There is nothing more beautiful than France.

My beginning to proper historical study started with the Total War series of computer games. I started off with Rome Total War and became interested in Classical studies (which is one of two of my bachelor's degrees). However, the Napoleon entry into the series started to get me interested in Napoleonic tactics. This was because one of my friends consistently defeated me in Napoleon.

So, I started to look up everything I could in order to further understand the tactics. This started a two year journey that leads me here, a ouiaboo.

However, it's branches further from here. Rather than just simply learning the history and tactics, I got caught up in the romance of the age. There is nothing more dashing to me than seeing the Hussar General Charles Antoine de Lasalle charging at Wagram to help protect MacDonald's Monstrous column, Davout coolly fighting off a Prussian army thrice his size at Auerstedt, Lannes pulling his Grenadiers to charge after him at Eckmuhl. The age was filled with larger than life figures that seemed impossible but are real.

So, this is why I went to French history, it encapsulated an age. Words like elan simply because it's automatically connected to the French it is. Further, what other nation has decided it's fate as much as France? In the long 19th century, France had four revolutions (if you count the Paris Commune as one), a level of instability that is rather insane for a First World country, let alone one of the leaders of European politics and military might.

For some inexplicable reason, I've always had a love for France (it might have been partly due to a French girl I had a crush on in middle school). However, I feel more comfortable and happy with my choice in subject than ever before.

I like France.

I suppose it makes me the second Francophile to answer this question - but I too am a big fan of France.

France (for me), in the 18th century, encapsulated the opulence of the age in a way that surpassed every other European nation. What drew me more, however, is the romanticism of the age. The fact that these aristocrats threw masquerades and balls and teetered closer and closer to the edge of oblivion.

Within aristocracy, you find individual stories. Characters with huge personalities, who affected the lives of others and over a century shaped the way that Versailles, and so France, operated. From the effeminate Philippe I, Duke of Orléans to the witty Madame de Pompadour to the womanising Louis XV, we see relatable and interesting people in a setting that dynamically shifts and changes as it moves on through time.

The story wraps itself up, too, in a unifying crescendo as revolution falls. It isn't always fair - people die who, morally, should probably never have been indicted. The real scum escape, more often than not. Why did Jeanne of Valois-Saint-Rémy get away with what she did, only to mysteriously fall from a window in London in 1791? Louis XV's last mistress Madame du Barry, who had come from a peasant's background, died screaming and begging for her life at the guillotine. Marie-Antoinette, the woman who had been her adversary at court for some time, died with her last words being an apology to the executioner for standing on his foot. The Princesse de Lamballe was torn limb from limb by an angry mob, while Louis XVI's youngest sister Élisabeth recited the De profundis at the foot of the guillotine alongside those who had been condemned to die with her. The Duchesse de Polignac dies of 'a broken heart' after hearing of the death of Marie-Antoinette. These stories are all beautiful and terrible in their own way, and each one told individually could make a smash-hit novel.

I suppose the real question is - why wouldn't someone be interested in my field?

Ive been fascinated with wine for as long as I can remember (even as a kid) and over the last 10 years or so I was most focused on the wines of Burgundy France. Im also a history nerd so I started reading about the history of wine. It quickly became glaringly obvious to me that there was very little information available about the history of burgundy wine and certainly no stand alone book. I started researching information wherever I could find it. One day it just dawned on me that if I don't write a book on it no one will. So I started formally researching for it. That sort of forced me to start learning about the history of alcohol in general as I wanted as much context in general about wine consumers and the wine trade.

I discovered askhistorians and enjoyed reading all the answers and every once in a while Id come across a question that I knew the answer to really well or I could easily research (I have like 1000 pages of notes). Eventually I figured I might as well get flaired.

What I really like about studying Burgundy wine is that it was for a really long time essentially a "border town" between north and sourth Europe so studying Burgundy has indirectly led me to really dig into western European history in ways I never would otherwise.

I guess that people without flair are welcomed in this question too.

My current field of interest is Weimar Republic. I must say that my interest for first German democracy is relatively fresh as it began one and half year ago, when I was ending Bachelor studies in History. I knew what I wanted to do at the next level - Master studies in History major at the same uni and Erasmus in Germany.

I didn't want to waste time at MA studies while being on Erasmus so I decided to do my thesis about Germany in hope of getting material abroad for thesis. Because of my lack of interest in history before French Revolution I decided to focus on history from 1789 to 1945 to get inspiration. At some point during May holidays (two years ago) I got it - I wanted to do MA thesis about Weimar Republic.

I presented three topics to my then-future supervisor - history of SPD, trade unions and diplomacy. The first two topics came to me as I have socialist leaning and history of socialism interests me a lot. She accepted to supervise me and agreed on SPD topic.

This topic (political evolution of SPD between 1918 and 1925) is very interesting for me as interwar time is one of the most overlooked topic in modern history. There are not many books about Weimar Republic in Polish, there are not many Germanists who do research about first German democracy. My Erasmus stay in Germany was very fruitful as I copied a lot of interesting books on Weimar Republic and SPD. I hope that my MA thesis will be, thanks to this, very original and innovative.

Also, another important reason for me is fatigue with previous field of interest - Russian history from Crimean War to Russian Civil War. I felt at the end of BA studies that writing MA thesis about Russia will be boring.

I have two answers to this question: why I decided to study what I studied in grad school, and why I wish I'd studied something different in grad school.

So I grew up in a journalism family (my dad and his dad were both newspaper publishers), and did my undergrad in journalism at a biggish midwestern university. I always wanted to go to grad school, and I thought an MA in history would help me in getting jobs in the field (journalism, not history). So the program I applied to had a guy who was studying journalism and the formation of political parties, and so it seemed to make sense he'd be my advisor. At the time, I was interested in looking at concepts of professionalism and objectivity in journalism, because at the time I went to grad school (late 1990s) these seemed to be coming under challenge or disruption by the rise of digital media/the Internet. So, I studied newspapers in my state (a border state) after the Civil War, when the early- to mid-19th century heavily partisan system was begin remixed in interesting ways.

So, for various reasons I've become a bit disillusioned with my choice, because at this point I feel as though it was something that seemed professional, rather than something I was interested in. I wish what I had done was to study in a professional manner what I read about all the time, which is naval history (particularly British during the Napoleonic period, but also during the naval race leading up to WWI through WWII).

I have always been interested in World War II (also WWI), because there are so many different stories, battles, tactics, weapons, countries, people and opinions involved. Whenever I read something about WWII I lose hours on reading new stuff and find myself reading about different Stahlhelms for example. I wish I was better at formulating and writing answers so I could participate in this sub.

I knew I wanted to study history while I was still in high school, but I thought that I wanted to be a classicist. At the same time, I had enough credits when I started college (through a special dual-enrollment program I'd been in to knock off GEs) that I was able to add a full second major (English) without adding any time/cost to my program. My first term, I wound up taking the first survey course for the English degree, which at my school is classical literature and medieval literature in translation (ie, non-English medieval literature).

The professor was incredibly passionate, one of those profs who is a legend among the undergrads both for his charisma and for being demanding. Getting through his course was a right of passage, and I sailed through. At the end of it, he asked me whether I was planning on an academic career, and suggested that I try reading some more medieval literature. I was hooked. I stuck with history over lit for a variety of reasons, though, including the fact that I never, ever in a million years want to teach freshman comp.

Edit: the professor I'm referring to was a medievalist who often taught that survey, not a classicist. So he was definitely poaching me.