There's no such thing as a "sure thing" in a war or Revolution, so I suppose events could have lined up in a way that ended with the British putting down the Revolution. What would the leaders have expected to happen to them if they weren't successful - was "hanging together or separately" a real concern, or would the punish have been different?

This fact always confused me and I can never comprehend why they would do this?

I'm curious to know what, exactly, can be taken as fact regarding the stories about him.

When they first established contact, the Europeans had massive sailing ships, libraries full of books, firearms, sextants, and all sorts of other technology. What allowed them to become so advanced, while native Americans were still using bows and arrows and dugout canoes?

My understanding is that, throughout most of history, nations didn't have sharp borders like we do today. The distinction between nations was more fluid. What was the first instance of two nations precisely defining an imaginary line and saying "we're on this side of the line and you're on the other side"?

Edit: I was inspired to ask this question while thinking of the communist manifesto, where Marx writes out about history as if its as story of the different social classes fighting etc. And I then thought maybe cause and effects in history are either far simpler than they seem(like, say, starvation was the vast overwhelming cause of the french revolution and everything else was just rationalization) or much more likely, that the actual causes are far too complicated and chaotic to actually figure out and in fact impossible to know. (And something about the butterfly effect-seemingly inconsequencial changes causing huge differences down the line) And I was also thinking that a non-narrative framework would be the perfect tfodder for some young aspiring postmodernist to tackle (andthat someone probably has) and that I would be interested in knowing what that framework was.

Like f.x using wheels for transport or something. I'm particularly curious about the exploits of the maya as some of them held out for decades against spanish incursion on their territories.

Is there any ideas to where they would have turned had the Pax Britannica continued? What about other Colonial powers?

after recently watching the monuments men movie i looked into the real life story. one thing i couldn't find too much information on was their involvement in japan. do any of you historians have any information on this? thank you

I know that the Russian Empire fought a war against the Ottoman Empire in the late 1700s. One of the results of that war was annexation of parts of the Ukraine into the Russian empire and the Crimean region became a Russian satellite state. Why were the Russians so interested in this region?

How did policy change, if at all?

Follow-up question, what was the time when America was the only one with the bomb like? (If it's argued we saw the Cold War coming why not nuke the USSR while we had such a military advantage?)

Up until Hitler took over, Germany was in terrible shape. How did they go from a country in one of the worst depressions in the world to a military super-power in less than 10 years?

It was in some audio lecture so I can't search it -- but I remember someone credible hypothesizing that the city of Rome hit a low of perhaps 12,000 people at some point? (Down from perhaps 800K - 1M?)

What was it like to live in the ruins and non-working infrastructure of a city built for hundreds of thousands more people? Why did the population number get so low?

Why did not some people settle there simply because there was a wealth of building materials? Were these residents just some skeleton-crew outpost of stone/brick/materials looters for other places?

Who has written/is writing about what Rome was like in its most abandoned state? Tangentially: I'm interested in reading more about the concept of people "living amidst the ruins" of an older, more-technologically advanced culture; which I understand to be fairly common in some places in the Middle Ages. Have there been any seminal, must-read works produced on this subject?

[I'm willing to read challenging (English Language) things, and have an adequate but unspectacular understanding of the high-points of first and second millennium European history... so I can hit the ground jogging, at least. I thank you for your time and for your expertise.]

Was wondering if anyone knew where I could find Flight info for B-24's flying for the 491st/855th during WWII. A friends Father is turning 89 soon and he would like to put something together.

Any and all help is greatly appreciated.

I read somewhere that "the short" could also mean "humble," but there was no evidence to support this, just a claim someone made on the internet. Also he was called Pepin the Younger and I wonder if Short wasn't somehow related to that.

At what time(s) and for what reason(s) did people stop referring to Britannia as Britannia and start calling it Great Britain? And if it was referred to as something else between those times what would that be and why?

The return of Napoleon from Elba is one of the most interesting events in history, leading to the March on Paris and eventually the Waterloo campaign.

However, seeing as the return only lasted a bit over 100 days, what was it like for someone in France at the time? How did the population take the news, and did the government institutions get changed from the monarchy ones in that time?

Also, my biggest question: Was there any chance of it being permanent? Britain/Prussia/Russia/Austria didn't take kindly to the return from Elba and immediately started military operations against France, but was it possible for Napoleon to hold it off?

Lastly, was the Hundred Days nothing more than a curious historical footnote in terms of effects? Did it cause anything to be really different than a universe where Napoleon never escaped Elba?

I've heard that New Zealand was more or less founded as a nation through the war, and after the way had a formidable reputation. But due to what? Why was it a founding event for New Zealand? Why did we get involved? How big of a role did New Zealand play?