I watched an intriguing video a long time ago where a man shared a remarkable and equally disturbing story about a patient he treated he described how, after giving her a unique therapeutic bath designed specifically to eliminate parasites, he discovered worms living inside her body falling out by the dozens.

The video featured the narrator reading from an old medical report, which seemed like a transcript of the events and the emphasis on the patient's transformation and the strange details of the worms and their presence made throughout the narration building up suspense and unease that was recorded by a doctor who at the time had to keep a professional opinion meanwhile trying to not get infected himself.

This account was both fascinating and shocking to visualize what people went through back then and how things were described and made me realize that our bodies are not as strong as we think when it is invaded by horrible and destructive parasites or other diseases.

It was eye-opening to hear how such treatments have evolved over time and the impact they can have on a person's health it really changed my life because I never knew the gravity of the situation back then and it took place in the 19th century when modern medicine was developing and changed to my perspective about health when dealing with such terrifying events and it was graphic too I'm not going to lie it was really disturbing.

I am just interested in exploring the notorious and dark history surrounding medical treatments from ancient practices to modern times, this includes the grim realities of autopsies conducted in centuries past, the chaotic nature of medical record-keeping, and the unconventional methods of medicine that were often more bizarre than beneficial.

I want us to delve into the evolution of therapeutics, highlighting the gruesome oddities that were commonplace when medicine was still in its infancy and fascinating to uncover how far we’ve come in medical practices, revealing the shocking and often macabre experiments beliefs that once guided treatment.

I'm hoping we can both learn about these historical practices in a way that leaves others both speechless and grateful for the advancements in health care we enjoy today, which stand in stark contrast to what patients endured in earlier times.

Here is a bonus question and you don't have to answer it but this will make things more interesting:

What was your favorite historical autopsy that was so graphic and descriptive that you had to stop reading because it was nauseating and disturbing to continue?

From what I understand, the job of the general secretary was basically admin work. In Oversimplified's video, he said that Stalins job was to give other people jobs. I understand that he used this power to promote loyalists but I can't find anything that shows that the general secretary could give people jobs. If he could, what were the limits? What jobs?

I thought Falstolf had met Joan in battle, whilst serving personally under the command of Henry V. This however turned out to be erroneous.

I know Henry died before the Siege of Orleans. So I was wondering who in Henry V's court had at least met Joan in Battle.

What I mean is their government and/or populace don’t waste a lot of money or resources, and use those resources in an effective way. This could also apply to foreign policy as well, having smart affairs with other countries. Past and/or present. If it’s a current country then I’d love to hear how they got that way.

Least rich to most rich

The area around Kostanay and Kokshetau is basically an extension of southern Siberia in terms of climate and topography. Many Russian settlers came in during the 1800s and it became majority Russian afterwards.

Why didn't it become part of core Russia during the late imperial or Soviet period?

There was an earlier post about people who were younger than we think when they made their accomplishments. So, now I'm wondering, who became accomplished later in life than we might think?

Did both sides ever considered possibly reaching out to the other? Or was Roosevelt's politics, despite being progressive, was still far too different from the Democrats.

Could he have made an impact to the Democratic Party down the line if he was taken in by the latter?

The Black Plague and 1815 Tambora Eruption come to mind.

What are your list of top natural catastrophes and how did they alter world history in your opinion?

Bonus points of humor or personality throughout! Would also be open to similar era books or similar power struggles throughout history

Thank you in advance!

Asked this question in r/AskHistorians about a month ago but got removed for "short answers", but since this question continues to interest me I have decided to ask again here lol.

I have been thinking a lot about how a lot of the significant powers from 500, maybe even 1000 years ago are still around in some form today. Countries such as France, Poland, Austria, etc.... but what about the countries that were not so lucky? Which countries that existed back say at least 500 years and played a significant role in shaping history are no longer around in any form?

I think the most obvious one would be Prussia and the other German States that made up the Holy Roman Empire (although you could say they live on through Modern Germany), but what about some others?

If so what caused that to happen?

How did spices (black pepper, nutmeg, cinnamon, etc) perceived as "luxurious" and highly sought after in 16th century (and successive centuries) Europe become so commonplace and cheap today? When did they transition from being sumptuous to becoming an integral part of a pantry?

We have seen plenty of Pirates, Western, Medieval/Ancient Europe and WW2 movies.

What are some other settings you feel should appear more often in movies. Or at least Hollywood movies.

