Why haiti became so poor and in worse condition than the dominican republic.

Plus being the second to gain independence in the americas I would have imagined that the USA would help this new country, if they did, why didnt help at the end.

Plus I heard that the saint domingue was very profitable.

So what happened with Haiti?

As in, we use, for example, AD/BC/CE/BCE. The Romans used their Consuls to date years and I am aware that a lot of other cultures (e.g., the Japanese, even now) refer to years using the titles of their leaders. Does anyone know how the ancient Irish did it? Are there historical references of this? Was it a standardised method throughout Ireland or was it different depending on the area (North vs. South)? If we don't have any evidence/knowledge of that time period, at what time period do we know of? Sorry for the torrent of questions, I am aware of the Coligny calendar and their use of 5-year cycles, but I have been unable to find any more information on it online. Any help is appreciated :)

Was there a general consensus of support from the global community at that time for one side or the other? Was the war even talked about in international terms? Was technology advanced enough to keep anyone informed with any up to date information?

I realize my question may be fairly wide. I've been reading books about piracy in the 18th century and I realized most of what we know comes from contemporary books or newspapers, a lot of letters and court and trade records. I imagine this is the case for many parts of history, but how did these records, especially letters that aren't reprinted, last so long through ages when they physically had to be stored somewhere safe?

Hey! Not sure if this is the right place to post this kind of question (and please do let me know where else to post this if it's completely in the wrong place) but I'm an Undergrad Classics prepping for my Dissertation this Sept. I've started doing some research around my topic but I'm a little worried about structuring and don't know what kind of structure/argument I should be aiming for. I have an idea and a topic I really love but I'm a bit confused and worried I'm going to get myself stuck writing a thematic narrative around the topic rather than actually crafting an argument. (For Context I want to look at the reception of Classical Imagery/Themes in Contemporary Art)

As of right now my idea is incredibly vague, which is why I've started researching so I can focus my question enough pre September to start writing in the Autumn, my trouble is the question is so big I don't even know where to start.

Google has given me lots of advice for Scientific Dissertations but I can't find any good advice for Humanities Dissertations which is why I thought I'd post this question here! How much of an argument should I be crafting right now? Is it enough just to do lots of reading around the topic and then figure things out later? In short I'm a little overwhelmed and would really appreciate some advice/useful links from fellow historians who have been or are going through the process, thank you in advance !!

Tl;dr: I'm overwhelmed by the Dissertation process and would appreciate some advice around structuring/starting or any tips at all

I’m working my way through Mike Duncan’s Revolutions podcast series, and I’m struck by the amount of infighting, purges, coups, countercoups and insurrections that seem to characterize almost every revolution covered in the series, except for the American Revolution, which seems to have gone off relatively smoothly and resulted in a stable civilian government pretty much immediately.

Obviously the American Revolutionaries had their disagreements, but they don’t seem to have been willing to kill each other over idealogical differences. Compare this to say, the Girondins and the Jacobins in the French Revolution, or the Constitutionalists and Conventionists in the Mexican Revolution. The American Revolutionaries seem so much less prone to violent infighting. Why is that?

During the battle of the coral sea 1 American carrier and 1 Japanese light carrier were sunk. During the course of the pacific war many more carriers would be sunk. What happened to the planes that were assigned to these carriers? Were they able to land on other ships or doomed to die without a place to land? Did regulations regarding this change during the war for either side?

What are some bona fide books to try out when it comes to the folktales and myths of the United States?

Me and a few friends are playing D&D, and the topic of making our own armor has come up since one of us can apparently forge stuff. However, I'm not entirely sure how long it would take to forge a suit of armor realistically, particularly plate armor. How long did it take the average skilled medieval blacksmith to forge a full suit of armor? A week? Months? A year? Two years?

I've read a little bit of political science about parties and it's often said that American parties are extraordinarily weak compared with those in other parts of the world, particularly Europe. I am a little curious if those late 19th Century/early 20th political machines, which seem more like 'strong parties' in that political science sense (e.g. they had membership requirements, the party chose the candidate not the electorate, people voted by party not candidate, the party controlled the candidate once in office, etc), and I wonder what sort of comparison you could make to European parties of the time.

I'm particularly interested in examples of mergers between countries which did not have a recent history of being a single country, as in not just a single country that broke in half for a civil war for a while or something. For some reason I cannot think of a single example, instead I can only think of a long list of countries which have broken apart. Was there ever two neighboring countries which just said hey, we really like each other, how about we become one country?

the years given were just pulled out of a hat, I don't care so much about specific dates as I care about the transition from the future will be the same as the present to the future will be new.

Interested in US/UK stations mostly, but if you know of what was happening elsewhere on TV around the globe during this time, or of any countries that had a TV service at that time but didn't air it (or couldn't), that would also be interesting. What were they showing in the USSR for example?

Forgive me, as I'm sure something like this must have been asked before, and it's certainly been touched upon in other answers, but a few searches turned up nothing that really answers the question.

I have heard many Indians say that "India was the richest country in the world" before the British colonized and plundered it. I am aware of the relatively modern nature of the words "nation" and "country". But to my knowledge, the territory now known as India was not at any time fully politically united (edit: as a sovereign power) prior to 1947 (despite a few empires coming very close), and being so clearly subdivided along ethnic/linguistic lines, only religion seems like the uniting factor (I'm particularly thinking of the North/South divide.)

Is the notion that India was, prior to British colonialism/interference, a country, something that's overall fair to say, or is it an anachronistic designation influenced more by post-colonial nationalistic ideas? That is to say, was India, long before colonization, considered "a country" in the minds of its residents despite its political divisions? Or does the real answer completely defy/not comport with the modern term "nation", or "country" at all?

In the present day Frank Lloyd Wright is viewed as an eccentric architectural genius who produced beautiful, original, and fresh modern architecture.

However, many of his structures have lingering problems and were vastly over budget. Fallingwater, for instance, exceeded its original budget fivefold, required millions of dollars in restoration work.

Did his clients and contractors understand what they were getting themselves into? Or were they surprised by these issues? Was there broader criticism on these issues?