I have never heard of any account of native american tribes or early settlers dealing with or describing tornadoes. They must have seen them. Did they see them as supernatural or just extreme weather like thunderstorms? Were there myths and legends behind them?

Did people dare explore them? Is there photographic evidence? How long until they began to be absorbed back in to the landscape versus how much is still off limits today?

I've grown up seeing, reading, and hearing Soviet leadership being depicted as somewhat like the capitalistic "robber baron" trope but with different clothes. i.e they were men who used the Soviet system to consume luxuries most other soviets couldn't obtain and/or use the Soviet system as a stick to make sure they and their families were given the best houses, cars, salaries, etc.

I know that it is hard to peer into a man's innermost motivations and feelings, but was there ever a sizable number of individuals in soviet leadership who seemed to really "walk the walk" when it came to living austerely, working for the common good, etc?

When the Berlin wall fell, was there any risk of such "hardliners" trying to militarily take back control of the situation?

In terms of both its ability to foster revolutions domestically and spread revolutions abroad?

Edit: Removed follow-up speculative question.

First time posting, so forgive me if I did this wrong or it's a bad question. I watch a lot of shows that are based in a medieval or fantasy settings with knights and warriors riding on horseback. I don't think I've ever seen foot soldiers ever targeting the horses instead of the riders. I don't know if it's because of filiming it, so you don't hurt the animals, or if nobody actually did that. I'm thinking that they would aim for the rider so they could steal the horses or something. Is there a definite answer though?

I'm very sorry if this question is weirdly worded or has been asked before. What I'm basically asking is how the mindset of an average peasant in a medieval society in Europe was. I'm going the leave the time frame and the region relatively open, as I'm interested in most areas of medieval, European history. To make the question a bit easier to answer: To what extent was the worldview of the peasantry influenced by their Church? To what extent did they identify with their nation or their ruler? How did they view their life and their role in society? Was criticizing the government widespread?

I'm italian and where i live the news of discoveries of ancient buildings during excavations to build. Where all the ground on them is from? and why sometimes there are also a few meters between the ground level and the ruins? This happen both in field and cities. In the latter case i thought that in order to build new buildings they used to demolish the previous structure and use the rubble as a "foundation", but the fact is that you can find building with the walls standing up! For example: it has been found a Roman domus under a square in my city (Cremona), how the heck it came under 6 meters of soil?!? and there is no hills it's all flat! i hope you can understand my english

Just based on the word, I would think it would mean that the historian in question is changing or revising the official account of some event, in order to make one party look better--similar to what I've read about Soviet Russia altering their history textbooks depending on who's in power. Is this the case? Or does it mean something else?

What is the difference between these? Why do we use the two terms synonymously (at least in North America), and were they always considered so?

In Pulp Fiction some of the protagonists are very much into using heroin. I would think cocaine was the drug of choice by then, especially among the well-to-do in L.A. Was heroin in fact (still/again) a party drug back then or was heroin just a plot device in this movie?

Some background : I was going through the TV channels and saw a show about Ashoka, in the scene where I stopped, a girl was walking on a very modern looking, metalled road.

My questions:

• That was a glitch right? Or were there really metalled roads during that time period?

• If no, then what were the transportation methods available to the common masses?

• IIRC the Indus Valley civilization had tiled pavements and walkways. Was it possible for leveled, concrete and tar produced roads (the steam roller pressed kinds we have today) to be made during the Mauryan Empire?

This is my first time posting here. Apologies if I broke any rule or formatting guidelines.

Fot my MA thesis I have to add a historiographical introduction. I have already implementented a segment on my 4 sources with their own historiographical background, but my professor insists that I add a introduction explaining the major characteristics of each tradition. (In what way are Islamic and Christian historiography similair, in what way do they differ, etc.)

I have already consulted various books on the matter such as Robinson's Islamic Historiography but they all examine one side of the matter and don't offer comparisons.

Also would his answer conform to official church doctrine of the time?

If they had would it have been effective in forcing a surrender from Japan, or would we have had to drop the second one anyway? If it wasn't considered, why not? Was it a matter of not showing our hand without direct consequence?

I am doing a presentation on the social question in England in the victorian age and I´m looking for any reading material or sources on what the government did to change the rising impoverishment. I wasn´t able to find much valuable information and thought maybe someone in here could help me out. TIA

Some sources I found say at in an indo-european culture black and white where the same word of "blace" but the c and e where a compound letter.