Edit: Related: if there wasn't a Tsarist secret police, did the Cheka inspire Chekism or did Chekism inspire the Cheka?

With the Titanic sinking in the middle of the night, and assuming most of the Carpathia's passengers were asleep when Captain Rostron gave orders to set course for Titanic, what would have my reaction been when I woke up in the morning to discover refugee's of the Titanic on board? Would have I been awaken and told in the middle of the night in preparation to help? Or would I have been kept in the dark during the whole event to keep from adding to hysteria on board?

I understand the set-up. Taking steps away from your foe and whatnot. But doesn't the first shooter have an enormous advantage over the second? How hard is it to nail a shot from 24 paces?

In Assassin's Creed 3 Sam Adams says that when the war was done they would have the luxury of addressing "other matters", referring to slavery. Is it correct that had they tried to do both at the same time they would have failed at both?

As an Brit who was born after pretty much all of the Irish troubles and peace process and considering current political events, I realised I really should have at least a basic knowledge of the events and issues. So what is a good source for me to read up on this area?

From recent news, burning a Quran is illegal in the UK for inciting racial hatred but obviously not illegal in the US.

How did the legal systems of both countries evolve away from one another to their present state?

No idea if this sort of question is allowed, but it can't hurt to try.

I was looking at my freshman year yearbook and I started wondering. It's a well made, 200+ page book for my 2000 person high school, documenting the clubs, people, and popular culture (senior quotes) of the time. But what other sorts of things could a historian learn from this sort of book?

In my opinion, this sounds wildly dumb but I'm nearly certain this teacher is pretty bright so I wouldn't know why she'd be making a claim this absurd. I'm unable to find any other data on the subject itself, so I felt as if this'd be the right place for this sort of question.

QUESTION: We're a certain amount of nurses shared between the North and South? - CIVIL WAR (OOPS didn't include that)

Let me know and thank you.

I can think of plenty of reasons why it would be easier to just lie and tell firing squads that one of them received a blank instead of actually receiving a blank round.

The cost of confusing blanks with live ammunition in a combat situation would be very high

Were there no outside indicators separating live from blank rounds?

Shooters couldn't tell the difference between firing a blank vs live round?

Responsibility is sufficiently diffused by just telling firing squads one of them received a blank round.

How do we know firing squads actually had 1 blank round instead of that just being a convenient lie told by commanding officers?

[deleted]

In popular culture it seems​ the saxons are depicted as alien Invaders who know nothing of the land they seek to conquer and it's people, was this really the case, was late Roman Britain so isolated from the continent?

I've heard stories of Australians who have ancestors sent as prisoners for a variety of reasons- from stealing cake to murder. Are there any records of what types of crimes would receive the sentence of being sent to Australia?

Something that I've always wondered about is how did the first few groups of European explorers figure out how to communicate with the natives in regions that had previously had no communication with the West?

I'm guessing if you were exploring Florida and had someone in your group that knew a language native to Cuba, you could probably find someone in the area who knew that language. And if you were British first exploring an area that had had Spanish presence, you would probably find a native who knew Spanish, so even if no one in your group knew a language from the area, you could probably still communicate.

How did they start this?