Here's what I'm trying to understand: On one hand, it seems like large discoveries could be increasing due to more people looking, more earth-moving projects, more development, etc. On the other hand, I could see the big finds decreasing if we had already found most of the big ones (just like there are few large oil fields left undiscovered and so the rate of discovery slows). And on the third hand (?), we're paving over and building on top of a lot of potential sites, meaning nobody in our era is likely to find them, but perhaps some future archaeologist studying our epoch will.

I'm trying to understand what the future might have in store, specifically, a slow down of big finds, or an increase. If the latter, at what point can we confidently conclude that there really are no more major finds left to discover? Implicit in this question is A) the assumption that the potential discoveries are finite, and B) we'll never find them all, but we will approach some asymptotic maximum percentage.

Sorry if this question is inappropriate; I couldn't really tell from the rules whether the current state of historical research is fair game. (Is this a historiography question? I'm often a bit fuzzy on the boundaries of that term.)

As medievalist, I've had to straddle both literature and history -- both in terms of discipline and in terms of evidence. Exposure to White, and then Foucault and Barthes, in graduate school really shook up the way I interpreted the act of composing/analyzing history. I would like to read more about how these critiques of historiography have influenced your thoughts about historical inquiry, as well as your work.

This seems to be a point of some contention to me. It's obvious that a shit tonne of people died in the Gulags, but at the same time the more "extravagant" numbers tossed around seem to originate from Western critics, who obviously had a motive to attack the USSR.

From the official statistics from the Soviets, the death rates varied from 3-20%(With 20% being at the height of the German invasion) - though similarly to their Western critics, they would have plenty of reason to fudge the numbers, even in the period of De-Stalinisation.

Do we know how accurate estimates of the death tolls are? Is there a broad consensus amongst the global community? Or are the statistics just lost to time?

Would an eighth century Umayyad ship bringing grain from Tunis to Alexandria use amphorae? What about an 11th century Neapolitan trade ship going from southern Italy to Spain?

What i'm asking is if there was a particular ideology behind their wars, and if so what was it.

I know that the iron age came after the bronze age and that it is called the iron age because it saw the widespread use of iron. What I would like to know is whether there was any forged iron at all before it became a common metal?

The Catholic Inquisition (primarily the Spanish Inquisition) are infamous for the brutality and dogma that drove them.

Nonetheless it's an interesting field of study. However, it has me wondering was there ever an Islamic Inquisition that hunted down heretics or witch's? In addition has there ever been a Jewish Inquisition or Eastern religion Inquisition?

Tldr; Is the "Inquisiton" a Catholic only event or has it been conducted by other religious groups?

Throughout the Protestant Reformation, the Habsburgers remained mostly Catholic, did they not? Also, did the Emperor have a problem with his subjects turning Protestant, or even go to outright war?

I've always wondered how other countries and rulers came to know about the new world. Columbus and Spain knew they were on to something big, even if they didn't know exactly what. Why didn't they keep it quiet? Why spread the knowledge rather than take everything for themselves?

It seems like people would continue speaking Latin even if the Roman Empire was gone. I can understand fairly foreign lands such as England and Africa, but why did Italy continue speaking Latin?

I'm interested in reading history books so far I mostly listen to history podcasts and maybe look at a few wikipedia pages but I want to get into reading so how I can I find out if a book is credible? Is there any site that you can use or do I just have to google and trust sources and reviews of the book?

For example, I've heard that Sloppy Joes were invented during the Great Depression when people tried to stretch their ground beef by adding ketchup or tomato sauce to it. Is there any truth to this? Are there any other examples?

If so, how?

This quote is a slight paraphrase from the novel Jurassic Park, right after their first encounter with raptors.

Was this is a common view? Rare(r) view? Completely false idea by the author, Michael Crichton?

If this statement is true (or true-ish), then...

• Was the view mostly held by scientists or non-scientist Christians (or both or others)?

• If the latter, which denomination(s) mainly held the belief?

• Finally, what was the Christian reaction to the realization that species did become extinct over time?

I am reading some sermons and letters written by Niemoller and Bonhoeffer while they were incarcerated, but I was wondering how members of the Confessing Church practiced Christianity outside of prison. Did members meet secretly? How did they avoid being caught? Can you suggest any further reading?

How did John Adams, John Hancock, Samuel Adams, and Robert Treat Paine fit into the socioeconomic hierarchy of Colonial Boston?

Colonization in Antiquity to me is Phoenicians or Greeks landing somewhere and establishing a city to expand their trade routes, but any conflict with natives is incidental. Or with Romans conquering an area (and killing some natives, true) and settling some former soldiers, but otherwise not systematically removing the native population.

Were there ever instances in Antiquity where the natives were completely destroyed or removed and replaced with a colonizing population?

I just finished Death of a King by Tavis Smiley over the weekend. I never realized how little I knew about Dr. King until I picked up that book. So much detail that I had no idea about.

Now I'm looking for something new. So make your suggestions, please...

After seeing pictures from the London blackout I was wondering if people abused that and committed more crime or was it sort of a known fact that people had more important stuff to worry about?

I have been told 80 were on the eastern, but how many on the Western?