I would want to guess with no facts that is was prejudice against native americans at the time, but I'd like to know more about how draftees were selected for officer school to become 2nd Lt's . It seems a college degree was a strong indicator for becoming an officer. Why wasn't Joe Medicine crow sent to OCS, with a completed masters degree (anthropology) and his Ph.D. in that subject nearly complete? There was at least one Naval Officer will full Native American blood, Commander Ernest E. Evans, USN, who fought valiantly against an overwhelming Japanese naval force commanding his Fletcher class destroyer USS Johnston. The Johnston was sunk, and Cmdr. Evans was posthumously awarded the Medal of Honor.

I know Joe Medicine Crow received other high honors, like the Presidential Medal of Freedom, French Legion of Honor, and perhaps most satisfying for him personally, he competed all the achievements in his engagements with the enemy (The German Army) to be a Crow War Chief.

Why didn't a man with a master's degree, a voluneer become an officer, then?

In a lot of games, it's common to have so-called archers and slingers units/squads of around 50-100 people all with the exact same weapons that are specifically arranged and taught a single weapon. Or even more specific greatsword/spear units who only carry these weapons. Are these real? Did medieval and roman generals really organize their armies in such specific ways? Or was it more like, get a weapon, get a squad does what feels right in battle? If the former really did happen are there any specific examples?

I'm currently looking for reasons for the fall of the Byzantine Empire but am not finding many answers. I'm wondering around what time, and for what reasons the empire fell, other than outside conflict.

Something that always puzzled me is how the Americans were open to giving the British tanks, trucks, food, supplies, and other necessities of war but never gave or helped the British develop a self-loading rifle during the war? What were the reasons for this? Because it was fairly evident by WW2 that self-loading rifles were the future of arms innovations with the Germans, Soviets, and Americans developing their own. The British even bought and actively used the M1 Thompson submachine gun which is a self-loading weapon. So with all the factors pointing to the development of a British self-loading rilfe, what factors prevented this from occurring?

It doesn't seem like there are a lot of mountains in that region, and it's not like those lands were barren or inhospitable, they were full of nations that made roads and wanted trade to flow, and Southern China is a region with many important ports so there is motivation to go there

I get the impression that going from India to China should have been a trip similar to going from Spain to Romania, long, expensive, dangerous, but completely feasible and maybe even somewhat safe in times of peace

In the 17th century, Joseon tried to produce gunpowder, but due to the lack of gunpowder production due to the rainy season, only small cannons could be used.

Europe used huge cannons, and how many gunpowder did Europe produce in a year in the 17th century?

I am just wondering. When Latin spread throughout its empire, vulgar versions of it evolved into French, Italian, Spanish, and Romanian. But English on the other hand remains the same when it spread throughout the world. The American english, Australian English, British English are still basically the same.

Hi all,

I'm a history undergrad graduating in 9 months. I want to pursue a career in history and I believe I can succeed in graduate school. I am specifically interested in islamic intellectual history and Ottoman political history.

However, every post on this platform suggests that becoming a history professor is impossibly difficult. Is this true? Do you any of you disagree? Did any of you who graduated recently secure solid positions? Did any of you secure tenure track positions? Perhaps I'm clinging onto false hope but I feel there must be some way to thrive and succeed with a history PhD.

On a related note, what are the most important factors to get hired as a history professor. Is it your PhD program/University? Your department/supervisor? Your publications? Your previous teaching experience? Obviously all are important but which are the most important.

Title. Also, were there any materials that had been stockpiled for her refit?

He pops up a lot in the new Beatles documentary Get Back. I decided to look him up and his life really went downhill after the Beatles broke up. Eventually in 1976 he seemingly comitted suicide by cop and his wiki page mentions that none of the Beatles went to his funeral. Why not? Seems cold considering they worked very closely with him.

It was weird that Italian states like Genoa and Venice did not attempt to find new trade routes. They had a lot of capitals to spare thanks to their banking and trade; they had a lot of reasons to discover new routes (as the Ottoman was their main enemy); they had the naval expertise to do so (seeing that many of the explorers like Christopher Columbus and Amerigo Vespucci were Italian) and their relations with Christian states were not bad to the point of being refused exit from the Mediterranean sea (unlike the Ottoman who would be stopped by Christian force if they attempted to do so).

So why did Venice, Milan, or Genoa never attempt to colonize the New World ?

I've recently been reading some 'self insert' fiction where a modern person is magically transported to the Middle Ages and proceeds to wander about doing the usual sort of things. Some of these stories are fairly mundane, for example A Connecticut Yankee in King Arthur's Court, or Timeline, where the people might have some scientific knowledge to disrupt things, but others have the character also possessing magical abilities such as being able to fly or be very strong.

I'm wondering what the general reactions of people in the Middle Ages would be. Let's imagine, for example, that one day a young man wanders down to a town, no one know's him, apparently he's from a remote region (a valley in the Alps previously unknown etc) and his parents are dead and he's looking to find employment. Well what can he do? Then he picks up a boulder or punches down a wall or something.

Undoubtably any lord would want such a person in their retinue, but I've read some stuff around the Templars for example, and the opposition toward them, with some saying instead of fighting religous enemies, Christendom should instead concentrate on internal soul searching and so on.

I'm curious about a few things then, firstly, what would be the processes for examining this superdude? I thought of the Sampson comparison as an obvious one, so maybe some hair cutting I suppose. However, given the scientific method wasn't known of then I can't imagine medival scholars would get very far in understanding how the person's power actually works.

Secondly, what would the wider responses be? Attempts to have this person come work for X lord I imagine. Possibly take him on a crusade so he can punch the gates of Jerusalem open or something.

Thirdly, how is this person likely to respond? Might they be persuaded to conquer somewhere for themselves? How might their views of their own miraculous powers be shaped?

My studies focus more on the eastern U.S., but the massive scale of giving away, or destroying, wealth in potlatch ceremonies is intriguing. Let's take it to basics...

Who is in charge of potlatches? Who gives/destroys goods and food, who receives, and who made those excess goods in the first place? How does slavery factor into the ceremony? What is the significance of the potlatch in the religious life of the nation? Is wealth really redistributed, or passed between elites?

Thanks in advance!

I will admit that I am not exactly sure how one should phrase this question and what part of what is now modern day China can be qualified for this topic, as my knowledge of early Chinese history is very limited. I suddenly realized that names, positions, relations and broad course of events concerning notable adversaries in Roman history, such as Carthage, Gauls, Germanic tribes and Parthians, are well known and researched, while I can hardly name anyone on the Chinese side during the period up to early AD, except for Xiongnu. Everybody knows that Carthage was fighting Roman republic for many years, and everybody knows that Caesar conquered Celts. What is the direct or broadly similar counterpart to these events, say, for Han empire? Who was Chinese Hannibal and what Gauls were actively resisting their conquests?