I am a college student who last studied History when I was in 10th grade. I don't know much about History and whenever I read about History in news articles, social media posts (some of them by Historians), etc, I always...like always, find contradictory things.

I live in India and whenever I try to read about the History of India I get extremely contradictory pictures: some say Gandhi was responsible for freedom of India, some say Bose was. Some say RSS (a Hindu nationalist party in India) was instrumental in the freedom struggle, some say they weren't. Some say Mughal rule in India was one of peace, some say Mughal rule was brutal against non-Muslims. Some say Aryan migration theory is correct, some say Aryan migration theory is false. Anything regarding ancient India, its religions and philosphies is basically a mystery. No one seems to know who wrote what, when and where. Some say Ramayana and Mahabharata were true, some say its not. When I try to find something about History of Kashmir, things are more complicated. I feel really lost and have no idea of what sources to consider legit and credible and what not. Any guide to tell me how, what and where should I lead about real and legit History?

It doesn't only have to be about India btw. It can be about anything related to History. I just want to know what should a non-Historian, a commoner, read to learn legit History.

Say your HMS Frigate rolls up on an American merchant vessel and her boarding party demands to "reclaim" all British-born able-bodied seamen. How would the birthplace/citizenship of individual members of the American crew be identified?

From reading Ronald Utt's Ships of Oak, Guns of Iron , it seems to me that the British, who insisted that their impressions were limited to those they believed owed loyalty to the Crown, must have claimed a use of some sort of system to distinguish the sailors in question from other sailors.

Hey there ! Hope I'm not in the wrong place to ask that kind of thing.

Anyway, I'm Dungeon Master on a few games (mostly med-fan) and lately, two questions are on my mind.

First : Most of the time, for the sake of convenience, we accept two types of bows, short and long, but only one type of arrow. So, generaly speaking, when it comes to medieval times, what were the difference between an arrow made for a short bow and an arrow made for a long one ?

Second : I'm pretty sure history is full of weird and interesting arrow ideas, can you share some with me ? I'd like to add some in my games !

​

I hope the question are not too vague.

Was there some precedent for all these movies like Indiana Jones and games like Tomb Raider and Uncharted to showcase ancient tombs featuring these over-the-top impressive engineering marvels? Do ancient locations like this really exist?

I must admit I haven't done a lot of reading on the histiography, but I haven't really found a good source to read yet. But as far as I can tell, the first Empire is considered to be around the time of American colonization, and indeed appears to end when the 13 colonies declared independence.

This early on, however, was it not a predominately English affair, with Englishmen colonizing and "planting" in Ireland? I know the act of Union which saw the birth of "Great Britain" as a nation occurred before this, but would it be more correct to consider this first Empire more "English" than "British", or do I just have a poor understanding of the situation?

Or could you build anything anywhere? And for that matter what did they use for deeds?

Seems a little silly to ask, but one of the major forces pushing for Prohibition was the Women's Christian Temperance Union, which might seem a little awkward for a Jewish teetotaler to join or support - so did they have their own organizations?

I live in Australia, which can make accessing information tricky at times. My area of focus is the Hiberno Norse / Norse Gaels (9th - 12thc CE). I am well acquainted with Elizabeth Wincott Heckett's "Viking Age Headcoverings from Dublin" but I am looking for any other evidence of clothing/textile finds from this time/area. I have a feeling that I'm not going to find anything from Ireland, and if that's the case, what Norwegian-found textiles are likely to be appropriate to assume *could* have had similar styles migrate with people to Ireland?

Also I don't understand the Khilafat movement in India. Indians being part of British Empire should've been against Ottoman empire, but the Khilafat movement was all for pressing to let the Ottomans keep their empire.

I have two questions. First being were the Wehrmacht technically Nazis during world war 2 or did they basically do their own thing. Second, off, was Poland invaded by the German army, the Nazi party or both?

Did the citizens of the Warsaw pact view their government as client states? If so, how did the Russians of the Soviet Union view their client states?

I've heard numerous people say online that Yahweh/Jehovah was once a war god from a polytheistic pantheon but over time he become more favoured and obviously evolved into a monotheistic religion.

Is there any truth to this?

Research texts and firsthand accounts would be very much appreciated.

In the Bible, at Acts 26:32, Agrippa said to Festus, regarding Paul, "This man could have been released if he had not appealed to Caesar." Since Paul had appealed to Agrippa, did some law not permit him to be released, even though the court officials said "This man is doing nothing deserving of death or prison bonds? I have researched a lot on this particular thing said, and while there is an abundance of information regarding the rights of the Roman citizen, as well as their laws, I cannot find a reason why Paul could have not been released.

Does anyone have a viewpoint or helpful insight into this matter?

Thank you very much!

In popular retellings of Dunkirk evacuation, notably in the 2017 Christopher Nolan movie, the little ships are particularly acclaimed for their role in the evacuations. It harks to an idea that private boats set out to rescue beleaguered allied soldiers, almost spontaneously and crewed by the civilian owners of those vessels in a potentially dangerous warzone. Its become a major symbol of British wartime attitudes, playing into a perception of regular people doing their duty by their own volition and British populace's general ability to soldier and pull together in times of crisis. How numerous and how important were these little ships compared to actual naval vessels in getting men off the beaches, and were many really manned by non-military personnel?

In the American Revolutionary war/Civil war were there any units of men that were almost a medieval unit and only carried hand to hand weapons like swords and spears? I know close combat was generally done with bayonets but were there units specifically designed for close combat that didnt use rifles?