For quite a while, I had thought that the verdict ruled that Scott couldn't sue for citizenship because slaves couldn't sue in court because slaves do not have the legal privileges of US citizens. Upon further study, I realized the wording was not slaves, it was people of African descent. The ruling also says that states may give people of said descent the privileges that white people held, but they could not be made citizens of the US because it was not within the power of states to do so. What did this mean for "free" Africans in the US? Did this essentially mean that a state could call them free, but that they still wouldn't be US citizens?

My great grandfather picked this book off of a dead Japanese soldier in the Philippines in 1944-1945. Since then it has been in my families attic until recently. IMG_0265.JPG IMG_0266.JPG IMG_0270.JPG

I was recently listening to a history show and the topic of Bulgarian expansion in the 8th-9th century came up. At some point the guest proffessor stated that at the time rulers werent as concerned with natural resources in newly conquered lands, rather the indigenous population, that could later be taxed, conscriped, etc. However resources like iron, copper, silver, gold, salt, etc were surely also important so how did people back then probe for them, considering they're hidden so far underground?

With all of the people resigning or turning down positions in the Cabinet, I was wondering if this is just a common problem that other presidents have faced.

Imperialist sentiment, perhaps expressed in terms of European superiority. Or something of that kind... It needs to be rather brief, no more that a few hundred words... Any thoughts?

Various historical accounts, as well as novels and films, portray noble, but impoverished British families forced to endure marriages with wealthy merchants and capitalists in order to preserve the manner to which they have grown accustomed. The marriages are usually portrayed as a quid pro quo: the nobles get money, the gentry get titles for their children/grandchildren.

Was there a similar push by wealthy Americans/Canadians to marry into noble European families -- and was there a difference between the American and Canadian outlook as Canada was still part of the Empire? If so, how were these efforts looked upon by British and European nobles vis a vis their own gentry, and just generally? Further, how did they work out for the North Americans?

It seems like in some fields that almost anyone can get a Ph.D. nowadays, as long as you complete the coursework and can defend your dissertation you get your degree. My mother-in-law is a high school teacher with a Ph.D. in Education. She did 90% of her work off-campus, coming to campus with about 6 other Ph.D. candidates for a two week period in the summer. She wrote a dissertation on an incredibly narrow subject, defended it, and couldn't find employment as a principal. Many districts want principals to hold doctorates.

Am I correct in stating that Ph.D.s used to be relatively rare, conferred only upon the elite in a given field? When did the Ph.D lose its high position? Is it due to the relative ubiquity of the B.A. and B.S.?

As a follow up, IF Tesla is as brilliant as they say he is, what happened after the War of Currents that made him fade into obscurity?

In one of my classes, we are learning about the history of science and technology and one of the medieval paintings we saw showed dragons on top of a castle. My question is how did the idea of a dragon/its significance in medieval come from? Also, dragon's arent unique just to Europe as there are other cultures (China) where they are mentioned too. Is there any relationship between the appearance of dragons in different locations?

Forgive me if my question is weirdly worded, I'm just curious about dragons.

Nominations are seeded based on the Sunday Digest Threads. Vote for the answer(s) you think most deserving. If something is missing, then please post it as well!

I would really appreciate it if you could shortly write about the most important things he did for Italy.

I'm going to imagine its a simple answer like 'trade spawns democracies' since there was plenty of viable republics in italy during the same time, but very curious to hear.

The Salem Witch trials are infamous throughout the western world, but it certainly wasn't the only case of "witch hunting".

Were the Salem Witch trials the bloodiest or the most brutal? Or does another similar event hold that title? I know of quite a few Witch trials that occurred in England that were well documented, but I can't seem to find a good source comparing various trials.

One of my favorite periods in history is the Crusades.(Not counting the fourth crusade, that hardly was even a crusade. Bloody Venetians ruin everything) So I was wondering if any crusaders kept a journal, or wrote about their experiences.

Yes, I know that many people at the time were illiterate. But nobles and knights were (mostly) literate.

Once they become the property of the orphanage, the infants were farmed out to wet nurses, in some cases their own mothers, until old enough to eat millet. They were then reclaimed by the Church to be raised as Catholics.

At a very early age these girls were put to work cleaning, cooking, and sewing. Certain products of their labor were sold on the market to provide a source of income for the orphanage and the Church. Having paid their way by long hours of toil—the older girls often worked up to 12 or even 14 hours a day—the young women were betrothed in their early teens to local peddlers, traders, peasants, or soldiers in return for a substantial remuneration.

This not only helped the Church financially, but also insured new converts and a younger generation brought up as Catholics. For in order to obtain a wife from the orphanage the husband had to promise to become a Catholic, and any children resulting from the union were automatically pledged to the faith. Since the orphanage was the main source of unpromised brides, and since its prices were about one-third lower than the average in the region, many poor peasants who wanted to get married had little alternative but to buy a Catholic wife.

This is an account of one of the ways the Church functioned in China during the early-mid 20th century.

This to me though seems like borderline slavery and human trafficking. Did the Church engage in this sort of behaviour outside of China?

England were the dominant nation in the British Isles, what benefit did they have to rename their global empire the 'British' empire instead of the English empire? What is in it for them?

Were the Byzantines unprepared for the Ottoman attack? Were they drained of resources to the point that they were unable to defend their (presumably) well fortified city that was the center of their civilization?

Take these wikipedia articles on Maeonius and Romulus Augustus for example; "According to Gibbon, the murder was revenge for a short confinement imposed by Odaenathus to Maeonius for being unrespectful." and "Orestes, however, refused to become emperor, "from some secret motive", said historian Edward Gibbon"