[deleted]
1 Answers 2017-07-15
Video: https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/6/69/Ulster.ogv
It was with some bemusement I watched the above video, which is a full 10 minutes, and not once it is acknowledged that Catholics of Ulster, as they are referred to in the video, have an Irish component to the their Identity, and this too is a source of conflict in Northern Ireland, as they are being discriminated against on that basis as well.
Was this use of language deliberate? Did the British establishment seek to avoid the concept that these citizens had an identity outside of the British one? Did they deliberately seek to frame the conflict as purely sectarian, or was this simply a bias emerging? I am conscious that this clip was created for the benefit of viewers in Great Britain, and the framing of the conflict as mainly sectarian, partly economic, but not at all as a conflict between two nationalities, would be influencing their perception of what's occurring in Northern Ireland. Is this a factor in how the narrative is being crafted? Is the narration avoiding introducing the idea to people in the rest of the UK that part of the UK has citizens who do not identify as British?
Furthermore, the narration of the clip ends on the line "this land, and it's oddly devout people" seem to suggest that people in Northern Ireland are odd/strange for allowing religion to form such a key part of their identity. Is this use of language deliberate, or is it a bias showing? I find the remark questionable given similar divisions would have also existed in parts of Scotland at the time/that religion would have also being a significant identity in parts of Scotland at the time.
1 Answers 2017-07-15
Which territory had "Iberia" adopted as its naming first, the Caucasian Kingdom or the Peninsula? Also, did people contemporaneous to both designations - the kingdom and the peninsula - get confused frequently about which was being referred to, in, say, a conversation?
1 Answers 2017-07-15
The question of which President is the best or worst seems a bit nonsensical to me...but you never know. I like to think that Stephen Colbert has competent editors and this sounds just a bit too direct to be solely humorous.
He was involved in scandals, but so were many Presidents.
So: is Harding really the worst? Anywhere close? Or is the question (all but) impossible to answer?
The segment in which Colbert makes the statement is available here, at about the 5:20 mark: https://youtu.be/5gcojKy6c7Q
1 Answers 2017-07-15
My girlfriend and I started talking about this while watching Game of Thrones and after seeing one too many lumpy brown sack-dresses that looked like it was made out of burlap and sewn with twine. Are these inspired by realities? I imagine the historical scope of my question is pretty vast, but any specific knowledge anyone has on the common clothes of common folks around the world before centralized/commercial/industrial textile manufacturing is welcome to enlighten me. Thanks!
1 Answers 2017-07-15
Hello! I just moved into a home in the "colonial lake" area of downtown Charleston SC; the realtors date the house as being a "Victorian structure" built roughly in the year 1880. The house itself is a traditional single style home with two adorning piazzas outside and large Charleston windows that lead out to them. I am finding the letter "M" purposefully carved into the mantles with a tree next to them, and one mantle appears even almost self inscribed by someone (it is on the top of one of the mantles, sort of out of view but still evident.. an extravagant "W" and then several spaces over the "M") The letter is also found on almost every door knob I can find in the home. They appear to be placed in what I am guessing is cast iron, the M's are literally placed in ornate designs on the locks hinges and entry ways to every room. At first I thought that the "M" may be the manufacturer or the company that made the knobs until I found the M placed into the wood mantle and then even hand written into the top of another one. I now believe that these are the initials of the person/family name of the person who built the home. Please help me identify who this person was or what these "M's" stand for specifically! I know through basic search on the internet that William Moultrie (/ˈmuːltriː/; November 23, 1730 – September 27, 1805) was given some of the land at colonial lake (also refered to as colonial pond) to develop, but he would have been long gone by the time this 1880's timeline was developed.
I only have reason to believe that this could be William Moultrie's hand as the knife carving of the overlapping (W, M in my last Imgur photo) can be compared to the little offhand characters I found after his signature reflected here: (copy paste link into browser)
Without dredging up historic documentation, can anybody attempt to point me in a possible direction as to who the person connected to this home might be and/or as to what all the M's stand for?
I do have pictures I have uploaded, please check this link: http://imgur.com/a/lltvx
Thanks!!
2 Answers 2017-07-15
This is a sensitive topic, so I want to make it clear that I have no bad intentions. I don't have an opinion on Armenian Genocide, I know that my country (Poland) recognizes it as a real genocide, but recently I met a Turk who described me the other side of the story. Now I just want to put everything together.
"Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide" from 1951 defines genocide as:
"In the present Convention, genocide means any of the following acts committed with intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial or religious group, as such : (...) Deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part; (...)"
So he explained to me that Turkey basically acknowledge that these people died. Ottoman Empire supposedly tried to relocate them to Syria so they wouldn't be helping Russians, but they planned it very poorly, so it wasn't intentional - it was rather a logistic f*ck up, so there are no sufficient circumstances to call it a genocide.
From my limited knowledge of history I know, that Turkey's logistic was really bad during the Great War - case in point is the amount of their own soldiers who died in this region, going to war with Russia, unprepared for the winter.
