Also any background information on how "mom" and "dad" became popular would be appreciated too.

I am honestly just looking for some advice. I recently graduated a semester early with my B.A. in History, Cum Laude and with a Distinction in History. I also had an internship with the university's Special Collections and Archives, which included making a feature exhibit that, after being put on display, was requested to go in a local museum! In short, I love history. My main focuses are Appalachian History, Colonial, and Weimar Germany.

I have an opportunity to get my Masters at a university located in Appalachia starting this fall, including a chance to be a TA and get some other experience under my belt. After finishing that I would then have to move on to a Phd program somewhere else as they do not offer one. My other option is to apply to schools like Chapel Hill, UVA, Yale, etc this fall and wait another year and a half to start my graduate career. What do you all think? Is it harder to get into PHD programs with a masters? Is it a waste of time to get a separate masters degree?

Edit: I appreciate all of your suggestions! It makes me feel a whole lot better about starting this fall with the M.A!

I often see "revisionist" used derisively, seemingly to suggest that reinterpreting sources or challenging assumptions must be ideologically motivated. It seems to me (not at all a historian, just a big reader) that rethinking and readjusting our interpretation of historical texts is a pretty natural way to arrive at the most accurate account, but I can also see where a natural ideological divide can occur: in general in our political and social spheres, conservatives seek to preserve past mores and liberals seek to upend them.

I've been studying the Later Roman Empire in university and we've inevitably come to the subject of Procopius. Having read a fair few extracts from the work I can't seem to pin down what Procopius hoped to achieve with this work. Whilst it's quite clearly a critique of Justinian (and co)'s reign, I'm unsure as to whether it is an almost satirical piece or a viewing of events tinted by a vivid imagination! I'm hoping by asking this sub-reddit I can get a clear view of what modern Academic opinion sees as the various themes and motives behind this work.

I was reading the wiki page about the Shroud of Turin and how the radiocarbon dating states that the shroud material dated to 1260-1390 AD.

Then there's this claim:

Some believers in the authenticity of the shroud have attempted to discount the radiocarbon dating result by claiming that the sample may represent a medieval "invisible" repair fragment rather than the image-bearing cloth.

Was it common practice or even allowed to perform such repairs on objects considered sacred? Are there any other examples of other similar items being restored in some way?

EDIT: Thank you for the great answers, I've learned a lot of interesting things today!

Were cough drops even around yet?

Also, was there a large divide between the people supporting Octavian and the people supporting Antony?

[deleted]

Even the oldest known breeds today seem to only go back a few hundred, or perhaps thousand years. This leaves a huge gap of time during which humans had domesticated dogs. Given the wide variety of dog breeds, is it known what kind of dogs existed in prehistoric times? What they looked like, what breed today they most closely resemble, etc.

Compared to something like the legion from Rome or the triplex acies, what made the Greek phalanx so revolutionary in warfare?

I don't know much about Napoleon or that time period in Europe, but I'm sitting here watching The Count of Montecristo and these people seem to be really afraid of Napoleon. So why didn't the French government or the allied nations execute him instead of sending him into exile, twice?

If not, when did this sort of character start to appear? I know there wasn't a ton of fictional entertainment in medieval times, but I'm just curious as to how this archetype might appear in such an old setting, without sunglasses, cigarettes, motorcycles and hip rebellious youth.

I just watched The World at War battle of Britain episode (on Amazon prime if anyone is interested), and they mentioned this program of the United States sending over higher octane fuel for British Hurricanes and Spitfires. Did this actually provide a measurable advantage for the British pilots? for instance if I was to fill an old Honda up with super premium gas I know it wouldn't noticeably make the car faster. Also they eluded to this program being conducted with a high level of secrecy, how were oil tankers sent across the Atlantic with any level of increased secrecy? Thank you looking forward to any responses!

I assume that his ambush of the French was, like the killing of Franz Ferdinand, the spark that started an inevitable war, but that's just my gut feeling. I'm not terribly familiar with the background to the war.

I'm imagining that this city was something akin to Byzantium, but before Byzantium.

It was obviously a target, but so was Byzantium for what I suspect are similar reasons. Location, location, location.

Except it seems the Greeks sacked it not for location, but maybe because it was a powerhouse. Or maybe it was because of location and we just don't have the evidence to tell us why. Maybe they were blockading a grain supply. I have no idea.

However... assuming Troy was a big player in the Mediterranean and Black Sea at the time it was around, how important could it have been in the Bronze Age before it fell?

I know the Minoans were already wiped out by the time Troy was around, and the Phoenicians were starting to pick up. So there was some trade outside of Troy. However, Troy would have seen the likes of the Minoans and witnessed the transition from Minoan power to Phoenician power.

On another note. Why do we not see Troy power rise (edit: as a region)? Were they not partial to either the Greeks, Phoenicians, or Minoans? Were they there own separate entity? What of the Lydians(/Hittites?)?

We think about history in terms of B.C.E. and A.D. now, but it hasn't always been this way. How did ancient peoples think about time in terms of cumulative years? When was year zero?

I just started a martial arts class in a studio that is primarily a Karate studio for kids. I'm curious about this.

There's a sort of carpeted store/spectator area and a training area with mats on the floor. Everyone always bows before stepping onto the mats. It's seems to me that this is a tradition setup by the studio's owner with its roots in Asian martial arts tradition. They said it's meant to show respect for where you train. But I want to learn about the beginning of this tradition, if possible.

How did this idea of showing reverence and respect for your training area develop? Is there some sort of pedagogical reason (e.g. to put you in the correct state of mind) that this bowing tradition has persisted over the years?

The British Brown Bess, French Charleville, and Prussian Potsdam muskets are all fairly well known and documented, but I can't find anything about the weapons used by the Russians. Did they have their own pattern of musket or did they buy them from another country? Did their jaegers use rifles? Do we know what kind?

Thanks!

[deleted]