I'm a fourth-generation Crimean immigrant from Turkey. I'm fully assimilated, do not speak Tatar except for a few phrases and do not know anything about Crimean history or culture. Recently I've come across a book about the oppression they faced and it left me wondering.

Someone I was talking to on a genealogy forum called the famine a genocide. I am wondering if it met the criteria for one, or if it was a mishap of being a mono- culture as the history books dictate.

Hi Historians,

I am wondering about the early years of modern Israel and how did people communicate back then when Hebrew was not yet a lingua franca and was not modernized yet. Having people coming from all over the world to Palestine how did the communicate? Was there a point where they were using any other language just to facilitate communication until Hebrew got reinstalled among everybody?

Hi, I've been very interested in medieval and ancient history as of late, along with this, a lot of history around Rome, it's battles, society, etc as I've mostly been a big WW1 onwards buff of history.

I keep seeing 2 answers to black people in Rome, and both of them are nonsense.

One side believes there were millions of black people living as kings, soldiers, peasants, and so on everywhere, even in Brittania and Gaul, and led the Romans to glory.

The other side just says, "Oh black people? Yeah, they didn't exist until 1500 lol ;)"

I've tried to look for actual studies, but everything is inconclusive or heavily biased. The most likely answer I've been able to find so far from actual studies and historical records from universities and archeological findings is that black people definitely existed in Rome and Egypt as immigration from Sudan and Ethiopia, plus slavery from West Africa and the Roman-Aksumite trade routes, but black populations even in Egypt, Yemen, and Arabia, places relatively close and appealing for black people were not heavily populated, and probably had less than 2% of the population being black.

If someone would be so helpful as to include some actual studies and historical material so I can get a conclusive answer on this instead of "Black people? Didn't exist." or "Actually, every single emperor of Romeme was black :)"

From what I understand they knew very well that they would be outmatched in men, ships, resources, and were already fighting the war in China. Yet they attacked anyways. Did they really think they would come out of it ok? Why?

I posted this last week, but got no response, so I am reposting.

I have heard mixed things regarding the accuracy of this book, and that it omits certain details. Does this book inaccurately portray the history of Nazi Germany?

Title really, I was wondering why he chose him over more well known possible successors like Speer, Goring, etc.

Legal by the Constitution during their time that is

I noticed that trains have changed a lot since the traditional 1800s style, and I was wondering, why is the design different nowadays? Is it a functional reason, or just a aesthetic reason?

I’ve been researching 18th century colonial trade and am asking for any help possible on trading through themselves and the West Indies. Also I’ve been looking at schooner ships like the Chaleur And Berbice but am having trouble finding specifics like the cost and speed of such a ship as well as the crew required to man it. Any help would be appreciated.

I recently learned that women didn't wear the same kind of underwear in the Tudor period in England (1485-1603) that they do now. Instead of a pair of undies, women wore a linen shift. So what did they do when they got their periods? I have heard before that women used to use rags before tampons and sanitary pads, but how would they stay in place if there are no undies? Or did Tudor women use something else instead of rags?

Is there any consensus as to whether the Bardiya killed by Darius was the real thing or an imposter?

Kind of a personal question for me, as one of the suggested options I see is a diagnosis I have.

The emperor Claudius is not usually presented as a particularly robust specimen of Roman manhood. The reason for this is not entirely clear to me.

Depending on the source, I hear that he limped (variously attributed to either an acquired injury, or else a congenital case of cerebral palsy), that he was partly deaf, that he stuttered, that he may have had epileptic fits...

Are any of these confirmed? Are all of these confirmed?

What can we say with reasonable accuracy about Claudius’ health, and why he was that way?

It's a question I've been asking myself for a while

I've done researches and know the backstory of it (with the knights templar etc ...) but never found out what baphomet really is

I remember seeing people saying that it was separated from Satan and christianity in itself. But then, is he part of any religion or just an icon of occultism or anything?

If you could lighten me on the subject it would be very highly appreciated :)