Marshall and Tully estimate that during the battle of Midway the Japanese lost approximately 25% of its aircrew from the four carriers deployed. With all four of these carriers destroyed, and no friendly airbases to land at writhing range, how did the remaining aircrew survive? We're they lucky enough to be rescued from sinking carriers or did they ditch in the ocean near other Japanese vessels operating in the area?

This may sound dumb, but I feel that using ponies is probably less efficient than using a full sized horse.

1850, 1900, and 1950?

• What could they study? What was the tuition? Did they receive grades in the sense that we do today?
• What was the average student's background?
• What did they do in terms of school work? Write reports and do homework?
• What did they do in terms of lodgings, food, and laundry?
• What kind of doors would a Harvard education open for them?

What would be the main differences in dialect?

I was recently at a concert that was put on by a local anarchist organization, and they made it sound like 1930's Spain was the hey-day of anarchism, and the best example of an anarchist society in the real world. In addition, was it truly that great or are they seeing it through rose tinted glasses?

I just want to know if people themselves were seeing the end of civilization.

I've been wanting to ask this questions to someone for some time but I'm not quite able to ask it in the concise way in which I wish I could. I have been trying to understand exactly what it would mean to have an income of "x" per year, in England, ala Pride and Prejudice. The only sense I can make of it would be this amount, such as Mr. Darcy's £10,000 a year, is actually the interest made from the estate's fortune? Is this so? How exactly were estates handled financially?

I'm genuinely interested in the money matters of the time, such as if this is indeed the interest then who is providing this? Banks? Please tell me all you know because I would very much like to have a better understanding of the financial aspects of the time.

Also, I'm new to the sub and am just interested in whatever you have to tell me. If someone has a suggestion for a resource beyond this sub, or if this isn't the appropriate place for my question, I'd gladly receive any information on an additional resource elsewhere. Thanks!

Obviously, a separate, sovereign Sikh state would be ideal, but were Sikhs afraid of being a minority in the future Muslim majority state of Pakistan? If so why was being part of a Hindu dominated India preferable? Or was this just another quirk of the Radcliffe Commission?

I can guess that slat is really important, but ... pepper?

Additionally, did the bureaucracy that Charlemagne helped construct continue to survive under any of the surviving Frankish nations?

In John Ashdown-Hill's book "The Third Plantagenet" about George of Clarence, there is a picture of a seal found in the Catalog of Seals in the Dept. of Manuscripts of the British Museum that looks very much like the Plantagenet COA and is labeled as "the arms of Jasper Tudor" without further explanation. Does anyone have any thoughts about this?

I was having a dinner table conversation and a relative in the military was recounting his time serving in Iraq. He described an incident where during a raid a woman started talking to my relative in Arabic and when he looked to the Iraqi interpreter to get a translation of what she said, the interpreter turned and smacked the woman and led her out of the room. The Iraqi man came back and apologized that she spoke to my relative (a man). My question is, considering Islam started about 600 years after Christianity, would a similar thing have happened if a Christian woman spoke to a man in medieval Europe?

Considering that the role of units (Specifically Line Infantry) of that time was essentially to form a line and shoot/be shot at by the enemy, how did these 'veteran' units work exactly? What made them less cannon-fodder than any other unit? I can see their veterancy coming in handy in terms of hand-to-hand combat and use of their rifles, but why exactly were they so renowned?

Also, did commanders ever make attempts to target specific veteran units during combat?

I had read somewhere before that their support for this film was related to attempts around the time (after WW2) to disband the USMC and distribute their functions with the Army and Navy. However I can't remember the source of this claim, so I'm not sure if its true. Was their support for the movie an attempt to improve their public perception?

Any suggestions? I mainly am hoping for a great narrative work that focuses on the bigger picture of the different eras, while avoiding the tendency towards hero-worship and mythologizing that popular histories are sometime prone towards. I realize I may not be able to find a one volume work, so if I must narrow it down, I'm mainly interested in Early Modern Scotland, so roughly 16th to mid-18th century, from the Tudor Era to the beginning of the Hanovers in England. Any suggestions would be most appreciated. I'm looking for a great book to delve into during the Christmas break (college student here) that will teach me a great deal. Thanks

I have seen alot of posts to /r/MilitaryPorn, and many feature black and white troops on the same units. Was Rhodesia as racially exclusive as South Africa?