My History teacher thinks AD means After Death ... Christ must have died as soon as he was born!

It is Anno Domini... Year of the Lord. And the funny thing is that she took World Religions course in University!

The misconception is that Jews were used as slave labour to "build" pyramids, but pyramids were no longer being built at that time (New Kingdom). Plus, if they are making bricks as bible states, what use will bricks have for building pyramids? Pyramids require massive limestone blocks, not some bloody bricks! 

One of my greatest historical annoyances is vomitorium.

Many folks think its a room where Romans would go throw up between courses so they could eat more

It was actually the exit........a passageway in an amphitheater or theater that opened into a tier of seats from below or behind. The vomitoria of the Colosseum in Rome were so well designed that it's said the immense venue, which seated at least 50,000, could fill in 15 minutes.  The vomitoria deposited mobs of people into their seats and afterward disgorged them with equal abruptness into the streets--whence, presumably, the name.

Wrageowrapper, what exactly did alexander the great do to be a real arse whole. i know that later on in his campaigns through persia he began to become more 'persian' by wearing their kind of gouns, and adopting their kind of culture whilst neglecting that of his own...also the ordering the raising of Persepolis to his soldiers when they went on looting and raping sprees...but is there more?

Actually, according to what I've heard, he dropped out of the running during the running becasue he had to participate in this other stuff.  He even clapped for him...?

im not too sure what your saying but hitler refuse to shake Jessie Owen's hands after winning a couple gold medals when one of his advisers suggested he do so...hitler was reported to say "you expect me to shake hands with a negro?"

There's a new non-religious one now... BCE, Before Common Era, and CE, Common Era.

where did you get this information from? because i have read and listened from numerous sources that it was otherwise, and Hitler did refuse to shake hands with Owens after the 100m race and that he stormed out in frustration.

but im not disputing what you say Roosevelt said nor the first day hand shake bussiness.

Good that you have read the book but (although me makes this observation) he puts in in a totally different meaning than you try to present it. The whole chapter is in praise of Alexander's genious if you recall

It depends on your point of view. It certainly does not pass unnoticed. One should remember that Hanson is a conservative and tends to make modern day projections of history. If you go past that, his books makes both an interesting read and a point of refference plus his theories are well founded.

I would suggest you to read it Cywr. It is certainly something that Classicists would approve and history-revisionists would burn.

That's common practice amongst most historians  They stick stubbornly to their opinions.

Seriously now, not that much as you may think. I'll insist on you reading the book and then comment...

Actually I don't see why Hitler would refuse to shake his hand. Hitler had nothing against blacks. (Just so long as they didn't breed with his "pure aryan" race.) His only racist sentiments were towards the jews, and the slavs to a lesser extent.

China was full of dippy-peasants who only used gunpowder for fireworks.

Mongols won through sheer numbers.

Atilla was driven out by defeat.

Washington had wooden teeth (they were hippopotamus ivory)

Jesus is white.

Washington had Hipopotamus teeth...

White is usually a term only applied to European Caucasians, and even more specifically northern Europeans. Arabs are not called White although they are Semite and neither are Greeks.

[/quote]Washington had wooden teeth (they were hippopotamus ivory)[/quote]

-----

American soldiers during American Revolution had shiny blue clothes

George Washington was horseback with his good looking cloth during the entire revolution.

There are too many innacuracies to count....

Certainly Egyptian slave labor and Mongol numbers bother me the most but so does the presumption that anything south of the Sahara is incapable of making dynamic hitory or a civilization.

True, their faces are not powdered...

True. Kiev is capital of Ukraine and not Russia.

The word "white" in itself is stupid. Northern Europeans have skin colours that are no lighter than that of Asians, and sometimes even a lot darker/redder, especially in recent times with that moronic tan rage.

Very good observation.it is the result of the Ottoman nation system..

For example,when the Seferad Jews(the jews of spain) was either forced to be a christian or leave Iber peninsula,it was the Ottoman Empire where became a home for those jews in 1400s.they were placed in Istanbul and Selanik(thessaloniki)..Today The seferad jews have  still been living in Turkey for centuries..

