in industrial production and how their entire economy was strapped for cash in “Battle Cry of Freedom” by James McPherson makes me wonder how the South was even able to hold out as long as they did. So was Foote right?

I was hoping that someone could provide me with some sources about Historical Materialism. I'm doing a presentation next week and I want to consider the Marxist side of the story. Unfortunately, I do not know enough about the subject yet. Hope someone could help me:)

I understand that after wars or great fires the buildings are partially built on the rubble of their predecessors, but how can it be that the ground rises several meters? Garbage and rubble do not seem to me to be a suitable foundation.

​

Thanks!

We hear a lot about the Pacific front during World War II, but we almost never hear about what was going on in China at the time. With the Second Sino-Japanese War intersecting with World War II in 1941, did the Second Sino-Japanese War have any significant effect on the war in the Pacific or was it just a mere sideshow?

Tunis , the modern capital and largest city of Tunisia , used to be a small Berber settlement overshadowed by it’s neighboor Carthage , the Punic city-state . But which city was built first : Tunis or Carthage ?

I’ve read that he didn’t even pray in Arabic until he was on his way to Mecca and it’s making me curious about his general knowledge of non-NOI Islam, since I assume he was taught about Islam by the Nation of Islam.

After the caltholic clergy converted, how did the reformation churches train new clergy? Did the reformation use the old Catholic infrastructure as a basis to train new priests/deacons? Was there fundamental changes to how clergy were selected?

I ask this because, although there was massive resistance from the senate and it was highly unorthodox, I can't find any source that says Caesar was acting against the law. Cato was a Praetor, not a Tribune of the Plebs, who had the "no touching" law protecting them.

[deleted]

In other words, what words did the different populations of Southeast Asia use where the Europeans would have used 'Indochina' or 'The East Indies'?

I see it was buried, but how did they do this if it was level with the rest of the city?

The question was sparked when I learned that a group of Irish-American officers did return to Ireland in the 1867 Fenian Rising, and the the Fenians had apparently wanted or intended to gather many of these Irish veterans. While the Irish may have been just a convenient manpower pool to the US government, did the British government see the creation of a large number of experienced soldiers that could form the nucleus of a professional Irish army as a threat?

Working on expanding my library, and general knowledge, of historical weapons. While I'm confident in my knowledge of the 18th century onwards (I'll talk your ear off about the evolution of bayonets), the farther back we travel, the fewer details I know, and I'd like to correct that.

Any ideas on books about armor, spears, shields, tactics, fortifications, etc? I'm all ears! Ideally with lots of pictures and measurements. I want to know as much as I can, not just the basic "Romans liked the gladius because it was suited to their tactics". We all know the basics. I'm looking more for what kind of steel was used, how were they constructed, was the design standardized, why did different regions use different handle materials, was bone or wood preferred, how weapons evolved over time, how soldiers cared for different kinds of weapons, etc. Not specifically looking for any time period or nation, really I'm open to everything, from the Japanese to the Celts, and everyone in between.

I do have a specific interest in European weapons if anyone has suggestions. I do have Oakeshotte's first book, did he write more? Any help is greatly appreciated.

Somwhat related, I'm moving into college now and I absolutely want to major in military history. Any professional historians have suggestions on that front?

[deleted]