I'm watching Downton Abbey and one of the characters was invited to Istanbul and said, 'Wouldn't the journey be painful?" Which I interpret as being too long, but how long would it be roughly for a noblewoman to travel to Istanbul from Yorkshire?

I'm trying to find any and all information I can on Maximilian Stoll, the Austrian physician from the 18th century, in an attempt to contextualize a Latin text I'm working on translating ("Praelectiones in Diversos Morbos Chronicos"). However, all of the information I have found is limited, and all the sources I've found feature the same copy-pasted blurb.

Would anyone have any ideas or favourite spots to check for more information? Most that I have learned about medical history thus far has been from physicians and historians talking about it and mentioning where to look for more information so I'm a bit out of my depth.

Thank you!!

not gonna lie i feel like yall bunch of snobs, if you don't have huge karma you ain't getting no answers. imagine creating a subreddit based on hisory and everytime you trynna discuss you have no answers it's demoralizing and waste of times. anyway i ain't posting on that subreddit anymore.

What would British colonists known or practiced? I've heard a lot of claims from the modern occult community about the use of Psalms as charms, and read about the scholarly debate on the extent of belief in spirits in Britain at the time (for example Margaret Murray's debunking and Wilby's book "Cunning Folk and Familiar Spirits: Shamanistic Visionary Traditions in Early Modern British Witchcraft and Magic".)

I'm curious if there's an identifiable tradition of folk magic amongst British colonists, especially since there's lingering traditions like dowsing or wart charming that may have come out of such beliefs.

when we talk about the violence of the mongols they say they killed around 40 million people. which leaves me confused. the mongols rules for like 200 years and ghenghis khan was dead long ago. even tho i still think he was ruthless but i still think it's over exagerated. again you know history tend to exagerated event. i can believe that the mongols kill 40 million people but not only on ghenghis khan reigns. and aslo doe famine count?

I understand that African-descended peoples of Aruba have close cultural links with the African diaspora of Latin America, which is believed to be the reason why most Arubans speak Papiamento, an Iberian-derived creole language.

Did these enslaved communities arrive on the island as practicing Catholics? Were any attempts made by Dutch authorities to convert Arubans to Protestant denominations?

I've been studying African American slavery at school, and it really does not make sense why slaves were whipped, tortured, and put in such harsh living conditions. I understand the whole racism thing, but isnt the whole purpose of having slaves is to increase production? Won't an injured slave decrease production of cotton, for example? It's common sense that if your workers are injured or sick, ur output literally decreases. Like how can u pick cotton if your entire back is scarred? If u put a bunch of people in a small ass shack with no plumbing, diseases and infections are bound to spread. Slaves cost money, right? If one of your slaves dies of disease, you literally have to buy a new slave?? How does that benefit anyone? Economically speaking, its literally a lose-lose situation.

If they used torture and punishments as an intimidation tactic, its really counterproductive in my opinion. well, i mean, the whole concept of slavery is dumb.

It is to my knowledge that bolt-action rifles with internal magazines originated during the 1880 with rifles such as the Lebel Model 1888 and the Lee-Metford. During the Late 1880s and early 1890s, many militaries began to transition away from singe shot weapons towards modern bolt action rifles, with the US adopting the Krag-Jorgensen in 1892.

Videogames such as Hunt: Showdown and Red Dead Redemption 2 portray such rifles as being available in the American west during the 1890s, being set in 1895 and 1899 respectively. In these games, the majority of characters depicted use western lever-action or single-shot rifles, however bolt-action rifles are still present. With how early these games are set, I doubt that these rifles would have proliferated as far into the West as they are portrayed as, especially since the majority of these rifles are used by the military.

With that in mind, I was wondering how common bolt action rifles would have been for your average citizen during this time period, especially since this is the era when these weapons started to become popular.

From Wikipedia

"While at Ohio State he created and directed the Listening Center, one of the largest language laboratories in the United States. The center was developed in conjunction with Ohio Bell Telephone and allowed self-paced language study using a series of automated tapes and prompts that were delivered over the telephone. "

Was it at all interactive? Did you have to keep track of your own progress, or was it recorded somewhere? How did you pay for it? Did people at the time consider it to be a legitimate way to learn a language, or more of a novelty?

If a woman born legitimately to someone like an Earl, Duke, Viscount etc. is rejected by the family, would said family still be forced to launch her into society regardless of their support of her? Were the any examples of this rite of passage being withheld and, if so, what were the consequences of doing so?

Everything I've heard about McClellan is negative, but is it all true or is he just a patsy for incompetence of the time?

I'm thinking about women in particular here, since I imagine it must have been a very male-dominated environment. Did they face a lot of harassment? Also, was socializing with the crew permitted? And if not, what did they do for fun?

The Catholic Church held all its rites (including the Mass) in Latin until Second Vatican Council (1962-65), and prohibited translations of the Bible until quite late. Was it an intentional obscurantism to not let the believers understand the Bible and liturgy (so that the Church could manipuate the text and fool the believers, while the clergy live a corrupt life)? Or was it that the Church simply couldn't afford to either teach everyone Latin or translate the Bible and liturgy to diverse languages, all the while keeping the true meaning of the Bible genuine?

I also wondered if back before the 15th century, the European languages did not contain enough data/words/allegories to carry the vast message of the Bible, and a loyal translation was just impossible (not just because the monks translators may demand more beer than the pope could afford).

Okay so I had this question for a while now why does some frigates have two gun decks instead of one like the USS constitution?

Cast for your vote for the BEST answers of March 2022!