I ask because I was reading in article in the Times' excellent Disunion series which happened to mention the wages of the workers at a factory in upstate New York; they were paid in shillings.
Now, this seems very strange, coming in the midst of the Civil War, some four score years since the end of the Revolution. Was this still common practice in this period, at least in the Northeast? When did the last holdouts switch to the dollar?

Would people just ride by on their horse and shoot someone with a crossbow and ride off if they wanted to kill them?

In ancient Greece and Rome, rhetoric was very much at the heart of education, with other topics like philosophy primarily serving as diversions or elements of aristocratic leisure. I also understand that it was central to Renaissance humanism, and that it maintained that centrality through the eighteenth and nineteenth century under the guise of legal study. Today on the other hand, one might take a public speaking class or join a debate club, but it is no longer considered a core part of education. What caused this change?

I've never gotten a clear indication of how many planes attacked in Pearl Harbor or the costs associated with them on either side? I understand much more life was lost on the American side, but as far as money goes did the kamikaze attacks actually prove to be beneficial?

Poland was absolutely important. But France and its fall in 1940 was a huge unprecedented move by the Nazis.

That said, why was France on the hitlist above Britain or any other large powers?

Thanks!

Sources would be appreciated.

During World War II, the time that has to be the most prominent use of air power, entire cities were basically destroyed, e.g. Dresden, Berlin, Coventry, so its clear that AA guns were not at all successful. And its my understanding that jets were launched post WW2 which I imagine only decreased their accuracy even further. So were they actually worth their metal?

I've always been curious when reading about battles in the pre-modern era as to what methods they would employ to properly assess the death toll afterwards.

Specifically, I've been really interested in how people figured out the number of dead after major sieges, such as the Siege of Carthage, in which as many as ~500,000 people were apparently killed. It seems like an incredible undertaking to record with accuracy such results.

I have to write an 11 page paper on Plessy v. Ferguson for history. The first two pages are on the author. Would the author be the Supreme Court or an actual Court Justice?

When i watched the show a while back, i wondered the historical accuracy in term of culture, technology and architecture.

I will appreciate the answers from the community.

I'm trying to find out more about early Modern English political thought, and how the constitution developed over the 17th century.

I'm particularly interested in the relationship between the law, the Crown/king, and Parliament, and which of them was supreme in terms of the constitution and principles of the common law.

Thanks in advance for your help!

I know the USSR didn't because they were boycotting the UN but why didn't China?

The only specific examples I can think of off the top of my head would be the Free Imperial Cities in the HRE, such as Bremen and Lübeck. How was life as a burgher in these cities different/improved from life as a feudal serf?

Hello! I'm sure you all are tired of talking about the historical accuracy of the 300 movie, but I can't seem to find any posts relevant to the new movie. I just watched it a few days ago and felt that it was way more exaggerated and unrealistic than the first one. I guess I'm just wondering if and how much they deviated from true history. Thanks!