What I mean by "usage" I mean saying like "She's a fine ship" "Her guns are the biggest in the fleet". I'm just curious of how that got started.

This is a bit of a meta question but I thought this was the most appropriate place to ask it, since answers given here are frequently well-sourced.

When it comes to science, math, or even some of "soft sciences" such as sociology, I know how to do this pretty well. Generally Google is reliable enough for quick answers, and if necessary I can do in depth research on J-Stor or Google Scholar or something.

However, with history, there is often a lot of speculation (perhaps I ought to say, it's possible to find a wide range of opinion), or the necessary knowledge to answer a question in detail comes from having a deep understanding of the issues at play during a time period or cultures that no longer exist. How on earth can a layperson research historical questions reliably?

(I apologize in advance if this question is not appropriate here. I checked the rules and couldn't find anything against it. However, I feel it's a potentially important question as there are many people like me who do not have a solid understanding of history but who are constantly asking questions about it.)

My extent of knowledge of the Praetorian Guard was that they were a kind of personal army of the emperor, but spent more time murdering him than actually protecting him.

So how would a Praetorian compare, on average, in skill and equipment to a legionnaire serving in a campaign or on a frontier, we'll say 10 years into service.

In Handbook to Life in the Aztec World, Manuel Aguilar-Moreno writes that

The common Aztec ate only two or three tortillas and a serving of beans at each meal.

We appear to have a great deal of evidence about how the tortillas were made, but do we have clues about how the beans might have been prepared?

Aguilar-Moreno also writes that other foods, including squash and avocado, could supplement an Aztec commoner's diet. Do we have any clues about how those were prepared? As for the Mayans, etc, do we have any information on their methods of preparation for similar foods?

I know that Quentin Skinner has argued that it was a crucial part of the Engagement Controversy and legitimised Parliament's rule and that Hobbes said that 'not a gentleman in England' had not read it. Apart from that, what was the actual historical significance of Leviathan and why was it not (very famously or openly) used as a manifesto for authoritarian government?

I am curious about the daily life of a Mongolian soldier. Some questions I have are like what kind of food they generally ate, what weapons they used, their battle tactics, religion, their traditions, and anything else worth mentioning. Thanks in advance!

Chess has historically been the reserve of the privileged classes, so it seems odd to me that it was so popular in Soviet Russia. Would anyone be able to shed some light as to why?

Hello, I am interested in doing primary source research on soviet policing (specifically relating to the secret police and their influence on the everyday lives of people) and was wondering if anyone here had any suggestions on where to start?

Shakespeare's Richard the III is depicted as Machiavellian, power hungry, selfish and down right evil. And that portrayal seemed to have a lasting impression on how people view the historical Richard the III. However, when they discovered his remains two years ago, I heard about several groups out there dedicated to giving Richard the III a more balanced assessment on his short reign. So based on historical evidence, was Richard the III as evil as he was made out to be? Or was a great deal of his reputation exaggerated by Shakespeare and the Tudors (assuming if they had a role in shaping the image of Richard the III)?

I've never understood this. China is never considered one of the allies and the conflict, apart from Nanking, is rarely discussed in history class (at least in America). In some way or another it involved almost every country that was a combatant and the outcomes are still being seen today yet I know hardly anything about the topic.

Somebody fill me in!

Most of the ideas I've been exposed to about what the future would be like were dreamt up at or after this point in history, when it was more clear what possible paths technology could take (e.g. hovercrafts, computation, time machines, etc). What might someone during, say, the Renaissance have thought would be futuristic, when Europe was becoming a bit more secular but technology was young? Are there any records of how people imagined things could change?

When I think of school shootings, the furthest back I can think is Columbine in 1999. Did this stuff happen in the early 1900s? 1800s?

Bonus question: Was there any final decision on the motive of the Columbine shooters?