(Sorry if this isn't the right question for the sub, but I figured I might get answers here)

For me, I recently found that my love for history has expanded in this massive amounts of free time we have. But unfortunately, I do not know where to dive in to learn more about specific parts of history. Like, what's a good starting point?

Specifically for me, I am interested in the Greek, Roman, Egyptian, etc. Time periods.

I know at some point hangul was created by a group of linguists, but why weren't Chinese characters adapted into their written system, if they were used as much as theyre portrayed in historical dramas?

Sorry if that is too many questions for one post.

Most research suggests that this is a myth or only loosely based in truth, but if that's the case, why does the concept seem so pervasive in certain historical narratives? Logistically it seems that it could cause more problems than it would be worth for the lords regarding legitimate/illegitimate children. Just wondering where this came from and how much is really a "myth".

Obviously we know the ones who suffered the most

• People with aristocratic backgrounds
• Jews
• Red Army officers who had ties to Trotsky
• Kulaks

How did the general population fare? I heard Stalingrad before the war was actually an ideal place. A new city with an urbanized workers' population.

If you were from a semi-peasant background who made the transition to urbanization to become a worker, I'm thinking you had it pretty good? As long as you didn't question the authorities.

Question is inspired by me watching Curse of the Black Pearl. In the movie, one of Commodore Norrington’s officers lambasts Jack Sparrow and Will Turner for trying to sail the ship “Interceptor” out of the bay at Port Royal by themselves. I assume the officer made this comment due to the fact that it would too long for Sparrow and Turner to make all the necessary preparations on board to sail before being caught by pursuing soldiers. It made me curious as to how long an average crew would need in order to make a ship ready to sail. Im using a Spanish galleon as a “placeholder” ship, but an answer regarding any ship during this time would be great as well!

Of course, the societies I mentioned above no longer relied purely on oral histories. But can we detect any echoes of truly ancient events in their records or stories? I’ve heard that the Flood stories, for example, might be based on some kind of actual sudden rise in water levels around the Mediterranean (though I’m not sure if that’s true). Are there other things like that that could be referencing ancient events?

If things that old haven’t been remembered elsewhere, what is it about the Aboriginal Australians that allowed them to preserve information for such a vast length of time?

I have to confess (as an Ottoman-Habsburg historian) this a gap in my knowledge on the military history of the monarchy. I know that Wallenstein laid the foundations for a standing imperial army during the Thirty Years War, but what other changes occurred postwar? Was the army during the Great Turkish War and War of Spanish Succession mercenary-based, or a permanent force? What was their equipment and training like? Thanks for the help.

In the 19th century, Americans tried to solve their political disputes through compromise (as seen by many compromises and legislation), but by 1860 compromise no longer worked for political disputes.

Why not? Are there any key events that can show this? Was there a gradual buildup of tension?

What changed during the years between 1820 and 1860 in the United States that stopped compromise?

The general narrative around Alexander seems to be that he's a unique, heroic military genius who pursued conquest as its own end. But that feels wrong, if only because it sounds like an extremely uncritical example of great-man history.

What social and/or economic factors compelled Macedon, a smallish regional power, to expand over vast swathes of land? And what forbade or dissuaded similar powers from doing so as well?

Sorry if this is too general. I was just curious how much whiplash the people went through in a religious sense post-Muhammad.

Scholar Richard Carrier (PhD) says that the Dark Ages were a real time period in history and that in that time period, science, living conditions, and a host of other things declined.

Today, if you look into the right corners you can find many neonazis claiming the Holocaust never happened and trying to revise history. Presumably after the war, high ranking Nazis were questioned, before or at their trials. Did some of them already engage in Holocaust denial? Or is this a purely modern phenomenon, and if so, how soon after the war did it start?

I’ve been a few months hearing (always from right wing extreme neoliberal people) that Hitler and Mussolini were socialists, that’s why the term Nazi comes from Nationalsozialistische Deutche Arbeiterpartei. I do now that Mussolini had a socialist past but I would like to know in a more profound way the facts why this affirmations are true or false. Thank you.

I guess African to classical will be too hard to cover... so what about classical to now?

Hello, i tried to search on google but i might not be using the proper terms. I want to know what did the surrender imply for Japan? Pay billions every year to USA? Let american culture and language in the country? Is there angry japenese with the terms? Like germany was very angry with the Versailles treaty? Thanks.