In England we have countless dukes, counts and barons. Why were the colonies not included in this aristocracy? Or in other words, why was there not a duke of nova Scotia or a count of Jamaica? I could could understand why the arrangements with Indian princes made it impossible there but why not elsewhere?

I was watching Gangs of New York and one if the characters was talking about traveling to San Fransisco from New York and she pointed to a map and showed them traveling around South America. Would it have been easier/faster to travel around South America or across the US?

I read a novel recently set in the 1840s and the narrator mentions the rapid rate at which New York is expanding over the island. When was this complete?

I was reading one of top posts on TIL about a soviet pilot who defected and was shocked at how a grocery store was actually stocked. I've seen quite a few similar stories that speak of the lack of basic necessities during the reign of the Soviet Union. Why did an empire that was presumably one of the top world powers have so much trouble providing and supplying goods to it's population?

All I know is my ancestors were from czechoslovakia but that split into Czechia and Slovakia because of the different ethnic groups and I can't find a website or anything that'll tell me the origins of my surname

I

What was the typical diet like for sailors during long voyages? It seems like it would be limited, due to perishability of most food items. How much did they cook while on the boat? It seems like a bad idea to use flames to cook things in the middle of a wooden boat on the ocean, let alone cook enough food to support an entire crew.

What I know is that there was a unit of African Americans led by a white officer. There was anymosity towards the officer by the soldiers. It could be the civil war or even ww2.. I'm not sure. The unit is sent as the first wave and essentially used as a sacrificial unit by racist command but they break enemy lines and help win the battle but they are eventually slaughtered to the last man including the white officer. In the pocket of the officer they found a note that said "bury me with my men" or something to that effect. It may even be a movie but I heard this story.

Does anybody know it? Thank you!!

in fact Wihtwara was forcibly converted by Mercia despite the fact they'd had a pagan king less than 10 years before

I remember once being told the oldest swords date from right around the time they were flourishing in the 1700s BC?

Was it limited to women of means or could any religious woman sign up? What sort of options were available as a religious woman?

Aside from abolitionists and churches donating money so slaves could buy their freedom.

Any resources that could help me figure this out would really help. I'm writing a paper on how language affects thinking and claiming that thinking also affects language.

I can get ready access to the documents of the council but I have no idea which volume offers a good background on the characters and key actors and also an accurate narrative of the sessions, meetings, services etc. Can you help?

While Germany became a relatively unified state in 1871, there was still a considerable amount of federalism. Except for a few small (compared to the overall area and population of Germany) city-states, all constituent states were monarchies, with different amounts of constitutionalism and parliamentarianism.

How come that within a few weeks in 1918, all these monarchs abdicated, and the monarchies were transformed into republics? Given the number of constituent states, one would think there would be at least a few whose population would be content enough with their monarchs to transform into democratic, parliamentarian monarchies. Were all monarchs, without exception, so unpopular that a shift to a republican order was seen as the best way forward in all German states? Or was there some leverage from the central power, powerful enough to enforce abdication in all constituent states?

[deleted]

Considering Stettin is west of the Oder and Stettin had a german government under soviet control first after the end of the war.

I mean successor in two distinct ways here.

1- Did it explicitly claim succession from the Eastern Roman Empire? Did the Sultan of the Ottoman Empire call himself the "Sultan of Rum" or somesuch, like the earlier Turkish state that had emerged following the defeat of the Eastern Romans at Manzikert?

2- How much continuity was there between the Late Roman institutions and administration and the Ottoman one? Did the Ottomans keep Roman bureaucrats? How did they interact with the Orthodox Church?

I was just reading a little bit about the aftermath of the French revolution, and how France seemed to surprise the rest of Europe with its military vigor, ultimately taking on pretty much every other power singlehandedly. Is there any consensus among historians as to what factors enabled France to dominate Europe so soon after such massive social upheaval?

Was France just a slumbering giant, whose demographics and economy meant it was naturally extremely powerful? Could ideas play a role - did the zeal and public enthusiasm following the revolution make it easier for France to wage large scale warfare in a way that was difficult for European monarchies?

Would love to hear any insights.