I am having difficulty in finding small grants that would allow for the purchase of equipment (like a drone) for archaeological research. What's the consensus on using crowdfunding to try and raise funds for the purchase of equipment? Is it illegal? Unethical? Morally grey? I'd like to hear people's thoughts.

A meta question, not sure if this deserves its own thread. I am an avid (almost daily) reader and enthusiast; although not a historian myself. I sometimes see questions that I too would like to read an answer to; although for one reason or another they don't receive one. Is there anything I could do to show my interest, in hope of somebody noticing and answering the question?

Obviously I don't want to comment simply "I am curious about this as well". Is there some other way I could bring a question to the attention of people capable of answering it? For instance, do you look at the number of upvotes when you decide which questions to answer?

For anyone who can be kind enough to answer, I am currently in undergrad and taking a Race Law class that prepares you for law school. I have recently read "In the Matter of Color" by Judge Higginbotham. In the book, there is an eloquent look at the case Sommersett v. Stuart, which was adjudicated by Lord (Judge) Mansfield. I truly admire the legal philosophy of Lord Mansfield. Any books, journals, or articles that could give me a more nuanced understanding of his legal philosophy would be greatly appreciated.

To give a flavor of his legal philosophy, my favorite quote by him is from his decision on the Sommersett case, "So high an act of dominion (slavery) must be recognized by the law of the country where it is used... The state of slavery is such a nature, that it is incapable of being introduced on any reasons, moral or political, but only by positive law, which preserves its force long after the reasons, occasion, and time itself from whence it was created is erased from memory."

What are your chances if you live in Western Europe to become a historian specifically about the first World War? I am 16 years old and that is my dream

Does anyone have any thoughts on First Man with Ryan Gosling? I loved it, but I'm wondering how it was as far as Armstrong's characterization. I read Jay Barbree's Neil Armstrong: A Life of Flight. It was a great, casual read, but the total lack of citations doesn't exactly instill confidence. For instance, when Barbree apparently asked Armstrong if he left anything of his daughter's on the Moon he deduced he had from a twinkle in his eye more or less.

I'm not posting this as an actual question because I'm also curious how people felt about it as just a movie. I can post it as a question if someone has something they want to say about it though.

Would it be appropriate to ask about the previous uses of National Emergency powers in America?

I am blurry when trying to understand The Honourable Company. So correct me if I am wrong, but essentially a group of merchants realized there was a lot of money that could be made in the Spice Trade, hence, they got together and eventaully... got a Charter from the Queen Elizabeth I (because other countries were already doing this, etc).

​

Anyways, from my understanding, I guess it was really competitive, so they just set up factories to buy and warehouse their stuff, they even had to fight off some locals, etc. Then, many yeats later.. they also got permission from the Mughal Emperor at the time to be able to setup more trading posts by Surat, etc.

​

There's a lot of in between stuff that I am still blurry about. It seemed like nothing much happened between 1600 - mid 1800s... but then, we always hear about this company imperialized India to for half a century.

​

How did it begin to take over territories, what monopoly did they have (why couldn't the Dutch or French do it, if they started before... why were the British much more successful?) And also, why did the British East India company get a diwani (the right to collect tax from a region?)

"There Is No News From Auschwitz" by Abraham Rosenthal. Originally published in 1985, I read it for the first time this week. The piece is really well-written, and makes me think about the struggles this subreddit has with Holocaust deniers. A key paragraph (the "nut graph", if you will):

And so there is no news to report about Auschwitz. There is merely the compulsion to write something about it, a compulsion that grows out of a restless feeling that to have visited Auschwitz and then turned away without having said or written anything would somehow be a most grievous act of discourtesy to those who died here.

See also this more recent article published earlier in the month about Henry Ford's Nazism (still news, even today) and Dearborn officials trying to prevent scholarship about it. Also a good example of the "Streisand effect".

How were the Mongols able to invade China affter the Great Wall was built?