During the Middle Ages/Medieval Era, what was the most likely way a King would die in a place like Western Europe? Assassination, poison, battle, old age, etc?

I'm reading a bit about Ethiopian history, and the face that it's the only pre-colonial sub-Saharan Christian church is fascinating. Why is this? How did it happen?

I know the Italians occupied it briefly, but it still holds the reputation as never having been colonised. Why is this, and why does it have this reputation despite Italian occupation?

Andrew Jackson reportedly said that "John Marshall has made his decision; now let him enforce it!". This seems to me a serious breach of the executive's duty to carry out the law, so why didn't his enemies impeach him on it?

Hope this is the right place, and that i ask an open enough question. Because there is not a simple answer, but now that there has risen a news covered conflict in syria, it would be nice to know how it got to this point before america tried to get involved.

It struck me that agency staffed historians may be subject to a conflict of interest when tasked with writing a historical account of the institution that issues their paychecks. Why not just leave the job to academic or amateur historians unaffiliated with the agency?

I was deployed in Afghanistan some years ago, where we shared a camp with some German troops. They used the nickname spieß (spear) for their company sergeant major. We where told that this harkens back when formations of pikemen where still used. The spieß would be standing at the rear of the formation and use his spear to prevent anyone from fleeing thus the name. I've been trying to verify this story without much luck. I was wondering if any of you would be able to succeed where i failed.

The Nerva-Antonine dynasty was arguably the most stable period in Roman history, largely in part to the stability that the adoptive emperor tradition brought with it. So why is that Marcus Aurelius allowed Commodus to ascend? Being the philospher king of Rome one would think he would have prevented Commodus; a military and poltical outsider, from ascending.

Was it because he was the only of Five good Emperors that had a living son to take over after his death?

Did his stoic philosophy make him believe that Commodus would rise to the occasion? "Nothing happens to anybody which he is not fitted by nature to bear." Meditations V.18

I've read meditations but he doesn't seem to give much insight into his philosophy on family or succession. I haven't read Cassius Dio, is there more insight in that text?

I hope this question is specific enough for the sub-reddit's standards.

To give some background info that might help you tailor your response, I should mention that I am a graduating English/Early Modern Studies major that will be undertaking a Masters degree at Oxford University this fall. As a student of literature, I have a decent grasp of medieval history, but I'm far from being an historian. In light of this, I'm hoping to hit the books over the summer to help mitigate this historical blindspot and prepare myself for reading medieval literature at the graduate level.

I'm asking this question in /r/Askhistorians because it is deceptively complex. Good academic sources are usually quite narrow in focus, and larger overviews can be either poor in quality or incredibly long. As someone looking to finish this book over the summer, I am thus looking for a good balance of quality, historical depth, and page length. And because I will be using this knowledge to assist me in my graduate studies, I'd prefer that the book be academically credible (at least as an entry point into further research, anyway).

Thank you for any recommendations you can offer. Bonus points will be given for books that are easy to read for historically-inclined but non-expert individuals!

Like the title says did left handedness inhibit or influence a persons place in the phalanx and in battle in general?

I understand there was plenty of political instability in the Latin American democracies, but I want to know why so many states alternated between governments, like Argentina, Peru, Honduras, Ecuador, Brazil, and Guatemala.

And as a side question, why did all these military dictatorships end during the 80's?

I was thinking last night if I had a historical time machine and I went back to the roman republic and I pictured two citizens getting in a fist fight. I realized my fighting imagery is based off of modern boxing with hooks, jabs, etc. I then realized this could be anachronistic thought, so my question is how has throwing a punch evolved from the "past" to the "modern" way?

In the U.S. baseball, American Football, Basketball and even Hockey are fairly popular. Football is popular throughout most of the world. However, 200 years ago these sports didn't exist (maybe football?). Anyway, throughout history, what sport remained popular for the longest period of time? The only thing I can think of is horse racing or wrestling and even then they are not widely popular.

I checked the FAQ and search engine but didn't see this specific question asked/answered. What method of time measurement (60 sec, 60 mins, 24 hours etc) did the Roman's use?

Bonus question: did the Carthaginians use the same system? What was their system?

Thanks in advance!

While the government of the U.S. Was officially neutral in the Napoleonic Wars, were there any prolific members of society at the time that either condemned or condoned him?

My Grandfather fought in WWII for the Soviets. He divulged limited information before he died and never did talk about the war. Just prior to the war he was in a Calvary unit but during the war he was an ambulance driver, and he served on the Iranian front. He never told us his rank, or really what much he did. I was wondering where I could go or how I could obtain information regarding his service.

For example, during the middle ages, or the early medieval period. How did they put out mass fires?