Nordicism - various modern sociologicalphilosophies which emphasise study of "Nordic" anthropology, often (butnot always) as a racial "science" based on principles no longer widelyaccepted. Often characterised by its own unique definition of the term"Nordic," contemporary Nordicism is sometimes revisionist or racist innature, and particularly popular outside Nordic regions. Certain Nazi ideas ofrace were, in a very broad sense, Nordicist.
Italianism - nationalist theory popularisedduring the Italian unification era (1848-1870) and subsequently encouraged underFascism (1922-1945) advocating the idea of Italians as having existed as a unitedpeople continuously since Roman times, notwithstanding the factionalizationexisting from the end of the Roman Empire (Early Middle Ages) until thenineteenth century; the theory often supports the Roman Catholic Church as theonly "Italian" church, and the standard use of the Tuscan-Italianlanguage (over regional Italic languages such as Piedmontese, Milanese, Sicilianand Sardinian) to the complete exclusion of all others. Italianism has becomeless popular with the advent of regionalism (federalism) in Italy. Nowadays,Italianists are most often encountered in extremely reactionary right-wing(Neo-Fascist) circles; the movement discourages the use of languages other thanItalian even in traditionally non-Italian-speaking territories such as SouthTirol (German), Aosta (French) and Trieste (Slovenian). Fascism's Italianist lawsprohibited the study of English and French, and strictly regulated public worshipby Protestants and Jews. In a broader (non-political) humanistic and positivecultural context, Italianism refers to an affinity for Italy, Italians andItalian culture.
Generalities aside, distinctions often exist between a person's ethnic (oreven genetic) identity and "nationalist" or group identities. As anation state, a united "Italy" has only existed since the 1860s, andbeing "Italian" (or German or Russian) means different things todifferent people. In the long term, passing political ideas (for example theFascist, Nazi and Communist governments in the case of the three countriesmentioned) have little effect on ethnic identities formed over the course of manycenturies. Beyond generalities (collectively related to language, history, art,music, cuisine, etc.), it's difficult --and rarely appropriate-- to place anundue emphasis on a person's supposed "ethnic" identity. Statistically,most of today's Italians are at least nominally Roman Catholic, but many belongto other religions (or profess none), and those in the minority are no lessItalian than those in the majority, just as a Neapolitan's dislike for pasta oropera makes him no less "Italian" than anybody else in Naples.
; | Over these thirty years, Turkmen territories were absorbed into the Russian Empire
*--West of the Black Sea, Balkan tensions mounted as relations deteriorated between and nationalism waxed among the Slavic peoples under dominion
*--The focus of shifted to south-eastern Europe and began to concentrate on vast transnational economic issues involved in the coming of the "petroleum era" of global industrialization throughout
The East India Company was responsible for the overthrow of Hong Kong and other Asian countries; it was responsible for creating Britain’s Asian empire.
Moreover, it is believed by the aboriginal Black people of the former Washitaw Empire who still live in the Southern U.S., that about 6000 B.C., there was a great population shift from the region of Africa and the Pacific ocean, which led to the migrations of their ancestors to the Americas to join the Blacks who had been there previously.
As for the use of ships, ancient Negritic peoples and the original Negroid peoples of the earth may have began using boats very early in human history.
:Russian state peasant reform
*--State represented about half the village population of the Empire
*--This reform preserved their advantages over ex-serfs recently emancipated from private gentry ownership [,3:620-1]
Of the rest each one endured different forms of torture. [etc]I think we can see that v.2 is the bit that Gibbon has used. Butdoes it mean what Gibbon says? Or is Eusebius, faced with a hugeamount of material for contemporary events, simply honestly stating thatfrom here on he won't cover everything, but only those which are in someway useful to know about, whether positive, or negative but with a usefulmoral, and for the rest stick to general statements? It seems asif that the latter is more consistent with the context, although one couldmake out some sort of case that Gibbon is misrepresenting something thatis really there in Eusebius. But is the idea that Gibbon is makingin Eusebius' mind at all? Surely he's thinking about writing somethinguseful to his public?
The Martyrs of PalestineThis is an appendix to Book VIII of the HE, and is not a history buta martyrology - a book intended for devotional use. Here's the ANFtext:1. I Think it best to pass by all the other events which occurredin the meantime: such as those which happened to the bishops of the churches,when instead of shepherds of the rational flocks of Christ, over whichthey presided in an unlawful manner, the divine judgment, considering themworthy of such a charge, made them keepers of camels, an irrational beastand very crooked in the structure of its body, or condemned them to havethe care of the imperial horses;-and I pass by also the insults and disgracesand tortures they endured from the imperial overseers and rulers on accountof the sacred vessels and treasures of the Church; and besides these thelust of power on the part of many, the disorderly and unlawful ordinations,and the schisms among the confessors themselves; also the novelties whichwere zealously devised against the remnants of the Church by the new andfactious members, who added innovation after innovation and forced themin unsparingly among the calamities of the persecution, heaping misfortuneupon misfortune.
Nimrod was the first person to become a "mighty"man. Our text calls attention to this by using the adjective "mighty"three times in describing him: "Nimrod ... grew to be a warrior on the earth. He was a hunter beforethe LORD; that is why it is said, 'Like Nimrod, a hunterbefore the LORD'" (vv. 8, 9). The adjective also occurs ina similar way in 1 Chronicles 1:10. Why is this emphasized? Isit good or bad? A little thought will show that it is bad. Theempire of Babylon under Nimrod was an affront both to God andman, an affront to God in that it sought to do without God (Gen.11:1-9) and an affront to man in that it sought to rule over otherpeople tyrannically. Martin Luther was on the right track whenhe suggested that this is the way the word "hunter"should be interpreted. This is not talking about Nimrod's abilityto hunt wild game. He was not a hunter of animals. He was a hunterof men--a warrior. It was through his ability to fight and killand rule ruthlessly that his kingdom of Euphrates valley citystates was consolidated.
"Racialist" descriptions of perceived "racial"characteristics of so-called sub-races (Pontids, Dinarics, Mediterranids,Armenids, Saharids, Arabids, and so forth) are still entertained in certain quarters. Viewed interms of the human genome, race (as the term is commonly used and understood) isa relatively insignificant (or at best superficial) and arbitrary consideration,and we are already seeing more reliance on purely genetic identification. Geneticdiversity is a reality. While race, as the term is traditionally used, is fastbecoming an outmoded concept, specific gene markers (based on relatively"recent" mutations) are naturally linked to persons sharing commonorigins (i.e. the same gene pools) coinciding with Asian, African, European orother "racial" groups or sub-groups. The legitimate scientific basis ofregional (racial) distinctions (but not racialism) is genetic differentiationover thousands of generations.
We therefore have not been induced to make mention either of those who were tempted in the persecution, or ofthose who made utter shipwreck of their salvation, and who were sunk of their own accord in the depths of the storm; but shall only add those thingsto our General History, which may in the first place be profitable to ourselves, and afterwards to posterity" In the other passage, Eusebius, after mentioning the dissentions of the Confessors among themselves, againdeclares that it is his intention to pass over all these things.
"Whatsoever things, (continues the Historian, in the words of the Apostle, who wasrecommending the practice of virtue) whatsoever things are honest, whatsoever things are of good report, if there be any virtue, and if therebe any praise; these things Eusebius thinks most suitable to a History of Martyrs;"of wonderful Martyrs, as the splendid epithet which Dr.