When Thomas Jefferson or any Democratic-Republican was in office, how were they able to maintain agrarianism in the American Republic?

I was recently speaking to an older person who emigrated to the US from Russia about 10 years ago. (She is in her 70s.) She was convinced that the Soviet Union's economic impact on the average Russian citizen was slight but positive (breadlines are better than no bread, there was a revolution in medical care, etc) and contrasted that to the impact of capitalism on the average Russian citizen, which (in her opinion) made them significantly poorer and sicker.

Is there any truth to this? If I was an apolitical Russian today, concerned solely with the economic well-being of the average citizen, would I look back on the Soviet Union at all positively?

As in, between the governments of both countries, if any thing was changed at all

I realise that the SAS was formed in WW2 - but were their no similar groups that were actively behind the enemy lines, attacking from behind, or destroying roads, supply routes, and such things?

I'm interested in whether the aura around Nelson is a bit of a myth, or whether he was really that critical to Britain's overall naval victory in the Napoleonic wars. Are there other unsung captains or admirals who don't get the praise that they should?

I'd also like suggestions on a Nelson biography to read that gives a detailed, balanced view of the man. I haven't been able to find one that's well-regarded. Thanks in advance.

[deleted]

Suppose the village blacksmith needs to make ten swords for his jarl, how would he define the amount of iron he needs? Or when salting herring for the winter, was there a unit salt was measured in? What about nautical distances, or overland? Suppose I'm a Viking, and wanted to measure a length of rope. What would my base unit of length be?

So, I have been really getting into early European history and, through this, I noticed that both of these families seemed to whittle down to nothing fairly quickly after losing power. Is it known whether the two families were actively discouraged from having children or was it some other reason for the dying out of the dynasties?

I was reading Max Planck's Nobel Lecture when I noticed that it was dated 1920, despite him having won the prize for 1918. Digging deeper I found out that in 1917:

Charles Glover Barkla received his Nobel Prize one year later, in 1918. During the selection process in 1917, the Nobel Committee for Physics decided that none of the year's nominations met the criteria as outlined in the will of Alfred Nobel. According to the Nobel Foundation's statutes, the Nobel Prize can in such a case be reserved until the following year, and this statute was then applied. Charles Glover Barkla therefore received his Nobel Prize for 1917 one year later, in 1918.

and in 1918:

Max Planck received his Nobel Prize one year later, in 1919. During the selection process in 1918, the Nobel Committee for Physics decided that none of the year's nominations met the criteria as outlined in the will of Alfred Nobel. According to the Nobel Foundation's statutes, the Nobel Prize can in such a case be reserved until the following year, and this statute was then applied. Max Planck therefore received his Nobel Prize for 1918 one year later, in 1919.

I certainly understand cancelling the Nobel Prizes because of the war, as was done in 1916, but why this business of deferring by a year? Was the hope in 1917 that the war would be over by the time Nobel's will forced them to award it but then it wasn't so they were forced to award it and then tried the same trick in 1918 (given that the war didn't end until November)? A similar thing seems to have happened to the Nobel Prize in Chemistry where as the other Nobel Prizes (Medicine, Peace and Literature) seem to have largely not been granted at all during that period.

I can find surprisingly little mention anywhere that this funny business happened at all, much less the exact reasons that it happened. Why did the Physics and Chemistry committees meet, where other prizes didn't, if they had no intention of granting the prize? Was it really just a stall tactic in hope that the war would be over in a year?

My flatmate recently told me about the atrocities committed there by Belgium and I was quite shocked to realize that I know nothing about any of it.

I'd really like to inform myself and read further into the subject, but am not sure where to start. I appreciate both factual accounts by historians as well as stories told by witnesses etc.

TIA for your help!

I understand that he was responsible for creating the geopolitical strategy resulting in the Vietnam and Cambodian wars. But numerous other politicians have also caused great suffering in warfare- why is Kissinger almost exclusively blamed for the Cold War proxy wars?

Edit: Lots of comments (now deleted) indicate that he acted without moral conscience. But if his actions were so disastrous and unpopular, why is he still considered an oracle of global relations? The man is 95, and still consulted by important politicians.

Barbershop quartets were a popular fad in the mid 20th century, but how did that start? Were there ever, say, groups of singers in "barber" garb in the 1910s that sang to people while they got their hair cut? It's just such a strange thing to exist out of the blue.

I'm writing a bit of fiction about a French village which has discovered the elixir of life and since then has been living in perpetuity since the 15th century.

The idea is that this village has been living in isolation relatively unchanged, so I need to know as much as there is to know about village life in this era, including clothing, social classes, traditions, habits, superstitions, religious practices, and how they might react to that which they cannot understand.

The supreme Alchemist responsible for the elixir has created a machine to continuously make and pump out into the villages water supply, so as long as the machine continues to run, everyone there will live forever. While the cannot age, a side effect of the potion is infertility, meaning their population can never exceed a couple hundred. Because of this, everyone must continuously work to ensure the machine is properly maintained, supplied with fuel, and the people fed and in high enough spirits to carry out the work required. While they can't die, they can definitely fall sick and become too weak to work.

I'm especially interested in key words for titles, and how others may refer to one another, as well as certain phrases or common expressions which I can use to add as much authenticity to the feel of the writing as possible. I'm going to assume that everything has gone by unchanged and that they have had little to no communication with the rest of France or even the rest of the world.

Anything at all will be helpful, even if it's just a reference to a really good source.

We obviously know that Renaissance architecture was heavily influenced by classical culture but what were the origins of things like the iconic arches and columns we immediately associate with Roman and Greek architecture?

This came up in some random askreddit thread and while I feel like I can guess at some reasons, and there's some Quora answer out there addressing it, I'd really be interested in a historian's answer.