Perkin's wikipedia mentions the relationship, however I was unable to find any first hand sources documenting on this matter. What interests me is how this relationship was made known and how she came to accept the relationship.

My understanding and knowledge of the Spanish Flu is limited, but it seems as far as cultural impacts go the Spanish Flu was an inconsequential blip on the historical radar compared to the larger issues foregrouding the next word war, despite all the fatalities it incurred. Why is this the case?

The Indus Valley Civilization- the pre-Vedic settlers of Pakistan/Punjab-

To what degree is there evidence of genetic or linguistic or cultural continuation into later (Indo-Aryan, Vedic) cultures, or were they wiped out by invaders with no modern descendants?

I am college educated. I've only had an intro history class though. I guess what I'm looking for is something that touches on events that I probably wasn't taught in my US History classes, but also something that sort of goes through a timeline and doesn't focus on one issue...I want a book that does a pretty good job summarizing a pretty large chunk of time but covers some things I probably have never heard of.

So I know its talked about in writing and religious views, but with the story about weighing people's hearts, did they actually weigh hearts during mumification? As in was this part of the process, or just a story they will tell.

The reason why I am asking is do the people do the judging or its it like an after life thing where it is said you will meet God's to judge you.

Lastly IF it is true that the people performing the mumification are the ones to judge, what would they do with the people who do not pass the test?

Thanks and I hope my questions are easy to follow.

Thanks in advance for responses. My question is about Elizabeth Bathory:

I recently read a couple historical essays on Bathory saying that most of the common lore about her crimes was not actually backed by physical evidence, or any evidence beyond gossip - She may have been a victim of a witch hunt. They say that other than a couple random bodies with ambiguous causes of death and her "list of victims" (seized from her desk when a mob stormed her castle), there is no hard proof, and there is some evidence to the contrary. Allegedly, she was into medical science - lists of her "victims" were actually of tenants on her land, and her "torture methods" had things in common with new (for the time) medical procedures. She may have been helping local young women escape forced marriages or acquire reproductive healthcare. These essays say nobody ever saw the bodies of her 600+ plus alleged victims-only like 2 bodies ever turned up? The Habsburg family had politically-motivated reasons to try to remove her from power and take her land (this part, at least, seemed believable from what I know of the Habsburgs). Generally, her being a young widow in charge of valuable land and "not a well-mannered woman" (she likely did hit her servants) may have helped convince people she was a Vampire/Witch. A LOT of convincing sources were linked, and especially the torture method vs. medical treatments part was surprisingly convincing.

TL;DR-What if Elizabeth Bathory was a scientist, not a serial killer (albeit an asshole), and legacy was the result of a politically-motivated witch hunt? What do we factually know about Elizabeth Bathory? What actual proof beyond local rumors and the "list of victims" is there of her crimes? How likely is it that there were social, political, and religious motivations to demonize and prosecute her, and her story is radically embellished?

I can't find much on this, but did men or women get cancer from kisses/other forms of affection? Especially from the girls' radium-laced lips on their body?

The first nuclear bomb test (Trinity) was of a plutonium bomb similar to the bomb dropped on Nagasaki. However, the first nuclear bomb used in warfare in Hiroshima was an untested uranium bomb. Why did the US military use the untested bomb type first? Who made that decision? And what was the purpose of Trinity if they wouldn’t lead with the proven bomb technology?

A quick google search reveals that RMS stands for Royal Mail Ship/Steamer (sources seem to vary), but I was under the impression that the primary purpose of trans-Atlantic steamers was to convey passengers and cargo? Am I wrong in this assumption? Or is the mail ship title a hold-over from an earlier time? Neither?
Thank you for your time.

As I shuffle through history, I've found various meaning applied to these words that aren't anything to do with out modern conception of 'romance' as a catch-all for love. The most obvious examples I know of are Romance languages/cultures; the romances which preempted the novel and some writers, such as Nathaniel Hawthorne, continued to categorise their long prose stories as; and the 18th-century romantic movement. With the last one particularly I've confused some friends thinking I mean lovey-dovey poetry or music, when really I mean tiger-tiger-burning-bright, in-Xanadu-did-Kubla-Kahn, or Beethoven-y stuff. While I can see a direct line from the heightened emotions of romanticism and the fantastical nature of medieval romances, I'm interested as to when we started using romance as we do today — and what people would've called our broad ideas of romance/romantic before then?

Ok so I am kind of confused here because whenever I google this the answers are confusing. Are they the same or are they two different entities?

Since I’m on the fence of researching books with the chance of it being inaccurate or exaggerated. What are some books historians could recommend on Mao Zedong or Communist China under his rule. I would really appreciate it. Thank you.

This is something that's been on my mind for a while. I ask this because in my mind Vikings are so innately linked with their Norse pagan religion and gods. Some Vikings converted early on due to peace treaties, surrendering, and trade; however, there seemed to be more (or at least an equal number) Christian Vikings than "pagan" Vikings before the Viking Age reached its conclusion.

Take Cnut the Great, for example. He was a 10th/11th century Dane who became King of Denmark, England, and Norway, I believe. But...he was also a devout Christian, and sought to unite all three countries under Christian rule. And this was still during the Viking age. So would it be appropriate to call him a true Viking? He was Danish, but had no ties to the pagan gods except through native ancestry.

(Also, I know the word "viking" was originally a Scandinavian verb that meant to go raiding, fighting, etc., but I'm using it in its more modern, general sense)

Thanks for reading over this. Any and all responses would be greatly appreciated.

Further, why did she only want to give such a considerably smaller amount than this other further away empire was willing to give? Was her amount fair and generous, or was it relatively minimal and merely given as something to save face? Also, is it known what Queen Victoria generally thought of/about Ireland and her Irish subjects?

I was watching a YouTube video about Caesar’s assassination and it was mentioned that Brutus stabbed Caesar in the groin I went through the sources that were linked in the video but couldn’t find any mention of that, and I couldn’t find anything when I tried to research myself Is there something I missed?

So I could be wrong, as I only dabble into historical stuff for fun once in a while, but it seems to me that despite training from the time they could walk and centering their lives around militaristic pursuits, Spartans have kind of a hit-or-miss military record and overall seem kind of average.

Why is that?

It was my understanding that the English and the French were in many wars on opposing sides in the 16th century, so why would King Henry VIII hire a French executioner to kill Anne Boleyn instead of an English executioner?

On many sexual posts in the subreddit there is an nsfw tag which can be useful to those who wish to filter out such content. But often on questions that discuss issues such as rape, torture, etc. there is no content warning of any kind. Would it be possible for such a tagging system to be implemented - especially for those readers who suffer from PTSD.

The Beer Hall Putsch in November 1923 seems pretty serious. It failed and Hitler was eventually arrested and charged with high treason, but only given a 5 year sentence. While in prison he authored the first part of Mein Kampf and grew in popularity. Hitler ultimately only served little more than 8 months and was pardoned by the supreme court. Why was he pardoned?

I’ve come across debates on Reddit regarding the Soviet Gulag system, and I found a lot of people, mainly from this subreddit, recommended Oleg’s book on The History of the Gulag because of his access to archival information. In regards to his other books such as his biography of Stalin and other works, would people here regards him and his work as credible compared to other authors or historians? What are also some other reliable historians on the Soviet Union you would recommend? Thank you