As a long time reader, I know that the question of how to evaluate a particular book or author comes up somewhat regularly. However, now that I am trying to answer this question myself, I can't find any of those previous questions and their answers! Since I'm positive that this has come up before, I'm wondering if there is a way to make the answer easier to find. Can it be added to the FAQ and/or the Book list? (I looked there first...)

For clarity: I'm not asking about how to evaluate a primary, historical source. That's a different discussion, that I believe is currently taking place elsewhere. I'm talking about currently published books, easily found at the bookstore/library. Definitely more Pop history than Academic...

To mean a cup of coffee? I read a couple theories myself but I'm interested what AskHistorians has to say about how this phrase was coined.

I'm reading Tolstoy's "War and Peace", and the main character is at risk of facing sanctions from the Tsar because of his duel with his wife's lover.

Firstly, I would like to know if it was ever an acceptable way of defending one's honor ?

And if it was, when did it stop to be ?

Hard labour sounds very grim, and the nature of Wilde's "crime" seems likely to have made his situation grimmer. But on the other hand, he seemed to get a lot of reading and writing done during this part of his life, and De Profundis seems mainly to describe the general misery of disgrace, without really even alluding to immediate, acute suffering.

We've all been taught that Stalin and his regime killed over 50 million people, but realistically that's impossible, since it's be a massive blow to Russia's economy at the time. Stalin was in office until 1952, which the population of Russia was barely 105 million people. How is it even possible that he killed 50 million people, nearly half of the population? It's just impossible that ever happened.

So how many people did Stalin actually kill?

Hello everyone. I'd like to ask how did the tactics between medieval europe and Japan differ.

I am aware that this is a very, very broad question and that "medieval tactics" in 10th century were different than those deployed in, let's say 15th century.

Let's make it a little easier and let's just assume that a medieval european army, just before the guns vere invented would be compared to Japanese samurai army just before the time fireweapons got there.

I'm not asking, however, if the European army would win or the other way. I'd just like to know some essential differences in fighting/tactics deployed. Eg: Japanese did not use plated armor (just an example, would love to get this corrected).

Thanks a lot in advance!

I remember hearing an apocryphal story about some old Lord or other who was still having his servants light gas lamps in the 1960s, since he had never bothered to have electricity installed. Any basis in fact?

[deleted]

So, I know on this subreddit the rule is history is 20 years before now but this question is less about the specifics of the war and more about how historians work.

Do professional historians also have a general 20 year rule? I imagine during a situation such as a war, we will need to try and preserve what we can now regarding useful primary sources on the ground so that historians down the road will have help...

Do any of you all know any historians who are engaged in the current conflict in anyway to preserve history or what now?

I'm using the Syrian Civil War as an example but I'm just curious in general regarding any answers about how historians interact with contemporary events...

Sorry if this has been answered before but I really doubt it. I'm wondering how much area a castle would have taken. From Curtain and inward only if possible (can't be picky.) Specifically i'm looking for the yard sizes ranging smallest to largest but knowing the entire size isnt that bad either.

Traditionally the British were enemies with France in the centuries past. The latest British act against France was during the Congress of Vienna to restore the status quo in Europe. From that point when did the British start to have good relations with France?

Obviously Latin was the language used by the Catholic church from these time periods, even though Latin lost use in some areas and combined with other languages/evolved to become the various languages used around Europe. But since individual languages as well as the literacy rates across Europe changed so dramatically over the centuries, it made me wonder how many people knew/were fluent in Latin throughout Europe in different regions and at different times. I assume most nobles/royalty would have had education in learning the language, but would the average person be fully able to understand it?

The Middle Ages (especially the early middle ages) are often pejoratively referred to as the "dark ages" because of the relative paucity of historical records, but what about technology? What notable technological advancements occurred during this period?

Do the Nazi also murder them in cold blood? I mean I'm sure those infants would be of no use in labor camps, so what do they do with them?

[deleted]

Hey r/AskHistorians ,

Looking for some non-fiction books about the Kingdoms from the HRE times. Would love to read up on this!

Thanks