I’m super curious as to what the people of civilizations like the ancient Egyptians, Mesopotamians, the Mayans etc. thought the future would be like? People in the 50s are always depicted as thinking the future was all chrome and hover boards and stuff, but surely those ancient civilizations had an idea of the ideal technological advances for their society? Also, as a side note, This question could probably be tied to when the concept of “future” and “past” became a commonplace knowledge. I’m just super curious about the history of human futurology!!

I understand that the Roman empire was a cosmopolitan and multi-ethnic empire, and that as time went on, more and more people in the empire were integrated and granted citizenship. How did the Romans conceptualize race? I'm asking this in the broadest sense -- any information you have on it. Other questions: did they have any conception or prohibition against miscegenation? Was Rome itself open to all peoples across the empire, or strictly for the residents?

I remember reading a while ago a post here or in /r/history about how colonizers viewed race. I can't find it now, but it had to say that one view was that race was emergent of the food that locals vs foreigners ate. I'd like to reference that post, but I can't find it anywhere.

Is there any records or evidence of human sacrifice in Scandinavia during the Black Plague?

Edit: justified and possible, I should maybe say.

This is a serious question and I don't mean any offense. I am wondering if religious conviction was just stronger back then, or if it is another part of history relatively glossed over. Many thanks. - Edit: just realized my poor grammar in the title, apologies.

The Tirpitz was a Bismarck class ship, and the heaviest ship ever laid down by a European navy. Supposedly it had all of the same armor and armaments of the Bismarck, so why is the Bismarck such a historical icon (there are movies, songs, and books about it) and meanwhile I only just found out the Tirpitz was ever even a thing?

I know it was officially to help the Roman Empire fight the Turks, but what other factors led to this decision? We’re there other parties interested in conquering the Holy Land, or was Urban the main instigator?

What happened to Catherine Parr after the death of Henry VIII? How was she treat by Mary and Elizabeth? Was she allowed to remain in the royal household?

I have been reading 'Bury my heart at wounded knee' by 'Dee Brown' and in chapter 4 page 90 he details how 'Colonel Chivington' had advocated for 'scalping' even 'infants', a small infant girl hiding in sand being killed, genital mutilation etc. This occurred despite Black Kettle having a US flag displayed in their camp and continued attempts to live peacefully under US jurisdiction. Many of these Native leaders had met with Lincoln and had been promised protection if they complied.

So I suppose my questions are: What created such a violent and normalised brutal murdering of Natives by the American Army? And why was Lincoln's and other commander's promises that the Natives would be left alone if they complied repeatedly ignored?

Many thanks to anyone who can provide information! I am just in such shock after reading that chapter how any group of humans can do that to another.

I'm surprised that small socialist countries behind the Iron Curtain were so interested in the politics of a small Third World country. I know these countries sometimes lent material aid to (Bulgaria gave some aid to Nigeria against Biafran rebels, Hungary and the DDR sold weapons to Iraq during their war with Iran), but I assumed (apparently wrongfully) that they had little foreign intelligence and foreign policy beyond that which was prescribed and arranged by the Soviet Union.

Was the Czechoslovak foreign service uniquely internationalist, or did other Eastern European socialist countries play an active role in liberationary movements like Cape Verdean independence? How independent were these intelligence organizations from the USSR? Did the Czech Republic have any specific motives for supporting the independence of Cape Verde, out of all the colonized countries in Africa?

How was it the only country that didn't get colonized? did some countries try to colonize it, but failed?

Do we have any accounts of Europeans encountering American animals for the first time? How did they describe these animals and what did they think of them. It must have been terryifying encountering an aligator or a bison for the first time.

Was nobody concerned he might call for violence on a massive scale like he already did in Missouri (which led to his arrest)? Was there no law preventing criminals from gaining such power?

Were the Americans that much better at killing or are these numbers all wrong?

I have studied European history and have a great interest in understanding (for now) the broader strokes of Chinese history.

I'm particularly interested in Yangtze river civilizations up through about the mongol occupation, i have very little prior knowledge of east asian history before the modern era.

sorry if this is an idiot question, i may be an idiot