[deleted]

To be specific, I'm looking for books on the history of the re-discovery of tombs and major monuments over the past few centuries, not books on the ancient history of Egypt itself. Pretty much everyone knows about Howard Carter and King Tut, of course, but I confess I didn't know much more than that; I was at the Fields Museum in Chicago earlier today, and learned about the cache of mummies at Deir el-Bahari, and found it fascinating. I've been looking around for any books that cover this topic as a general overview, and not having a lot of luck, so any recommendations are appreciated - general overview, or a book covering a specific find that you think is interesting. Anything from the finding of the pyramids onward, basically. Thanks much!

I have always wondered this question.

First I realized that all the founding fathers had British accents, then wondered what the generation or two in America after them sounded like.

I assume the older generation still had a bit of a British accent, and with the mass waves of immigration there was probably a ton of accents in the country. Was there a unique "American accent" at one point in the country's history?

And is the current American Accent just a bastardized version of all the other accents?

Similar to what occurs now in states such as North Korea?

Someone told me today that roughly 20M slaves were brought into New Orleans, but only about 500,000 were brought into America and that the rest were sent to South America and the Caribbean. Is this true?

A lot of popular history, and even my own undergraduate courses twenty years ago strongly imply the Han Chinese culture was very inward-looking, largely unconcerned with other cultures except to keep invaders at bay. When the Chinese Empire expanded its territory, it was mainly during the rule of non-Han dynasties like the Yuan and Qing (Tang being the notable exception). Han dynasties seemed content to rule over a mostly Han populace within the borders originally united by the Qin/Han dynasties. This line of thinking will bring up events like the Ming dynasty court ending Zheng He's far-reaching expeditions as examples of this mindset.

However, in the last century and a half, Han Chinese have emigrated to almost every corner of the globe, and appear to be successful almost every where they settle. Chinatowns are found in major cities all around the world, many small business are owned and operated by Han Chinese, and later-generation immigrants excel in higher education and professional vocations. At least, this is the popular perception; e.g. the "model minority".

What caused this cultural shift from isolationism to successful integration?

Hello all! In the timeless film National Treasure, Nicolas Cage's character mentions that the founding fathers were committing high treason against the british crown, and had they been caught, they would have been "hanged, beheaded, drawn and quartered and, my personal favorite, had their entrails cut out and burned!" is this accurate? Would the founding fathers have received such a brutal execution, or even capital punishment in the first place?

Several prominent Southeast Asian academics during that time downplayed or denied the Cambodian genocides as exaggerated and blown out of proportion by the foreign press and Cambodian refugees. Gareth Porter, Noam Chomsky, George Kavin, and other respected academics of Southeast Asian history and more publicly defended the Khmer Rouge .

Were the eyewitness accounts really that unconvincing and contradictory? It seems obvious now that the Khmer Rouge was behind several mass killings and atrocities in Cambodia; what motivated the large amount of skepticism?

Sorry if this is a stupid question but I can't really find the answer with google. What I want to know if there are communities of people with black/dark skin that did not originally come from Africa via immigration, slave trading, or human trafficking.

Sorry if this isn't the right subreddit

As a lay historian who has only taken one class in history at the college level, I find that not only am I not really aware of the latest developments or seminal works in the fields I'm interested in (Mostly Ancient Mediterranean Military history and Byzantine history), I don't really know where to look. I'm aware of databases like JSTOR, but I don't really have the background knowledge necessary to search for and evaluate sources with any kind of ease. In general, how do you recommend those of us without formal education in the field keep abrest of the important works in the field, and specifically, what are some books/journals that everyone in my field of interest should be reading or following. (Mostly talking about secondary sources here, but if there's a primary source you think might be obscure enough that I haven't heard of it, feel free to recommend away) The second half of the question is more relevant for the Byzantine history part of my interests, as the reading list provided is a bit spare.

Despite the context I'm about to give, this really is a historical question and not a religious one: I sometimes find myself in debates about the historicity of Jesus. There is an argument against the historicity of Jesus based on the sparse-to-non-existent (depending on what sources you accept) contemporary mentions of him. The counter-argument is that there is only sparse-to-nonexistent contemporary evidence of any historical figure going that far back. This seemed implausible to me, but I thought I would ask the pros: what are the primary sources for this historicity of people in Roman times?

The only thing I can find is the small excerpts about the Vikings and Rus but did he write more about his travels?

I'm really interested in reading about his entire travel through europe from start to finish.

Although the Uprising was timed to coincide with the Rev Army's advance toward the city, the Red Army suddenly stopped short during the critical moments, and would not allow either British or American air support to use its airfields in support of the Uprising. Was this a purposeful effort on the part of the USSR to see Poland crushed? If so, why did they support the Uprising in the first place?

I understand that the main ceremonies in Greek temples were animal sacrifice. What would be an example of a prayer done during one of these sacrifices? I am also curious as to what other purposes a temple would serve.

I know some basics, such that Roman combat medicine was actually pretty effective, and things like that. But it's hard to find information on the medical procedures we take for granted these days. A friend of mine tore his miniscus and is having a surgery to remove some of the scarred tissue so that it can heal, but that type of surgery is a relatively new procedure, as is a lot of our current sports medicine. So what happened earlier in history when you got "sports injuries" in the past, such as torn ACLs and MCLs, or other stuff like that where it can take you up to a year to heal even after surgery?

Vlad the Impaler is a notorious person, for obvious reasons—there are many primary sources describing how he brutally killed tens of thousands of turks and ottomans during his reign. However, I've been trying to separate fact vs myth about the person, notably whether he distinguished between enemy combatants (men) and women/children. In particular, wikipedia cites a passage from german pamphlet written in 1521: "He roasted children and forced their mother to eat them. He cut the breasts from the women and force their husband to eat them. Finally he impaled them all."

Is this accurate? Did he engage in forced cannibalism, of torturing women and children in this manner? Are there any primary sources for this? If so, is there any indication of how prevalent this practice was or why he did it? I suppose it could be considered a type of total war, albeit a particularly brutal and psychological version.

Anyway, I'd appreciate any and all insight or material that y'all can provide.

If I joined the US army at the outbreak of World War 2, how was it decided which division I would be assigned to? I assume I wouldn't get a choice in which division I join, So who decided? was it based on location? and as a small follow up, were soldiers that enlisted in groups split up or would they be assigned to the same unit?

Obviously he wasn't the emperor, as the work was written under Augustus. Do we know much about this individual? Was there any relation to Antoninus?