Supposedly Sir Patrick banished snakes from Ireland by standing on a hilltop and... telling them to go away? Is there any evidence, written or archaeological, that suggests the snakes were actually there?

I can understand the religious context and the symbolism of the snake, like Patrick drove the devil out of Ireland. I've heard it suggested that the snakes were a metaphor for the land working Pagans who were culturally driven to destruction by Christians. But I'm not sure this is evidenced or not

Large portions of museums and bookstore shelves seem to be filled with military paraphernalia, and catalogues of historical weaponry seem to be disproportionately popular compared to other pieces of material culture. Some of the first books I ever had as a child were books handed down to me by my cousins about Cold War materiel, and I have many memories of visiting the IWM with older family members. The various ways of stabbing, shooting and blowing each other up that we have devised seem to be an "acceptable" interest, while, say, the history of textiles or of gardens would be niche or eccentric. The more I think about it, though, the more bizarre this focus on historical warfare is for a global society that nowadays prides itself on peace. Why is this the case, and how do academics feel about it and work around it?

like podcasts or something

learned about it in high school and university would like to know more

heard a few askhistorian podcasts about it but not enough

Rumors held that as many as sixty Barbary men-of-war were actively prowling the English Channel, waiting for the opportunity to capture more product for the slave markets of Algiers and Tripoli. For most of the seventeenth century, an English or Irish family living near the coast confronted the real possibility that the might be hauled off without warning….[the] numbers suggest that the odds of sudden enslavement by Barbary pirates were far higher for the average Devonshire resident than the odds of experiencing a terrorist attack in a modern-day Western City.

From Steven Johnson’s "Enemy of All Mankind."

I don't necessarily mean time zones in the modern sense specifically. Presumably humans have known that the sun rises in the east and sets in the west since pre-history. But how long did it take for people to realize that towns to their east would have an earlier sunrise? How well was this understood before the industrial revolution sped up communication?

Can someone recommend a good book about the Khazars for lay people? I know Khazar history is controversial and prone to anti-Semitic abuses, so I want to select what I read carefully.

I am a high school history teacher and we’re about to get into the causes of WWI. I normally stick to the script of militarism, alliances, imperialism, and nationalism as the tinder and the assassination of Franz Ferdinand and the “blank check” as the spark that sets it all off.

However, I’ve seen here and elsewhere some criticism of MAIN. Usually it’s part of a list of flawed or outdated ideas and there isn’t a specific explanation of what the flaws are. Could someone provide an explanation of why this is a flawed way of looking at things?

Also, would it be better to teach the same stuff then do a little critical thinking exercise looking at the potential flaws, or should I throw it out entirely and use a different framework. Remember this all has to be squeezed into about three 45 minute periods!

As a young adults, I’ve come to realize the taunting from middle to older age people has inexplicable roots in vagrancy laws, which essentially punish existing and not working. While you aren’t likely to be fined or jailed for engaging in leisure on a weekday, you’re still gonna get berated by Boomers.

Feel free to expand on what you know of punishing existing & not working, ie vagrancy.

I reallize this is a bit vague time line wise, but as it does grow in the regions, is easy to mill, and doesn't end up with rocks and dirty in it. (because you wash it before use)

I really want to know why it never cough on, or if it did, cant really find more then a few cookbooks, and peasants are almost never written about.

Edit: I meant to say Rice, sorry for the spelling mistake.

1. Can we get to Britain? How?
2. What will happen when we get there? Will we be integrated into the British army? Broken up? Will we even be allowed to continue fighting?

Bede tells us that the cleric Hadrian, who was to become an Abbot of Canterbury, was "by nation an African", and at the Niridian monastery, not far from Naples, prior to being sent by the Pope to Britain (Eccles. 4.1). When he did travel to Britain, he was accompanied by the monk Theodore, "born at Tarsus in Cilicia" (ibid.).

How was it that a man from North Africa found himself in a monastery in Italy, before travelling to Britain with an Anatolian man for company? How well connected was Early Medieval Europe and North Africa? Were these international connections facilitated by the church, or was such long-distance travel available to non-clergy people?

Any sources would be most appreciated.

Thanks in advance!

I realize that the Kingdoms weren't officially integrated until the 18th century; that they were instead, held in a personal union up to that point. But I'm curious to now - was the term "Spain" used to describe them prior to that point? Were Isabella and Ferdinand actually ever referred to as the King and Queen of Spain by their contemporaries?

I’ve heard this as a concept but have never seen any actual examples. The idea is that, in a monarchy where anyone that displeases the King/Queen can be executed, the court jester is the only one able to explore ideas that others are too afraid to touch. It makes sense that having humor as a tool, and being considered a “fool” so not having all of their words fully scrutinized, would allow them to speak more openly, but are there any documented examples of this happening?

In the Boston area there are several monuments and/or memorial plaques dedicated to the Norse explorers who supposedly landed or made settlements in New England, from Norumbega Tower to the Leif Eriksson statue in downtown Boston to a commemorative plaque conveniently located right next to where Gerry's Landing would be a few hundred years later. Who put these monuments up? What were they trying to say politically? How did they convince themselves?