I've always heard that treaties like the 1972 ABMT (Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty) were an attempt to stall the arms race. However, why would these Nations want to limit their capacity to defend against ICBMs?

Bonus points for those who could explain the diplomatic process involved in negotiating such treaties.

It seems to me that histories of late Republican/early Imperial Rome describe, in great detail, the collapse of the Second Triumvirate, the war between Octavian and Marc Antony, and the creation of the Principate. We also always read about the disastrous Battle of Teutoburg Forest. But the histories I've read seem to skim past most of what happened during Augustus's reign. I know that it was a time of unprecedented wealth, and that Augustus bragged of finding Rome in brick and leaving it in marble. And I've read that Augustus tried to promote traditional Roman values. But what about intrigues and scandals? For example, I've also read that Augustus often slept with Senators's wives. I know he was briefly wed to a child-bride. And I seem to remember there was at least one plot to assassinate him. I guess one way of framing my question is this: How alike was Augustus's reign to those that came after? Even apart from Caligula and Nero, there were frequent plots, arrests, executions, etc. Is there evidence of similar intrigue during Augustus's reign? And could you recommend some good sources to read?

Edited for typos.

I assume that the depiction of Native Americans, despite being slightly more progressive* than other westerns, is completely wrong. But I was curious as to how the movie got Native Americans wrong? Is the film's portrayal of Native American tribes close to how they actually acted? To add to that, how is its depiction of the West in the late 1800's? Did the filmmakers get western life correct, with families mostly living on isolated farms, or was life more nuanced than the film portrays?

*Progressive in that the film portrays Ethan Edwards' intense hatred of Native Americans as morally wrong and completely unheroic

I suspect that the use of characters has played a very large role in the way that the Chinese think. Is this accurate? How?

For example, the relative unity of China throughout the centuries in spite of a number of dialects was helped, at least to my knowledge, by characters allowing for written communication throughout the empire.

I mean, were the regions where the Silk Road flourished any more stable as a result of the economic relations now taking part? It seems to me if everyone was benefitting from this trade, less people would want to tear the process apart.

title says all

[deleted]

I am not talking about the germs that the Europeans brought. I once heard a while ago that in the decades leading up to European settlement in the New World that there was some kind of mass outbreak (or perhaps a famine) that decimated Native American population. It went on to point out this is another reason why the deaths from the Europeans were so bad because their population was already a lot lower than it was only for the Eurpeans to make it worse.

Any truth to this?

At what point in history did humans start to create music, and why? Was it just for recreation, or was there another reason?

The full quote from episode 90: "In 97 AD, a Chinese embassy was sent west to try to make contact with 'The Kingdom of the Daqin', which is what the Han called Rome. But apparently, they were stopped short in Mesopotamia after the Parthians explained that the difficult crossing to Rome would take another two years at least. This bald-faced lie was meant to keep the two poles of the lucrative trade routes - which Parthia controlled - from ever meeting and working out a way to bypass the Parthian middleman."

Is there evidence that it was formal state policy of the Parthians to keep China and Rome from forming more cohesive diplomatic relations?

There's a picture book from the eyewitness series by DK called 'Battle'. It features bronze and steel cannon with what looks to be steel covered wheels.

How did the steel part of cannons not rust?

[deleted]

In myth, the titan Prometheus was chained to a rock, where an eagle would eat his liver, only for it to grow back again and again.

We know the liver regenerates, but did the Greeks in ancient days know that as well? Is there any reason to think the myth of Prometheus' liver was informed by how real livers regenerate?

I'm wondering if it's just a coincidence that the story includes that detail.

Hello. First, a word of clarification: I know "soldier" may not be the most applicable term for medieval fighters, but I don't know what else to call them. I refer here to those in the army who were not men-at-arms. Also, my question is mainly concerning the high Middle Ages.

So, while actual pitched battles were clearly uncommon, they were bound to happen eventually. It is here where I'm a bit confused. Knights would wear their heraldry allowing them to identify each other in combat. But, at least until pretty late in the Middle Ages, most contemporary prices of art I've seen show the average foot soldier wearing their boring brown tunics coupled with whatever armour they happened to have scraped off the battlefield. Perhaps this is just the Age of Gunpowder buff in me, but being unable to distinguish the soldiers of two kingdoms/lords/whatever at a quick glance seems like lunacy to me. I realize that, with the absence of thick smoke from guns coat in the field, piercing bright coats are unnecessary, but was there any way to distinguish between rival footsoldiers (surcoats, painted shields, etc), or were they just packed into tight lines and told to stab in the general direction of the enemy? If there really were no distinguishing features of an army, how did could a soldier know he wasn't bludgeoning an ally to death if a line broke or during a particularly chaotic conflict a la Sluys?

In my research, I have found (at least recently) you can be fined for ignoring, or lying on a US census document. However, I was curious if there are any known issues of the time (1900-1920 specifically) of people who immigrated to the US, lying on US census forms about their naturalization? If so, what would their reasons be for doing so? Or if it was not possible to lie about this, what steps did the US government take to verify naturalization claims, if any?

If it matters, the reason I ask this is because I am researching my ancestry, and my great-grandfather listed himself as having been naturalized for the 1920's US census, but he did lie or unknowingly put his wrong age, and immigration year.

I've always wondered how Count Basie & his orchestra were treated by white Americans in the build up to the Civil Rights Movement.

Were African-American Jazz musicians treated as badly as their peers?

Or how common was it throughout its history? And which cities outside Sparta were keen to send their sons to the agoge? I was reading somewhere that apparently the rich families of other cities viewed it as a status symbol to have sons participate in the agoge and vied for the chance to do so.

This doesn't quite match up with how the Spartans viewed themselves compared to other non-Spartans and so the idea of non citizens participating sounds odd, but still, it's possible right? I can't find the source which mentioned this so

Here is the source:

Charles [the Fat], who had the title of emperor, marched against the Northmen with a large army and advanced right up to their fortification. Once he had got there, however, his courage failed him. Through the intervention of certain men, he managed to reach an agreement with Godefrid and his men on the following terms: namely that Godefrid would be baptised, and would then receive Frisia and the other regions that Roric had held. To Sigfrid and Gorm and their accomplices he gave several thousand pounds of silver and gold which he had seized from the treasury of St-Stephen at Metz and from the resting-places of other saints, and he gave them permission to stay so that they could go on ravaging a part of his cousin’s kingdom as they had before.

I've googled it and I get references to the Vikings and pirates; I also seem to remember reading something similar about the Danes in Einhard, and Godefrid being their leader - but he was assasinated and I think it was before Charles the Fat?