I can name dozens of movies, songs, monuments, TV shows, and books about World War Two and the Vietnam War, but apart from MASH I can’t really think of any lasting cultural impact from the Korean War. Why is that?

Currently doing research on LGBT discrimination and opposition and I would like to compare political cartoons as one of my main sources of evidence. However I've delved into newspapers archives published during important LGBT dates of the era and have come out empty handed. Do any of you have any relevant cartoons or know where I could find them? Thank you

Sorry if this is not allowed. I realize it's not the usual format of "I am x around year y ... " I'm sorry if I broke any rules.

So as the title says I just finished the meditations and I'm in absolute awe .. it was like a window into the past and it just made the person and age so real for me ... Like I could stretch out and touch something long gone from this world.

Are there any other works that are similar in the sense that they are written in a personal style?

Thank you :)

Belgian news outlets have published articles recently claiming the average horse in Europe in the 1100s had a height at the withers is 1m35 (4ft5) compared to 1m75 (5ft9) today.

This seems extremely unlikely as knights riding around at that height is just plain ridiculous, right?

I was playing some Kaiserreich and wanted to learn more about the region. I read on Wikipedia that Eritrea was an Italian colony which was given to Ethiopia after WW2. Did they consider other options?

I teach physics and when we talk about density it's fun to tell the story of Archimedes and the crown. For the uninitiated the story goes that the king was gifted a crown that was claimed to be made of solid gold. The king wanted to know if it was actually solid gold, or fake (perhaps mixed with silver). The king tasked Archimedes with finding a way to tell without damaging the crown. Archimedes thought long and hard about the problem, and then one day in the bath though of the following solution:

You place the crown on one side of a balance scale, and have gold of known purity placed on the other side until the balance balances. Now the mass of the crown equals the mass of the gold. The question is about their volume. So you get a bucket of water, note the height of the water. Place the crown in the water and note how high up the water rises. Then remove the crown and place the identical mass of gold in the water. If the water rises to the same height, then the crown is pure gold. If, however, the crown is mixed with a lighter element like silver, then the crown will be 'fluffier' than a pure gold crown and push the water up higher.

The story goes that he jumped out of the bath tub running naked through the streets yelling "Eureka!"

Students love this story and naturally ask the question "So was the crown real or fake?" and I cant find an answer. Whenever I google this I just get retellings of the story I wrote above that ends with an explanation of the physics. I cant find the actual story. Is this story a made up parable like Newton getting hit with the apple? Or did this really happen? If so what was the outcome?

Thanks.

Hopefully the 200 year span is small enough. I understand that the Silk Road was across dozens of regions and along many paths, but there must be some records from traders suggesting how much money was being made.

Followup question: How much risk was there?

So, after his father sold them all (his mother, 3 sibilings and him) to pay his travel to france, he recovered his fortune, bought back his son thomas alexandre and freed him... But I havent be able to find any mention of his 3 sibilings's destiny.

Did they remained slaved and were lost forever to history? Were they freed? It is unkown?

I find weird that they would remain slaved, bc thomas alexandre was not only free but also had a life of richiness and money privilege right after his father took him to france so he could easily bought back all his kids (or thomas could use some of the extra richiness to try to buy his sibilings to freedom) but I also havent found a single mention of this or even their names. Only the name of his half sister that was not the product of his white and rich father, but a kid of his black slave mother from before she was originally bought by his dad.

Also, aparently his mother was left in charge of his father's land on haiti, which would mean she was bought back at some point and probably freed (I doubt a slave would be legally put on charge of a plantation). Perhaps they were all bought back and stayed there? However, I have also not find nothing more of that in all internet.

Which is weird bc thomas alexandre was pretty famous and had a lot of writers as descendents. You would think at least one of them would bother to write something down.

Thanks!!

When I read about the Democratic party as it existed before and after the US Civil War, there are two very clear factions, the Southern Democrats who were animated by Slavery and Tariffs and the Tammany Hall Northern Democrats often tied to patronage and Catholicism. These two groups don't actually seem to have a lot in common other than animosity towards Northern Industrialists. Was there more to it? Were there issues that united them?

The question is completely contained in the title. Thanks in advance!

I've always heard that beer was the drink of choice of most people due to it being cleaner than water and that this practice was widespread across a large timeframe. Most famous example are probably the Egyptian labourers who drank up to five litres a day. My question is: if this practice of drinking beer was so common, did people switch to something else when the first Caliphate conquered them? Did they have a choice at all?

A fair amount of lanugages whose speakers are predominantly Muslim (like Circassian, Turkish, Crimean Tatar, Tajiki, Malay, and others) used Arabic in the past as their writing system. Nowadays, most of these languages (with the exception of Persian, some dialects of Kurdish, and Malay in some places) mostly use Latin or Cyrillic. Was there any reason having to do with linguistics (with it being cumbersome to use) or political reasons for this fairly large shift?

Its my understanding that a botched siege of Quebec City was a major early setback for the revolutionaries at the start of the war. Considering that Quebec was a recent conquest, under the control of Britain with its different language and religion, and the fact that almost the entirety of the rest of Britain's American colonies were flaring up in revolt, and the entrance of Quebec's former mother country, France, into the war against Britain, why did they seem to be content enough with British rule not to cause any particular trouble? Were they worried about being sucked into some kind of radical Protestant new state with a worse deal than they had with the British?

On a related note, were the French hoping to somehow regain their former possessions in Canada when they supported the revolution?

Joan claimed that Archangels had visited her and instructed her to expel the English from France. If we exclude the possibility that this truly was a divine message, then the two possible explanations would seem to be that these were hallucinations or that she made them up. Is there consensus as to which?

Many countries didn't have access to the European technology that made the industrialization possible, but Latin America had access to that technology, and yet they never industrialize in any significant degree until the mid 1900s. What was the reason for this?

How was it described, what were the explanations for it?

So, I am not sure this is the right place to ask this but I am a baffled italian that has travelled North to discover that absolutely nothing in Norway is actually old because their cities kept burning too the ground. In my homeland roman-era structures have withstood earthquakes and volcano eruptions and 2000 years of wars and history. Whilst in Bergen, the rainiest city in Europe so not the most flammable I assume, there has been an average of a fire every 20 years that burnt the city to the ground, the last big one in 1955. Similar stories are found in many norwegian cities I have been to and traces of their past have been entirely destroyed by fires, but in the little I have seen of swedish and danish cities this is not always the case, I've seen castles and housing from at least the renaissance. Instead in Norway, cities that would be as old as many french, british and german cities look modern-ish because of the choice of materials their past erased entirely. I thought it could be poverty, but Bergen was a center of trade and a fairly large city for the time I seem to understand, it was even the capital at some point and they say even then that the main stone structure (Haakon's Hallen) was built on initiative of a danish princess. Guides say that working with stones was expensive, but most of these cities are close to mountains, I'm no geologist but rocks don't appear to be scarce. What crucial resource was missing? Or is it just a matter of preference? Because I imagine that having a whole city burn down to be quite a hassle, especially 2-3 times in a lifetime.