I have tried 'Google it' and gotten nothing but unrelated information about New START in 2010, the US withdraw in 2002, the extensions made to START II in 2003, and the Wikipedia entry on START II which doesn't answer my question.

I am looking for anything that indicates the Senate vote on the treaty. Including but not limited to the actual docket on the Senate floor in 1996.

Up until recently, I had assumed that the heavy infantry and heavy cavalry on both sides would have been equipped with plate armor - breastplates and all that - because I assumed they'd been coming into use over the fourteenth century and therefore guys would have them. However, I read "The Medieval Warrior" by Mortin Dougherty, which includes an image of an English knight from the 1350's, who doesn't seem to be equipped with much plate beyond some leg and arm protection - his torso seems to be primarily protected by mail.

So, in the mid-fourteenth century, what would knights/heavy infantry/heavy cavalry have been wearing for protection? As well, how would this differ from generations of armor coming before and after?

I had thought that armour and fire control systems would have meant ships were more resilient.

Would the evacuated 300,000 soldiers from Dunkirk have a lower or higher chance of surviving the war compared to those captured and sent to POW camps by the Germans?

I imagine that the 300,000 would still be sent to fight in the next five years of the war, so their chances may be lower than captivity, but I want to know if there are data for this.

In 1914-1918, Spain may have been a second-rate global power when compared to the other giants of Europe, but her armies and economy could have played a major role in World War I. What geopolitical (and/or other) factors prevented Spain from breaking neutrality during the conflict, and to what degree was Spain truly neutral during that great seminal catastrophe that was The Great War?

Small spoiler for the first 2 minutes of the film.

Just got back from watching Dunkirk and at the very beginning the Germans are literally 300 yards from the beach, stopped only by a small line on French. Aka a WEEK before the end of the evacuation the Germans were already in Dunkirk? Yet they don't use mortars or anything even though they basically can see the beach (or so the movie would have you think).

That can't be right? How quickly did the Germans advance and how far away were they at different points in the evacuation?

Haiti revolted against French rule between 1791 and 1804. Why did Cuba not have such a revolution? Did the Napoleonic wars not upset Spain's colonies enough to lead to such an outcome? When did Cuba first have a movement toward independence and why?

What was Marcus' relationship with Commodus like?

I heard it was the increase of rodents, that was created by mass killing of them because of religion believes. Is this true?

So I'm pretty familiar with WWII, and I know that the vast majority of Jews effected by the Holocaust were Ashkenazi Jews, in fact I think the majority of European and American Jews are ethnically Ashkenazi. However what I'm not clear on is whether, after the modern day nation of Israel was recreated after WWII, were all of the new citizens European extracted Ashkenazi?

I was also under the impression that the Ashkenazi primarily spoke Yiddish as their ethnic tongue, but modern day Israel lists Yiddish as a minority tongue and Hebrew as the primary tongue. Would the Ashkenazi have also spoken Hebrew, at least in religious settings, which was expanded to the primary language of the country, or were there a lot of Hebrew speaking Jews of other ethnic background that still spoke Hebrew?

I was looking through the subreddits Holocaust book section and came across a description of the book "Hitler's willing executioners". Which I own but have not yet read. I was surprised to see that the book was described as being very controversial in the academic field, but the description did not say why it was.

Can anyone explain to me why the book is considered so controversial and if the controversies are valid?

Do you think philosophers like Descartes, Plato, etc. were on drugs when they had their famous works like Descartes' Meditations?

Apparently in the vast majority of cases it was bad for patients. Can modern medicine considered to have begun after bloodletting was phased out?

[deleted]

See, for example, "Sallet and Buff for a Rennzeug in the Saxon Fashion," (European Helmets, 1450-1650, plate 57) which states the buff was:

a large rigid defense covering the lower face and neck which ... was bolted to the breastplate so that the head and upper body remain immoble [sic.]

I would like a general idea of what attitudes towards homosexuality were in say Mesopotamia, pre-Islamic Arabia etc. before Hellenistic and Roman cultures became dominant in those regions and before the coming of Islam.

With the exception of anthems and hymns which are explicitly religious or political in nature, and ethnic music that is associated with certain cultures music seems to have been pretty neutral throughout history. But nowadays genres like hip hop, rock, New Age and country have cultural values attached to them and are associated with subcultures (punk, hippie, rap, rave, country, emo, metal etc).

How did genres and even styles of music become such a powerful means of defining identity and symbolizing countercultural movements?

I know that nowadays you can get whatever kind of food you want in the UK or US but it still seems like both regions have a preference/iconic ethnic food that is popular. Even though Britain colonized India and imported foods from there they also dealt extensively in East Asia and didn't lose Hong Kong until the 20th century meanwhile the US had no Asian colonies but Chinese food is huge. What's up with that?

I'm really interested in hearing more about the power vacuum following Cnut's death. Edward the Confessor had a fairly lengthy reign in England in the interim, but never seems to have consolidated any sort of lasting power. Why was William able to essentially step in and take charge? Did he get lucky? Is it a case of right-place-right-time? And why did it last - how did the Normans hold on after he died?