First off i don't mean any disrespect to anyone.
Recently I've been wondering about my family history, and I don't seem to understand why jews have BLUE/GREEN eyes, and some blonde/red hair.
Allegedly, "we" the jews came all from the old Israel. (Pre-Greece/Roman Empire) then they scattered all around europe, but mostly REMAINED ghettoed, and didn't merge completely, trying to keep their identity. (At least this we can tell from the WWII) Nevertheless knowing that, jews remained with jews, there must have came a point where something happened to our genetic pool/merged or something that lead to some have blue eyes since we are supponsed to be semites.
For example, my grandmother family comes from RUSSIA, blue diamond eyes. Jew to the bones. So, what happened there? I can only think about conversions, but is that in a land of christianity a possibility? Maybe there was merging with the local people (all around europe, grandfather poland, green eyes and blonde), but im afraid that even if there was merging, it would have been difficult to maintain the religion.
Anyway is there any explication, or history facts about this? Maybe this question would work better in /AskScience, but i guess its a mix of history and science.
Once again, i don't mean any disrespect, just blunt curiosity.
2 Answers 2016-05-15
Did they say it was a Civil War, an insurrection, or did they just call it a revolution?
5 Answers 2016-05-15
Today:
Welcome to this week's instalment of /r/AskHistorians' Sunday Digest (formerly the Day of Reflection). Nobody can read all the questions and answers that are posted here, so in this thread we invite you to share anything you'd like to highlight from the last week - an interesting discussion, an informative answer, an insightful question that was overlooked, or anything else.
2 Answers 2016-05-15
Did they really collaborate with the Nazis? It's baffling to me that the USSR would do it in such a brutal way and just after the war ended.
2 Answers 2016-05-15
I understand that the Early Church did a lot of work to define a list of books that were to be the standard, and iirc they mostly based it on actual use more than theology, so I guess it was mostly a power struggle among the communities? Afterwards the power was very much centralized though, so why keep four different, and on many points contradictory, accounts of the same story? Why not try and present a single narrative?
1 Answers 2016-05-15
1 Answers 2016-05-15
Have there been any examples of different powers in Europe unifying under a European identity to fend off invasion from elsewhere?
I'm asking in consideration of the concept and identity of Europe itself. It seems to me that Europe as an identity holds significant economic and political weight in modern times, mainly through the EU, but has this same European identity existed or been used in defence of Europe pre-Napoleon?
One possibility that springs to mind is a unified Europe against threat from the Mongolian Empire that got as far as Poland but I'm largely stabbing in the dark here and merely speculating.
Any answers or reading is much appreciated! (I have an essay due)
1 Answers 2016-05-15
2 Answers 2016-05-15
[deleted]
1 Answers 2016-05-15
1 Answers 2016-05-15
I've been looking for a 'birds-eye' view of the colonial empires (Dutch, Spanish, British, Portugese and French primarily).
Basically how they formed, what characterized the different regions and colonies, what the differences were between the way nations handled their colonies, that kind of info.
Most books in the (excellent) book list in the sidebar are about specific individual regions, I was wondering if there is a book that serves as a sort of 'travel guide' about all of them.
Thanks in advance.
1 Answers 2016-05-15
I'm currently studying the Holocaust in history class (visited a Holocaust museum last week) and learnt about what is called 'Vergangenheitsbewältigung'. So interested in asking further about how the Germans came to terms with the concentration camps, and how they reacted and reconciled themselves - must have been difficult.
I've seen stuff on the holocaust like Schindler's List, The Pianist, The Reader, but if people could point me in the right direction with more academic references and information that would be great.
Thanks.
3 Answers 2016-05-15
1 Answers 2016-05-15
I'm reading the book A Man Called Intrepid by William Stevenson, and it's claiming that Hitler lived in Liverpool before world war one. I also found a guardian page making the same claim. Is there any truth to this? http://www.theguardian.com/notesandqueries/query/0,5753,-1915,00.html
1 Answers 2016-05-15
1 Answers 2016-05-15
Chinese-Indonesian here. My grandparents all came from China during early 1900s.
My grandparents have all died before I was born (except a grandmother who spoke minimum Indonesian and just basic Chinese; she spoke Hakka instead, and died when I was 16) so I have difficulty tracing even for grand-aunts or grand-uncles.
For more information, my surname is Xiao (written 萧) and my grandfather from my father came from Meixian. His name is Xiao Mugui (written 萧木贵) and he was once a soldier under Mao Zedong who also joined the Long March.
My uncle told me he ran away from the Long March, hid somewhere around his hometown, and then the Japanese came and did massacres here and there. He fled to Indonesia to avoid being killed, but no idea on the exact year or date.
3 Answers 2016-05-15
I started questioning this today. For example today, with the implementation of the cell phone we can get photo and video evidence of what happens. But, with all the media sometimes pushing agendas actual facts could seem different from what they really are. you could as a Ukrainian and a Russian about crimea and both would have different opinions. Lets imagine that the an alien comes to earth and ask a Chinese about what happened in the Sino-Japanese war and he tells them his point of view and the alien then rights it off as fact. even today reading articles i can read for example on the death count of a conflict
Casualties of the Great Human Pets war:
| kingdom of cats | kingdom of dogs |
|---|---|
| 1100 casualties (cat sources) | 2100 casualties (cat sources) |
| 1500 casualties (dog sources) | 1120 casualties (dog sources) |
Im genuinely curious if historians have a way to know if for example https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Saule this happened and how genuinely believable are the sources
The knights marched southward into Samogitia, raiding and plundering local settlements. The locals had only a few days to gather troops for defense. On the knights' northward return, however, they encountered a determined group of Samogitians at a river crossing. Unwilling to risk losing their horses in the swampland, the Holsteiners refused to fight on foot, forcing the knights to camp for the night.[4] The next morning, on the day of Saint Maurice, the main pagan forces, possibly led by Duke Vykintas, arrived at the camp. The Lithuanian light cavalry flung javelins at short range, which were highly effective against the unwieldy Livonian heavy cavalry. The swampy terrain was advantageous for lightly armed pagans. The slaughter of the Christian troops, including Volkwin, sowed the seeds of confusion in the Livonian ranks. The lightly armed native forces under the command of the Brothers soon fled from the battle. Those crusaders and knights who tried to flee to Riga were allegedly killed by the Semigallians.
many stories today are over exaggerated by the media today. Couldn't in the past people over exaggerated battles, didn't one empires view point have more weight than the others? Couldn't a government write something off just to push an agenda, or exaggerate a battle to inspire the people?
with all the history thats in our reach, how do historians actually know what happened, and know what could be made up or exaggerated? more importantly, what tools do historians use to gather actual factual information about an event?
Disclaimer: Im really curious and not trying to be a new member of /r/conspiracy
1 Answers 2016-05-15
This is not intended to be a political discussion, I'm just genuinely curious.
1 Answers 2016-05-15
1 Answers 2016-05-15
2 Answers 2016-05-15
We tend to refer to Austria-Hungary with its full title, but when talking about it possessively we often refer to it as Austrian and its people as Austrians.
A similar phenomenon happens with Poland-Lithuania and Bosnia and Herzegovina, which are respectively Polish and Bosnian.
Why and when did this begin to occur?
1 Answers 2016-05-15