First of all, how did the Romans treat them? And are the descendants of most Western Sicilians related to the Carthaginians who initially inhabited the Island? And how did they react to Hannibal's invasion of the Italian mainland?

I've read that well up until the time of Nero, Italians constituted the backbone of the legions but from there on out, provincials instead constitute the majority of the legion's man power. My question is, are many of these provincials the sons and grandsons of Italian legionaries? I've read that most provincials fell into this category, being that their mothers were often non-Italian - is that accurate?

[deleted]

How much is European culture shaped by paganism?

Presumably because of the climate, but why not Atlanta? Why not somewhere in Florida? The fact that it took so long to get from the east coast to Los Angeles before the advent of commercial airlines, I'm wondering why a place so relatively remote became so big in film.

I just finished the Goddall/BBC "Story of Music". It's really well done, but until they get to the 800s it's all very loosey goosey feeling, history-wise. Understandably- they didn't even have the ability to write music down in a reproducible way before then.

He makes the claim in the beginning of the first episode that the paintings at Lascaux were found to be located in the at "the places of maximum resonance"- that throughout cave system, it's tunnels and passages, by standing in front of the paintings and "singing" you can be heard over the entire complex. So he said the theory was it was a kind of echo location.

But I'm confused- how on earth do we know they were "singing"? How do we know they weren't yelling out whatever cro magnon man was using to mean "Hey, Bob, over here!". Or drumming, for that matter? Or blowing pipes (there are pipe blowing figures in the paintings at Lascaux). And what does any of it have to do with putting the paintings themselves in those places?

tl;dr: Lascaux, ancient music, and Howard Goddall (nothing against him, he's great). This feels like horse crap. Is it horse crap?

Do we have any idea how "music" started?

How did a Legion get new recruits if it was stationed in a border province and the requirement for a Legionary was that he was a Roman citizen (before Caracalla)? Were there recruiting offices in Italia?

I read on Wikipedia that the "classic" Morion helmet was not in use during either conquest. So that begs the question, what exactly did they look like?

Not wishing to insult what the Marines did, but why was the conflict not dominated by Army units when the fighting was largely non amphibious?

So I was channel-surfing the other day and ended up watching one of those "edutainment" shows about the crusades. They went over various famous figures and orders in a, let's call it "broad strokes" way. When it came to the "Knights Hospitaller" (and the mashed together various orders under that banner) they essentially showed what we would call "combat medics" - knights and their banner-men in chain or plate mail, rendering first aid to wounded comrades right there on the battlefield, and transporting them to nearby field hospitals. It was a total mess, looking more like "M.A.S.H. in plate mail" than anything I have read about medieval medicine. I would consider myself to be somewhat knowledgeable in medieval medicine, especially the treatment of combat injuries, history of "surgery", etc., and I'm pretty sure I have never read about soldiers, especially knights(!), being trained and used to provide first aid and more during combat, and/or in the field at all. But I am far from being a real expert, maybe I simple never stumbled over those things (I tend to focus more on the technical aspects).

I would be delighted if an expert could share their view/expertise on medieval "combat medics", etc.

(If you happen to know about the implementation of the "combat medic" concept in other historical settings, please do feel invited to share that, too)

I have read Livy and Polybius' writings on the Punic Wars and the society of Carthage, as well as publications by modern historians. One thing that puzzled me was the inability of the Carthaginians to rebuild their fleet following the First Punic War. Carthage had, only a generation before the 2nd Punic War, the greatest and most formidable fleet in the Mediterranean. It is mentioned by many historians that by the start of the Second Punic War, while having experienced land commanders such as Hannibal and his ancestors, Carthage no longer had a navy that could rival Rome. Rome had no navy until a few decades before, yet now had superiority over Carthage who had for centuries always had a strong naval force.

Why could Carthage not reconstruct a great navy? Surely it would have been possible, given the great wealth of the city even after the 1st Punic War? Rome also lost many hundreds of warships during the course of the first war, yet with great zeal and determination was able to rebuild by securing funding from allies and eventually private citizens. Was Carthage unable to rebuild her fleet because she was simply unwilling to spend the money? Livy and Polybius tell us a great deal about Carthaginian society, as have many historians, and it seems to be almost the direct opposite of Rome. Citizens rarely fought in wars, with most focused on merchant enterprises rather than fighting. I know a large reason for the victory of Rome in the first Punic War was the unwillingness of Punic citizens and aristocrats to participate in the war effort.

I also understand that a large part of the reason Hannibal took to invading Italy via the Alps was because Carthage was unable to ferry troops without risking disaster, owing the the presence of the Roman navy. Hannibal was to be left without supplies or troops while campaigning in Gaul and Italy, the Carthaginian navy seemingly unable to compete with the Roman. Only a few decades before this would have been unthinkable. Why was Carthage now forced to rely on land forces, traditionally the weaker and less formidable branch of its military, rather than the navy which had always been its strongest arm?

Were there big bands and jazz orchestras in China? How were they received by the government and society?

Tanning solutions work on dead animal skins, so I imagine that prolonged, repeated exposure would have some effect on living animal skin (a person's). Additionally, I read that different tree species' barks were used to tan hides into different colors (i.e: chestnut oak vs white oak, resulting in brown vs yellowish hides respectively). So is my hypothesis correct? Did historical writings on tanners ever mention that their hands were discolored from the hide tanning process?

I'd really like to learn more about the culture, societies, history of this Greco-Buddhist era. Based the associated wiki it looks like I'm kind of fishing for books that might talk about Alexander the Great, the Indo-Greek Kingdom, and/or Kushan Empire. I'd also be really interested to read about longer term impacts on both sides from these interactions.

I came across the following passage in a legal textbook by the renowned English jurist Glanville Williams, published in 1951: 'In R v Coney (1882) it was held that the spectators at a prize fight were not guilty of any crime. They did not assist (save in the Gallic sense), and therefore were not principals in the second degree to the misdemeanour.' My question is: what is he referring to when he says 'save in the Gallic sense'?

If I were the average pirate, how often would I have run into another ship that I could terrorize? Also, did pirates ever run across each other, and if so would they fight?

In order to lower the influence of bias, instead of a who's right who's wrong thread, I want you to pretend you are the claimant and give to me a rundown of the common points given by your side as to why it belongs to you.