Question: Miller's words were considered what?

These were fighting words to be coming from a country that once insisted Europe needed Turkey and was willing to spill blood over it. For his authority Miller invokes the people, citing the "collective wisdom" of Europe, and introducing a concept to arise many times in the decades to follow under chilling circumstances:

Answer: fighting words

<hl> These were fighting words to be coming from a country that once insisted Europe needed Turkey and was willing to spill blood over it. <hl> For his authority Miller invokes the people, citing the "collective wisdom" of Europe, and introducing a concept to arise many times in the decades to follow under chilling circumstances:

These were <hl> fighting words <hl> to be coming from a country that once insisted Europe needed Turkey and was willing to spill blood over it. For his authority Miller invokes the people, citing the "collective wisdom" of Europe, and introducing a concept to arise many times in the decades to follow under chilling circumstances:


Question: It was considered Europe needed what country?

Answer: Turkey

<hl> These were fighting words to be coming from a country that once insisted Europe needed Turkey and was willing to spill blood over it. <hl> For his authority Miller invokes the people, citing the "collective wisdom" of Europe, and introducing a concept to arise many times in the decades to follow under chilling circumstances:

These were fighting words to be coming from a country that once insisted Europe needed <hl> Turkey <hl> and was willing to spill blood over it. For his authority Miller invokes the people, citing the "collective wisdom" of Europe, and introducing a concept to arise many times in the decades to follow under chilling circumstances:


Question: What was Miller citing?

Answer: the "collective wisdom" of Europe

These were fighting words to be coming from a country that once insisted Europe needed Turkey and was willing to spill blood over it. <hl> For his authority Miller invokes the people, citing the "collective wisdom" of Europe , and introducing a concept to arise many times in the decades to follow under chilling circumstances: <hl>

These were fighting words to be coming from a country that once insisted Europe needed Turkey and was willing to spill blood over it. For his authority Miller invokes the people, citing <hl> the "collective wisdom" of Europe <hl>, and introducing a concept to arise many times in the decades to follow under chilling circumstances:

For his authority Miller invokes the people, citing <hl> the "collective wisdom" of Europe <hl> , and introducing a concept to arise many times in the decades to follow under chilling circumstances:


Question: The Ottoman Empire had no choice but to develop their relationship with what country?

If the British Empire was now going to side with the Russian Empire, the Ottoman Empire had no choice but to cultivate a relationship with the Austro-Hungarian Empire, which was supported by the German Empire. In a few years these alignments became the Triple Entente and the Triple Alliance (already formed in 1882), which were in part a cause of World War I. By its end in 1918 three empires were gone, a fourth was about to fall to revolution, and two more, the British and French, were forced to yield in revolutions started under the aegis of their own ideologies.

Answer: Austro-Hungarian Empire

<hl> If the British Empire was now going to side with the Russian Empire, the Ottoman Empire had no choice but to cultivate a relationship with the Austro-Hungarian Empire , which was supported by the German Empire. <hl> In a few years these alignments became the Triple Entente and the Triple Alliance (already formed in 1882), which were in part a cause of World War I. By its end in 1918 three empires were gone, a fourth was about to fall to revolution, and two more, the British and French, were forced to yield in revolutions started under the aegis of their own ideologies.

If the British Empire was now going to side with the Russian Empire, the Ottoman Empire had no choice but to cultivate a relationship with the <hl> Austro-Hungarian Empire <hl>, which was supported by the German Empire. In a few years these alignments became the Triple Entente and the Triple Alliance (already formed in 1882), which were in part a cause of World War I. By its end in 1918 three empires were gone, a fourth was about to fall to revolution, and two more, the British and French, were forced to yield in revolutions started under the aegis of their own ideologies.

If the British Empire was now going to side with the Russian Empire, the Ottoman Empire had no choice but to cultivate a relationship with the <hl> Austro-Hungarian Empire <hl> , which was supported by the German Empire.


Question: Who supported the Austro-Hungarian Empire?

Answer: the German Empire

<hl> If the British Empire was now going to side with the Russian Empire, the Ottoman Empire had no choice but to cultivate a relationship with the Austro-Hungarian Empire, which was supported by the German Empire . <hl> In a few years these alignments became the Triple Entente and the Triple Alliance (already formed in 1882), which were in part a cause of World War I. By its end in 1918 three empires were gone, a fourth was about to fall to revolution, and two more, the British and French, were forced to yield in revolutions started under the aegis of their own ideologies.

If the British Empire was now going to side with the Russian Empire, the Ottoman Empire had no choice but to cultivate a relationship with the Austro-Hungarian Empire, which was supported by <hl> the German Empire <hl>. In a few years these alignments became the Triple Entente and the Triple Alliance (already formed in 1882), which were in part a cause of World War I. By its end in 1918 three empires were gone, a fourth was about to fall to revolution, and two more, the British and French, were forced to yield in revolutions started under the aegis of their own ideologies.

If the British Empire was now going to side with the Russian Empire, the Ottoman Empire had no choice but to cultivate a relationship with the Austro-Hungarian Empire, which was supported by <hl> the German Empire <hl> .


Question: Who did the British Empire side with?

Answer: the Russian Empire

<hl> If the British Empire was now going to side with the Russian Empire , the Ottoman Empire had no choice but to cultivate a relationship with the Austro-Hungarian Empire, which was supported by the German Empire. <hl> In a few years these alignments became the Triple Entente and the Triple Alliance (already formed in 1882), which were in part a cause of World War I. By its end in 1918 three empires were gone, a fourth was about to fall to revolution, and two more, the British and French, were forced to yield in revolutions started under the aegis of their own ideologies.

If the British Empire was now going to side with <hl> the Russian Empire <hl>, the Ottoman Empire had no choice but to cultivate a relationship with the Austro-Hungarian Empire, which was supported by the German Empire. In a few years these alignments became the Triple Entente and the Triple Alliance (already formed in 1882), which were in part a cause of World War I. By its end in 1918 three empires were gone, a fourth was about to fall to revolution, and two more, the British and French, were forced to yield in revolutions started under the aegis of their own ideologies.

If the British Empire was now going to side with <hl> the Russian Empire <hl> , the Ottoman Empire had no choice but to cultivate a relationship with the Austro-Hungarian Empire, which was supported by the German Empire.


Question: The formation of the Triple Entente and the Triple Alliance partly caused what?

Answer: World War I

If the British Empire was now going to side with the Russian Empire, the Ottoman Empire had no choice but to cultivate a relationship with the Austro-Hungarian Empire, which was supported by the German Empire. <hl> In a few years these alignments became the Triple Entente and the Triple Alliance (already formed in 1882), which were in part a cause of World War I . <hl> By its end in 1918 three empires were gone, a fourth was about to fall to revolution, and two more, the British and French, were forced to yield in revolutions started under the aegis of their own ideologies.