In the backstory to Asoiaf after the Targaryens are overthrown following there defeat in the war of the five kings Elia Martel and her children the Targ heirs are brutally killed. She is raped and then cut in half with a sword her daughter is killed by being stabbed dozens of times and her infant son is bashed to death against a wall.

Granted there are some caveats to this Tywin Lannister only orderd the murders as a show of loyalty to the new Baratheon dynasty since he has chosen to remain neutral during roberts rebellion, he claimed her only order the death of Elia children and it's stated that the to men he sent to kill the Targ heirs where more brutal then most men but still.

Are there any real examples of members of defeated Medival dynasty's being killed like Elias children?

I’ve heard lots of questions asking “Who were the best” or “Who were the worst presidents of the US.”

This isn’t what I’m asking. I’m not asking you to grade who you think on balance who was good or bad, or even which presidents are your favorite. What I’m asking is, can you name 5 presidents who you, by studying them, have decided were exceptional politicians? Either their campaigns were creative and unexpected and they won unexpectedly, had excellent foreign policy, was good at governing, solid communicator and good at crafting stories that put down their opponents, etc… Whatever you consider the thing that makes an obviously good politician

Obviously, every president that won won because they won. And to win, they’d have to be somewhat successful. But, can you name 5 that you think are exceptional winners?

Considering that it was not as contentious as it was in the 1860s, what would be a slave's best hope in acquiring some form of freedom from a society that universally wants them to be enslaved.

There is a lot of territorial tensions in Europe, but has there been any cases of a country giving up its territory voluntarily? For example, region A has predominantly different language and nationality, let's give it to our neighbor who is of the same nationality.

For example, Rome had their money in gold, silver, and bronze denominations, but I assume it would've been used as a medium for every kind of exchange.

Modern examples that fit what I'm thinking would be bonds. You can't spend a bond bill at a grocery store, Loans that specify a type of use also apply. Like mortgage loans, money that can only be used for a specified purpose.

So the question is if there was a civilization that maintained different lines of currency, restricted in its type of use? I assume that there would still be a "mainline" currency, but the conversion between the restricted and mainline currency would not allowed, or allowed in only one direction.

I understand that the entire point of a currency is to make exchange of goods/services easier, so this system would hamper economic growth/ease depending on how restrictive it is.

Note: I am not referring to currencies that are used internationally or foreign currencies that are accepted domestically like the euro.

Bonus question: What would be some hypothetical benefits to this kind of system, or one similar to it?

My immediate thought is that if someone in olden times were to contract a third party for something, they might use the restricted currency to prevent embezzlement.

Alternatively, it could be a warrior society, and armor/weapons can only be bought with the special currency, and the special currency is only given as pay to soldiers, thus maintaining a more rigid caste system. In this case, conversion between the warrior currency and mainline currency would have to be disallowed completely.

This could either be because there are no movies made about said historical event or the movies made about the event suck and there needs to be better movies that portray the event.

It was an empire and it was big and powerful but nowadays we barely hear anything about it.

What happened to it?

Hard question to ask because its more a public perception questions then a historic question. but i think this is a common thing in imagination of history.

I am an AP Research student aiming to draw a connection between historical education and politics. I’m doing this to try and get a better understanding of how they correspond. The results of the survey will, anonymously, be used in my research paper. If you are able to fill this out (or even share it), it would be greatly appreciated!

https://docs.google.com/forms/d/e/1FAIpQLSfm5p8_v1zFNTs4VqzNRUYt2xOVnDoqot30SKRbTbMgxFXHtQ/viewform?usp=preview

1. How frequently would someone pass by( in the countryside ) if you are travelling on the road from Rome to Constantinople?

2. Same, but for a less popular route?

3. How frequently would you see a structure/building?

Bibilically, it's said that the israelites invaded the canaan and exterminated the canaanite people

However in reality(based by archaeology and genetics) it's suggested that the invasion did happen but the Israelites didn't exterminate i.e. the biblical account is likely exaggerated. It's said that the israelites established themselves them with a already existing population as their culture was influenced by the canaanite culture and they had overlapping dna with the canaanites

I've read this regarding the invasion. Ofcourse the source has its own bias right there in the name but it does suggests some real evidence for the invasion

So did the invasion really happen?

What are some historical examples when governments threaten people to spy on each other and report it?

Edit: Thank you everyone for the responses! I learned a lot!

By 'non-state' I mean a society where no one group has a monopoly on the use of violence. Did they have something similar to modern freedom of speech and expression? Were there any requirements on how they had to raise and educate their children?