Your statement is partly true,i would say..because that system remained in the ottoman periods...there was,for sure,a difference statue between muslim and non-muslim communities..the jews and the christian were in the same way in that case..

let me give an example on the Ottoman nation system.

For example,the Armenians were 3-nations...The Cotholics,Orthodox, and those who are Protestants..each was consituting a different nation in the ottoman system..

i know the term jewish is not refering by nature....but just look at how they were considered for centuries..and we cant imagine the 1400s with today2s mentality.

And no i cant remember..because i was 6 years when awave of african immigrants  came.what i remember we were wishing to see more and more African footballers playing for our football team...

As you said,a few example doesnt change the subject..so your friend's family can not draw s whole picture you named taboo.

You can not make everything depend on marriage issues..,Colchis..

if you do,europe would be the racist place on the earth..Marriage is a very different dimension.. its social psychology ...

Pls just look at my signature,and ask yourself that why even the second meeting of different worlds being organized in Turkiye for once again.Think once.Think again.

Racism is a social phenomenon, Diplomat. If it isn't observed in social context, where else would it be observed? Have you not read the part where Elvan Abeylegesse is mentioned, am I talking about a marriage in that one? I am talking about an African athlete representing Turkey and some people's reactions to it. Now, that also is social psychology, of course but human is the social animal,  you cannot observe people and nations without social theory.

Nice info but it's too late. I needed to fill an application form for a British institution recently, and it asked my ethnicity. The categories were white (european), and asian (bangladeshi, indian, chinese) and such. I hadn't known what to do, since in Turkey and Germany, my ethnicity is simply Turkish, and they don't ask if you are European or Asian. In the end I chose 'other' and wrote 'I am Turkish, I don't know if it counts as European or Asian' next to it.

As to racism in Turkish society, Colchis is of course correct.

Originally posted by Kubrat Nice info but it's too late. I needed to fill an application form for a British institution recently, and it asked my ethnicity. The categories were white (european), and asian (bangladeshi, indian, chinese) and such. I hadn't known what to do, since in Turkey and Germany, my ethnicity is simply Turkish, and they don't ask if you are European or Asian. In the end I chose 'other' and wrote 'I am Turkish, I don't know if it counts as European or Asian' next to it. , just put white down when your not sure, it's bound to have more advantages .

not really, if you have something like affirmitive action going on. (which will not be debated here, if anyone wants to talk about that start a new thread)

All American slaves were caught by white slavers. (No, manywere sold by Africans, who owned them, to new owners)

Colchis is partly right on the issue but I never heard anyone complaining about Abeylegesse (anyone I talked to liked her)

Other historical inaccurasies I hate are these:

1) The Turks founded a state in Mongolia in the 6th century, disappeared, re-appeared in the Middle East to serve the caliphs and later founded Turkey. The only Turkic states were the Seljuks, Ottomans and the Republic of Turkey.

2) Modern Macedonians were the same with the Ancient Macedon people.

3) Modern Bulgarians were the same with the Bulgars. Huns were Bulgars, Bulgars were Huns.

4) All the Turkic states and empires in history were founded by the Turks of Turkey (yeah, everyone in Turkey has this mentality)

Let me clarify something. The "Bulgars" were a union of various Turkic peoples of Oghur origin, some of them migrated to the Balkans, some of them settled on the Volga-Kama region. The Volga Bulgars are the ancestors of two peoples: the Chuvash and the Kazan Tatars (though the latter were formed after mixing with the Qypchaqs) while the Balkan Bulgars became Slavised.

Modern Bulgarians are mostly Slavised Latinised-Thracians and Slavs. The original Bulgars of the Balkans have disappeared, leaving only their name to their Slavic subjects.

OTOH, there were no "Bulgars" during the time of the Huns, there were many Oghur peoples, however. The Bulgars were formed from some of these Oghurs following the fall of the Hunnic Empire.

Annoyances:

-The middle ages were dark

-everyone was stupid and deliberatly ignorant during the middle ages

-the "renaissance" changed living conditions and way of thinking among people at the time

-the greeks and romans were all sincere old men dressed in white and oliveleafs, who did nothing but discussed democratic politics and philosophy

-The conquistadors were superiour due to their primitive firearms (like if the cumbersome handguns and arqebuisses of the 15th-17th century were some kind of super-AK-47...)