If the British Empire was now going to side with the Russian Empire, the Ottoman Empire had no choice but to cultivate a relationship with the Austro-Hungarian Empire, which was supported by the German Empire. In a few years these alignments became the Triple Entente and the Triple Alliance (already formed in 1882), which were in part a cause of <hl> World War I <hl>. By its end in 1918 three empires were gone, a fourth was about to fall to revolution, and two more, the British and French, were forced to yield in revolutions started under the aegis of their own ideologies.

In a few years these alignments became the Triple Entente and the Triple Alliance (already formed in 1882), which were in part a cause of <hl> World War I <hl> .


Question: By what year were three empires gone?

Answer: 1918

If the British Empire was now going to side with the Russian Empire, the Ottoman Empire had no choice but to cultivate a relationship with the Austro-Hungarian Empire, which was supported by the German Empire. <hl> In a few years these alignments became the Triple Entente and the Triple Alliance (already formed in 1882), which were in part a cause of World War I. By its end in 1918 three empires were gone, a fourth was about to fall to revolution, and two more, the British and French, were forced to yield in revolutions started under the aegis of their own ideologies. <hl>

If the British Empire was now going to side with the Russian Empire, the Ottoman Empire had no choice but to cultivate a relationship with the Austro-Hungarian Empire, which was supported by the German Empire. In a few years these alignments became the Triple Entente and the Triple Alliance (already formed in 1882), which were in part a cause of World War I. By its end in <hl> 1918 <hl> three empires were gone, a fourth was about to fall to revolution, and two more, the British and French, were forced to yield in revolutions started under the aegis of their own ideologies.


Question: What year was Arnold J toynbee becoming metaphysical about the Near East?

By 1916, when millions of Europeans were becoming casualties of imperial war in the trenches of eastern and western Europe over "the eastern question," Arnold J. Toynbee, Hegelesque historian of civilization at large, was becoming metaphysical about the Near East. Geography alone was not a sufficient explanation of the terms, he believed. If the Ottoman Empire had been a sick man, then:

Answer: 1916

<hl> By 1916 , when millions of Europeans were becoming casualties of imperial war in the trenches of eastern and western Europe over "the eastern question," Arnold J. Toynbee, Hegelesque historian of civilization at large, was becoming metaphysical about the Near East. <hl> Geography alone was not a sufficient explanation of the terms, he believed. If the Ottoman Empire had been a sick man, then:

By <hl> 1916 <hl>, when millions of Europeans were becoming casualties of imperial war in the trenches of eastern and western Europe over "the eastern question," Arnold J. Toynbee, Hegelesque historian of civilization at large, was becoming metaphysical about the Near East. Geography alone was not a sufficient explanation of the terms, he believed. If the Ottoman Empire had been a sick man, then:

By <hl> 1916 <hl> , when millions of Europeans were becoming casualties of imperial war in the trenches of eastern and western Europe over "the eastern question," Arnold J. Toynbee, Hegelesque historian of civilization at large, was becoming metaphysical about the Near East.


Question: Who was the Hegelesque historian of civilization?

Answer: Arnold J. Toynbee

<hl> By 1916, when millions of Europeans were becoming casualties of imperial war in the trenches of eastern and western Europe over "the eastern question," Arnold J. Toynbee , Hegelesque historian of civilization at large, was becoming metaphysical about the Near East. <hl> Geography alone was not a sufficient explanation of the terms, he believed. If the Ottoman Empire had been a sick man, then:

By 1916, when millions of Europeans were becoming casualties of imperial war in the trenches of eastern and western Europe over "the eastern question," <hl> Arnold J. Toynbee <hl>, Hegelesque historian of civilization at large, was becoming metaphysical about the Near East. Geography alone was not a sufficient explanation of the terms, he believed. If the Ottoman Empire had been a sick man, then:

By 1916, when millions of Europeans were becoming casualties of imperial war in the trenches of eastern and western Europe over "the eastern question," <hl> Arnold J. Toynbee <hl> , Hegelesque historian of civilization at large, was becoming metaphysical about the Near East.


Question: Arnold J Toynbee believed what?

Answer: Geography alone was not a sufficient explanation of the terms

By 1916, when millions of Europeans were becoming casualties of imperial war in the trenches of eastern and western Europe over "the eastern question," Arnold J. Toynbee, Hegelesque historian of civilization at large, was becoming metaphysical about the Near East. <hl> Geography alone was not a sufficient explanation of the terms , he believed. <hl> If the Ottoman Empire had been a sick man, then:

By 1916, when millions of Europeans were becoming casualties of imperial war in the trenches of eastern and western Europe over "the eastern question," Arnold J. Toynbee, Hegelesque historian of civilization at large, was becoming metaphysical about the Near East. <hl> Geography alone was not a sufficient explanation of the terms <hl>, he believed. If the Ottoman Empire had been a sick man, then:

<hl> Geography alone was not a sufficient explanation of the terms <hl> , he believed.


Question: What was able to rise from the death of the Near East?

From the death of the Near East new nations were able to rise from the ashes, notably the Republic of Turkey. Paradoxically it now aligned itself with the west rather than with the east. Mustafa Kemal, its founder, a former Ottoman high-ranking officer, was insistent on this social revolution, which, among other changes, liberated women from the strait rules still in effect in most Arabic-speaking countries. The demise of the political Near East now left a gap where it had been, into which stepped the Middle East.

Answer: new nations

<hl> From the death of the Near East new nations were able to rise from the ashes, notably the Republic of Turkey. <hl> Paradoxically it now aligned itself with the west rather than with the east. Mustafa Kemal, its founder, a former Ottoman high-ranking officer, was insistent on this social revolution, which, among other changes, liberated women from the strait rules still in effect in most Arabic-speaking countries. The demise of the political Near East now left a gap where it had been, into which stepped the Middle East.

From the death of the Near East <hl> new nations <hl> were able to rise from the ashes, notably the Republic of Turkey. Paradoxically it now aligned itself with the west rather than with the east. Mustafa Kemal, its founder, a former Ottoman high-ranking officer, was insistent on this social revolution, which, among other changes, liberated women from the strait rules still in effect in most Arabic-speaking countries. The demise of the political Near East now left a gap where it had been, into which stepped the Middle East.


Question: What notable nation was able to rise from the ashes of the Near East?

Answer: the Republic of Turkey

<hl> From the death of the Near East new nations were able to rise from the ashes, notably the Republic of Turkey . <hl> Paradoxically it now aligned itself with the west rather than with the east. Mustafa Kemal, its founder, a former Ottoman high-ranking officer, was insistent on this social revolution, which, among other changes, liberated women from the strait rules still in effect in most Arabic-speaking countries. The demise of the political Near East now left a gap where it had been, into which stepped the Middle East.

