I the Magyars seem to have passed through Kiev; were the Kievan's at the time under Varangian rule? (I've read about the Varangians setting up governments over the local Slavic peoples, whether by request or not, I'm unsure).

And prior to their migration, did the Magyar come from nearer the baltic coast, or did they originate nearer the Arctic Circle. Their language's closet European relative is Finnish, but they're considered Uralic languages, did they perhaps come from nearer the Ural Mountains?) I misread/remembered this. It's Urgic, not Uralic, but the language group seems to straddle the Ural Mountains, and seems to be part of an larger language tree known as Uralic

Bonus question: What spurred their migration? Many cultures pushed west from the steppes, and at different times, such as the Huns. I've read as well that some Hungarians claim their culture descends from the Huns, in some way, and that the city of Buda (before becoming Budapest) was named after Atilla's brother Bleda), could their migrations be related, even if 300 years apart?

I was reading /u/yodatsracist's answer to an earlier question about Gypsies and he mentioned and linked to an article about the Yenish. The wiki article states that it has many Yiddesh words and through that also has Hebrew. What is the connection between Yenish and Yiddish?(besides that their names sound alike.)

I recently started reading Edwin Black's book "The War Against the Weak: Eugenics and America's campaign to create a Master Race" and what he seems to be asserting is that the American eugenics movement of the progressive era is what inspired the Nazis' ideals that eventually lead to the holocaust.

How true is this? I have always been aware of the eugenics movement and it was touched on briefly during my schooling, but I have never seen anyone else draw a correlation between American eugenics and the creation of Nazi ideals. It wouldn't surprise me, but I'd like to know more about this subject from other sources than just his book.

I've never really understood why Japan sought to enter into WWII. What was their ultimate goal? In the better part of the history I've read/seen, they just showed up but they had to have had a goal.

a

When/why were they created? Have they ever seen combat as a unit?

An interesting theory I've read is that it comes from a strict lenten discipline of the Syrian churches. How well supported is this idea?

Yeah, Put in a purposefully shocking manner but still there are only two new literary forms we can credit the Romans for , encyclopaedias and novels.

It seems like if a unit of horsemen even heavily armored would be let down by the fact that horses are really the weak spot as far as having effective damage done to an individual. What I mean is that it seems like any wound landed on a horse would freak the animal out making it hard to effectively control. Also when a pack of horsemen charging at galloping speeds hit a organized unit of infantry, sure it would hurt alot of men on the ground but it seems like the horses would just trip over eachother, the men they hit, shields, rocks, etc and fall and just generally hold up the rear ranks of charging cavalry. Are horses just more agile than I am imagining or was the nature of combat just not what I'm imagining?

I was wondering if anyone has previously read this biography and could tell me how historically accurate it is. I know askhistorians sets a very high standard, and I'd appreciate the opinion here more then amazon reviews.

To add to the title, have groups involved become more vocal or have they taken a back seat.