Do we overestimate today how seriously people took to worshipping gods back then, when it was more like "cautionary tales" and fairytales to people? I'm curious to know even if you have more knowledge in Norse Mythology or Egyptian etc.

Jews have historically been literate because they were required to learn to read the Torah. But before the printing press books were super expensive and exclusively for the rich. So how did poor communities of Jews have access to a Torah to learn to read?

How close together might castles have been during the early-late middle ages? I'm mostly interested in possible extreme cases, where castles of knights or lords who were not necessarily allies might have existed in view of one another. It seems that in the south of France, where many small villages had their own castle, this might have occurred.

Any insight into extremely dense distributions of castles would be greatly appreciated.

I am currently assigned to write a report about the European Wars of Religion and I don't know where to start. I am wondering if any of you guys know which books should I start with? Thanks in advance!

Recently, I’ve been reading into South Carolina legal history and I’ve ran across the “Negr*’s Seamen’s Act“ though I am unable to find a source to read this document. There are several others which I wish to read as well like the Morrill Tariff and the Revenue act of 1861. Any good sources? Ibe heard the Library Of Congress is very good though I am unable to find the Seamen’s Act in their files.

Could Hercules been real? By real I mean a real man that was very powerful and roamed ancient Greece doing good deeds and helping city-states defeat enemies?

I think he was a real man and his legend was told from generation to generation.

Your thoughts?

Did the ancient Romans have any sort of nightlife at all? I am aware that they loved to throw dinner parties and would often use them for political and social gain, but did they have any actual nightlife? Did they have restaurants, wine bars, or any sort of social places of sorts they would congregate at during night?

I'm having a hard time imagining a chariot being any more valuable than just the horse and rider... but apparently the chariot was a revolution in warfare.

i'm just not picturing it, like, at all.

The books can be academic in nature thats okay:-)

What kind of furniture do I have? is my bed made of wood or is it a sheet/mattress on a slab of stone / dried mud? Have I got any lanterns? How many rooms can I expect to have? How big are my windows?

Of course i'm not expecting concrete answers to every point, but I am very curious about the urban design of the earliest civilisation.

Every time I tried doing my own research online , I get about 50 different answers from all different websites, so I’m curious who the original indigenous people/original inhabitants were! Thank you!

Edit: someone commented about being more specific to different regions so who were the first people in western Russia (moscow, St. Petersburg, etc). I’m asking because most online sources have said the indigenous groups are similar to US’s Native Americans and have Asian features. I’m curious where the white people in Russia came from.

I've been studying Roman beliefs and practices around sexuality and marriage, which obviously brought me to the Lex Julia (specifically the requirements for marriage and childbearing). I was more than a little surprised to learn that part of the reason we know so much about it is because there's so many court cases due to lower classes ignoring it. Even Augustus, the man who wrote it violated it by cheating on his wife as she was giving birth, then divorcing her shortly after. So even though Rome had these laws in place, and occasionally enforced it, it mostly went ignored. If we didn't get lucky with the specific records surviving, we would have no clue that it wasn't actually widely believed.

The modern analogue I'd give for this would be speed limits, and general road laws (at least in the US). We have signs up everywhere reminding people, we have government officials who spend years of their life enforcing it, we have to go through training and learn about it. And most people still take "30 MPH" as "I can do 35 no problem". If every traffic violation were somehow prosecuted, I doubt there'd be a single person left able to drive. However, if historians or archaeologists hundreds of years in the future looked at us, they could very easily assume that the laws were strictly enforced and everyone followed them.

There's a tendency among historians (especially more amateur ones) to take certain sources at their absolute word, and assume that a belief or law was widely practiced, when in fact it was often ignored or overlooked. A lot of this comes from the issue that the people whose sources often get preserved (or who have the time and education to write a great deal) tend to be the upper classes, and are a bit aloof from the rest of society. Or, those writing the sources want to make their society look better than it really was (especially if they're a politician or part of a bureaucracy).

So, what are some other instances in your field of study where we either know or suspect that a society's "widely held beliefs" weren't actually all that common?

This statement always seemed suspicious to me, especially seeing the physical appearance of Hitler and Goebbels.

I haven't really found anything related to that.

So is it just a myth/propaganda or is it true?

And if not, what did they know about eachother?

I have heard some regard Grant as blunt and straightforward as a general, wielding his greater numbers as a blunt instrument. But I have also read in Ron Chernow's biography of Grant that he was not a butcher as some regard him, but simply more decisive than many other Union generals. While Chernow didn't really get into the nitty gritty of battlefield tactics, he did compare Grant and Lee's generalships as Grant being a decent but inferior tactician and a better strategist and logician. That Lee was good at winning the battle in front of him but was not as well inclined or equipped to win a war of attrition. How does Chernow's take on Grant (or at least my recollection of it) stand up to current scholarship, and is there any truth to the other takes on Grant as a general? And what exactly did good command in terms of battlefield tactics look like during the Civil War?

Work with me here. It is my understanding that peppers come from the Americas. Now, I'm a fan of Thai food in general, but I can't fathom it without some seriously hot peppers as a cuisine.

So, for example, if I was living in Thailand in say, the 1200s, what would my food look and taste like? For bonus points, what about other places that are fairly regularly on the spicy scale, like India and Vietnam?

When I look up "authentic" recipes, I get things that are using obviously post-Exchange ingredients. With other cuisines, I can either figure it out (use turnips instead of potatoes, you moron), or I can substitute (I'm sorry, I'm not adding rue to a dish). But it seems like my research has failed when it comes to those particular areas and it would be interesting to see what things would be like before the capiscum.

Even in a diminished form considering Prussian influence for instance?

Women of the higher classes mostly had to obey their guardian and where often used as a resource for securing good relationships with other families or to get on someones throne, etc.

But how was that for women of the lower classes, especially farmers? Sure, their families werent surely less patriarchal, but how much could they say who they wanted to marry?

I can only imagine that if an aging pop star were to come out with a duetting romantic love song with his own daughter today, it would be quite the source for some memes. Was it a source of comedy at the time it came out, or was the general public just too mature to giggle at such a thing? (doubt that)