I have heard that MLK Jr. cheated on his wife, participated in orgies, witnessed and laughed at a rape and did nothing to help her, and even raped someone himself. This was supposedly all recorded by the FBI under J Edgar Hoover but if that's true, shouldn't there be proof? Is any of this actually true or are people just trying to slander him?

I'm basing this question off Mahmood Mamdani quoted in Ben Nugent's 'Africa Since Independence'.

Hello! I apologize if this isn't the right place to post this question (and if not, please delete!), but I'm doing a lot of research into a potential career change, and I wanted some professionals opinions.

I'm currently an attorney that focuses on civil litigation. I've always been a history "enthusiast," with a particular interest in the middle ages. The thing I like about being an attorney is the research, writing, and opportunity to teach people about things they didn't know before.

I've recently been reading a lot more, and I've been brainstorming some ideas on things I would like to write about related to my historical interests. I'm not a trained historian, so I'm sure this wouldn't be that useful of an exercise at this point. So this got me thinking about going back to school and getting an MA in history and then potentially continuing on to a PhD program if that suit me.

I'm not worried about cost because I'm fortunate enough that that isn't an issue. but I wanted to ask /r/askhistorians about what beginning this career path would potentially look like, how a person could come into this from another career, and whether it's even a recommended course of action. In case it's relevant, I'm 28.

I heard that Armies had reserve divisions, and replacements often entered depleted divisions through reserve batalions. But what about existing batalions? Did they receive replacement, smaller military units (reserve companies, squads etc)? Or were depleted units simply merged

Did the indigenous peoples of the Americas have one or more sign languages?

After Grand Master, Albrecht of Brandenburg took his title as Duke of Prussia, what became of the Teutonic Order's remaining territories across France, Germany and the Netherlands? I understand these territories were organised into "Bailiwicks," each ruled by a Land Commander. Each Bailiwick was a conglomeration of Parishes, small landmasses owned by the Knights and priests. These lands were often either donated to the Order, or else they were purchased, as if like private property. My question is: Would these lands be recognised as sovereign territories of the Teutonic Order? Or rather, after the dissolution, did the Teutonic Order evolve from being a nation, to more of a religious organisation? The lands which were purchased and donated, were they ultimately just under the control of the non-Teutonic counts, dukes and Kings who offered them?

I have encountered the sentence: "Nation states are a modern/englithenment invention." in several publications now, but not one has given a source for this claim yet. As I have some background in East and Central Asian history (although it's not my main area), this has always struck me as odd. We quite explicitly learned about an emergence of something very much like a nation state in Korea at the beginning of the modern era, I would myself argue that even early Tibetan history is also very nation-state like.

Can anyone point me to a recent publication which deals with the idea of nation states globally and not just euro-centrically, or perhaps a source which would shed some light on the origins of this claim? Thanks in advance! :)

Learning a bit more about European history, I've come to the conclusion that the whole idea of nation(that is, a group of people bound together by shared culture and language) didn't really exist until XIX century, with many being basically constructed by a small group of intellectuals.

Would that be a misconception? I imagine that it's far more complicated than that, but it would still be interesting to know what the historical consensus on this issue is.

Is this mainly an American pop culture creation? Not sure what the origins are.

I've checked Spanish, French, German, Portuguese and Polish, they all translate to "Secession War". On the other hand, in Russian and Greek they translate to "Civil War".

This is probably a niche question, but why the split? Is there a clear reason?

My first guess was to claim Confederate legitimacy, but one of the Spanish documents using the term shortly after the war, praises general Grant. So it's not obvious the relation. Maybe people simply considered it a secession war and didn't have any reason to avoid that term, in contrast to the US government?

Hello all!

As the title suggests, I’m interested in the lifestyles of so called “barbaric” cultures in the periphery of Rome following Caesar’s conquest of Gaul and the Pax Romana. I’m fairly familiar with Celtic/Gaelic history from Hallstatt to La Tène, but I’m currently interested in other groups from later on in the Iron Age, in particular the Vandals.

As far as the term “blacksmith” goes, let’s assume that it encompasses all forms of common metal working, stretching from art and decorations to weaponry and armor.

My main questions are primarily as follows, though any broader inputs would be gladly welcome as well.

What’s my status in the Vandal hierarchy? Is smithing considered to be a valuable skill worthy of respect, or just a menial task?

How am I compensated for my work, and how does that compensation compare to other occupations within the Vandal culture? Am I a member of the working classes or the aristocracy? Is there an institutionalized monetary system in place, or does compensation occur at a more simple and direct bartering level?

Thanks in advance!

I just read that the first goose-down jacket was produced in 1936, and I didn't do any additional research but it got me wondering-- since coats like we have nowadays were obviously not always available, how did people stay warm in Scandinavian areas when temperatures dipped below zero, sometimes far below zero?