Thanks to all the great questions and contributions over the years. Best sub around.

Two more sleeps till 2022 is over.

I hope people have had a good festive time and been able to end the year on a nice note. I wish for better 2023 for everyone and a lovely New Year on Sunday

Is there a word they describes the culture/vibe/ ascetic of Berlin towards the end of the Soviet era? I’m thinking of something like cyberpunk? I’m really interested in learning more about the culture of late Soviet era Berlin

Your Weekly /r/askhistorians Recap

Friday, December 23 - Thursday, December 29

###Top 10 Posts

###Top 10 Comments

If you would like this roundup sent to your reddit inbox every week send me a message with the subject 'askhistorians'. Or if you want a daily roundup, use the subject 'askhistorians daily'. Or send me a chat with either askhistorians or askhistorians daily.

####Please let me know if you have suggestions to make this roundup better for /r/askhistorians or if there are other subreddits that you think I should post in. I can search for posts based off keywords in the title, URL and flair. And I can also find the top comments overall or in specific threads.

Happy Friday folks!

This is a historiography and contemporary history question:

Is it done for historians to write about the 'recent now'? What distinguishes historical writing from journalism, or is it a grey area?

For example, if a historian wanted to get the perspective of the jailed insurrectionists from Jan 6th, went, interviewed them, as well as other sources, is that a form of recording history and a historical event or journalism? Does it matter?

What if we were lucky enough for the war in Ukraine to end, definitively with a treaty of some sort, this coming February? How soon could someone wanting to write a history of that war wait?

We have the 20 year rule on this subreddit but are there historians that actively write about recent events or is there a written or unwritten rule that a certain amount of time needs to pass, or more facts gathered by others (journalists, et al.) that they would then need to base their histories off of?

I wonder if I also need to distinguish between the world of writing for academia vs public consumption here but this is already a broad enough question so will let it there.

I am looking for a video where a military commander from Iraq talks about how in his experience 5 percent of soldiers are bad apples and need to be weeded out. 80 are good soldiers. And the 15 percent can go either way. Therefore he needs to spends 90 percent of his time finding those 5 percent and kicking them out or else the 15 percent will be influenced.

Great short interview clip - anyone familiar?

Are there some historical topics/issues/people/views/etc that have been thoroughly exhausted?

Unless there are new discoveries or documents or something, are there things that we’ve basically said everything that can be said about it/them? I suppose something like a biography can be written from a new perspective or insight, but using George Washington as an example, is there (currently) enough material to warrant 100 more biographies? How much more can be said about the Battle of Thermopylae?

I'm rewatching Midnight at the Pera Palace (2022) right now, and I have a quick question: How acceptable was PDA (i.e. public displays of affection) in 1919, particularly between unmarried couples? What was considered "acceptable" vs. "unacceptable", or actively frowned upon by society, during either an informal* or formal courtship?

There are several scenes where a man makes sexual/romantic advances in public with a woman he's interested in, including two scenes where the two have a snogging session in public. However, from my understanding, even today, this tends to still garner unwanted attention from more conservative onlookers, especially in modern-day Turkey. (Turkey is Muslim-majority.)

Additionally, how common was marriage shortly after meeting in 1919? The male romantic lead in the series essentially proposes marriage to his female love interest after they have one date. (This also happens with Princess Anna of Arendelle and Prince Hans of the Southern Isles in Frozen, which supposedly takes place in 1840s Norway, but I digress.)

Did people in the 1800s and the first half of the 1900s get married after only a short time dating?

Since his second triumph pompey captured 1000 fortress and 900 cities. He also founded 39 cities and captured 800 ships from the cilician pirates. Also he taxed 50 million in money from the conquered territory and looted 85 million and 20 thousand talents more and gave it to the roman state and its people, while to his soldiers he gave at least 15000 drachmae to each

When lucullus had returned from asia after being ill treated by pompey, he was received by the senate with the utmost honor and when later on pompey also had returned from asia, the senate started begging lucullus to defend the interest of the state from pompeys supposed machinations. Although lucullus had accustomed himself with a life of leisure and he had catos help, he nevertheless vigorously retracted pompeys banishment of his laws. Pompey, now humiliated, sought protection with tribunal power, therefore giving himself to young and inexperienced men, the most despicable being clodius

Clodius used to walk around the forum with pompey by his side making sure that all the interest of the common folk were being attended. Clodius also made pompey to exile cicero, the one who had helped Pompey a lot before. Cicero even tried to plea for his life but pompey shut his house door and fled from the back. So fearing for his life, cicero immediately left the city

Now, caesar being returned from his governorship he passed a law that brought him much popularity, then he got the consulship and started passing laws that would distribute land and found new cities so he could increase even further his popularity