I heard that 800 years ago 90% of jews spoke Arabic. What caused the proportion of Arabic speaking Jews to drop to around 10% prior to world war 2?

After the first world war, they were split into independent states, but wouldn't it be better for them to unify to make a stronger country?

Thanks I am really curious

The rulers and citizens of the Byzantine Empire always viewed themselves as Romans, and in fact the name Byzantine was only applied to them after the fact, by historians.

But what did the other kingdoms of the ages call the empire? Were they known as the Roman Empire even by medieval Europe? Were they recognized by the rest of the world as the continuation of Rome they believed themselves to be? Or were they simply seen as Greeks (the language mainly spoken there instead of Latin) or some other nationality?

Since the slaves were armed and mobilized and the owners of those slaves took a deal the government offered (apparently 2 slaves for each one freed), did Rome honour the deal, and if so, would the slaves become citizens? Or were they just sent back to the owners since their services were never actually needed?

I don't understand how they didn't prioritize food production, while at the same time guaranteeing jobs, education, and healthcare to everyone.

[deleted]

Students of Indian history are familiar with the major leaders of the Indian freedom struggle (Gandhi, Nehru, Bose, ...) and their exploits. But was there a faction in India that favoured continued British rule, even as independence drew closer and closer? Or was the entirety of the country united against the British?

[deleted]

Hurricane shapes are quite distinct to us because we have satellite imagery. But on the ground, it simply looks like a huge storm. When and how did people start to recognize that hurricanes were different?

I'm asking this because L.A. voted to replace Columbus day with Indigenous Peoples Day.

I found a few threads on this through the search bar, but I wanted to ask again to see if I can get a modern consensus (perhaps more primary sources have been discovered on the topic).

Here are some things I've heard about Columbus:

1. He forced indigenous people to fulfill a gold quota or he would chop off their hands.

2. When he fought the indigenous people he would feed wounded combatants to dogs.

3. He enslaved many indigenous people and forced them to work in brutal conditions, so that 1/3 of his slaves died every 8-10 months.

4. When his slaves escaped, he would hunt them down (not personally) and feed them to his dogs.

5. He forced 9-10 year old girls into sexual slavery.

When you consider that there were fewer people in the world, and that Columbus didn't have the technology to build gas chambers, it appears as if he is morally comparable to someone like Reinhard Heydrich or Heinrich Himmler.

I understand that some of these claims may have been exaggerated for the sake of selling books, or for television and whatnot, so would someone versed in this area of history please determine whether or not these claims are true?

If so, were they still worn by the French populace and the military after the 1600s in a time frame, say like, the early 1700s?

The ability to predict storms is recent. I'd imagine that with major storms, the average person would have little, if any, warning ahead of time. What were casualty levels like during major storms?

Also, obviously it varies on location (little choice on an island nation), but in general would survivors / new people rebuild areas, or would they move on to a new area? Examples from any time period are welcome, but if anyone has info on colonial / early America and how it shaped the country, that would be interesting. Thank you.

I'm specifically talking about Jews, Romani, and other groups targeted for roundups. Were urban dwellers more likely to be caught and rounded up, or is there "safety" in numbers and the relative anonymity of the city?

I'm a huge fan of tanks and the more research I do the more criticism i see of the Sherman (especially the 75mm models). It made me curious about what share of the total crewed Shermans in late 1944 were of the 76mm variety. Was it really all that rare to find a Sherman that could take on a Tiger tank (tank on tank, I do recognize that numbers certainly played a role in armored combat) in late 1944 like everyone seems to imply?

I have always heard of this country referred to as Sardinia-Piedmont, but recently my history teacher and close friend, called it Piedmont-Sardinia. I'm a huge fan of history, and would like to know which of us is correct.

I'm a socialist and frequently come into contact with people who take Grover Furr seriously, particularly on questions regarding Trotsky, Bukharin and Zinoviev. Have any historians here ever cited him, or referred to the sources that he uses? I'd like to get a better grasp of just how seriously I should take these people in future discussions.

Obviously in general Europe was steadily Christianised during the this time period and there are many examples of Pagans converting to Christianity. I was wondering if there happen to be any notable examples of Christian rulers converting to a pagan religion.

I know my question was about Europe but I would be interested in hearing about any cases in other parts of the world, if there are any.

So I learned recently that South Africa is the only nation to have voluntarily dismantled all its nuclear weapons. But why did it have nukes in the first place? All the other nuclear powers have them as a deterrent in some sort of arms race or Cold War (US/Russia, India/Pakistan, Israel/pretty much the entire Middle East). But what threat compelled South Africa to want to build nuclear weapons?

My class was recently told to read the Law of Hammurabi, and as familiarizing myself with some I came across this line "215. If a physician make a large incision with an operating knife and cure it, or if he open a tumor (over the eye) with an operating knife, and saves the eye, he shall receive ten shekels in money."

This begs the question from me, did the Babylonians understand tumors as incurable? Was cutting it out a common practice, and do we know how they found these tumors, or if the practice worked? Any information would be appreciated, Im rather curious!

Some historians have speculated that Western European fishermen may have reached the Grand Banks of Newfoundland in the mid-15th century. The English, in particular, had incentive to find good waters to the west to compete with Icelandic fisheries.

Is this all a bunch of film-flam, fanciful "what ifs" to tickle the imagination? Or are there primary sources to back it up?

Also, what do y'all think about this topic?