It may not necessarily be in the exact format as today's recognized "yo mama" jokes, but I'm curious how far we can look back and still find people insulting each other's mothers.

It is my understanding that small-scale fighting such as raids were a large part of medieval European warfare. But from what I can find, often those smaller actions are not described in any sort of detail.

So what does "looting", "burning the village" or "ravaging the land" actually entail? Who took part in such actions? How large would a "raiding party" be? How do you burn down an entire settlement?

It seems like the oracle might have been breathing in some kind of intoxicant, or maybe was just experiencing hypoxia through replacing air. Do we have any clues from history (maybe combined with geology!) about what the actual stuff is that was being inhaled?

I know that the name means "praiseworthy", which makes me wonder a few things:

Was "Muhammad" actually the prophet's birth name, or was it applied to him after he rose to prominence? While I don't doubt that an average joe in a polytheistic, Jewish and Christian Arabia could have been named "praiseworthy", it seems like too much of a coincidence that that is his name.

If it was indeed his birth name, does this mean that it might have been a common name in the pre-Islamic world and later fell out of favor amongst non-Muslims? Would there have been Christian and Jewish Arabs named "Muhammad" prior to the rise of Islam?

I've heard it repeated a few times in classes before that the reason which Constantine I converted to Christianity was because of a prophetic dream he had. However, this fact sounds a little too editorialized to be true. What text or texts describe this prophetic dream? Are they reliable, or is this prophetic dream some kind of classical cliché?

I'm working my way through Shelby Foote's books on the civil war and it seems like every time General McClellan says anything, it centers around being hopelessly outnumbered when he actually has the numerical advantage. How is it that such important figures be constantly, obscenely, wrong?

This is a fairly open ended question and I hope I've done a good enough job with it.

I was talking to a friend earlier who introduced me to the neoreactionary movement. As I read about them, I realized that all modern schools of thought used to study history are predicated off of the liberalism of the enlightenment. Its the same as when I read about the alt right or the neocons, or on the other side progressives. It seems to me like liberalism and one's stance towards it are the main bases of historical thinking. The problem is that any of these ways of thinking to me seem flawed because they spend too much time trying to defend or pick apart classical liberalism. When I say that the other schools of thought are predicated on liberalism, I'm not saying that liberalism is the 'dominant' or 'most rational' way of thinking, I'm just saying its undeniably addressed by both its supporters and its detractors as a way of establishing perspective for their own views. I think the reason for this is because liberal values are firmly rooted in the constitutions of Western European governments.

I suppose what I'm asking for is an approach or survey of history that goes beyond the debate of liberalism and its reactionaries. Any leads or interesting takes would be much appreciated.

And is there a better/non-political term to use than Palestine? But anyway, as I understand it Aramaic was the "native" tongue at the time of the Roman conquest(s) of the area. When and how did Aramaic die out and Arabic replace it?

For a bonus, what do we know of how/why Hebrew was replaced by Aramaic?

TIA.

Is there any way you can conduct research, work with artifacts, and travel without a degree? Can some one that is self taught compare to a college graduate in terms of just knowledge and understanding? Can a apprenticeship or internship play a factor? Thanks guys!!

It is often said that players like Babe Ruth and Ty Cobb were famous (or infamous), but how would someone in, say, Texas have been able to follow their exploits? What, if any, affiliation did people in the rest of the country have to big league teams?

Seems like if you left linens and things in a high humidity environment they would suck up moisture and be a good place for things to live in them. Maybe it wasn't an issue, I'm just curious.

My grandmother's maternal family (the Tsakgalou's) were greeks living in Constantinople at the time of the genocide and apparently my great-great grandparents were killed. Family lore has told that my great-grandparents died during some incident involving a train.

In "Chiefly About War Matters" published in the Atlantic Monthly, Hawthorne posits:

There is an historical circumstance, known to few, that connects the children of the Puritans with these Africans of Virginia in a very singular manner.
They are our brethren, as being lineal descendants from the Mayflower, the fated womb of which, in her first voyage, sent forth a brood of Pilgrims on Plymouth Rock, and, in a subsequent one, spawned slaves upon the Southern soil...

The Slave Voyages database shows no record of such a voyage, and histories of the Mayflower are vague of its service between its time on Cape Cod and its eventual appraisal and breaking on the Thames a few years later.

Where did this idea originate?

Question says it all, I need it for a project so ideally an academic source would really help.

Thank you in advance!

Additional question: were there any similarly right wing groups/parties in the Weimar Republican that were equally nationalist and anti-semitic/anti-communist that also sought restoration of the Monarchy?

If this is true, how exactly did Hamilton (or those truly responsible) accomplish this?