-The mexicas (popularly known as aztecs) welcomed Cortéz as a God 

-the huns were ethnic mongols, and that Attila was born in Mongolia

-Chinggis Khan conquered all of China (or that he was born there)

-Tibet is a historical Chinese region

-the sámi is an asian people which migrated into Scandinavia from Siberia in the east

-the mongols lost at Liegnitz 1241 and were forced to retreat back to the east

-the american civil war was fought to liberate the slaves

-medieval european cavalry was superiour to any infantry prior to the 100-years war

-the longbow easily defeated armoured men-at-arms 

-People who died during the construction of the great wall of China were buried inside the bricks

Horses may be my best friend but I'm their worst enemy. God I hate those smelly beasts.

Well, that would be the Oghurs, not the Bulgars. Besides, there were even no Oghurs during the 5th c. BC.

Well, there were all those knights around....

get it?  Knights - nights?

Yes, I know....really bad joke....but hey, someone had to do it. 

Well, the rich ones did so all of the time, but most of the times when they were discussing about Ethics, Democracy & Philosophy, they were doing it naked, piss-drunk and with a bunch of good looking naked women (and boys) around them...

dogs were not actively domesticated by humans with intent though, its far more likely they just scavenged around human junk piles and bred in the presence of humans on their own and gradually became more bold around people because of that.

Actually dogs weren't really meant to be hunting companions in the beginning, at first they were an alternative food source. The creature that eats your scraps becomes friendlier and friendlier until it hangs around you all the time. Then comes famine and your best friend joins you for dinner in the back room of a korean resturaunt.

As to dog domestication, I've heard of a report done about a russian silver fox breeding program (to make fur coats) and how they bred the more docile ones so eventual the foxes became near-domesticated. Of course they stopped that policy when the foxes coats came out splotched and thus unable to be used for fur coats.

actually, dog-eating wasn't because of famine, but because it was a smarter choice of meat than say a cow back in the times.

and it was eaten all over the world, it's just that Korea and China did a better job of keeping traditions alive

Egypt didn't have slaves at all in the Greek/Roman/European/southern US sense. They paid taxes in a way that could be confused with slavery. The average egyptian peasant farmer paid taxes by giving the pharaohs government a portion of his harvest 25% IIRC, and manual labour on public works projects while the nile was in flood. Where he got room and borad and medical care. On his flooded farm lands he would get jack.

http://www.ouruniquegift.com - http://www.ouruniquegift.com

A large portion of Europe was shaped by Islam as well.  I'm not sure that I see the connection between a country having an Islamic or Christian majority and it being a part of Europe - or especially European history.  As far as I know - the European Constitution says nothing about requiring a specific religion as a  requirement of membership - quite the opposite in fact. 

Historically, Istanbul, and much of western Turkey has for most of its (give or take a few) 4000 years of history been much more closely tied to Europe and European history than it has to anything in Asia.  I cannot imagine a study of Ancient Greece excluding the eastern Aegean coast nor a study of European history that did not include the Byzantine Empire.  Modern Turkey's interactions have also been primarily with the west.  Any study of Europe that did not include this would be greatly lacking.

This is - however - somewhat off topic as the question raised was about historical events and this is a contemporaty political issue.  If there is not a thread that already addresses Turkey and the EU (I believe there is/was one), perhaps you would like to open one in the Intellectual Discussions forum.

well put ,Cywr....i wanna thank you for correcting the pan-hellenist view of Ottoman history.

In 1532,the French King I.François was saying these to a Venetian Ambassador:

''Againts Habsburgs,we are in safe thanks to the Ottomans''

Ottoman Empire helped the Potestants quite a lot..Even the Sultan Suleiman was in close contact with them..

Desparetely?Hahaha...funny boy..The Ottoman Empire was a global empire during the 16.Century...It was at its peak.

where did you learn history...i wonder...

 I was commenting on Cywr when he stated that many protestant rebels wanted alliances, and the only place they could get some is with the Ottoman Empire.

The Ottoman Empire was a global empire during the 16.Century...It was at its peak.

Why do I care? Many empires have had bigger peaks, and trust me, my history is quiet alright, and like I say, they had a good run, but went out ugly...