I'm currently reading the Autobiography of Malcolm X and he is talking about how his conversion to the Nation of Islam and how through his readings he was not only convinced that history has been "bleached" to fit the white man's perspective removing the black man's achievements but, closer to my question, that black civilizations were far more advanced before white civilizations.

Is that accurate? It seems like an easy historical premise that could be fact checked but I'm not quite sure where to even begin on that.

By the way, the quote in the title I got from page 184 in his Autobiography.

I'm curious to wonder how the Australian Aborigines would of fared were Australia not colonised by Great Britain, but perhaps the Netherlands, France, Portugal or even Germany who all had colonies in the South Pacific Region. Thanks in advance.

A common staple of modern conflicts appears to be information from sources such as Twitter and Youtube. If a hypothetical future/current historian is trying to document/analyze such a modern conflict, how will he go about it? Would tweets/grainy videos becomes the new "primary sources"?. If so, how will historians even take up the gargantuan task of analyzing all these videos for understanding what was actually going on?

Basically, does modern technology overdetermine the conflict and will this make the task of historians even more harder? If so, in what ways?

If I'm not clear, a simple version of my question is - How do twitter and youtube affect a military historian's job?

When did the "Easter and Christmas" Christian trend get started?

I started wondering if there were other, lesser known battlefield speeches by Lincoln and I can't seem to find anything online, so I suspect it's the only one - please correct me if I'm wrong!

If so, why did Lincoln only make a speech after Gettysburg and not after some of the many other major civil war battles?

Or what was the first board game?

Puritans would be pretty far to the right on our modern political spectrum, and yet the states where they settled the most (Massachusetts in particular) are now solidly blue states and widely regarded as among the farthest left in the country. Why the change?

Hello! I'm an aspiring medievalist partway through my degree. However, as we all know, it's not easy to get a job in a historical field. I specifically want to work in academia, and I have time to improve my employability now, seeing as I don't have my degree yet. I fully intend to get a doctorate, incidentally, because most historical jobs seem to demand that. I'm also working on my Latin, German, and French. Do you have any other suggestions for me? Thank you so much for your time.

Oh, I also work in a small museum of early US History currently, if that helps.

Was this something they started with? Did it only start when they started being purchased by the middle class?

On a related note, what were the very first car thieves like?

Whenever I think of The Beatles, I think of them as being the first musical group to ever become just as successful worldwide as they were in their home country. Were there any pre-Beatles examples of this?

Just visited Gibraltar today and "The Rock", and I am curious if Gibraltar ever was threatened by any sort of invasion by the Axis forces? Or maybe even Spain at some point posed a large threat to Gibraltar?

it seems like the French king only lost power due to William's invasion. did he have something to gain, like English land on mainland Europe? or did he allow it because he wanted to see a Frenchman/Norman on the throne? or was it some other reason?

I work in a museum and am cataloging a collection of photos from a photo studio. They did everything from weddings, portraits, parties, insurance photos. Every now and then I find a photo of a body in a casket surrounded by flowers in a funeral home. Sometimes the client was the funeral home, but usually it seems to be the family. I know that Victorian compose photography was a thing, but there's are from the 1920's and 1930s mostly

Why did the British open fire on the French in the Attack on Mers-el-Kébir during WWII? From what I understand the British were fully aware that the French people were 100% forced to surrender to the Germans. So why would the British attack a French ship with only French soldiers on board?

Obviously, a huge number of movies have been made that paint the Republicans in a sympathetic light. Furthermore, there seems to be a lot of sympathy for them nowadays, after the Good Friday agreement. But how publicly could one express sympathy for the IRA during the hunger strikes? Was it portrayed as a tragedy? Any sort of insight would be hugely interesting, thanks!

What are some examples cultural practices that were brought to the territories conquered by the Mongols (China, Western and South Asia, the Middle East and Eastern Europe)? Or more generally, what are some of the lasting effects of the conquest that we still feel today? (Borders, politics, language, food, etc)?

[deleted]

Also, if true, and for political or other reasons was hushed up before the presidential elections, why was it not exposed shortly afterwards, why didn't Johnson/his followers inform the justice department o,r at least, the Washington Post? Much seems to be explained on how it was a different era or for the good of the nation and swept under rug without a murmur. Could even a case of a candidate trying to win office by sidetracking peace talks qualify so lightly?

This may be a bit of a blundering question, but what actions was Niemoller referring to when he wrote "they came for the socialists"? Why would the National Socialist party go after socialists?

I'm aware of the explosiveness of manure, but am wondering if this was utilized before gunpowder in combat and assassination attempts. This question pertains to the the middle ages and prior. In Crusader Kings 2, assassinations are often done by way of explosive manure placed beneath floor board in the target's home- i'm just wondering how common this method actually was.

Hello AskHistorians,

I've always had a fascination with history but never been anything more than a novice. What I'm looking for are some great ancient books or stories to read, there are probably many I've never heard of.

The Epic of Gilgamesh? The Iliad? And older version of the bible perhaps?

I would love to hear your suggestions.

Why is it that women have long hair and men have short hair generally? When did this begin happening, and are there any societies where the opposite was true? Also is there any known reason for this or did it just happen this way?

edit: Thank you for all the helpful answers and resources. It was interesting to read all these answers, and I'll have to check out some of the books mentioned. These Desmond Morris books sound like something I will enjoy reading.