From the death of the Near East new nations were able to rise from the ashes, notably <hl> the Republic of Turkey <hl>. Paradoxically it now aligned itself with the west rather than with the east. Mustafa Kemal, its founder, a former Ottoman high-ranking officer, was insistent on this social revolution, which, among other changes, liberated women from the strait rules still in effect in most Arabic-speaking countries. The demise of the political Near East now left a gap where it had been, into which stepped the Middle East.

From the death of the Near East new nations were able to rise from the ashes, notably <hl> the Republic of Turkey <hl> .


Question: How did the Republic of Turkey align themselves?

Answer: with the west

From the death of the Near East new nations were able to rise from the ashes, notably the Republic of Turkey. <hl> Paradoxically it now aligned itself with the west rather than with the east. <hl> Mustafa Kemal, its founder, a former Ottoman high-ranking officer, was insistent on this social revolution, which, among other changes, liberated women from the strait rules still in effect in most Arabic-speaking countries. The demise of the political Near East now left a gap where it had been, into which stepped the Middle East.

From the death of the Near East new nations were able to rise from the ashes, notably the Republic of Turkey. Paradoxically it now aligned itself <hl> with the west <hl> rather than with the east. Mustafa Kemal, its founder, a former Ottoman high-ranking officer, was insistent on this social revolution, which, among other changes, liberated women from the strait rules still in effect in most Arabic-speaking countries. The demise of the political Near East now left a gap where it had been, into which stepped the Middle East.


Question: Who was the founder of the Republic of Turkey?

Answer: Mustafa Kemal

From the death of the Near East new nations were able to rise from the ashes, notably the Republic of Turkey. Paradoxically it now aligned itself with the west rather than with the east. <hl> Mustafa Kemal , its founder, a former Ottoman high-ranking officer, was insistent on this social revolution, which, among other changes, liberated women from the strait rules still in effect in most Arabic-speaking countries. <hl> The demise of the political Near East now left a gap where it had been, into which stepped the Middle East.

From the death of the Near East new nations were able to rise from the ashes, notably the Republic of Turkey. Paradoxically it now aligned itself with the west rather than with the east. <hl> Mustafa Kemal <hl>, its founder, a former Ottoman high-ranking officer, was insistent on this social revolution, which, among other changes, liberated women from the strait rules still in effect in most Arabic-speaking countries. The demise of the political Near East now left a gap where it had been, into which stepped the Middle East.

<hl> Mustafa Kemal <hl> , its founder, a former Ottoman high-ranking officer, was insistent on this social revolution, which, among other changes, liberated women from the strait rules still in effect in most Arabic-speaking countries.


Question: Who was a former Ottoman high-ranking officer?

Answer: Mustafa Kemal

From the death of the Near East new nations were able to rise from the ashes, notably the Republic of Turkey. Paradoxically it now aligned itself with the west rather than with the east. <hl> Mustafa Kemal , its founder, a former Ottoman high-ranking officer, was insistent on this social revolution, which, among other changes, liberated women from the strait rules still in effect in most Arabic-speaking countries. <hl> The demise of the political Near East now left a gap where it had been, into which stepped the Middle East.

From the death of the Near East new nations were able to rise from the ashes, notably the Republic of Turkey. Paradoxically it now aligned itself with the west rather than with the east. <hl> Mustafa Kemal <hl>, its founder, a former Ottoman high-ranking officer, was insistent on this social revolution, which, among other changes, liberated women from the strait rules still in effect in most Arabic-speaking countries. The demise of the political Near East now left a gap where it had been, into which stepped the Middle East.

<hl> Mustafa Kemal <hl> , its founder, a former Ottoman high-ranking officer, was insistent on this social revolution, which, among other changes, liberated women from the strait rules still in effect in most Arabic-speaking countries.


Question: When was the term middle east common as a noun and adjective?

The term middle east as a noun and adjective was common in the 19th century in nearly every context except diplomacy and archaeology. An uncountable number of places appear to have had their middle easts from gardens to regions, including the United States. The innovation of the term "Near East" to mean the holdings of the Ottoman Empire as early as the Crimean War had left a geographical gap. The East Indies, or "Far East," derived ultimately from Ptolemy's "India Beyond the Ganges." The Ottoman Empire ended at the eastern border of Iraq. "India This Side of the Ganges" and Iran had been omitted. The archaeologists counted Iran as "the Near East" because Old Persian cuneiform had been found there. This usage did not sit well with the diplomats; India was left in an equivocal state. They needed a regional term.

Answer: the 19th century

<hl> The term middle east as a noun and adjective was common in the 19th century in nearly every context except diplomacy and archaeology. <hl> An uncountable number of places appear to have had their middle easts from gardens to regions, including the United States. The innovation of the term "Near East" to mean the holdings of the Ottoman Empire as early as the Crimean War had left a geographical gap. The East Indies, or "Far East," derived ultimately from Ptolemy's "India Beyond the Ganges." The Ottoman Empire ended at the eastern border of Iraq. "India This Side of the Ganges" and Iran had been omitted. The archaeologists counted Iran as "the Near East" because Old Persian cuneiform had been found there. This usage did not sit well with the diplomats; India was left in an equivocal state. They needed a regional term.

The term middle east as a noun and adjective was common in <hl> the 19th century <hl> in nearly every context except diplomacy and archaeology. An uncountable number of places appear to have had their middle easts from gardens to regions, including the United States. The innovation of the term "Near East" to mean the holdings of the Ottoman Empire as early as the Crimean War had left a geographical gap. The East Indies, or "Far East," derived ultimately from Ptolemy's "India Beyond the Ganges." The Ottoman Empire ended at the eastern border of Iraq. "India This Side of the Ganges" and Iran had been omitted. The archaeologists counted Iran as "the Near East" because Old Persian cuneiform had been found there. This usage did not sit well with the diplomats; India was left in an equivocal state. They needed a regional term.


Question: The middle east was not common in diplomacy and what other context?

Answer: archaeology

<hl> The term middle east as a noun and adjective was common in the 19th century in nearly every context except diplomacy and archaeology . <hl> An uncountable number of places appear to have had their middle easts from gardens to regions, including the United States. The innovation of the term "Near East" to mean the holdings of the Ottoman Empire as early as the Crimean War had left a geographical gap. The East Indies, or "Far East," derived ultimately from Ptolemy's "India Beyond the Ganges." The Ottoman Empire ended at the eastern border of Iraq. "India This Side of the Ganges" and Iran had been omitted. The archaeologists counted Iran as "the Near East" because Old Persian cuneiform had been found there. This usage did not sit well with the diplomats; India was left in an equivocal state. They needed a regional term.

The term middle east as a noun and adjective was common in the 19th century in nearly every context except diplomacy and <hl> archaeology <hl>. An uncountable number of places appear to have had their middle easts from gardens to regions, including the United States. The innovation of the term "Near East" to mean the holdings of the Ottoman Empire as early as the Crimean War had left a geographical gap. The East Indies, or "Far East," derived ultimately from Ptolemy's "India Beyond the Ganges." The Ottoman Empire ended at the eastern border of Iraq. "India This Side of the Ganges" and Iran had been omitted. The archaeologists counted Iran as "the Near East" because Old Persian cuneiform had been found there. This usage did not sit well with the diplomats; India was left in an equivocal state. They needed a regional term.

