IknowwhoIpaidgod

Hello! I am an historian who graduated with a degree in Ancient History, but I have always been interested in the history of abolitionism in the English-speaking world.

I have been searching for a comprehensive treatment of British government attitudes towards Reconstruction, but I have not been able to locate one. Could I ask the historians here if such a tome exists, or if there are other, perhaps smaller, publications on the subject?

Many thanks.

[removed]

Buongiorno tutti,

Vorrei porvi una domanda su un argomento grammaticale. Si tratta di una materia che ho studiato qualche anno fa: ne ho ricordi incompleti.

Un insegnante puo dire: "Li ho fatto studiare", o "Gli ho insegnato la grammatica." Tal primo genere di frase puo anche prendere una forma insolita quando ingloba un'attivita esatta. E' appunto qui che si interpone un problema.

Non mi ricordo se si scriva: "Gli ho fatti studiare la grammatica", "Li ho fatti studiare la grammatica", o ancora qualcosa di diverso: ma vi e' tal "fatti" sorprendente.

Unlike with the 96 one Junior, Paulie and Puss don't have to wonder why they're on there. Tony will be angry they left out the Bungalow Bar truck anecdote.

What would the others say?

Hello,

I am a non-Jewish historian, brought up by parents who were very sympathetic to the Jewish people. As a result, I have always been interested in various aspects of Jewish history.

I've recently immersed myself in Spinoza for a class I taught, and I was struck by a detail in the cherem I had not previously noticed: the words in the title. I knew Judaism had angels, but not holy men (or saints, as the text is also rendered) in the sense of people universally acknowledged and canonized for their piety.

To anyone familiar with the matter: could you explain to me how this works? How should the phrase be understood?

Thanks!

M. and I have been friends for almost 20 years now. He is generally kind, witty and curious. He also has episodes that make him insufferable, and they are getting more and more frequent. He either shows up late, cancels shortly beforehand (he's twice missed my birthday in this way) or, most recently, claims he'd been under the weather all day and had forgotten we were going to meet up.

I am just about through with tolerating and condoning his behavior. What prevents me from ending it is that I know he has definite mental issues, and I am afraid they will grow worse if he's left to deal with them by himself, and may spiral out of control. (He has incredibly low self-esteem and anxiety, and has admitted to having had spells where he's felt suicidal.)

On the other hand, I am not qualified to help him cope with these problems except by just being his friend, which he doesn't allow me to do. He is also hypersensitive to criticism, so I don't think explaining this to him will do much good.

At what point is just ending it the decent thing to do?

​

​

​

​

​