Now my question is - do we have any proofs that this catastrophe was intentional? Like orders, documents? Or maybe West acknowledged it as a genocide only based on the educated guess? If so, then how educated guess that was?
2 Answers 2017-07-15
I must say, even though I'm interested in history I'm way less informed than I'd like. I keep stumbling across references to the Normans, and about the battle of Hastings, and was wondering who exactly were they, and how did they affect history as we know it
1 Answers 2017-07-15
I was in the Wikipedia and there says that Horthy was a the a King of Hungary but this has no Sense because Hungary was fascist in the WW2.
I have a Picture from the Wikipedia
2 Answers 2017-07-15
How did the ancient Japanese, Chinese, Romans/Greeks and Europeans feel about men marrying multiple woman/having concubines? What factors tended to be common in cultures that allowed it?
1 Answers 2017-07-15
2 Answers 2017-07-15
Also, approx how many people were killed in WWI because of this? Planes would of had to been shot down without the pilot dying, only to die hitting the ground.
2 Answers 2017-07-15
Religion hasn't been around forever (I don't think). Are there any clues as to what or who, if they did, the first humans worshiped as some of us worship gods of today?
1 Answers 2017-07-15
2 Answers 2017-07-15
Hello. I'm currently reading the nonfiction book "The Sea Wolves" by Lars Brownworth. The claim is made that Vikings would toss babies of their enemies onto spears, and throw them into a circle, as a game to amuse themselves. When one Icelandic Viking refused, he was called a Baby lover.
Is there any truth to this story? The author didn't provide a source, and I've yet to find one on the internet. Is this story something manufactured by the enemies of these sea raiders?
1 Answers 2017-07-15
1 Answers 2017-07-15
1 Answers 2017-07-15
For a very brief time after the civil war, the us had the largest navy in the world, but I was wondering how their army would compare
3 Answers 2017-07-15
As I understand it, there existed, in general terms, a Greco-Roman view of sexual relationships between men. A generally acceptable homosexual relationship would be one between a more powerful older man, and a younger, less powerful man/adolescent. For example, Hadrian's relationship with Antinous. Being seen as masculine, and in the modern gay lexicon, a top, made this relationship acceptable. Whereas, an unacceptable relationship would be one where one could find their masculinity questioned. For example, when an adolescent Elagabalus takes older more masculine lovers, becoming a feminized 'bottom' in the popular imagination.
Yet, something seems to be changing by the 4th century. In 390, the Salonika riots are started by German auxiliaries arresting a famous charioteer, for having sodomized a male servant. Around the same time, laws are being passed against men taking on a feminine sex role.
What's going on to cause this shift? Obviously, the Empire is Christianizing and Germanizing during this period. Is this the cause for the shift in sexual mores?
Follow up question on Church history, when/how was the book of Leviticus, including its currently famous lines condemning both participants of homosexual sex to death, included in official Roman Christianity?
1 Answers 2017-07-15
Were the oligarchies of greek city states somehow empowered to displace their monarchs? Did the after effects of the supposed Dorian invasion have anything to do with it?
1 Answers 2017-07-15
In an Irish history called Cogad Gáedel re Gailab (The War of the Irish against the Foreigners) which documents the battle of Clontarf in 1014 of the forces of Sitric Silkenbeard against those of the Irish high king Brian Boru, the author uses a famously long and hyperbolic string of adjectives to describe the Vikings in disparaging terms.
Now on the one side of that battle were the shouting, hateful, powerful, wrestling, valiant, active, fierce-moving, dangerous, nimble, violent, furious, unscrupulous, untamable, inexorable, unsteady, cruel, barbarous, frightful, sharp, ready, huge, prepared, cunning, warlike, poisonous, murderous, hostile Danars; bold, hard-hearted Danmarkians, surly, piratical foreigners, blue-green, pagan; without reverence, without veneration, without honour, without mercy, for God or for man.
What did the term "blue-green" mean in the context in which the author uses it?
1 Answers 2017-07-15
I've seen it on TV plenty of times, where there's a battle between two sides and one side wins with only a handful of survivors. Is there any historical truth to this or is it all fiction?
1 Answers 2017-07-15
Ron ridenhour said that the my lai massacre was a "nazi kind of thing". What differentiates what Hitler did to what Charlie company did in vietnam. And how is this an abuse and distortion of history? Thx
2 Answers 2017-07-15
![Here[1]](https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/7/75/Ares_Canope_Villa_Adriana_b.jpg/800px-Ares_Canope_Villa_Adriana_b.jpg){kind=link}
![are[2]](https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/e/e8/MetapontumDrachmRutter1576Obverse.jpg){kind=link}
![examples.[3]](https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/e/e8/Seduzione_tra_marte_e_venere%2C_alla_presenza_di_un_amorino_e_ancella%2C_da_casa_dell%27amore_punito_a_pompei%2C_9249%2C_02.JPG){kind=link}