The term middle east as a noun and adjective was common in the 19th century in nearly every context except diplomacy and <hl> archaeology <hl> .


Question: Where did the "Far East" derive from?

Answer: Ptolemy's "India Beyond the Ganges."

The term middle east as a noun and adjective was common in the 19th century in nearly every context except diplomacy and archaeology. An uncountable number of places appear to have had their middle easts from gardens to regions, including the United States. The innovation of the term "Near East" to mean the holdings of the Ottoman Empire as early as the Crimean War had left a geographical gap. <hl> The East Indies, or "Far East," derived ultimately from Ptolemy's "India Beyond the Ganges." The Ottoman Empire ended at the eastern border of Iraq. <hl> "India This Side of the Ganges" and Iran had been omitted. The archaeologists counted Iran as "the Near East" because Old Persian cuneiform had been found there. This usage did not sit well with the diplomats; India was left in an equivocal state. They needed a regional term.

The term middle east as a noun and adjective was common in the 19th century in nearly every context except diplomacy and archaeology. An uncountable number of places appear to have had their middle easts from gardens to regions, including the United States. The innovation of the term "Near East" to mean the holdings of the Ottoman Empire as early as the Crimean War had left a geographical gap. The East Indies, or "Far East," derived ultimately from <hl> Ptolemy's "India Beyond the Ganges." <hl> The Ottoman Empire ended at the eastern border of Iraq. "India This Side of the Ganges" and Iran had been omitted. The archaeologists counted Iran as "the Near East" because Old Persian cuneiform had been found there. This usage did not sit well with the diplomats; India was left in an equivocal state. They needed a regional term.


Question: Where did the Ottoman Empire end?

Answer: the eastern border of Iraq

The term middle east as a noun and adjective was common in the 19th century in nearly every context except diplomacy and archaeology. An uncountable number of places appear to have had their middle easts from gardens to regions, including the United States. The innovation of the term "Near East" to mean the holdings of the Ottoman Empire as early as the Crimean War had left a geographical gap. The East Indies, or "Far East," derived ultimately from Ptolemy's "India Beyond the Ganges." <hl> The Ottoman Empire ended at the eastern border of Iraq . <hl> "India This Side of the Ganges" and Iran had been omitted. The archaeologists counted Iran as "the Near East" because Old Persian cuneiform had been found there. This usage did not sit well with the diplomats; India was left in an equivocal state. They needed a regional term.

The term middle east as a noun and adjective was common in the 19th century in nearly every context except diplomacy and archaeology. An uncountable number of places appear to have had their middle easts from gardens to regions, including the United States. The innovation of the term "Near East" to mean the holdings of the Ottoman Empire as early as the Crimean War had left a geographical gap. The East Indies, or "Far East," derived ultimately from Ptolemy's "India Beyond the Ganges." The Ottoman Empire ended at <hl> the eastern border of Iraq <hl>. "India This Side of the Ganges" and Iran had been omitted. The archaeologists counted Iran as "the Near East" because Old Persian cuneiform had been found there. This usage did not sit well with the diplomats; India was left in an equivocal state. They needed a regional term.

The Ottoman Empire ended at <hl> the eastern border of Iraq <hl> .


Question: Why did archaeologists count Iran as "The Near East"?

Answer: because Old Persian cuneiform had been found there

The term middle east as a noun and adjective was common in the 19th century in nearly every context except diplomacy and archaeology. An uncountable number of places appear to have had their middle easts from gardens to regions, including the United States. The innovation of the term "Near East" to mean the holdings of the Ottoman Empire as early as the Crimean War had left a geographical gap. The East Indies, or "Far East," derived ultimately from Ptolemy's "India Beyond the Ganges." The Ottoman Empire ended at the eastern border of Iraq. "India This Side of the Ganges" and Iran had been omitted. <hl> The archaeologists counted Iran as "the Near East" because Old Persian cuneiform had been found there . <hl> This usage did not sit well with the diplomats; India was left in an equivocal state. They needed a regional term.

The term middle east as a noun and adjective was common in the 19th century in nearly every context except diplomacy and archaeology. An uncountable number of places appear to have had their middle easts from gardens to regions, including the United States. The innovation of the term "Near East" to mean the holdings of the Ottoman Empire as early as the Crimean War had left a geographical gap. The East Indies, or "Far East," derived ultimately from Ptolemy's "India Beyond the Ganges." The Ottoman Empire ended at the eastern border of Iraq. "India This Side of the Ganges" and Iran had been omitted. The archaeologists counted Iran as "the Near East" <hl> because Old Persian cuneiform had been found there <hl>. This usage did not sit well with the diplomats; India was left in an equivocal state. They needed a regional term.

The archaeologists counted Iran as "the Near East" <hl> because Old Persian cuneiform had been found there <hl> .


Question: Where did the use of the term Middle East as a region of international affairs begin?

The use of the term Middle East as a region of international affairs apparently began in British and American diplomatic circles quite independently of each other over concern for the security of the same country: Iran, then known to the west as Persia. In 1900 Thomas Edward Gordon published an article, The Problem of the Middle East, which began:

Answer: in British and American diplomatic circles

<hl> The use of the term Middle East as a region of international affairs apparently began in British and American diplomatic circles quite independently of each other over concern for the security of the same country: Iran, then known to the west as Persia. <hl> In 1900 Thomas Edward Gordon published an article, The Problem of the Middle East, which began:

The use of the term Middle East as a region of international affairs apparently began <hl> in British and American diplomatic circles <hl> quite independently of each other over concern for the security of the same country: Iran, then known to the west as Persia. In 1900 Thomas Edward Gordon published an article, The Problem of the Middle East, which began:


Question: What was Iran known as to the west?

Answer: Persia

<hl> The use of the term Middle East as a region of international affairs apparently began in British and American diplomatic circles quite independently of each other over concern for the security of the same country: Iran, then known to the west as Persia . <hl> In 1900 Thomas Edward Gordon published an article, The Problem of the Middle East, which began:

The use of the term Middle East as a region of international affairs apparently began in British and American diplomatic circles quite independently of each other over concern for the security of the same country: Iran, then known to the west as <hl> Persia <hl>. In 1900 Thomas Edward Gordon published an article, The Problem of the Middle East, which began:

The use of the term Middle East as a region of international affairs apparently began in British and American diplomatic circles quite independently of each other over concern for the security of the same country: Iran, then known to the west as <hl> Persia <hl> .


Question: When did Thomas Edward Gordon publish "The Problem of the Middle East"?

