Okay, so things I've read about the byzantine empire usually mention eunuchs at some point, although the only one who I remember anything about is Narses. Anyway, I was wondering what jobs eunuchs actually filled in the Byzantine Empire, especially post-arab conquest. Was it like the Qing Empire where they were outside the general imperial bureaucracy, or were there just some jobs in the bureaucracy that could only be held by people who had their testicles removed? Also, this question is only somewhat related related, but were their testes removed before or after puberty? This doesn't really matter as much, I'm just kinda curious.

I am writing a paper on Aristotle, and all the books I read talk about his life and direct influences (Plato, Alexander the Great, etc), but less about how the time period itself affected him. I know it was a turbulent time and the edge of a philosophical renaissance, but I know almost nothing about Greek history so it's difficult for me to write about it.

How did the events and thinking of the time period influence Aristotle's life, both directly, and indirectly?

I read recently that Russian orthodox churches might not have pews because they’re a closer reflection of what a church started out as. Less about being entertained by a person and more about coming to experience spirituality.

I don’t know how true that is but now I wonder how close the modern version of a western Christian church is to its intent in the first few hundred years AD.

Hi there, I am currently watching Philip Daileader's "Early Middle Ages" from The Great Courses lecture series. In the episode "Carolingian Christianity" he talks about the problem of Iconoclasm. Before posting this, I checked whether someone has asked the question on this subreddit, but it seems no one has. I roughly understand what the whole dilemma is about and I remember going over the topic in history class in secondary school when I was 13 or 14.

Even then it struck me that Christians would have icons when, if I remember my Ten Commandments right, no graven images or icons were to be made and prayed to. Yet the insistance on keeping the icons in some part of the Christian world makes this a rather interesting issue.

Please tell me, am I right in thinking that the insistance on praying to icons is basically violating the 10 Commandments? Was this at all a concern to anyone in 8th-9th centuries?

During WW2 Japan owned French-Indochina, Dutch East Indies and British Malaya. Why did they still have supply problems dispite owning those provinces which had a lot of oil?

All I know about the topic of attitudes towards spousal abuse in early American history is that it was outlawed by the Massachusetts Bay Colonists in their Body Of Liberties. But I can imagine that these liberal views might have been restricted to New England.

Were there any places and/or times that it was seen as acceptable in upper and middle class America? Were their mainstream theologians, ethical writers, etc that spoke positively about it?

Of course, you can answer about lower class America if you can - I don't mean to continue to marginalize the poor - but I understand that evidence of how the poor felt about something is unfortunately preserved to us in documents which might be colored by classism, and so it's probably a far harder question. And I'm, in any case, personally more interested in bourgeois attitudes.

What I'm asking is if there are things he did in his reign that we can say would qualify him to be considered as one of the best rulers history of South Asia has seen?

To preface: I'm not a Neo-Nazi or an admirer of Hitler in any way, one of my relatives was KIA in USAAF service in Europe.

As far as I know, no verified remains of Hitler have been found. There's plenty of speculation about Hitler escaping Berlin just before its fall, most likely to Spain or South America, what I'm wondering is if the escape theory is taken seriously by European history experts. It seems the only other explanation is that the Soviets disposed of the remains in utter secrecy and perhaps without informing their western Allies

Did Neo-Nazi groups considered Nazi celebrities like Fischer to be symbols/leaders for their cause and produced public statements like “Bobby Fischer is fighting for us! Sieg Heil!” or did they not bother portraying celebrities like him as leaders?

Also, Fischer’s mom was Jewish, which he denied claiming it was part of a “Zionist Conspiracy” to discredit him. Did Neo-Nazis accept Fischer’s lies or the truth on this matter?

I think part of the problems we face now, such as people using the defense “American History” when referring to Confederate statues and monuments, is never dissociating the two as separate countries, with the Confederacy being a foreign and hostile state.

I recently read about the Carolingian council of Frankfurt and the outlawing of witch hunting/witchcraft whereas I thought witch hunting was more of a late middle ages atrocity.

My questions are: was there much (or much evidence for) witch hunting in dark to early middle age Frankia, British, Pictish, Gallic and Anglo-Saxon controlled Britian?

I'm well aware that in the 16th century, religious tension was at a high point. I'm also willing to bet that, in the case of Germany, Martin Luther's anti-Semitic views didn't help matters. That said, considering mercenary groups (naturally) tend to put personal politics aside for the sake of their work, would it have been possible for a Jewish man to find work with a mercenary company of the day?

I'm a bit of a fanatic when it comes to reading about the First World War and lately, I've been extremely interested in the war at sea.

In Robert K. Massie's book Castles of Steel, he mentions, I think it was Jellicoe, drinking a thick cup of cocoa during the night action phase of the Battle of Jutland.

I'm currently reading Baltic Assignment - British Submarines in Russia 1914-1919 by Michael Wilson. In one passage he is describing the passage of E18 through the Sound into the Baltic Sea. E18 at one point has to submerge quickly, in very shallow waters (depth gauge showed 10ft). This passage describes what Lieutenant-Commander R. C. Halahan did next.

As the looks of dismay and alarm spread over the faces of the control room crew, he turned to one of the sailors nearby and said in a voice utterly confident and calm, "Get me a cup of cocoa, will you, Welsh."

The use of cocoa in navies does not seem to have been limited to the British, as I found in a mid-1918 doctrine memo by Lieutenant J. C. Van de Carr of the United States Navy a passage about food and provisions onboard U.S. Submarines. J. C. Van de Carr states that Cocoa should be served instead of coffee on night watches. I have a feeling this practice was adopted from the Royal Navy, as many other practices he lists he admits had been based on information given by the British in their experience.

So I guess my question is why cocoa was the drink of choice, for at least night-watches, onboard ships (specifically in the Royal Navy)? When did the practice start?

Did "Dragons" actually affect the way medieval villagers and cities acted? Where people actually sent out to kill "Dragons"? Has a "Dragon" cause a large impact single important event?

In using Dragon in quotes I'm refering to the idea of Dragons. I always felt like Hollywood over played the importance of Dragons in medevil times.