It's a character type that shows up occasionally in fiction: the arrogant nobleman who uses his superior sword skills to essentially bully his peers. He does whatever he wants and challenges anyone who stands up to him to a duel, killing them and cowing all the others.

Is there a historical basis for this? Could such blatant behavior even be possible?

I'm watching "how the west was won" with Ray Mears, and at one point he talks to a Blackfoot group as they hunt bison.

While talking to them, there is an undertone of environmentalism being spoken about. E.g. They take only what they need, and they use all parts of the bison so as not to be wasteful.

It's my experience that this theme of natives = environmentalists is echoed in a lot of modern pop culture.

But thinking about it, it seems kind of strange. Environmentalism seems like a very modern concept to me. And on top of that, while efficiency obviously would be a concern in terms of using all the bison, but it seems like the lifestyle wouldn't lend itself for the same kind of moral concept of environmental conservatism that we have nowadays.

So can anybody expand on this for me? And what of the other North American native groups?

And if environmental conservation wasn't a traditional concern, when did they adopt it?

Not talking about archaelogical finds or similar, talking about what part of their culture of society we can see in our current western society if there's any?

Only appears in latter works almost taking form like an aging Henry Ford

In light of the recent rulings of the SCOTUS legalizing gay marriage in the U.S., I've been seeing a bunch of posts talking about how the recent ruling was passed under the 14th amendment. The assertions go on to say that since the 14th amendment was never ratified, this recent ruling was never ratified, and is not actually legal.

I was hoping this sub can tell me if this is valid or not. Since the mods have a strict rule on sources, I figured this was a great place to ask. Thank you!

Was he mourned or were there instances of celebration considering how soon after the end of the Civil War it was?

What did former leading Confederate figures have to say about it?

I've heard that the reason 19th and 18th centuries architecture seems so magnificent and of consistently high standards is that only the most important of buildings survived demolitions and urban planning.

Now, obviously, not everyone could afford to build like that, so I'm certain most middle-class and low-class houses were smaller and less decorated, but my question is: did they build in the same style and spirit as the great buildings that we see today, or was there a completely diferent set of conventions for that sort of buildings?

One example I'm talking about is rank and file lining up two groups of soldiers in front of each other and shooting each other, but not targeting officers.

This is something I've always been curious about. I understand to some extent that it was based on class. What I'm curious about is were officers actually not targeted at all? What about when they entered melee/hand to hand fighting? Were there any groups that actually did target officers? What were the consequences if a private was seen targeting an enemy officer? What about being over run and defeated, were captured officers kept safe?

Basically I'm curious if this is a big Hollywood lie or there's truth to it.

Thanks!

I've heard of the Battle of Sitka in 1804, but what sort of relations developed between the various peoples involved throughout the rest of this short colonial venture? Were they notably different from American/British/French/Canadian interactions with the continent's indigenous peoples?

Army 1 and Army 2 meet on the field of battle slaughter each other so badly there was no clear winner and because resources were so depleted from the battle fighting couldn't continue afterwards?

How different is the equipment of a U.N soldier (U.S in particular) compared to a Chinese one?

looking for one with a longer scope

Hey! I'm a high school teacher and a chronic over-thinker. I've got this vague-ass standard - "describe the relationship between religion and political authority in ancient Egypt." I am having trouble taking everything I know about Egyptian religion and political authority and distilling it down into something that high school students, in a non-AP class can understand.

TL;DR - I'm having trouble not making the relationship between Egyptian political authority and religion completely fucking complicated for my high school students.

ETA: That I'm not a kid, but high school AP World History teacher who hates this standard.

This symbol doesn't really look like a heart to me, so what is its significance and where does it come from?