I'm currently pursuing my BA in history and hopefully will be going on to get an MA (and hopefully a PhD!) also in history. However, the more I learn and the more I research, the harder it becomes to actually decide on a specific time period or focus. I love material culture and social history but I also adore political and labor history. How did you decide on your subdiscipline/focus, and what made you realize that was the time period/issue/aspect of life you wanted to focus on?

The the Norman invasion was in 1066 and the Entente Cordial was in 1904. Between those two dates there was constant antagonism and either direct or indirect conflict between the two countries… the Hundred Years' War, the French Revolutionary Wars, the Seven Years' War, the American War of Independence, the Napoleonic Wars etc etc.

How did such a long history of conflict come to a permanent end in 1904?

Fama Fraternitatis is the first of a series of spiritual manifestos published in 1614 in present-day Germany. It claimed to reveal to the world the existence of an age-old secret order — the Rosenkreutz — and championed pretty much every esoteric tradition imaginable in its name, from kabbalah to alchemy.

It is my understanding that these works were taken very seriously at the time, and even went on to shape some aspects of then burgeoning Freemasonry. Eventually, it broke into the mainstream with the foundation of a self-described Rosicrucian organization named AMORC during the 1910s — one that anybody can join.

That being said, no evidence for the existence of a Rosicrucian order prior to the publication of the aforementioned manifesto has ever been unearthed. It has however been suggested that some purported Rosicrucian writings are effectively a farce; Johannes Andreae admitted as much when he claimed authorship of the anonymous Chemycal Marriage of 1616 and described it as a practical joke.

Could it be that Rosicrucianism is originally nothing more than a humorous hoax? A bit of performance art of sorts which many in learned circles took at face value, and which subsequently developed a life of its own?

In 1535, Jacques Cartier visited the village of Hochelaga, and stated it was a village protected by a wooden palisade. The village was described by Cartier as being quite large, with 50 longhouse constructed and an estimated population of 3,000.

When he returned to the village in 1541, it was gone. He made no mention of it in the journals of his 1541 voyage.

I know there are a number of theories as to the disappearance of the village, but it strikes me as extremely odd it was completely gone, longhouses and Palisades included, after just six year. Is there a theory that carries more weight than others, or is the truth lost to the sands of time?

Born in the late 70s in the midwest of the states “The Troubles” were not something in my sphere of Influence. Can you give me a quick recap, how it started, how bad it got, and how it was resolved? What was the day to day impact on “normal” British citizens?

Is there any suggestions for documentaries or books on the subjects?

It seems even when I visited the war museum in London it was all focused on the famous wars, and no mention (or very little) of the Troubles.

Does it have to do with Salic law? Was England originally against female monarchs but made an exception for Elizabeth due to wanting a Protestant ruler, or something?

I'm not sure if the premise of my question is incorrect.

In the game Medieval 2, there is a mercenary unit called "The Great Cross" essentially a cross on a horse drawn wagon, which gives morale buffs to troops and can only be recruited in whilst on crusade in the Italian peninsula.

When i encountered one during my first medieval 2 playthrough i found myself wondering if these great crosses where used or not.

Did medieval italians and crusaders actually use these great crosses to battle? Medieval 2 isn't really known for historical accuracy, so i doubted the existence of the cross wagon being used in battles and just thought of it as gimmick coded in by the game developers of the game.

I don't have a scan, but in one chapter of the manga, while investigating a death, the elderly character Sasayama realizes the case at hand has relations with Unit 731, and asks the younger protagonists if they know about it. When even Sasaki, the "smart one" doesn't know, Sasayama complains about the "propaganda filled education" youngsters got.

Were Japanese war crimes really taught in Japanese schools at some point in time? What changed and when it happened? To a modern audience, used to, e.g., Abe's revisionist history and denialism of the Rape of Nanjing, it sounds very weird that something horrorifying like the Unit 731 crimes were being taught in schools

For reference, the manga is set in the early 2000's, the protagonists are all recently-graduated 20-somethings, and Sasayama appears to be in his late 50's/early 60's

According to my textbook, in the "Map showing the impact of the Treaty of Versailles on the borders of Europe", it states "Lithuania, Estonia, and Latvia became independent states. Germany had taken these states from Russia in 1918".

The textbook states the Paris Peace Conference took place from 1919-1920.

According to the internet, the independence days are:

Lithuania - 16/2/1918

Estonia - 24/2/1918

Latvia - 18/11/1918

If somebody can help me out, that would be very much appreciated.

Yair Lapid, the current Minister of Foreign Affairs of Israel, is quoted as saying:

It is no coincidence that the Nazis created their center of extermination in Poland. They knew that the Polish population would help them.

Is that claim accurate? Was the "willingness of the Polish population to help" considered by the Nazis when deciding on the location of the concentration camps?

Since I wasn't around in 1942, I don't know how the character of Sam would have come off relative to what was typical of African American portrayals at the time.

On the one hand, he was second fiddle to Bogey and highly loyal, but he wasn't subservient, and often spoke up if the situation was dire (like when he dragged him onto the train as they were escaping Paris). He was more of a 'right hand man' or a 'sidekick' as opposed to a servant. Marlene Dietrich's Ingrid Bergman's (whoops!) character referred to him as "the boy over there" when she first walked in to that gin joint (out of all the other ones in the world), but then she greeted him like a dear old friend and then very nicely pleaded with him to play 'As Time Goes By' while he made it clear he'd rather not.

There were a few other things that were a little cringey by modern standards, such as the lyrics of one of his songs referring to his hair and eyes, or the way he walked on the train platform in Paris.

How was his portrayal received at the time, and how has it been criticized in hindsight?

Before photography (or other forms of copying works of art) became available, how did the wider "art world" learn about new styles and new great works of art? Did painters, architects and sculptors travel around in order to see these works in person, or were new movements and techniques very localized and slow to spread out of their region of origin?

I am wonder if the allies would drop their nuclear bombs on germany before japan if germany still was a problem when they had their nukes ready. I know that they had a germany first policy but it still dont feel realistisk to them to nuke a place that they had a land border with. I am thinking of 1944-1945.

I've read here and there about the treatment Indigenous Peoples in America by various European colonial powers. One consistent theme seems to be that England and Spain had no regard for the lives of the natives, whereas France seemed to have a more standoffish approach. Was this due to the differing ambitions of these nations (i.e. colonization and resources in the case of England and Spain and just resources in the case of France) or did it have more to do with the culture of the colonial powers themselves? Was the French attitude towards those different from them less hostile than that of England and Spain?

My friend asked me to be on her podcast, and since I'm kinda the history nerd in our group she asked me if I could put something together about Roman methods of birth control and such.

Everything I know is anecdotal (I think in Rome, the show, they give someone belladonna to induce a miscarriage) or inference (obviously pull-out was a thing): Could anyone recommend some more reliable sources I might use?

Please and thanks.

I am aware of the purges of French people after the French were defeated in Vietnam / Indochina. French-owned plantations were nationalised after the American Vietnam War and most French were either killed or kicked out.

But is there still a group of descendents living in that region, either as a business elite or a rural farming community of any significance (i.e. Caldoches number over 70,000)? And what is their name?