Answer: 1900

The use of the term Middle East as a region of international affairs apparently began in British and American diplomatic circles quite independently of each other over concern for the security of the same country: Iran, then known to the west as Persia. <hl> In 1900 Thomas Edward Gordon published an article, The Problem of the Middle East, which began: <hl>

The use of the term Middle East as a region of international affairs apparently began in British and American diplomatic circles quite independently of each other over concern for the security of the same country: Iran, then known to the west as Persia. In <hl> 1900 <hl> Thomas Edward Gordon published an article, The Problem of the Middle East, which began:


Question: What article did Thomas Edward Gordon publish?

Answer: The Problem of the Middle East

The use of the term Middle East as a region of international affairs apparently began in British and American diplomatic circles quite independently of each other over concern for the security of the same country: Iran, then known to the west as Persia. <hl> In 1900 Thomas Edward Gordon published an article, The Problem of the Middle East , which began: <hl>

The use of the term Middle East as a region of international affairs apparently began in British and American diplomatic circles quite independently of each other over concern for the security of the same country: Iran, then known to the west as Persia. In 1900 Thomas Edward Gordon published an article, <hl> The Problem of the Middle East <hl>, which began:

In 1900 Thomas Edward Gordon published an article, <hl> The Problem of the Middle East <hl> , which began:


Question: The problem of the Middle East was published by who?

Answer: Thomas Edward Gordon

The use of the term Middle East as a region of international affairs apparently began in British and American diplomatic circles quite independently of each other over concern for the security of the same country: Iran, then known to the west as Persia. <hl> In 1900 Thomas Edward Gordon published an article, The Problem of the Middle East, which began: <hl>

The use of the term Middle East as a region of international affairs apparently began in British and American diplomatic circles quite independently of each other over concern for the security of the same country: Iran, then known to the west as Persia. In 1900 <hl> Thomas Edward Gordon <hl> published an article, The Problem of the Middle East, which began:


Question: What threat caused Gordon to publish his article?

The threat that caused Gordon, diplomat and military officer, to publish the article was resumption of work on a railway from Russia to the Persian Gulf. Gordon, a published author, had not used the term previously, but he was to use it from then on.

Answer: resumption of work on a railway

<hl> The threat that caused Gordon, diplomat and military officer, to publish the article was resumption of work on a railway from Russia to the Persian Gulf. <hl> Gordon, a published author, had not used the term previously, but he was to use it from then on.

The threat that caused Gordon, diplomat and military officer, to publish the article was <hl> resumption of work on a railway <hl> from Russia to the Persian Gulf. Gordon, a published author, had not used the term previously, but he was to use it from then on.


Question: Who was a diplomat and military officer?

Answer: Gordon

<hl> The threat that caused Gordon , diplomat and military officer, to publish the article was resumption of work on a railway from Russia to the Persian Gulf. <hl> Gordon, a published author, had not used the term previously, but he was to use it from then on.

The threat that caused <hl> Gordon <hl>, diplomat and military officer, to publish the article was resumption of work on a railway from Russia to the Persian Gulf. Gordon, a published author, had not used the term previously, but he was to use it from then on.

The threat that caused <hl> Gordon <hl> , diplomat and military officer, to publish the article was resumption of work on a railway from Russia to the Persian Gulf.


Question: Who had not used the term middle east previously in publications?

Answer: Gordon

<hl> The threat that caused Gordon , diplomat and military officer, to publish the article was resumption of work on a railway from Russia to the Persian Gulf. <hl> Gordon, a published author, had not used the term previously, but he was to use it from then on.

The threat that caused <hl> Gordon <hl>, diplomat and military officer, to publish the article was resumption of work on a railway from Russia to the Persian Gulf. Gordon, a published author, had not used the term previously, but he was to use it from then on.

The threat that caused <hl> Gordon <hl> , diplomat and military officer, to publish the article was resumption of work on a railway from Russia to the Persian Gulf.


Question: Who was a member of American diplomatic and military circles?

A second strategic personality from American diplomatic and military circles, Alfred Thayer Mahan, concerned about the naval vulnerability of the trade routes in the Persian Gulf and Indian Ocean, commented in 1902:

Answer: Alfred Thayer Mahan

<hl> A second strategic personality from American diplomatic and military circles, Alfred Thayer Mahan , concerned about the naval vulnerability of the trade routes in the Persian Gulf and Indian Ocean, commented in 1902: <hl>

A second strategic personality from American diplomatic and military circles, <hl> Alfred Thayer Mahan <hl>, concerned about the naval vulnerability of the trade routes in the Persian Gulf and Indian Ocean, commented in 1902:

A second strategic personality from American diplomatic and military circles, <hl> Alfred Thayer Mahan <hl> , concerned about the naval vulnerability of the trade routes in the Persian Gulf and Indian Ocean, commented in 1902:


Question: What was Alfred Thayer Mahan concerned about?

Answer: the naval vulnerability of the trade routes

<hl> A second strategic personality from American diplomatic and military circles, Alfred Thayer Mahan, concerned about the naval vulnerability of the trade routes in the Persian Gulf and Indian Ocean, commented in 1902: <hl>

A second strategic personality from American diplomatic and military circles, Alfred Thayer Mahan, concerned about <hl> the naval vulnerability of the trade routes <hl> in the Persian Gulf and Indian Ocean, commented in 1902:


Question: When did Alfred Thayer Mahan comment on the trade routes?

Answer: 1902

<hl> A second strategic personality from American diplomatic and military circles, Alfred Thayer Mahan, concerned about the naval vulnerability of the trade routes in the Persian Gulf and Indian Ocean, commented in 1902 : <hl>

A second strategic personality from American diplomatic and military circles, Alfred Thayer Mahan, concerned about the naval vulnerability of the trade routes in the Persian Gulf and Indian Ocean, commented in <hl> 1902 <hl>:

A second strategic personality from American diplomatic and military circles, Alfred Thayer Mahan, concerned about the naval vulnerability of the trade routes in the Persian Gulf and Indian Ocean, commented in <hl> 1902 <hl> :


Question: Who did not connect with the soldier?

Apparently the sailor did not connect with the soldier, as Mahan believed he was innovating the term Middle East. It was, however, already there to be seen.

Answer: the sailor

<hl> Apparently the sailor did not connect with the soldier, as Mahan believed he was innovating the term Middle East. <hl> It was, however, already there to be seen.

Apparently <hl> the sailor <hl> did not connect with the soldier, as Mahan believed he was innovating the term Middle East. It was, however, already there to be seen.


Question: What did Mahan believe he was innovating?

Answer: the term Middle East

<hl> Apparently the sailor did not connect with the soldier, as Mahan believed he was innovating the term Middle East . <hl> It was, however, already there to be seen.

Apparently the sailor did not connect with the soldier, as Mahan believed he was innovating <hl> the term Middle East <hl>. It was, however, already there to be seen.

Apparently the sailor did not connect with the soldier, as Mahan believed he was innovating <hl> the term Middle East <hl> .


Question: What had already been there to be seen?

