Let's say I am a German living in a semi-nomadic settlement close to the borders of Rome but far enough so to not be bothered by them throughout my life.

Then for some reason, my relatively small community of about 500 people moves westward with intent to settle.

How would the transition into Roman territory look like? Would the community be killed off? Would they be captured and sold into slavery? Would they even be noticed?

I am aware that the location is relevant here since Romans had forts along strategically important river crossings and such. So if anyone could touch upon the possible outcomes and the conditions required for such outcomes I would be very grateful.

Anthropologists, historians and political observers often comment on "tribal" divisions in modern and historical Africa, the Middle East, India, and the Americas but rarely outside of antiquity is this same talk of "tribes" applied to Europe (and to some extent, China Korea and Japan).

Was there a real shift in European and East Asian society that reduced tribalism and led people to identify themselves with broader cultural, national, or political identities? If so, when and why did this occur?

Or is the designation of African/Indian/American/Middle-eastern societies as "tribal" wholly a product of a colonial mindset attempting to disparage those societies, and they're not and never were any more "tribal" than Europe?

Everyone agrees that he was A LOT into hindu mythology, even learning sanskrit to read the sacred Hindu text.

Everyone seems reluctant to say that he was a hinduist, rather saying that he was "curious" or even "overeducated", and apparently he never said it either, instead saying that those text: "shaped his philosophy in life", but all this seems to me that hue was a hinduist, his friends knew he was a hinduist, but back then it was better to keep quiet about such unusual things.

Is my impression correct or was he really just curious?

I know that they were 'facing persecution' but what exactly did this entail and who was it from? Also, was there any specific reason that they decided to travel to (what became) Utah or did they just set out in a random direction and were 'guided' by their prophet and God?

These are Empires that had stood for over a hundred years and being seen as unending by those who inhabited it, yet a few hundred guys from Spain with guns were able to knock them out in a few years. How? Was it really just because of the guns and disease brought by the Spanish? Or was there some deeper reason these empires were prone to falling so quickly?

First and the most important to me, I once found a source which I can't get to right now but it stated that seeing they don't stand a chance, merchants would often surrender without a fight, after just a simple warning from the pirates. If so, what did such warning look like? How close could a ship get for a message to be understantable but not risking the ship getting away?

Okay, also: I do know which parts are the most beneficial to attack when wanting to destroy a ship but is there an actual way to just slow it down without making it useless? It seems probable that pirates wouldn't like to kill everyone on sight as it'd make them wanted more and that's not your popular wish I guess, so I can imagine a pirate taking just the booty itself, letting the crew go with their ship empty.

Also, how expected was a pirate captain to kill, either all the crew or or just the enemy's captain?

These three budge me the most but if there's anything you think I should know writing about a story including pirate attack, I'll very much appreciate that.

Before we computers, before we understood the age and wastness of the universe and before we had any data about the world or any way to count or preceive big data, did people have a concept of big numbers like million or trillion since people had no real life equivalent of those types of numbers? I guess this might sound not so insightful since they did have many natural things around them like stones or grains of sand but those things had no value in being measured, so i just thought it interesting if big numbers have been an understood concept all along or if it's something thay derives from nessecity of big numbers

In the book Crown Of Blood by Nicola Tallis, she describes the reception of Lady Jane Grey as cool, while Mary was received by cheering crowds. How much would the common people of the era (both in and outside the capital) have been concerned with who was sitting on the throne?

I know already that no British or American troops fought in the Eastern Front (but did give soviets Aircraft and supplies), but when the Allies were beginning to get closer to Berlin did British and American Aircraft and Troops fight alongside Soviet Troops and Planes in cooperations?

From what I've read it's pretty obvious the even if it "calmed" people it did so at the expense of their internal life. The people weren't cured they were cleansed. How do you do that to a family member and then tell other people it was a good deal?

In learning about Zyklon B, I began wondering why gas chambers weren’t filled with neutral gasses such as helium, so as to asphyxiate victims in roughly the same amount of time it would take to die from Zyklon B. Helium, nitrogen, even hydrogen seem like suitable alternatives. Did they simply want to inflict more pain than would come from a peaceful death from neutral gases?

There was a text I distinctly remember where a Muslim man was somewhere in Scandinavia and documented his experiences living with them. One part of the reading referred to a particularly disgusting tradition where a woman would go from household to household with a pot of water. She would offer the pot of water to person at the house, and they would take the water in it, wash their face in it, and blow their nose into the pot. The same pot was then taken to the next household with all the snotty goodness still in there.

Pretty nasty, but was this a real thing, or simply an embellishment by a visitor to comment about how much more civilized he believed his people to be? The only thing holding me back from this is that I've been reading about how medieval people were more hygienic than we traditionally think of them, and this is just so insanely disgusting that I have a hard time believing anyone at any time period could think this was a good idea.

So, did this sort of thing ever happen anywhere in northern Europe? Communal nose-blowing pots?

In 1925, the Guna people won semi-autonomy during a revolution with the Panamanian government. I'm working on a story that aims to contextualize their victory within other indigenous revolutions. How unique is their story in this hemisphere?

Africa seemed to have a lot of Soviet and Chinese support during the cold war, such as the Rhodesian Bush war and Angola. Why wasn't the west as keen on sending in military or other support into Africa to curb Communism or am I wrong?

I have only ever seen the title of this play given as some variation on Bacchus like The Bacchae, The Bacchantes, etc. I've always understood Bacchus to be the name of the similar but separate Roman god. And often in the text of the play the name is given as Dionysos. Did Euripides and Greeks of the time Bacchae for the god, his followers, and the play? Or was this a later change or addition, perhaps in Roman-dominated times?

In history classes in Irish schools we were always taught that Wolfe Tone and the Ulstermen were inspired by the French and American revolutions to rebel against the British crown, but obviously there are substantial differences between these revolutions and between the thinkers who inspired them. So would I be correct in thinking these Protestant landowners would be more like the American founding fathers than the French revolutionaries or is there evidence to counter this?

Were the horses rode by medieval knights very different from horses seen in every day travel at the time, how would both breeds compare to “modern” horse breeds, is there much difference or are they still basically the same?

Is any of them more defensible than another?

Additionally, is authorship (or likelihood of firsthand-witness) any more discernible in the non-canonical early Christian texts?

I read that Florida in North was a Spanish colony during Spanish colonisation of Americas. And also that USA helped other colonies to gain Independence. So was USA not under Spanish rule? If not why? And also if USA was under British rule so how come Spainiards were first to discover Americas? if they were first so they ideally should have ruled US.

Did the economics system of the USSR shield it from the global financial crisis?