Preferably free. Many thanks!

[deleted]

I was wondering whether Europeans already had racist viewpoints when the slave trade started, or did this spread later on. Was it propagated to justify the slave trade which brought in huge profits for many? I know that even when the Americas were discovered the natives were treated as savages, but was this purely because of their lifestyle/non-christian beliefs or were these ideas of "lesser humans" already developed?

I am aware that this may be a kind of a "chicken or the egg" question but I would like to hear the opinion of someone more knowledgeable on the topic.

What was happening in Bavaria that lead to the limitation of ingredients in beer?

[deleted]

Reading a biography of Walt Whitman I came upon a curious passage from his 'Hospital Visits' written in 1863, documenting his visits to Union military hospitals in Washington:

The soldiers are nearly all young men, and far more Americans than is generally supposed - I should say nine tenths are native born.

Granted, I'm British so my knowledge of the ACW is limited but I find it odd that there should be any non-Americans fighting, let alone that 10% of the forces should be foreign.

Who could these foreign troops possibly be? Canadians? Mexicans?

Edit: I'm aware of Zoave regiments fighting for both the Union and the Confederacy but I was under the impression that they weren't particularly prevalent.

I'm assuming it has something to do with the geography, and perhaps the first Europeans to venture to America assuming they were in India? If this is so, why did the term stick for so long, to the extent that everyone still thinks of "cowboys and Indians"?

My professor mentioned this during a lecture, but he's no historian, and this sorta sounds like a physics urban legend. Are there any credible sources that support this?

Seeing that modern helmets look a lot like the German stahlhelm. The British one looks like it leaves the most of your head exposed compared to other helmets, and I'm not sure what the function if the large rim around it was.

Surely one assumes after 7 centuries of Muslim rule they would've started speaking Arabic.

Edit: thanks for the answers. The consensus seems to be that Arabic didn't take hold because it was the language of the elites, and because it was too different from Spanish in the first place.

I understand that this may have been an attempt to relinquish the responsibility of choosing between his siblings but would not electing a relatively unknown claimant of the throne who lacked any serious support only jeopardise the stability of England further? Not to mention that his father, Henry VIII would likely have much preferred the crown to pass to Elizabeth than a distant relative.

Also, how would this compare with their draw weight and draw length, and weight of ammunition?

Bonus: How well could this shoot through various armour at close range?

I'm working on an assignment for school, it's about the differences between the modernisation of China and Japan in the late 19th century/early 20th century. I got stuck on the effects of the industrialisation/modernisation on the common people, like what changed in everyday life? I know there was a greater effect in Japan than in China, but that's about it. I looked through the recommended book list, but I don't have access to a lot of those books, and I couldn't really find anything on google. If anyone could recommend me an alternative source that would be greatly appreciated.

I just learnt about the Long March led by Mao Zedong in 1934-35. 6000 miles semi-voluntarily seems extraordinary with a 80% death rate. Has there ever been something similar either of a group or individuals?

With the increase in news about Nolan's next film "Dunkirk" I got thinking about the place of Dynamo in the British national consciousness and the narrative of WW2.

The "little boats" obviously are a major part of the story and many town quays and docks in the southern UK have plaques commemorating how many boats left to help and some of the vessels themselves still taking part in remembrance events, so my question is this:

Do we know how useful the informal help of non-military vessels was during the evacuation?

If so, how useful were they at actually helping in the evacuation or was their benefit (if any) more of a psychological/political one in the building of the "Dunkirk Spirit" narrative?

Specifically I'm looking for a narrative history that will cover in broad strokes, how various powerful families in Europe came about leading to Dynasties we all learned about in school and beyond. In other terms, the collapse of the Roman Empire at roughly 400AD must have left a giant power vacuum throughout Europe. How was this filled. By about 1000AD or thereabouts there are established nations, Kingdoms, dynasties with different names and languages from those seen in Roman times. What is the narrative of that 600 year period.

Obviously the whole of Europe is a rather large subject - I wouldn't mind books with a bias towards England / the UK but Europe as a whole would be good too.

Thanks.

What part of the world was drinking it first? Who could be credited with 'inventing' it? What else in the way back machine do we know about it?

What is the earliest mention of it?

From narrow view of the fourth crusade I get the impression that it crippled what was left of the Roman empire, making it that much easier for the Ottomans the crush them.

I understand that an alternate history is hard to answer, but to me it seems that had the fourth crusade never happened, the Romans would have lasted longer than they did.

Similar to how Catholicism, Protestantism, Baptism, etc, came from Christianity?

I read that two were retrieved by Germanicus and one later on, but how exactly did this happen? I mean, did the legions hide their eagles? I doubt Arminius would just leave them around, especially considering he mailed around heads. They he put them up for public display, so that they could easily found by the invading Romans?