I know cacao, rubber and turquoise were traded, but what else? And was trade regular among these peoples? I know the Mesoamerican ball game was brought to the Southwest, so I assume the cultural influence from Mesoamerica would have been extensive.

I'm told by Christians that no one believed they existed except for old testament writers.

Bonus claim I heard: There are documents of the Hebrew enslavement, the record lies with the Israelites and even Egyptians but Egyptians are known to destroy documents at times.

Reading the letters of Alexander Hamilton, one finds paragraphs like this:

"The influx of foreigners must, therefore, tend to produce a heterogeneous compound; to change and corrupt the national spirit; to complicate and confound public opinion; to introduce foreign propensities. In the composition of society, the harmony of the ingredients is all important, and whatever tends to a discordant intermixture must have an injurious tendency."

If I'm doing my math right, the average word length here is 5.7 characters, compared to an average of 4.5 - 5 today. Did Americans back then - the rich ones, at least - speak this way too? Or was this kind of language purely written, the way people kept writing Latin long after they stopped speaking it?

(Any other interesting info on the crew or their Hiroshima/Nagasaki missions I would enjoy as well~)

I am curious what life was like for the average nazi german family during ww2. From what i understand there was a huge economic depression before Hitler. Did any of his policies grow the economy and make it easier to make a living?

Many historical texts, especially ancient documents gave inaccurate number. For example, Hedorotus inflated the Persian army to more than 1 million. So how do historians make estimation of the real number of combatant in a battle?

I would like to ask the same question for the death count in some events of the 20th century which statistic is unavailable or not credible. For example, if a historian doubt the Great Leap Forward's casualties reported by Chinese official statistic, how can he/she estimate the real number?

I am aware that different historians may give different estimations on the same subject, I am just interested in the methods at their disposal.

I'm particularly interested in cultures that developed independently of one another. Did Native Americans see the same shapes in the stars as Europeans, etc? I already know that some cultures have different names for constellations, I'm more interested in if they recognized the same patterns.

When studying history in school, and even university, 'history' is divided into distinct era's or periods, such as the Roman Empire, Dark Ages, Middle-Ages, etc. Each of these periods has a distinct characteristic or theme about them. I find myself looking at the roman empire and then early medieval Europe and wondering 'how did one period transition into another?' Are there any good books that map out the history of Europe in the transition from the roman empire to what became medieval Europe? As in, something that explains and describes the process of the fall of the roman empire and the creation of christian medieval, feudal kingdoms? thanks

Did they just leave after that?

I just used the toy to make believe I was an Indian or a very incompetent mery man. I was a bit disappointed when I found out, years later, that a real bow was like most of a grown man's hight, not the length of two rulers.

You know I'm only 23, I'm making it sound like I was a child in the 50s. There was a PS1 in the next room well I was doing this crap. One of my brothers friends was probably player 2 at the time.

I recently came across this website where a man named CW Porter made several claims in a piece called Made in Russia: The Holocaust about how many of the methods by which the Nazis exterminated Jews supposedly brought up in the Nuremberg trials were either ridiculous, impractical, or impossible. Now, I am aware from the very beginning that this man is considerably biased. One look at his homepage can tell anyone that. But I simply want to know, how valid are his claims?

Was everything supposed to revolve around carrier aircraft and submarines, or were the remaining gun-only cruisers and destroyers from WWII supposed to engage with their guns when carriers were not available? I noticed that the Harpoon Missile didn't even come into service until 1977, so there's a huge gap there where the only equipment a surface ship would have to engage the enemy was still it's guns.

[deleted]

Ottoman Turkish was overloaded with Arabic and Persian borrowings to the point that they were influencing its grammar. If a noun and an adjective were both of Arabic origin, they had to agree in gender, something completely foreign to Turkish, a language without grammatical genders. It means people had to know the original genders that those words had in Arabic. It wasn't probably a problem as many were studying Arabic, which was the language of religion. And that's my next point. All the educated people knew Arabic, the empire was the Caliphate, they used the religious identity, not the national/ethnic one, the Arab lands were part of the country, and many citizens were Arabs. It would have looked perfectly logical if they had completely switched to Arabic. Why didn't they do so?

Were the Allies really backed against the type of corner that would warrant such extreme action?

A mathematician friend of mine argued to me that Rome was a dark age when it came to math. He thought it was striking, and damning, that the relatively small Greek civilization produced so much math, but Rome did almost none.

My attempted responses to defend the honor of Rome:

• Rome was big on delegation. They conquered the Greeks. If they needed math, they used Greeks. It's like they say at the end of the Aeneid—yours, Rome, is to rule.
• They preserved a lot of Greek math, which would otherwise have been lost.
• For all we know, the Romans did do a bunch of math, and medieval scholars and monks just failed to transcribe it.
• Rome was great at applied math, e.g., engineering and accounting. So there was probably some pure math "underneath" that they just never bothered to really write down separately.

But I'm starting to wonder if it truly was a "dead period" for math. Maybe Rome just didn't consider pure mathematics of interest? In their defense, back in the day, it probably seemed more like weird numerological mysticism or obscure philosophy. Still, it does seem that the Greeks wildly outperformed them in this area.

And, to clarify—I'm not counting "applied mathematics". I'm well aware of the Roman genius for architecture and engineering, and my friend did concede those points.