Tried researching this on Google and could not find any satisfactory answers. Are they all still there? Or was it never really discovered exactly where they were? Was there any attempt made to exhume the victims and give them a proper burial?

Not as in gay, but such as Lincoln and Joshua Speed.

From Lost to the West and some sources on this subreddit I know that Byzantine people considered themselves Romans until their end. However, when they eventually gained independence centuries later it was as Greece. How did this change in culture occur?

It just seems they use a lot of christian symbols and Saints names as their names

I wanted to know that if the lower class worker had more bargaining power after the black plague due to there being a shortage of labor after the black plague killed so many of the lower classes.

Skipping straight to the point I've got the vaguest idea of a story I want to write about the zombie apocalypse happening in 1918/19 so I was wondering how realistic it would be for a solider to be able to do a head shot with period weapons?

I know typical zombie apocalypses tend to be less than realistic with almost everyone being excellent marksmen but I was wondering if there'd be a significant difference between modern weapons and period ones?

Thank you in advance for any help you can give me.

History lessons are full of the exploits of American, European, Soviet, Chinese, Japanese, and Australian forces in the second World War.

What did South American do?

How about India?

Was Mongolia involved?

Has any countries voted to no longer be a country and instead chose to join completely with another country. I am not thinking states becoming satellite states or joining something like the EU.

The only example I though of (which is not recent at all) was Scotland in 1707. Has there been any more recent examples?

From ancient Greek statues to 18th century portraits, women in particular often have their hair in plaits or pincurls, and I don't see how it would be possible to secure those styles with string or ribbon or straight pins (I've tried).

We always read about how 'bad' the Soviet Union was, but how did Stalin treat the working class? Did he still care about the 'communist values' ?

With this I mean: Stalin was obviously Lenin's student. Lenin brought Russia back to the world theater. Thanks to the communists, Russia became important again. The country's economy was restored and they really cared about the working class, Lenin was not a politician with fake promises, like, for example, all of the recent US presidents and EU leaders.

But did this policy continue under Stalin's rule?

I am not talking about if the Soviet Union was a great place to live in with a lot of freedom. I am talking about Stalin's ''policy'' towards the working class, did he still care about them, or was he delusioned by power?

I searched for answers to this but none were satisfactory. My question is: if Andrew Jackson was such a champion of states' rights, why did he act so harshly during the Nullification Crisis? I could understand trying to stop South Carolina, but threatening to invade them? Additionally, what other achievements of his were such profound victories for states' rights that he can still be considered a champion of states' rights even after his action during the crisis? Thanks for your help.

I am aware that the Chinese utilized explosives, artillery and rudimentary hand cannons by the 13th century, but almost all sources I can find indicate that guns, that is, firearms with ergonomic and mechanical components that primed and ignited gunpowder, were invented in Europe? What components of warfare in the High Middle Ages and Renaissance, in Europe, were present to necessitate such developments that were absent in contemporary China?

As a side note, why did gunpowder spread west from China, but not east and south? I know that firearms were introduced to Japan by the Portuguese in the 16th century, and I believe Southeast Asia also did not receive firearms until the age of European influence.

I have never been able to find this out. My thought is that it would be impossible for a single trench to span the whole of the western front (300 miles???) but then if that was the case why couldn't each side just out flank the other?

It is my understanding that often warriors took on almost mythological characteristics needed for morale purpose or simple storytelling appeal. So how do historians methodologically separate out the basis for the legends from the legends themselves?

In your experience, do legendary warriors typically have a demonstrable outstanding personal combat record or is the legend entirely crafted for other purposes?

All examples would be great.

If the former, what exactly did he do to win the election, who were his biggest opponents and what did they base their campaign on?

After the fall of Rome, how long did they keep the typical legionnaire armor, weaponry and tactics of popular imagination? I'm having trouble wording this and I apologize, but basically when and how did the Western Roman army transform from the legionary style to a more medieval look?

I'm mostly curious about medieval Europe, particularly amongst the Viking/Nordic peoples of Scandinavia, but any answer from any historian is welcome regardless of whether or not they study other cultures or different time periods.

(those that supported these regimes obviously, not implying everyone on the left were supporters)

Ghengis Khan is almost universally shown as an East Asian man in contemporary dramatization, with black hair and dark/black eyes. Are there reports of other peoples in that part of Asia having those same features? Is this description considered to be fantastical?

If Ghengis Khan did have these "white" features, would it have been due to admixture with European and Central Asian peoples?