AP

Sometimes it takes editors that much time to find a reviewer. You can ask, but I doubt you will have any updates.

This is a great question. My PhD friends who are in the federal government are very happy. They work good hours and make good money. I have some friends in academic-adjacent jobs (librarians, etc), some because the professoriate didn't pan out for them, others out of choice. In all cases, they all made the PhD work for them. Eg: federal jobs pay more. However, I doubt that you would need a PhD for those positions, if you have other skills. My suggestion would be to contact those folks and ask them. They are better equipped to talk about the qualifications for their jobs. Maybe @dr. telkanuru can help too.

In addition to all responses, this is the first semester all faculty are fully in-person, which means we cannot meet so much on zoom because we have literally less time from commuting/walking across campus. Don't take it personally.

If you already know you won't be able to attend, contact your POI and CC the DGS explaining the situation (without giving too many details) and thanking them for the opportunity (and hoping to collaborate in the future). Then, you need to officially withdraw so that they can admit other students.

Second this, don't read into it. There are a million reasons why someone might remember your application, it might be because it was good, it might be because it reminded them of someone else. You don't have enough information right now to assume one thing or the other. Also improve your WS if you can, this is a crucial document.

Agh, my bad. I glided through that sentence. Sorry.

Based on your post, it seems you haven't dived into what entails to do a PhD in History. Doing a PhD with a focus in medieval/early modern cities would require you come in with specific language proficiency. Additionally, a doctoral dissertation demands extensive archival research, broadly construed. While I applaud PhDs who write nonfiction (and I know many), the PhD doesn't train to do that. Do you want to spend 6+ years training for something you don't want to do? May I suggest: Looking into Liberal Arts/Interdisciplinary programs? A master's? Thinking what the PhD (in whatever discipline) will add to your career goals? Reading historians that have written nonfiction, "popular" books? My two cents.

It depends a lot on discipline/dept culture. To me, the PhD was a job, so I was comfortable (jeans, shirts) but not in gym clothes. You never know when your advisor will introduce to the dean, take you to lunch with a visiting scholar, etc.

This looks pretty academic-ly to me. Always, ALWAYS put the most relevant pieces of information first. Hence, I'd put teaching experience before service or extracurricular. "Publications & Scholarship" sounds redundant. Either "publications" or "scholarly work." The only portion you might to add some resume-style detail is for research experience, if this experience was not the norm or if it includes very different experiences. For instance, maybe you were an RA for a professor and that meant scanning books, maybe for another prof you went into the archive.

Friendly reminder from a faculty: August-September is the best time to contact POIs.

Ditto. I do think that it certainly makes your research more interesting if you eventually include historians of other regions in your committee, but for application purposes, given the number of historians of medicine in North America, you should definitely apply to a place where there is one.

I have some colleagues that work on the Soviet Union that had to re-calibrate their projects. Sometimes it's just not the right time...

My rule of thumb is to take the example of your mentors. Signatures are not CVs. They should reflect who you are and provide information that it would help your addressees respond better to your inquiry. Unless your fellowship come with an appointment, I wouldn't list them.

I'll add some comments/points of clarification in bold to complement this exhaustive post:

Allow to provide a different angle. While your level of Russian might be enough for the program requirement, not all POIs admit based off that. The whole point of languages is that you use them for your research, either reading sources or reading scholars. So, in your CV you can add a line on "known languages" (no need to include they are self taught, if they are not in your transcript, people will add up). But in your WS you can show that you've used the language. Or in you SOP you can point at language training as part of your career development. Eg, you found sources that you are unable to read yet, but are confident that a summer program in X university will get you to the finish line. Or Eg 2, You plan to take three semesters of Russian at the institutions well-renowned Language Center. In other words, admissions are not a list of boxes that you check. Those boxes are a starting point, but you need to show how you will grow as a scholar in that specific program.