I am currently reading this book and I'm wondering if it is historically correct, is completely inaccurate, or contains any truth.
I'm particularly interested about Thugs' origin and the claim that the “sculptures in the Caves of Ellora” (the author says they were created in the eighth century) depict Thugs' operations.
Did Thugs really existed? Did they operated in the way described in the book?

Am I avoiding people? Do I try avoid crowded spaces? Do I still attend mass on Sundays? Do I stay clear from animals? Do I bathe more regularly? Etc.

I've seen a wide range of theories about the identity of the Sabians, an unidentified religious group who (from what I understand of the relevant verses) are described in the Quran alongside Muslims, Jews and Christians as being among those who may receive salvation.

I'm curious if there's an academic consensus, or a hypothesis with strong evidence, as to which religious group the term "Sabian" referred to, and if there's an understanding of why their identity has been so poorly recorded, considering that they're grouped together with what are now the major Abrahamic religions.

So Hitler wanted to create a German realm where all Germans live in? But even after occupying Denmark he did not re-annex North Schleswig that was German before WWI and even had a sizeable German population. Why is that?

This question is mostly about countries like Andorra, San Marino, and Liechtenstein. Why and how did these countries survive other countries expanding and the unification wars around them?

Well before sewage was a thing, people dwelled in enclosed, public or semipublic places, sometimes eating and drinking (e.g. inns and markets, monastries, courts). How did people in, let's say, late medieval (or early modern Europe) solved their natural urges in a civil manner? Did people use chamberpots out of their chambers? Were there designated interior places? Or would people just wander out and into the woods? Or were alleys generally very disgusting places? Were visitors expected to hold some kind of hygienic standards?

Further, was there an observable evolution of customs in time (consistent convergence of uses with increments in technical knowledge and demographic concentration) or is it just the recurrent "it was different for every civilization and historic period, significantly influenced by diverse geographic, economic and cultural factors".

As an obvious follow up question, when and where did public toilets first appear (i.e. "private" enclosed areas in public or semipublic places dedicated to defecation), and when did people start expecting them as a given thing (e.g. modern regulation for customer bathrooms in the gastronomic industry).

This questions were not typed in the bathroom.

Can someone recommend me a book from the fall of Constantinople to the age of industrialization I would like if its not Europe centered only it doesn’t matter to me if its more than 1 volume and you can recommend me books about a specific time in that age but i would rather a book that goes through the whole early modern ages

As I understand it, the Napoleonic Wars saw a dramatic increase in the use of artillery, including but not limited to solid, round-shot cannonballs. In some battles, the total number of artillery rounds fired by both sides soared into the hundred-thousands. At Wagram in 1809, the number was about 200,000, while at Leipzig in 1813, the number was an astounding 400,000!

My question is specifically about the round shot: with so many of these cannonballs littering the various battlefields around Europe, whatever happened to all of them? Given their sheer number, it must've taken considerable time and effort for anyone to collect them all. Did armies make any effort to collect some of them after a battle, or were they mostly left alone for anyone to come along and collect them on their own? If a random person from this time were to come across one of them, what would they have likely done with it? Take it to a blacksmith to melt it down? Sell it? Maybe even keep it as a collector's item?

I've been told that there are ample sources available in Japanese. I do not know the language unfortunately, so I can't dive into those. The closest I've seen are Taiko (by Eiji Yoshikawa) and a biography or two for Tokugawa Ieyasu by A.L Sadler and Stephen Turnbull (I believe), but I'm uncertain how accurate and up-to-date the scholarship of both are in regards to two of these famous figures.

The former seems more like a historical novel, and from what few threads of the past I can find of Turnbull's name here, there seems to be skepticism, though one thread did mention him going back and correcting himself on some things.

Failing that, are there any resources in English that can substitute literature (if there are none)? I'm interested in their daily life and who they were as people rather than just their accomplishments. Virtues and flaws all. Thank you for your time.

I'm curious about what kind of protective equipment that builders would wear during the construction of historical megaprojects. For example, how did workers keep themselves from falling off a cathedral mid-construction? Did they wear a rope belt, or did they simply try not to fall? Did they wear any kind of head protection? How did they avoid injuring themselves from, say, stubbing their toes?

Why did Alfred the Great call himself “King of the Anglo-Saxons”? Why did Æthelstan call himself “King of the English” and why did William the Conqueror call himself “King of England”? Thank you!

Notably, Albania, Bosnia and Kosovo are majority muslim regions. As I understand it, this can be explained by the lengthy Ottoman rule during the 14th-20th centuries. But then why did other regions persist in their christianity? Why was it Serbia specifically that broke up into 2 parts with different religious majorities (Kosovo and not-Kosovo)?

What is the general academic picture on the historicity of Moses? Not necessarily the Exodus, mind you (although I'd like to hear about that as well), but Moses specifically.

I see two conflicting arguments on this topic.

One claims that that the Japanese surrendered because of the bombs, as broadcasted by Emperor Hirohito.

The other claims that Japanese scientists hypothesized that America only had 1 or 2 more bombs and the leaders decided they would be fine only losing a couple more cities. They really surrender because of the Soviet Union but only said the atomic bombs because it was less embarrassing.