Obviously all alliances are advantageous due to the fact that it is one less person you have to worry about, but considering all the enemies both those countries had, deciding to ally with the other would gain them more enemies than it would eliminate. Or was it more that they had so many common enemies that an alliance was inevitable?

I know there were people with the title Magi (Magus) in some vague eastern country, but what they actually did, and how they ([admittedly:] supposedly) decided to journey west remains a mystery to me, aside from the story in the Bible.

It's my understanding that the Basque language is from a totally separate language tree from its neighbors. While that may be an anthropological or linguistic focus to the question, was there any reason why this group of people remained isolated for so long from conquest, whether it be some sort if terrain, no interesting resources, etc. Or any combination therein.

Another way to put it, language shifts depending on so many factors, migration and war being two; but the Basque language is distinct from the people's who lived all around them for centuries. Is there some historical reason for this?

Apparently, the standing fyrd would only go back home in order to rotate out the farmers and warriors. Before then, the fyrd could only function for half a year, because they had to head home for harvest in autumn and then the winter season.

How the heck did Alfred the Great do this? And what's the difference between this and levies in say, medieval france of the 12th century?

Was it just chance of better cavalry officers being assigned out west? Did eastern commanders just not know how to use their men? Or was there something more basic at play?

How can I learn more about human life and culture during the most recent ice age? Where did humans live? How many were there? What was life like?

I have seen many memes on the internet stating that through linguistic mutations (from Aramaic to Greek, Greek to Classical Latin, Classical Latin to Medieval Latin, Medieval Latin to English) Jesus's name has changed from Joshua the Messiah to Jesus Christ. Is there any evidence that this is true?

I've been wondering which came first, airplanes or paper airplanes? Like was there any kind of aerodynamic flying toy before the Wright Brothers did their thing, or did it only become popular after humans started flying?

[deleted]

Hello! I am designing a party game about dukes and duchesses plotting their spousal murders, and I am curious about the methods in which a women of the Victorian era, so I guess the mid-19th century, would protect herself. Like today, there are not many women I know who do not leave the house without pepper spray on their chain or a taser in their purse. Technically this question is specifically about self-protection during the Victorian period, but all answers are welcome! Thank you. I think the simple answer would be a knife like a small dagger or a letter opener, but maybe not!

With this I mean, there is no papyrus nor clay to write down their stories, but Hattusa did write down their stories, about their gods and all, though they ended up thoroughly destroyed.

While Linear B is plenty attested, nothing has been discovered involving other things rather than "inventories". Might be that finally deciphering Linear A would discover us something, but it might be it wouldn't either. Someday it will have to be discovered what those tablets mean, however.

The great kings had tablets to write down as well as papyrus in case of Egypt, why was that never an option in Greece/Hellas? Hatti is in an eminently mountainous country but had access to tablets. The Mycenaean could use only stone. Clay tablets, papyrus, wax tablets, they were used by the different kings but not the Mycenaean ones, why? Or why it hasn't been discovered that there was at least some use of those materials in Hellas and it has been discovered for other countries? Does really all of this go back to "They were across the sea" and so unavailable to purchase despite ample evidence of Mycenaeans paying homage to Thutmoses III as Tajannu and the Mycenaeans bickering and calming with the Hittites?

The Ares I rocket doesn't have fins. Instead it relies on gimballed engines to control the direction of thrust because any fins would have to be ridiculously huge in order to stick far enough outside of the rocket's boundary layer to have any effect. I heard a rumor that the fins on the Saturn V rocket are actually useless for the same reason, but von Braun ordered their addition anyway because it just didn't look right.

Is there any truth to that?

I've submitted this question several times before but never received an answer.

Most of us have heard of Tortuga’s infamous buccaneer history during the 17th century, but really that’s the only colonial history that has seemed to come out of it. There seems to be nothing about Tortuga’s history after its buccaneer era in the late 1600’s

• Was Tortuga ever used as a strategically important area for any navies in the early 18th century? (i.e., Queen Anne's War)

• What were the major settlements/ports?

• What happened to the buccaneers of Tortuga?

[deleted]

I'm a first year student of history and currently doing some research on the Roman emperors during the Year of Four Emperors. One overarching theme of this crisis and other Roman civil wars that I've noticed is that generals who make a bid for the purple are proclaimed emperor by their troops before actually making their move. Moreover, they also seem to be able to quite easily mobilize the armies under their command to march on Rome and potentially fight their own countrymen.

Now I know that during the days of the Late Republic legions were often privately funded, but I can't imagine that this is still the case during the empire, right? Moreover, where the civil wars of the republic might have been somewhat confusing as to who was right and who was wrong, it seems to me that if you live in the empire you know exactly who is the lawful emperor and who is the usurper.

So I guess my question is: how is it that during the days of the Roman Empire, soldiers were so much more loyal/devoted to their generals than their country? I can imagine one or two insanely charismatic generals convincing all of their troops to fight and die for his personal ambition, but so many times? There has to be something inherent to the system that allows this to happen, right?

There are for example, a number of men who fought the American Revolution and also saw the onset of the Civil War. Do we know of any Russians who lived through all of those incredible transitions?