In my experience, the Greek-speaking world teaches Greek history as an interconnected progression, with ancient developing into medieval, and medieval to modern. Yet, my experience in a British, Anglophone university is that Ancient Greek history is taught completely separated from later periods of Greek history, giving the impression that the ancient Greeks happened, then disappeared, and then people calling themselves Greek re-appeared suddenly in the 19th century. On the other hand, at the same university you could learn about how the western Roman Empire developed into Anglo-Saxon England, or Frankish France, Lombard Italy, Vandal Spain etc. Is there a reason for this?

[this is my first ever question, so I apologise if I haven’t managed to adhere to all of the posting rules. If the question has issues, please feel free to suggest edits etc., and I can try again. Thank you]

It seems the first European settlers of Greenland were gone by the middle of the 14th century. When the educated people in the old world became aware of the new world, did anyone know about the Norse exploration/settling of North America? How long did it take for mainstream historians to realize the land discovered by Columbus was related to Greenland, Vinland, etc? Did people in Iceland know this first?

Thanks!!!

Historians of ancient and early eras often have to pore over the few surviving texts or artifacts from that era, examining and re-examining the source to squeeze every bit of information or context from it, and building on other historians' analyses of the same source.

But as the era in question gets closer to modern day, there's an obvious and natural increase in the amount of surviving primary sources. r/askhistorians accepts questions that are on topics at least 20 years old, so the study of 'history' comes right up well into living memory, and into the age of the Internet. Now historians could access the forum posts and blogs of everyday people discussing events as they happened on a potentially massive scale.

So how does this sudden huge increase in the availability of sources affect the academic techniques of historians? Are the recommended methods of selecting how to refine which sources to use and how to assess their validity (in terms of whether the author is a respected authority on the subject, an 'everyman', or sowing deliberate misinformation, etc) different when there is excess of information compared with the study of eras when information is scarce?

Are there any historians studying Internet-Age topics who could give their experiences of sifting through millions of sources and how they might expect the academic techniques of history to change in response to this?

Thank you!

And it had to come from CHina?

Particularly during the Hasmonean Kingdom, when Jews were free to govern themselves

I recently watched The Thin Red Line and it got me thinking about what happened to the wildlife of the jungle during the war. I’ve been trying to find out if there were any species that went extinct as a direct or indirect result of the conflict. I’m also curious on how the fish population globally was affected, if anyone has any information it would be greatly appreciated

The specific question I have is the following:

I have often heard the claim that the LGBT movement only seems "modern", or without much history, because Nazis and other political groups systematically eradicated the study of sexuality as part of their famous book burnings, and that a lot of information from the late 19th to early 20th centuries was lost.

Is this true, and was the academic field really diminished enough to change public perception of LGBT history to this day?

Or did the study of sexuality really only take off, in the way that is familiar to us, in the cold war period?

The majority of Greek philosophers appears to be jacked and healthy according to the folks around them, their writings, and their sculptures. Was there any mentions or hints of their work out routines based on their works?

Hi everyone,

As the question reads, I am planning on writing a paper on the Jewish catacombs of Rome during the Republican/Imperial times. However, i'm in need of a (fairly recent) catalogue on the inscriptions and epitaphs found in these catacombs. Does anything pop to mind with anyone?

Any general help is appreciated! Thanks in advance.

Okay, so I'm writing a short story and it won't be entirely true, but my main question is at the time did the pirates around the 17th century mainly come from the same areas or could they have been more spread out? How did crew's usually run, and do we know their nationalities? Also how did women play into pirate society. I read a post about how women would dress as men, and when they would kill they would expose a breast for the man dying to see they were killed by a woman. Were women accepted into pirate society or not? If anyone has any more details, or maybe some good links I could go to read more about it that would be wonderful! Thank you.

I saw asserted, without any support, that Stalin and Richard Sorge knew the day and the method of the Pearl Harbor attack but did not choose to inform the US government. I've never seen this mentioned anywhere else. Is there anything to support it?

I can understanding taking slaves in wartime, or to settle debts. But I struggle with the concept enslaving someone by the side of the road or in their own homes minding their own business.

Can wrongly enslaved Roman Citizens appeal to the local authorities?

What about enslaving foreign merchants travelling on some road?

Do you need just cause to enslave someone?

Did LBJ actually repeatedly expose himself in the white house or is it just a old wives tale?

Or Stalin deported Tatars and Koreans simply because of racism?

As the title says;I've recently started wondering on this subject. Christianity is currently the number 1 religion of the world and Islam isnt all too far behind. History was riddled with Christian and Muslim civilizations and they were major players in history. There are stilI a couple theocracies in the world today; yet judaism never achieved any of these. Why?

To be more clear, I heard an opinion on the matter, by a friend who lives in the U.S. He told me that one reason they did those drills, was to protect the children from watching their impending doom. So any thoughts on the and any clear answers?

I'd assumed it was ineffective, but reading Wages of Destruction (Tooze) recently, it states that there was an epidemic of worker absenteeism in the Ruhr. Was this due to bombing? Is the effect quantifiable?

Did knights actually slash/swing with their swords in combat like in games such as Dark Souls and Skyrim, or did they attack each other at a distance like fencing?