The population of St. Louis, Missouri reached a high point in 1950, and has been declining ever since. I know that many other American cities saw population declines during this period, but why was this decline so dramatic in St. Louis?

In order for Cyrus to establish the Archimedean Empire, he had to unify the tribes. How many tribes did he unify in order to establish the Archimedean Empire?

And if possible can somebody please give me a historian that speaks about how he established the Empire. Thank You

Buddy Holly has been known as one of the most important musicians of the 1950s and a father of rock music. But, no one I know that was alive back then knows who the heck Buddy Holly is. Ritchie Valens though? Yeah, he's iconic. Every senior I've asked throws a blank towards Buddy though.

Have Buddy predominantly become popular posthumously? What was his target audience and where was he most popular?

Wasps design seems severely compromised in retrospect what alternatives did the Navy consider when building its carrier fleet & why did the ultimately settle on 2 good designs & a compromised third?

Hi, reading up on the battle of Cynoscephalae for my degree, thought I could use my Penguin published version of the Histories and wikipedia says his account is Book XVIII. 19–27. Yet when I open the book its missing line 14-29.

For a battle this significant I'm just wondering why Penguin would remove this part in the book.

ps: the page numbers line up, theres no trans;ation note

I don't know if my question is misguided or confusing, but bear with me, please. I am looking for examples where military incompetence was present from start to finish throught an entire conflict. I've read about disastrous battles, bad leaders and what not, but I was wondering if there were any instances of it happening on a larger scale?

To be honest, some of the terms and concepts are a bit hard for me to understand or to connect, and an entire war has many more aspects and added complexity than a single battle or operation, so I'd like you to explain to me like I'm a 5 yo, if you don't mind.

Considering they made a war effort substantially higher than the other Allies.

I was thinking when watching Letters From Iwo Jima last night. We’re the soldiers stationed on Iwo Jima all preparing for their first time fighting personally against American troops? Knowing that they usually fought to the end (to the point of suicide), were there cases of Japanese soldiers that were pulled back to prepare for the next battle or was it fresh troops each time on their side going up against battle hardened allies (marines fighting in multiple battles like Guadalcanal and Okinawa per say)?

Were there any traders that on record went there, any diplomatic missions?

How is Edward Said's Orientalism viewed by fellow historians? What kind of criticism is directed at it? And does it stand up to the criticism?

In addition, if anyone has answers:

• I know the idea of using atomic energy for a weapon existed in pop culture well before the Manhattan Project. If the idea of an atomic bomb was so well-known that comic book writers knew about it, what was the harm in comic book readers knowing about it? Or were the Superman writers at the time more informed than the general public for some reason (and if so, how?)
• Are there other cases of something like this happening (a government requesting or demanding a delay of an entertainment product for national security reasons)?

Wikipedia sources this claim to The Superman Files, by Matthew K. Manning. It also says that a comic strip in 1945 where Lex blasts Superman with particles from a cyclotron was pulled, but that implies it was after publication, so the title question isn't relevant in that case (though the follow-up question is.)

My understanding is that the area in which Muhammad lived cosisted of largely polytheistic societies, so how did Muhammad have knowledge of events written in the Koran which are nearly identical to those in the Bible and Torah, such as Adam and Eve and the story of Noah? Or was he Jewish and had this knowledge? Or were the texts with these elements written later?

Like did the early eastern roman empire have legions, auxiliaries, cohorts etc. Did the eastern romans fight like their western brothers with soldiers rotating every 6 minutes? If so when did they stop doing that and reformed their military?

Hi, all. I was wondering what entitled Tsar Michael I to the Russian throne. As I understand it, he was a great-nephew in-law to Ivan Grozny, and had no blood connection to the Rurikids. How was the line of succession treated in Russia at that time? I understand there were a few Tsars in between Michael and Fyodor, the last Rurikid ruler, but it seems they only ruled for a single generation. Why were their families not made the ruling dynasty? And further, I understand the majority of the princely families (knyaz) of Russia are cadet branches of the Rurikid dynasty. Why were none of the blood descendants of the Rurikids made the new ruling family?

I know for example in Britain, the Hanoverians inherited the throne because they were 1. Protestant, and 2. descendants of James I, and George I was the closest relative to fit both those requirements. I assume eligibility for the throne in pre-Romanov Russia was quite a different system, and I'd like to understand what it was.

Books, videos, people to talk to. I'm reading Ian Kershaw's biography on Hitler, and the politics of the time are confusing to me. I know they are very important for molding Hitler into the man we all know him as, but I would like to understand in much more depth why this was so.

In Band of Brothers, there’s a scene where they liberate a concentration camp. However, the soldiers are told that they can’t provide too much food to the prisoners because of their malnutrition and require the prisoners to go back into the camps.

I was wondering what was the exact process, such as health, financial and civil aid provided to the victims, from the moment the gates were opened?

This is inspired by the recent mod post regarding example seeking questions. Are there any particularly prominent examples of these officers? I mean both those who were prominent in the Wehrmacht and also those who started out in the Wehrmacht and later became prominent in the Bundeswehr. Also, how were these officers perceived by German society and by foreign countries? Was the presence of these officers exploited by Eastern Bloc propaganda (I think I recall that the idea that West Germany was a continuation of the Nazi regime was popular in communist propaganda). What were relations like with NATO allies? Was there any tension? A sense of respect, perhaps? (If I recall correctly, the Western Front was "cleaner") Finally, how did the presence of these officers contribute to the myth of the "clean Wehrmacht"? I apologise if this question is somewhat long-winded.

Am currently reading "God's Shadow" where in chapter 6 it advances a view I've not heard before that "long before Columbus crossed the ocean, numerous native americans rode atlantic currents eastwards to europe and africa" Specifically that columbus met multiple native americans in Galway, before he himself crossed.

The citations it uses to support this are "men of cathay" as a quote of columbus in David B. Quinn, "columbus and the north, england, iceland and ireland" and

Jack D. Forbes, "Africans and native americans, The language of Race and the Evolution of Red-Black peoples" also author of "the american discovery of europe"

Is this a standard historical view now? I live in the UK so never learnt much about Columbus' journeys, but I didn't find much corroborating this online so would love to know more about the general view on pre-columbian

I apologize if this is the wrong place, but I didn’t know where else to post this, and this question has really been bugging me. If you look at a map, Russia has this weird shape that shows the top middle of the country is at a more northern point than the Chukotka Oblast (Far East Russia), when in reality, that’s not the shape of it. Why do maps do this?