If so what did those slaves do? What were their lives like?

Or were they tied to the life until death?

Was it because he wasn't a good president? Is it because he was unpopular? Was he unintelligent?

I live in an area where these programs were carried out. There aren't many native americans left here, even though this is an area where you would expect to find a lot of them; its mostly white.

No one locally ever talks about the programs locally, except for every now and then a retired (and I think dead) local doctor's name will come up with quite a bit of contempt attached to it.

If there is anyone that could shed light on the rumors and stories that go around, and separate fact from slander and whitewash, I would greatly appreciate it. Objective historical research of this sort is difficult.

Example: Queens of the Stone Age or Arctic Monkeys-esque riffs and music being made in the 50's.

Was it related to cultural shifts among the general populace of the west in the approval of using nukes? A fear of encouraging their use by the Soviets in future conflicts, or of reprisal by them during Korea? Fundamental strategic differences in the Korean War that precluded their use or made it undesirable to use them? All or none of these?

As a layperson, it seems odd that the US, having used nuclear weapons successfully in avoiding a costly, full-blown invasion of Japan in 1945, would be reticent to use them again not very long after for the same purpose.

Brandenburg was a principality of the Holy Roman Empire. Why was it allowed to chase for power independently and to acquire land outside of the Empire's territory and outside the authority of the emperor?

I just finished season 6 of game of thrones and have been playing video games like For Honor, Nioh and the Witcher. Is there any truth to how they battle in the movies? How do they see out of those little slits in their armor?

I assume 1 on 1 combat was very different from being surrounded by other people.

I imagine that it wasn't as cool looking as we would think but then again maybe I am wrong.

Why not older, especially in countries that are more than 200-300 years old?

Of course, both characters in the movies I mentioned are works of fiction but I found it interesting that they both have a few key similarities:

• extreme trauma from their war experience
• both point out a special lag of sense in relation to the extreme actions they were required to do
• both use extreme force and violence

So, I was wondering if both characters are based on a real life example or correlation between the special forces or general American participation in the war in South East Asia.

When did guns switch from being loaded by putting each bullet in individually or in clips of five to the magazines we see today? And what's the name of the loading mechanism i mentioned first ?

My limited knowledge of Italian history doesn't extend much past ww2, however I've been doing a fair amount of basic research online. I've mostly read bits on the years of lead but certainly nothing academic- and I'd like the historical context for that period, particularly postwar fascism.

Édit: missed my actual question, i meant this to be 1945-55 or so? But literally any political history, history of Italian political thought etc.

I'm talking from a medical standpoint, as in, if of two otherwise identical people, one was hit with a musketball, and another stabbed with a musket, who would be more likely to survive? I'm not asking whether in a battle you were more likely to be killed by one or the other.

I remember hearing somewhere that bayonet wounds were generally deadlier, in part due to the triangular blade, and in other part due to how dirty they were (fouling and such), to the point where some doctors, during triage, would not even bother with bayonet wounded soldiers, and instead focus on those shot, as they had better chances of survival. Is there any truth to that statement?

This according to genes. Through paperwork the furthest back I can trace my ancestors is to Alsace-Lorraine in 1716, but during the next 100 or so years they moved East to Czechoslovakia and remained their until after WW1. This was some sort of family split.
The main family name is LeGore which seems French but there is not a translation easily for this. The best i could get to was "the pig" so maybe pig farmers? The LeGore family heads served high ranking with LaFayette and settled in Maryland in Lime-stoning after some legal issues involving a semi-legal duel/murder. There was some sort of family split though. The other side that moved to Eastern Europe is Huzovich and I know little other than their movement to America in the 1930s. This is all on my maternal side and have only had contact with the Huzovich family once as a small child, yet my mother carries their name (middle) where others carry the LeGore.

Any help is most appreciated. Initially thinking Cossack due to the settling by the mongols, but could be Hun as well though there was much more killing there and less intermingling. What, I'd like to see if anyone has input on is Mongolians settling and breeding with Europeans, and also any input into the strange French sounding name.

P.S. I look like a regular Caucasian.

I am wondering how a Roman army would have marched from the garrison at Carnuntum through to Rome (following the march that Septimus Severus did to claim his position as Emperor) Did they know about Eastern passes through the Alps or would that have marched to the Via Claudia Augusta and followed a more well trodden path?

Thanks!

I know in Hacksaw Ridge they really play up the fact that Doss refused to carry a weapon but I thought that was pretty standard during the time since carrying a weapon would void the protection medics receive under the Geneva Convention.

I think specifically of Imperial Russia and the Byzantine Empire because they had some broad similarities, both being total autocracies heavily backed by Orthodox Christian beliefs and that tended to deify the portrayal of the Emperor. However Byzantium was infamous for the scheming back-stabbing nature of the throne that saw no small number of Emperors assassinated, with new dynasties rising and falling.

Meanwhile the Romanov dynasty lasted over 400 years, with the showdown between Peter I and the regent Sophia being the only case of something like a coup, or Catherine II's takeover from Peter III. Nothing like the seething mass of conspiracy and plotting that dominated the Byzantine courts. So what made empires like Byzantium so much more prone to this sort of political instability than others like Russia?

The giant one in Washington, in front of the Buffalo City Hall, the three in Central Park. What's the significance of them?