Answer: the term Middle East

<hl> Apparently the sailor did not connect with the soldier, as Mahan believed he was innovating the term Middle East . <hl> It was, however, already there to be seen.

Apparently the sailor did not connect with the soldier, as Mahan believed he was innovating <hl> the term Middle East <hl>. It was, however, already there to be seen.

Apparently the sailor did not connect with the soldier, as Mahan believed he was innovating <hl> the term Middle East <hl> .


Question: The Near East and the Middle East coexisted until what period?

Until the period following World War I the Near East and the Middle East coexisted, but they were not always seen as distinct. Bertram Lenox Simpson, a colonial officer killed eventually in China, uses the terms together in his 1910 book, The Conflict of Color, as "the Near and Middle East." The total super-region consisted of "India, Afghanistan, Persia, Arabistan, Asia Minor, and last, but not least, Egypt." Simpson (under his pen-name, Weale) explains that this entire region "is politically one region – in spite of the divisions into which it is academically divided." His own term revives "the Nearer East" as opposed to "the Far East."

Answer: the period following World War I

<hl> Until the period following World War I the Near East and the Middle East coexisted, but they were not always seen as distinct. <hl> Bertram Lenox Simpson, a colonial officer killed eventually in China, uses the terms together in his 1910 book, The Conflict of Color, as "the Near and Middle East." The total super-region consisted of "India, Afghanistan, Persia, Arabistan, Asia Minor, and last, but not least, Egypt." Simpson (under his pen-name, Weale) explains that this entire region "is politically one region – in spite of the divisions into which it is academically divided." His own term revives "the Nearer East" as opposed to "the Far East."

Until <hl> the period following World War I <hl> the Near East and the Middle East coexisted, but they were not always seen as distinct. Bertram Lenox Simpson, a colonial officer killed eventually in China, uses the terms together in his 1910 book, The Conflict of Color, as "the Near and Middle East." The total super-region consisted of "India, Afghanistan, Persia, Arabistan, Asia Minor, and last, but not least, Egypt." Simpson (under his pen-name, Weale) explains that this entire region "is politically one region – in spite of the divisions into which it is academically divided." His own term revives "the Nearer East" as opposed to "the Far East."


Question: Who was the colonial officer killed in China?

Answer: Bertram Lenox Simpson

Until the period following World War I the Near East and the Middle East coexisted, but they were not always seen as distinct. <hl> Bertram Lenox Simpson , a colonial officer killed eventually in China, uses the terms together in his 1910 book, The Conflict of Color, as "the Near and Middle East." <hl> The total super-region consisted of "India, Afghanistan, Persia, Arabistan, Asia Minor, and last, but not least, Egypt." Simpson (under his pen-name, Weale) explains that this entire region "is politically one region – in spite of the divisions into which it is academically divided." His own term revives "the Nearer East" as opposed to "the Far East."

Until the period following World War I the Near East and the Middle East coexisted, but they were not always seen as distinct. <hl> Bertram Lenox Simpson <hl>, a colonial officer killed eventually in China, uses the terms together in his 1910 book, The Conflict of Color, as "the Near and Middle East." The total super-region consisted of "India, Afghanistan, Persia, Arabistan, Asia Minor, and last, but not least, Egypt." Simpson (under his pen-name, Weale) explains that this entire region "is politically one region – in spite of the divisions into which it is academically divided." His own term revives "the Nearer East" as opposed to "the Far East."

<hl> Bertram Lenox Simpson <hl> , a colonial officer killed eventually in China, uses the terms together in his 1910 book, The Conflict of Color, as "the Near and Middle East."


Question: Who wrote the 1910 book 'The Conflict of Color'?

Answer: Bertram Lenox Simpson

Until the period following World War I the Near East and the Middle East coexisted, but they were not always seen as distinct. <hl> Bertram Lenox Simpson , a colonial officer killed eventually in China, uses the terms together in his 1910 book, The Conflict of Color, as "the Near and Middle East." <hl> The total super-region consisted of "India, Afghanistan, Persia, Arabistan, Asia Minor, and last, but not least, Egypt." Simpson (under his pen-name, Weale) explains that this entire region "is politically one region – in spite of the divisions into which it is academically divided." His own term revives "the Nearer East" as opposed to "the Far East."

Until the period following World War I the Near East and the Middle East coexisted, but they were not always seen as distinct. <hl> Bertram Lenox Simpson <hl>, a colonial officer killed eventually in China, uses the terms together in his 1910 book, The Conflict of Color, as "the Near and Middle East." The total super-region consisted of "India, Afghanistan, Persia, Arabistan, Asia Minor, and last, but not least, Egypt." Simpson (under his pen-name, Weale) explains that this entire region "is politically one region – in spite of the divisions into which it is academically divided." His own term revives "the Nearer East" as opposed to "the Far East."

<hl> Bertram Lenox Simpson <hl> , a colonial officer killed eventually in China, uses the terms together in his 1910 book, The Conflict of Color, as "the Near and Middle East."


Question: What was Simpson's pen-name?

Answer: Weale

Until the period following World War I the Near East and the Middle East coexisted, but they were not always seen as distinct. Bertram Lenox Simpson, a colonial officer killed eventually in China, uses the terms together in his 1910 book, The Conflict of Color, as "the Near and Middle East." The total super-region consisted of "India, Afghanistan, Persia, Arabistan, Asia Minor, and last, but not least, Egypt." <hl> Simpson (under his pen-name, Weale ) explains that this entire region "is politically one region – in spite of the divisions into which it is academically divided." <hl> His own term revives "the Nearer East" as opposed to "the Far East."

Until the period following World War I the Near East and the Middle East coexisted, but they were not always seen as distinct. Bertram Lenox Simpson, a colonial officer killed eventually in China, uses the terms together in his 1910 book, The Conflict of Color, as "the Near and Middle East." The total super-region consisted of "India, Afghanistan, Persia, Arabistan, Asia Minor, and last, but not least, Egypt." Simpson (under his pen-name, <hl> Weale <hl>) explains that this entire region "is politically one region – in spite of the divisions into which it is academically divided." His own term revives "the Nearer East" as opposed to "the Far East."

Simpson (under his pen-name, <hl> Weale <hl> ) explains that this entire region "is politically one region – in spite of the divisions into which it is academically divided."


Question: What is the basis of Simpson's unity?

