Can't find the answer on the Web. I know he left it in 1847 and I found somewhere saying that the approximate site was marked by a friend in 1872, meaning it must have ceased to exist by then. What happened to it? Was it deconstructed or just fell apart from the weather? And would have only 25 years really been enough for all traces of it to just disappear?

I'm also curious as to why no one seems to have put in an effort to preserve it, as it seems from reading "Walden" that it was quite a well-known little oddity of the error, and it seems to me like people would visit it in the years after and be like "Ah, this is where the philosopher guy lived alone." Any known reasons behind why this didn't happen?

Thank you.

Hi i just want to know what Guidelines and rules should i follow before i post something.

I know very little about this period but it strikes me as one of the big differences between how the England dealt with Ireland as opposed to Scotland and Wales was how the local ruling classes were treated.

Was it the case that they tried and failed to bring the upper classes on board or did some other factor mean they didn't try?

I don't think I've read about this before, where there threats to use one to force a surrender like in WW2?

Shadiversity talks about armor a lot, and usually he mentions that leather armor wasn't really used in the medieval era, but gambesons filled that role. I know there's some debate as to whether or not leather armor was actually used, and a few examples of historical leather armor, but I'm curious about something else.

Is there any functional reason why leather armor wasn't as common as gambeson? Would armor made of leather not provide protection because of the material or some other physical factor, and what factor might that be? If there were definitive examples of leather armor, how did they compare in practicality to more conventional or widespread armor? Any info on any of these questions would be great, thank you!

Just wondering, seems like that should be par for the course on a subs of this size with active moderation but it's conspicuously missing. Any particular reason there isn't flair denoting what questions have or haven't been answered? I think folks visiting here would really appreciate it.

if so, were there ever witch hunts?

I often hear the Nazis described as "national[ist] socialists". At the same time, though, its always been made clear that the Nazis hated the Soviet Union with a burning passion. While I know that he blamed the Jews and other minority groups for the depression that, in reality, was just left over from the First World War, I never seem to hear about his polities outside of the unspeakable things he was behind. I'm curious not so much about the social beliefs, but what they did economically.

Would he be considered conservative? Liberal? Did he believe in welfare and minimum wage? Or was he more similar to the modern American Republican Party?

Ive always been curious about this time period and besides wikipedia didn't know where to start.

Long-winded question, sparked by a discussion with a friend.

The immediacy of television heightened the impact of non-violent protest in the 20th century. I'm wondering to what extent individuals with limited mobility (those using crutches, wheelchairs, etc.) volunteered to be arrested for their cause in the hopes of generating even worse bad press when protesters were arrested. For example, several documentaries/films about the Vietnam War protests features marches with a vanguard of veterans wounded in action. Was this a deliberate strategy that emerged over time? Did other protest movements adopt similar tactics to maximize the negative impact of arrests?

Thanks in advance!

Obviously there are numerous depictions of naval combat in movies but you don't get a real sense of how naval battles were fought. All you see is a periodic broadside and eventually a ship either sinks or gives up. At what range did broadsides occur? How did ships close the miles and miles of distance between and their intended target? Why was grapeshot not more heavily used? Why was double-shotting not used more often? Could a ship disengage from a battle and have a chance of escaping?

Thanks for taking the time to look through my questions!

It seems like it would be hard for the pikemen to hurt someone wearing full plate. Couldn’t the men-at-arms push their way through the pikes and attack the (usually poorly armored) pikemen with swords?

[deleted]