FOREWORD: since many historians will give different subdivisions, to our purposes here the history of Europe for convenience is divided roughly into four periods:

1. Ancient History: that is the period (lasting about 4000 years) starting from the pre-classical history, preceding the appearance of Greek-Roman sources , and coming to classical (ancient Greece and Rome ), goes to end with the decline and fall of the Western Roman Empire and barbaric invasions.
2. History of Middle Ages, which includes roughly the period from 500 AD to 1500 and goes to end with the fall of the Byzantine Empire (or Eastern Roman Empire). The term "Middle Ages" appears for the first time in the fifteenth century in Latin, and reflects the opinion of contemporaries who said that period would represent a departure from the classical culture, in opposition to the Renaissance.
3. Modern History, which includes a period of three centuries from 1500 until around 1800 (the French Revolution, Napoleon Bonaparte, the Congress of Vienna in 1815).
4. Contemporary History which starts from 1800 and is made to end (so very different between different historical) in the twentieth century.

Who's writing here do not want to be absolutely a professional historian - though we should not hold us up, I say to myself, nor to be an amateur of the subject or even simple storytellers - because the respect due to historians must be great, since without their researchs and their work it should be almost impossible to know or assume the facts of the past.

"Do you know how was the name of Romulus' wife? If you miss this notion, the fault is not yours. You should lament with professional historians, who, rather than tell the facts, are interested to develop a system of the story as if it were created in their study of the sources." (°)

Unfortunately, however, historians - but also novelists and reporters - write, as they say, for bias. The ancient historians were monarchists, republicans, imperialists, pagans, Christians, and often their writings sinned by excessive flattery or bias. Modern historians are no different: Italians or foreigners have always interpreted the facts in a biased way and according to the convenience and to their particular vision of politics and history. However one has to excuse them because if not, they could end up hurt or would have a poor success and a lot of criticism (see Renzo De Felice, with his history of Italian Fascism).,

Without too many pretensions or ambitions we would like listed here simply well documented written and other material, which rationally analyzes different versions of events, could compare and clarify historical truths distorted by fads, or bent and distorted by materialism's myths and relativism´s subjectivity. The content can cover every period, consisting also in criticism and comments on what is to our knowledge through literary, film, and shows in question.

(°) From the preface of the book by Antonio Spinosa "The great history of Rome, from dawn to dusk" Oscar Mondadori Collection - year 2012 - reprint.