The basis of Simpson's unity is color and colonial subjection. His color chart recognizes a spectrum of black, brown and yellow, which at the time had been traditional since the late 19th century. Apart from these was "the great white race", which the moderate Simpson tones down to simply the white race. The great whites were appearing as late as the 1920s works of James Henry Breasted, which were taught as the gospel of ancient history throughout the entire first half of the 20th century. A red wavelength was mainly of interest in America. The eastern question was modified by Simpson to "The Problem of the Nearer East," which had nothing to do with the Ottomans but everything to do with British colonialism. Simpson wrote of the white man:

Answer: color and colonial subjection

<hl> The basis of Simpson's unity is color and colonial subjection . <hl> His color chart recognizes a spectrum of black, brown and yellow, which at the time had been traditional since the late 19th century. Apart from these was "the great white race", which the moderate Simpson tones down to simply the white race. The great whites were appearing as late as the 1920s works of James Henry Breasted, which were taught as the gospel of ancient history throughout the entire first half of the 20th century. A red wavelength was mainly of interest in America. The eastern question was modified by Simpson to "The Problem of the Nearer East," which had nothing to do with the Ottomans but everything to do with British colonialism. Simpson wrote of the white man:

The basis of Simpson's unity is <hl> color and colonial subjection <hl>. His color chart recognizes a spectrum of black, brown and yellow, which at the time had been traditional since the late 19th century. Apart from these was "the great white race", which the moderate Simpson tones down to simply the white race. The great whites were appearing as late as the 1920s works of James Henry Breasted, which were taught as the gospel of ancient history throughout the entire first half of the 20th century. A red wavelength was mainly of interest in America. The eastern question was modified by Simpson to "The Problem of the Nearer East," which had nothing to do with the Ottomans but everything to do with British colonialism. Simpson wrote of the white man:

The basis of Simpson's unity is <hl> color and colonial subjection <hl> .


Question: The great whites were appearing as late as what time?

Answer: the 1920s

The basis of Simpson's unity is color and colonial subjection. His color chart recognizes a spectrum of black, brown and yellow, which at the time had been traditional since the late 19th century. Apart from these was "the great white race", which the moderate Simpson tones down to simply the white race. <hl> The great whites were appearing as late as the 1920s works of James Henry Breasted, which were taught as the gospel of ancient history throughout the entire first half of the 20th century. <hl> A red wavelength was mainly of interest in America. The eastern question was modified by Simpson to "The Problem of the Nearer East," which had nothing to do with the Ottomans but everything to do with British colonialism. Simpson wrote of the white man:

The basis of Simpson's unity is color and colonial subjection. His color chart recognizes a spectrum of black, brown and yellow, which at the time had been traditional since the late 19th century. Apart from these was "the great white race", which the moderate Simpson tones down to simply the white race. The great whites were appearing as late as <hl> the 1920s <hl> works of James Henry Breasted, which were taught as the gospel of ancient history throughout the entire first half of the 20th century. A red wavelength was mainly of interest in America. The eastern question was modified by Simpson to "The Problem of the Nearer East," which had nothing to do with the Ottomans but everything to do with British colonialism. Simpson wrote of the white man:


Question: In whose works were the great whites appearing?

Answer: James Henry Breasted

The basis of Simpson's unity is color and colonial subjection. His color chart recognizes a spectrum of black, brown and yellow, which at the time had been traditional since the late 19th century. Apart from these was "the great white race", which the moderate Simpson tones down to simply the white race. <hl> The great whites were appearing as late as the 1920s works of James Henry Breasted , which were taught as the gospel of ancient history throughout the entire first half of the 20th century. <hl> A red wavelength was mainly of interest in America. The eastern question was modified by Simpson to "The Problem of the Nearer East," which had nothing to do with the Ottomans but everything to do with British colonialism. Simpson wrote of the white man:

The basis of Simpson's unity is color and colonial subjection. His color chart recognizes a spectrum of black, brown and yellow, which at the time had been traditional since the late 19th century. Apart from these was "the great white race", which the moderate Simpson tones down to simply the white race. The great whites were appearing as late as the 1920s works of <hl> James Henry Breasted <hl>, which were taught as the gospel of ancient history throughout the entire first half of the 20th century. A red wavelength was mainly of interest in America. The eastern question was modified by Simpson to "The Problem of the Nearer East," which had nothing to do with the Ottomans but everything to do with British colonialism. Simpson wrote of the white man:

The great whites were appearing as late as the 1920s works of <hl> James Henry Breasted <hl> , which were taught as the gospel of ancient history throughout the entire first half of the 20th century.


Question: What was mainly of interest in America?

Answer: A red wavelength

The basis of Simpson's unity is color and colonial subjection. His color chart recognizes a spectrum of black, brown and yellow, which at the time had been traditional since the late 19th century. Apart from these was "the great white race", which the moderate Simpson tones down to simply the white race. The great whites were appearing as late as the 1920s works of James Henry Breasted, which were taught as the gospel of ancient history throughout the entire first half of the 20th century. <hl> A red wavelength was mainly of interest in America. <hl> The eastern question was modified by Simpson to "The Problem of the Nearer East," which had nothing to do with the Ottomans but everything to do with British colonialism. Simpson wrote of the white man:

The basis of Simpson's unity is color and colonial subjection. His color chart recognizes a spectrum of black, brown and yellow, which at the time had been traditional since the late 19th century. Apart from these was "the great white race", which the moderate Simpson tones down to simply the white race. The great whites were appearing as late as the 1920s works of James Henry Breasted, which were taught as the gospel of ancient history throughout the entire first half of the 20th century. <hl> A red wavelength <hl> was mainly of interest in America. The eastern question was modified by Simpson to "The Problem of the Nearer East," which had nothing to do with the Ottomans but everything to do with British colonialism. Simpson wrote of the white man:


Question: These regions were occupied by who?

These regions were occupied by "the brown men," with the yellow in the Far East and the black in Africa. The color issue was not settled until Kenya became independent in 1963, ending the last vestige of the British Empire.

Answer: the brown men

<hl> These regions were occupied by " the brown men ," with the yellow in the Far East and the black in Africa. <hl> The color issue was not settled until Kenya became independent in 1963, ending the last vestige of the British Empire.

These regions were occupied by "<hl> the brown men <hl>," with the yellow in the Far East and the black in Africa. The color issue was not settled until Kenya became independent in 1963, ending the last vestige of the British Empire.

These regions were occupied by " <hl> the brown men <hl> ," with the yellow in the Far East and the black in Africa.


Question: Where where the yellow?

Answer: the Far East

<hl> These regions were occupied by "the brown men," with the yellow in the Far East and the black in Africa. <hl> The color issue was not settled until Kenya became independent in 1963, ending the last vestige of the British Empire.

These regions were occupied by "the brown men," with the yellow in <hl> the Far East <hl> and the black in Africa. The color issue was not settled until Kenya became independent in 1963, ending the last vestige of the British Empire.


Question: Where were the black?

Answer: Africa

<hl> These regions were occupied by "the brown men," with the yellow in the Far East and the black in Africa . <hl> The color issue was not settled until Kenya became independent in 1963, ending the last vestige of the British Empire.

These regions were occupied by "the brown men," with the yellow in the Far East and the black in <hl> Africa <hl>. The color issue was not settled until Kenya became independent in 1963, ending the last vestige of the British Empire.

These regions were occupied by "the brown men," with the yellow in the Far East and the black in <hl> Africa <hl> .


Question: When did Kenya become independent?

