| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
Agamemnon
Daedalian Member
|
 Posted: Wed Jul 06, 2005 9:02 am Post subject: 1 |
 |
|
We just need a general world history thread here to invigorate my mind and make me feel I'm worth something again. I can talk for hours on European political/general history, or waffle away on world history using my reference books. Maybe others can contribute too, so lets get going then................
............you first!  |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
groza528
No Place Like Home
|
| Posted: Wed Jul 06, 2005 11:30 am Post subject: 2 |
|
|
Istanbul was Constantinople
Now it's Istanbul not Constantinople
Been a long time gone, Constantinople,
Still a Turkish delight on a moonlit night,
Every gal in Constantinople
Lives in Istanbul not Constantinople
So if you've a date in Constantinople,
She'll be waiting in Istanbul.
I'm no good with history; that will be about the extent of my "contribution." Just kicking things off. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Jack_Ian
Big Endian
|
| Posted: Wed Jul 06, 2005 12:29 pm Post subject: 3 |
|
|
In general,
it's England's fault.
 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Mr Stoofer
Daedalian Member
|
| Posted: Wed Jul 06, 2005 12:48 pm Post subject: 4 |
|
|
| Jack_Ian wrote: |
In general,
it's England's fault.
|
That applies from about the 16th Century to mid 20th Century.
Since 1945 it's been the Yanks' fault. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Jack_Ian
Big Endian
|
| Posted: Wed Jul 06, 2005 12:57 pm Post subject: 5 |
|
|
| But there wouldn't be any Yanks if it were not for England. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Jedo the Jedi
Paragon in Training
|
| Posted: Wed Jul 06, 2005 2:00 pm Post subject: 6 |
|
|
| I'm quite fond of Russia myself. Aga, what can you tell me about their fight for the acquisition of a warm water port starting in the 17th Century? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Jack_Ian
Big Endian
|
| Posted: Wed Jul 06, 2005 2:51 pm Post subject: 7 |
|
|
Q1. What do you think it was, that created the special relationship between India and Britain?
As as outsider, it seems to me that India is quite British (and proud to be so) and that Britain considered India to be "the jewel in the crown" and indeed embraced many parts of the Indian culture, including some of it's vocabulary.
Q2. Also, it seems to me that the British Monarchy are held in much too high esteem by the British people. Is there a historical reason for this?
I assumed that it was perhaps just as a symbol of things British, given that British "culture" had been so diluted through the aftermath of imperialism. The problem with this is that while it might explain the current devotion to the monarchy, it does not explain such devotion in the past, especially given its German heritage. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Agamemnon
Daedalian Member
|
| Posted: Wed Jul 06, 2005 6:05 pm Post subject: 8 |
|
|
| jedi wrote: |
| I'm quite fond of Russia myself. Aga, what can you tell me about their fight for the acquisition of a warm water port starting in the 17th Century? |
Are you talking about the Moroccan Crisis, Bosnian Crisis, Balkan Wars, Anglo Afghan wars, Odessa disputes, Sevastopol, Korean war, or one of the many other latter day quests for a warm water port?
Or do you want the history of Peter the Great's construction of St Petersburg? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Agamemnon
Daedalian Member
|
| Posted: Wed Jul 06, 2005 6:14 pm Post subject: 9 |
|
|
Jack_Ian
Q1 needs a lot of research and time for it's a damn bloody good question imho, and one that I've never really given thought to. I have a small collection of books that concentrate on the George III period, covering the 'East India Company' and general first traders with India, Indian 19th century politics and Indian Princedoms, empires and states. I'll take a read up on some parts to see if I can get some form of an answer to your question, though I doubt I can do justice to such a task. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Jack_Ian
Big Endian
|
| Posted: Thu Jul 07, 2005 10:37 am Post subject: 10 |
|
|
| I'm glad I could invigorate your mind. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
extropalopakettle
No offense, but....
|
| Posted: Thu Jul 07, 2005 12:10 pm Post subject: 11 |
|
|
| Why does England's Queen Elizabeth II appear on Canadian money? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Mr Stoofer
Daedalian Member
|
| Posted: Thu Jul 07, 2005 12:16 pm Post subject: 12 |
|
|
| She is also the Queen of Canada (Seriously!) |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
extropalopakettle
No offense, but....
|
| Posted: Thu Jul 07, 2005 1:31 pm Post subject: 13 |
|
|
| Because Canada says so, or because she says so? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Mr Stoofer
Daedalian Member
|
| Posted: Thu Jul 07, 2005 5:06 pm Post subject: 14 |
|
|
Because we conquered Canada in the 16th Century and the Canadians haven't thrown off the shackles since.
If any Canadians need help in throwing off said shackles, I'm happy to help, provided they help me overthrow the Queen here. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Agamemnon
Daedalian Member
|
| Posted: Tue Jul 12, 2005 6:23 pm Post subject: 15 |
|
|
| Quote: |
| Q1. What do you think it was, that created the special relationship between India and Britain? |
I've had a chance to read up a bit on this, and believe me, it's vast 
The relationship seems to stem from 'the East India Company' back in around 1620-ish. They were a major trading company that used (and abused) trading links with east and central Asia. When they were first trading, they became a very powerful and wealthy company, due to the fact that the goods and items they bought from Asia were new to the western world.
The East India Company traded their way into India via the breakdown of Indian Royal families, and also the demise of the Raj and rich land owners. What seems to have happened is that the Indian regals were losing support and money due to break-away traders bartering with foreign traders. The East India Company used this to their advantage as being the main stay traders there, they made deals with the regal land owners to 'share' their wealth and trade. This was an acceptable route for the regals as this gave them favour and support from their subjects, plus, it took the high cost of maintaining and split it with the British.
The British were liked big time early on in these type of partnerships as they offered good wages, cheap living accommodation and even healthcare from sited British doctors. They also fitted in well as the British class system in place then was similar to the Indian caste system in place there. Both co-habitated together well, with British traditions and ways brought over and used within Indian life, and Indian families living under virtually the same rules but with better living standards. This was how is was to be until the British government decided to stick it's foot in and use greed as India's downfall.
..........still reading up, will update as I go along later. This also needs to be 'straightened out' a bit too as I've just ploughed in without thinking it out  |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Jack_Ian
Big Endian
|
| Posted: Wed Jul 13, 2005 2:28 pm Post subject: 16 |
|
|
That makes sense.
Thanks. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
