I'm watching the 1955 British made TV series "The Adventures of Robin Hood." It's set during the reign of Richard the Lionheart.

I am completely confounded by the currency. Ha'penny, penny and shillings I understand.

But they keep talking about marks and crowns and deniers. I know a crown was a 1/4 of a pound. But they never mention pounds. Sometimes they mention the coins being silver. Sometimes they mention them being gold. A silver mark, a gold mark. A silver crown, a gold crown. The denier was mentioned as being silver.

I've tried Googling it, but can't find anything on marks, crowns, deniers in silver or gold and their relative value.

Can someone explain the 12th century English currency system?

​

It's been surprisingly difficult to find a detailed account of this conquest; when it had far reaching consequences for Indian history.

​

What were some large-scale engagements in this conflict? What tactics did Maurya use to achieve victory? Do we have any primary source materials from Nanda detailing their view on the war? Or anything from Chandragupta's army?

I'm of South Indian decent but my Grandpa moved to Singapore during the 1930's to start a new life there. My dad used to tell me that my Grandpa fought for the Japanese Army during WW2, but unfortunately he passed away before I was old enough to pick his brain in-depth about the subject. All of my dad's siblings have passed since then and I really don't have anyone to confirm the stories that my dad used to tell me about my Grandpa.

I've read that many British, Indian and Singaporean men/soldiers were put into POW camps -- but I haven't come up on anything that talks about forced enlistment into the Japanese Army.

Is it just that they didn't advance as fast as western European powers, rather than actually declined? But if that's true, why did they keep losing to Russia, which also lagged behind significantly in technology? (I don't know a ton about Russian/Ottoman conflicts, I just know the Ottomans lost to Russia in the Crimean War, attacked them in WW1, but lost a ton of men in the Caucasus and basically gave up and went to fight Britain in Mesopotamia instead.)

Sorry if this has been answered before (I checked the reading lists and couldn’t find anything), but what are the best Hitler biographies and which ones should I avoid? I have John Toland’s two-volume biography but I know it’s been out a while. Is there a more current biography that is a good companion to the Toland one? I’ve heard that Kershaw is good but biased. Is there validity to that claim?

[deleted]

[deleted]

In reading a brief passage about the landings of Operation Dragoon it mentioned "Apex boats" which appear to be some sort of remote anti mine boat. I can't find any further information of this nor do I know of any other attempts (successful or otherwise) of allied attempts to use RC technology

Was this sort of weapons solely used by the axis?

For example, Pagan Romans were very comfortable with nudity in the home and they frequently partook in communal bathing. They also partook in sex for pleasure.

[deleted]

[deleted]

Hey all, I recognize that this isn't so much a historical question as much as it is a question about how contemporary historians would approach the problem of documenting and piecing together an outline of everything that was lost.

Primarily, I'm interested in knowing how often, if ever, historians take into consideration what future historians would find useful when assessing the scope and significance of the loss of a museum such as this one.

Do historians ever attempt to preserve certain historical or contemporary artifacts and documents for future generations with the knowledge that it is precisely these sorts of documents and artifacts that they themselves would like to possess when engaging in historical scholarship?

Or a bit more precisely, we have a fairly good idea of what was lost in this fire because individuals who worked there are able to tell us just what was contained in these collections. Does this first-hand knowledge ever become formally documented after an event like this so that future historians with no access to individuals who worked at the museum can nevertheless still have an idea of what this museum contained?

My second question is, given the prevalence of technology such as smartphones with built in cameras, it would be reasonable to think there exist massive amounts of personally taken photos of the contents in the museum so that, even if the original artifacts no longer exist, at the very least photos of them still do. Is this helpful to future historians?

And lastly (I hope the mods forgive the lack of specificity of my questions!), have there been efforts to recreate digital walkthroughs of museums for posterity such as the one Google did a few years ago? Would something like this be feasible for all the existing museums in the world?

Thank you!

It used to be the go-to font style for trustworthy newspapers and whatnot, now I see it more in heavy metal music than anywhere else. How did it come to be seen as "dark"? Was it the nazis?

I know this isn't probably accurate, but I am imagining the two lines of trenches being dug up a few feet from the ocean with warnings not to dig any further and let the ocean in.