This just popped in my head, and being the nerd I am I thought of the Romulan and Vulcan peoples; coming from a common ancestor, but over many generations their language and even biology drifted apart.

Obviously biology isn't the point (unless it is, let me know), but over 2 or 3 generations of being separate the languages must have diverged somewhat; especially with one being introduced to the world forum, while the other has not

I hope this is the right place to post but couldnt think of anywhere better than to ask historians who are very skilled in finding information like this. Both my Uncles were killed in WW2 and I am trying to get information on their deaths to give to my dad but am having a hard time finding any records at all. I was able to find their graves online but would like to find more detailed information on their deaths but do not know how to go about doing so, even though I am sure there must be a way. 2nd Lt George R Kumm was shot down in Germany on a B-17 and killed on March 21, 1945 and Pvt. Donald C Kumm was killed in Belgium during the Battle of the Bulge on January 4, 1945. They are both brothers from Virginia. This is all the info I have and would like more, please if anyone can help or send me in the right direction to getting more information on their deaths it would be greatly, greatly appreciatd. If I have posted in the wrong place can somebody please direct me to the proper place.

I know this is a huge question. I've tried to muddle it out but only get more confused. I am a reader, not an historian, and the enclosing of commons keeps coming up as a controversial issue. I know it was a political issue, and a social issue, and that there were riots. I think it had to do with land ownership? Can you help me to understand the issue, its background, and how it all turned out?

On top of that, can someone explain it's role in pre-Soviet society?

The essay question is: "To what extent did the growth of Pacific tensions lead to the bombing of Pearl Harbour?"

It's a 25 mark question that we get 45 minutes to write. This is my introduction, am I on the right track?

The growth of Pacific tensions was of fundamental importance in leading to the Japanese bombing of Pearl Harbour in 1941. The nature of nationalism and the responses to imperialism had an extensive role in contributing to the escalation of Pacific tensions. These, when compounded with other factors such as, US and British policies, the role of imperialism and militarism, and the breakdown of political negotiations, were imperative to creating the situation whereby Japan was faced with two options: to succumb to U.S. and British demands or to risk war by expanding into South-East Asia for resources. Thus as a result of Japan’s situation in 1941 caused by Pacific tensions, Pearl Harbour was “born of strategic desperation”.

Thanks!

Or any other race for that matter?

I guess I'm asking multiple questions here. Where did the tale of the Fountain originate? Why did the Spanish try to find something that was a myth? When did they stop searching for it? What kind of conflicts did the Fountain produce?

I read The Black Tulip by Dumas recently, and this not-so-accurate telling of the murders piqued my interest.

I don't fully understand the difference in principles between the followers of William of Orange and the republicans.

It seems as though the de Witts weren't that evil so the uprising threw me off.

What was the official reason for this decision? Why hadn't it been done before?

As a semi-related question that I'm not sure merits its own post, or is even allowed on this subreddit, seeing as Edward the Elder isn't counted among the "numbered" Edwards in the list of English kings, if a new British monarch were named Alfred, would he be Alfred I or Alfred II?

I spent a month backpacking India, but I don't know a ton about the caste system. Obviously in modern India, caste may or may not have much to do with the military, but I'm thinking about the caste system in a more ancient time, not necessarily specific to India.

Here are some questions that might help you hone the details of your answer:

If there were a call to arms who would be called?

In India the Khsatriyas are the warrior caste (second highest, only to the Brahmins priests), so would only they be required to fight?

Are the lower castes off the hook or do they just serve lower roles in the military?

If a lower caste person (like a shudra, the artisans, farmers, blue collar workers, servants) join the military if they wished?

What if they weren't so low as the shudra, but something like a vaishyas (the merchant class just below the khsatriyas, still considered "twice born" in the Hindu tradition, unlike the shudra)?

edit: for clarification

I understand how troops were needed to force the integration but what did Eisenhower gain from it? I mean it was before his re-election and it seems to me to be a good way to loose votes in 1950s America

Was it personal conviction? Was there something his administration gained from it?