When I say Monarchists, I'm not just talking about British Crown Loyalists but the educated and uneducated supporters of Monarchy in general.

People who would have preferred a King if America or any individual colony gained independence.

We see monarchist in Mexico with the establishment of the first Mexican Empire and the Brazilian Empire. Not to mention the several European realms created in the 19th century; arguably the golden age of Monarchy and in the short lived kingdoms in WWI, the last hurrah.

So were there American Monarchists beyond just loyalists before the War? And did the bickering of the Confederation make more or less Monarchists in the American educated elite?

I’m reading Gulag Archipelago and Solzhenitsyn talks about how one of the wave of arrests in the 30’s specifically targeted the Kulaks. He compares this to Hitler’s targeting of the Jews and calls it an ethnic catastrophe. However after googling this I don’t see any reference to the Kulaks being an ethnic group, they were simply farmers who had over a certain amount of land and livestock. Is this an error on Solzhenitsyn’s part or was there some ethnic correlation within the Kulaks?

So I just finished an excellent book by Tim Blanning titled Pursuit of Glory covering years 1648-1815. I liked the writing style (still academic but enjoyable to read to layman). I also enjoyed the breadth of the book from agriculture, transport to courts to hunting etc.

Could anyone recommend a similar book covering period say 1348-1648 or 1484 to 1815?

While I realize that questions regarding paleontology might be better posed to other subreddits, I'm hoping that the moderators and Redditors of this community will indulge me.

My nine-year-old niece, who for the past four years, something her mother calls an eternity in kid years, has never stopped letting us all know that she is going to become a paleontologist. Recently however, she's been going through a bit of a crisis. She had the epiphany that by the time she's grown up, all of the dinosaurs might be discovered and there won't be any paleontology jobs left for her.

When my sister shared this new development with me today, the first thought I had was about women like Mary Anning or Sue Hendrickson but I couldn't think of very much else. I'm hoping that this community might be able to point me, and my niece, towards other women who have helped pioneer paleontology and the stories of their lives. I would also very much like to find and share sources with my family about the ever-changing nature of paleontology through the years.

Thank you for any comments or advice and Happy New Year!

Conquerors like Hitler, genghis khan and even shaka of the zulus are so well known. Yet Tamerlane conquered a MASSIVE empire and yet no one knows his name. Why is this?

Given that Britain is a fairly small island, with presumably a relatively small population, how was it able to supply enough military power to establish control over its territories? Was the British population more dense than the size of the Island might suggest? Was military power needed to maintain control over its all territories at the same time?

(I'm an American who was less than a year old on 9/11)

It's difficult for me to comprehend the sort of emotions that people experienced during those events. I understand that the Towers were important, but I'm unable to feel their importance in the way that I could if I was older. For instance, the Empire State building (in my mind) is the nost prominent symbol of New York as an icon, currently. Did people feel a similar way about the Twin Towers pre-9/11? And, if that is the case, did the empire state building only BECOME such a prominent symbol after the events of 9/11?

Edit: Maybe to be more clear, what cultural symbols that exist today do you think occupy a similar level of importance to the Towers? My goal in asking this question is to be able to understand the events of 9/11 on a more human level.

What was the process which led us to have Roman names for months and Norse names for weekdays?

In American Colonies: The Settling of North America, Alan Taylor writes that, "In western lands, the Americans meant to reproduce a society of family farmers endowed with household independence, which would postpone the dreaded emergence of a propertyless proletariat of white people.” (last page of ch. 18)

Reading this, I was reminded of Enclosure - and it occurred to me that maybe the vociferous drive for such household independence in British America may have been fueled by the recent history around British Enclosure. Is that how it worked and/or has anyone written about this before?

Hey there, I am getting into history and it seems to me that economics is one of the if not the most important factor in geopolitics, therefore geopolitical history as well and I only understand economics at a very base level. So I wanted to ask, is there any way to understand the economics required for 'getting' historical economies without studying economics outright? Do you have any good books, websites, or any other media on the topic?

Strategic position? Capable military leaders? Taliban incompetence? What’s the answer?

The establishment of TSA, stricter cockpit door regulations...couldn’t these things and others have all been done in the 1970s? Why weren’t they?

Considering the riches many Conquistadors acquired from the conquests of South America, did pirate attack or raids often occur on ships transporting the wealth back to Europe?

I am thinking of Europeans in African countries. How does it go from arriving in a new country with, I assume, a limited number of men to "Ok, we own this now, you are all our subjects" ?

I have a Chinese friend who is claiming Ethnicly Han Chinese armies never sacked cities, is this true?

Around a venue like the Coliseum where 10s of thousands of people came together, how would transportation be stored? What would the breakdown be of pedestrians, horseback riders, chariot riders, and others? Was theft a major concern? Was there such a thing as a rudimentary version of "The Club" or a wheel boot?