Not to put him on the spot, but I'm wondering what /u/restricteddata, our resident nuclear bombing expert, has any reactions to Obama's Hiroshima speech. It is hard to top it in regards to history in the news. Is this really such a change from how American leaders earlier talked about nuclear weapons?

Last week, while doing some random digging for information on the 1930s Texan pulp writer Robert E. Howard, I found a letter that his father - country doctor Isaac M. Howard - had published in the North American Journal of Homeopathy asking about cures for pellagra - a vitamin deficiency usually associated with corn-heavy diets and poverty which became epidemic in the United States in the early 20th century. That letter, and the response to it in the same journal, led me into doing a bit of research on the disease (which was attributed to everything from acidic groundwater to spoiled corn to bacteria - and which was treated with everything from arsenic to electroshock and "partial appendectomy"), the state of medical licensing at the time while allowed homeopathic and eclectic medicine to flourish alongside "regular" medicine, and...well, it was interesting enough that I wrote up a brief article about it.

So, after a very long journey, this is happing right now. I'm just taking my time over writing the conclusion and acknowledgments. It's tough, actually, because whom should I thank, our of so many people who have been there for me? And just what the hell did this whole dissertation say, anyway?

Sitting at my desk two blocks from Trump Tower, wondering if it's all going down the tubes.

I just discovered the Thomas Kuhn's The Structure of Scientific Revolutions... This is fucking brilliant. Not only can I think of places to use it in my thesis (specifically the ideas of paradigm and normative science as a part of the critique of existing historiography) but it looks like something I could apply to my understanding of theory in general.

I've been really busy this week so far. The preseason has started for the excavation, so I've been in Israel for a few days doing preparations for the upcoming season of excavation. I spent some time supervising a bulldozer for a day while it removed topsoil for one of our excavation areas (archaeologists don't just dig with dental tools and paintbrushes, though we do use those when appropriate...). I've also spent a lot of time updating our computers. Do you know how many updates Windows needs to run after not turning on a computer for 10 months? The answer is over 150.

This week in /r/EarlyModernEurope, we had a discussion on the legacies of Cardinal Richelieu and Marazin. Everyone is welcome to talk and just enjoy the era, for while there are many experts, it is an open space just to embrace the Early Modern Era

I've been trying to find out the identity of this odd metal bracket or something on the transmission covers of some, but not all, M10 tank destroyers. It's not the brake-locking pawl (far right, arrow), as that faced vertically and had notches in it. Hm.

Posted this on the Flair board but thought I would share my most recently completed book(along with Ian W. Toll's Conquering Tide). Currently rereading Marder's Volume on Jutland for the anniversary.

Also just finished Black Shoe Carrier Admiral by John Lundstrom. Essentially an operational narrative on the command tenure of Frank Jack Fletcher. A man who earned the Medal of Honor but who would later be called a traitorous yellow coward.

Most general history paints him as an overly conservative, reactionary Admiral, who exercised minimal direct influence in the first year of the war, and whose greatest achievement was not getting in the way more. And who was maligned greatly by historians post war, and Morison above all.

Lundstrom however makes a powerful case, using the vast trove of sources which have since been collected from both sides of the Pacific to call several key errors in the traditional narrative to task.

Painting a strong picture of a dedicated officer, grappling with a new kind of warfare, rightly concerned with preservation of his precious force above all else, while hamstrung by plans and commands which where equally evolving for a new type of war. And who in the end was responsible for sinking more IJ carriers than Halsey or Spruance, was the most senior Admiral awarded the Purple Heart, but who had no place in the post war mythos for suffering the pitfalls of being the first in the job and a non aviator.

Would highly recommend along with his First Team books (First Team and First team at Guadalcanal). They and The First South Pacific Campaign are probably the best collection of works on the first year of the Pacific War around today that focuses on the USN carriers.

I've recently become interested in learning more about the Chinese Cultural revolution, Mao, and all the events surrounding that time period. The issue I'm running in to is that all the books on Amazon have 3ish stars and it's hard to pick out the good stuff from the pro-Mao/pro-communist propaganda, at least for me. Can any of you recommend a good book?

How did Cortes be proclaimed as a God by the Aztecs if he and his crew didn't know Aztec language?

Finished up Ninety Percent of Everything this week, a look into the modern shipping industry and the issues and images that define it in the 21st Century. Pretty quick read, but very good for anyone wanting a straightforward look into the modern ways of economic seafaring. A striking observation I pulled from the book was the ever lurking presence of public image in an industry that has largely found itself hidden from day to day public eye behind prohibited docks and port security measures. An industry whose laborers, owners, and investors are all wrapped in the issue of public perception (where the bad always seems to find its way publicized above the good), where the public image of merchant vessels and seaborne trade can range from none to the antiquated cultural memory of a life at sea and in port. Interesting stuff.

How do you guys like to go about collecting(finding) sources for historiographies/ finding out the state of work within your area? I'm a sophomore and trying to figure out ways of searching what sort of scholarly work is being done within the area I am interested in.

Sorry if this is actually a bigger question.

I'm absolutely overjoyed because I discovered the Total War series of video games this week. They're essentially the epitome of the armchair general; the player controls armies of thousands of men in battles of dubious historical accuracy through time periods stretching from Caesar to Napoleon. Besides for being ridiculously fun, some of the most interesting things about these games are actually the ensuing historical debates; some aspects of the game are debunked as being pop culture misconceptions whereas others are admired for their accuracy, with grey areas in between. This brings up the larger debate of how far historical book/video game/movie/TV show producers should be willing to sacrifice entertainment/story/mechanics in an attempt to make the product more historically accurate, which is also very interesting.

Just started reading the first available installment of the New Oxford History of England. I'm very excited.

From this article

https://journals.lib.unb.ca/index.php/MCR/article/view/17669/22312

In the 18th century, trials were conducted to determine how accurate the fire from infantry battalions was. Moritz Thierbach, writing in 1866, summarized several Prussian, Bavarian and French tests as if they had been one standardized effort involving 60 shots at target approximately 100 feet (30 m) long by seven feet (2.13 m) high.6 Thierbach calculated that from a distance of 75 metres, only 36 shots (60 per cent) penetrated the target; from 150 metres, 24 shots (40 per cent); from 225 metres, 15 shots (25 per cent); and from 300 metres, only 12 bullets (20 per cent) found their mark. The Graz tests suggest Thierbach may have been optimistic in his estimates.

Does anyone know any English sources that go into detail about these tests or similar musket tests from the 18th century? I keep hearing them mentioned, sometimes with slightly different numbers, but I'm having trouble finding a reference for them.

As an aside, the statement "The Graz tests suggest Thierbach may have been optimistic in his estimates." is sort of confusing me. The quote above states Thierbach was giving a 60% accuracy rate against a 2.13 meter tall target at 75 meters away, while the Graz test found smoothbore weapons had a spread of between about 50 and 80 cm at 100 meters. If anything that makes it seem like soldiers with smoothbore muskets could have potentially achieved much higher accuracy than Thierbach gave.

Has anyone here read Glantz's work on Stalingrad? In one of his talks, he blamed von Manstein for the defeat, saying he set up von Paulus to take the fall and lied in his memoirs, and that he had the documents to prove it. Don't doubt him in the slightest, but a little apprehensive about wading through three doorstoppers to find the salient points. What's the cruz of his argument here?