[deleted]

I also understand that voting rights varied by state with Arizona being one of the last states to allow voting. Can't find any info on voting rights for Native American in Washington State.

In most media depictions of Oda Nobunaga, he can be seen wearing a red cape, such as in Akira Kurosawa's Kagemusha. I know that Oda is usually associated with western gear due to his favour of western technology and christian missionaries, but i can't find the origins of the "red cape" that is always stuck with this character's image. Does anyone knows where the cape comes from or when was he first depicted wearing one?

Thank you for your time!

For example the romans, ancient egyptians etc. How are we so certain about what the members of these civilzations wore?

The details of the westward expansion are fairly common knowledge: manifest destiny, settlers, poxy blankets, buffalo soldiers, reservations, battles, etc.

But how the colonists got the land for the 13 colonies seems less well known. I know the tribes on the east coast moved west sometimes supplanting the tribes who were already there. But why did they leave their lands? I don't remember learning about them being violently removed from their lands. Although there was some violence, famously Wall St. in NYC was originally had a defensive wall to protect the colonists from the natives. But I don't picture the same kind of deliberate, violent land grab that we think about when we think of the expansion of America.

Also what is a “revisionist?”

So I had a thought today concerning Germany’s economic crisis during the Second World War.

I am essentially clueless regarding economics so forgive me if this is a stupid thing to ask but I remember reading about people filling wheelbarrows with millions of Reischmarks in order to pay for a load of bread.

My question is if you were to save these millions and not spend them and wait years later for the economy to return to normal could you not theoretically achieve millionaire status through patience?

The only instances I can think of are Namibian independence and the border commission between Eritrea and Ethiopia (the results of which were only accept by Ethiopia like 2 weeks ago).

If there aren't any major examples, why didn't this occur? Wouldn't states be more easily governed if they were (even marginally) more homogeneous?

I'm having trouble finding out what the average Ancient Greek actually did in his day to day. I understand that slaves did most of the menial laborious tasks, but I'm speaking about the average citizen who would drink wine, go to the gymnasium, and vote. Did this Greek actually have a career besides landholding? Was he a scholar, educator?

What were the beliefs and cultural aspects to pistol duelling that made it referenced so often? What was the reality? What was the etiquette/rules and how often were they observed?

I've heard, a few times, that "World War 1 shouldn't be called a World War because the fighting mostly took place in Europe." I wanted to know what was the stance of historians, and if it is accurate or if it's not accurate?

Did Nero himself think himself a God?

I am assuming the desert would had preserved the bodies really well. If I am correct, up to 30,000 people died so I would think bodies, relics, graves, etc would be discovered but I wasn't able to find anything about it.

Following WWII, the former German city of Königsberg was renamed Kaliningrad after Stalin ally Mikhail Kalinin. Since the collapse of Communism, a number of cities honoring communist heroes have been renamed (i.e. Leningrad in the USSR or Karl Marx Stadt in the GDR).

Why hasn’t Kaliningrad been renamed to a Russified version of Königsberg or another name since the end of the Soviet Union?

Is Mikhail Kalinin viewed more favorably in Russia today than other Bolsheviks?

Goes to show, it's not what happens,its who writes the history books.

By this I mean that how early could Europeans have discovered the Americas if it had been a real priority from the start?

From what I have been able to find, it seems that is was widely used because of its vibrancy compared to other green compounds. As it contains arsenic, it was toxic as a person was exposed to it. When was the line drawn that it fell out of use as a dye for things such as clothing and paints? I have found that there were some loosely regulating laws in places like Britain, but that those could be worked around. I am wondering, additionally, if there were any legal consequences for it's use and wear? I read that colloquially some of the wealthy European women who wore it were regarded as murderers, but it didn't seem to hold any legal bearing. Thanks!

I would like to start with an apology if I offend anyone with this question. It is not meant as offensive just as an inquiry.

I was researching the definition of martyr and came across the following definitions:

1. having suffered death rather than renounce religious beliefs

2. having suffered greatly or having died for a cause, belief, etc.

I came across this while researching the holocaust. Now, I had always considered those who suffered during that time (Jews along with many other groups) as "martyrs" but most don't seem to fit into the definition. This being because, with very few exceptions, you were not really given a choice as to whether or not you were targeted and both of these definitions seem to imply that an individual had a choice, not that they were born into a religion or were currently a certain religion. Is this still the most accurate term for those individuals or would a different one such as "victims" be more accurate?

I was wondering if there are any secondary source books that tackle the historical rather than the mythological components of the romance of the three kingdoms. Thanks!