Answer: 1963

These regions were occupied by "the brown men," with the yellow in the Far East and the black in Africa. <hl> The color issue was not settled until Kenya became independent in 1963 , ending the last vestige of the British Empire. <hl>

These regions were occupied by "the brown men," with the yellow in the Far East and the black in Africa. The color issue was not settled until Kenya became independent in <hl> 1963 <hl>, ending the last vestige of the British Empire.

The color issue was not settled until Kenya became independent in <hl> 1963 <hl> , ending the last vestige of the British Empire.


Question: The color issue was not settled until when?

Answer: Kenya became independent

These regions were occupied by "the brown men," with the yellow in the Far East and the black in Africa. <hl> The color issue was not settled until Kenya became independent in 1963, ending the last vestige of the British Empire. <hl>

These regions were occupied by "the brown men," with the yellow in the Far East and the black in Africa. The color issue was not settled until <hl> Kenya became independent <hl> in 1963, ending the last vestige of the British Empire.


Question: The Ottomans were portrayed as what?

This view reveals a somewhat less than altruistic Christian intent of the British Empire; however, it was paradoxical from the beginning, as Simpson and most other writers pointed out. The Ottomans were portrayed as the slavers, but even as the American and British fleets were striking at the Barbary pirates on behalf of freedom, their countries were promulgating a vigorous African slave trade of their own. Charles George Gordon is known as the saint of all British colonial officers. A dedicated Christian, he spent his time between assignments living among the poor and donating his salary on their behalf. He won Ottoman confidence as a junior officer in the Crimean War. In his later career he became a high official in the Ottoman Empire, working as Governor of Egypt for the Ottoman khedive for the purpose of conducting campaigns against slavers and slavery in Egypt and the Sudan.

Answer: the slavers

This view reveals a somewhat less than altruistic Christian intent of the British Empire; however, it was paradoxical from the beginning, as Simpson and most other writers pointed out. <hl> The Ottomans were portrayed as the slavers , but even as the American and British fleets were striking at the Barbary pirates on behalf of freedom, their countries were promulgating a vigorous African slave trade of their own. <hl> Charles George Gordon is known as the saint of all British colonial officers. A dedicated Christian, he spent his time between assignments living among the poor and donating his salary on their behalf. He won Ottoman confidence as a junior officer in the Crimean War. In his later career he became a high official in the Ottoman Empire, working as Governor of Egypt for the Ottoman khedive for the purpose of conducting campaigns against slavers and slavery in Egypt and the Sudan.

This view reveals a somewhat less than altruistic Christian intent of the British Empire; however, it was paradoxical from the beginning, as Simpson and most other writers pointed out. The Ottomans were portrayed as <hl> the slavers <hl>, but even as the American and British fleets were striking at the Barbary pirates on behalf of freedom, their countries were promulgating a vigorous African slave trade of their own. Charles George Gordon is known as the saint of all British colonial officers. A dedicated Christian, he spent his time between assignments living among the poor and donating his salary on their behalf. He won Ottoman confidence as a junior officer in the Crimean War. In his later career he became a high official in the Ottoman Empire, working as Governor of Egypt for the Ottoman khedive for the purpose of conducting campaigns against slavers and slavery in Egypt and the Sudan.

The Ottomans were portrayed as <hl> the slavers <hl> , but even as the American and British fleets were striking at the Barbary pirates on behalf of freedom, their countries were promulgating a vigorous African slave trade of their own.


Question: Who is known as the saint of all British colonial officers?

Answer: Charles George Gordon

This view reveals a somewhat less than altruistic Christian intent of the British Empire; however, it was paradoxical from the beginning, as Simpson and most other writers pointed out. The Ottomans were portrayed as the slavers, but even as the American and British fleets were striking at the Barbary pirates on behalf of freedom, their countries were promulgating a vigorous African slave trade of their own. <hl> Charles George Gordon is known as the saint of all British colonial officers. <hl> A dedicated Christian, he spent his time between assignments living among the poor and donating his salary on their behalf. He won Ottoman confidence as a junior officer in the Crimean War. In his later career he became a high official in the Ottoman Empire, working as Governor of Egypt for the Ottoman khedive for the purpose of conducting campaigns against slavers and slavery in Egypt and the Sudan.

This view reveals a somewhat less than altruistic Christian intent of the British Empire; however, it was paradoxical from the beginning, as Simpson and most other writers pointed out. The Ottomans were portrayed as the slavers, but even as the American and British fleets were striking at the Barbary pirates on behalf of freedom, their countries were promulgating a vigorous African slave trade of their own. <hl> Charles George Gordon <hl> is known as the saint of all British colonial officers. A dedicated Christian, he spent his time between assignments living among the poor and donating his salary on their behalf. He won Ottoman confidence as a junior officer in the Crimean War. In his later career he became a high official in the Ottoman Empire, working as Governor of Egypt for the Ottoman khedive for the purpose of conducting campaigns against slavers and slavery in Egypt and the Sudan.


Question: What did Charles George Gordon spend his time between?

Answer: assignments living among the poor and donating his salary

This view reveals a somewhat less than altruistic Christian intent of the British Empire; however, it was paradoxical from the beginning, as Simpson and most other writers pointed out. The Ottomans were portrayed as the slavers, but even as the American and British fleets were striking at the Barbary pirates on behalf of freedom, their countries were promulgating a vigorous African slave trade of their own. Charles George Gordon is known as the saint of all British colonial officers. <hl> A dedicated Christian, he spent his time between assignments living among the poor and donating his salary on their behalf. <hl> He won Ottoman confidence as a junior officer in the Crimean War. In his later career he became a high official in the Ottoman Empire, working as Governor of Egypt for the Ottoman khedive for the purpose of conducting campaigns against slavers and slavery in Egypt and the Sudan.

This view reveals a somewhat less than altruistic Christian intent of the British Empire; however, it was paradoxical from the beginning, as Simpson and most other writers pointed out. The Ottomans were portrayed as the slavers, but even as the American and British fleets were striking at the Barbary pirates on behalf of freedom, their countries were promulgating a vigorous African slave trade of their own. Charles George Gordon is known as the saint of all British colonial officers. A dedicated Christian, he spent his time between <hl> assignments living among the poor and donating his salary <hl> on their behalf. He won Ottoman confidence as a junior officer in the Crimean War. In his later career he became a high official in the Ottoman Empire, working as Governor of Egypt for the Ottoman khedive for the purpose of conducting campaigns against slavers and slavery in Egypt and the Sudan.


Question: When did he win Ottoman confidence?

Answer: as a junior officer in the Crimean War

This view reveals a somewhat less than altruistic Christian intent of the British Empire; however, it was paradoxical from the beginning, as Simpson and most other writers pointed out. The Ottomans were portrayed as the slavers, but even as the American and British fleets were striking at the Barbary pirates on behalf of freedom, their countries were promulgating a vigorous African slave trade of their own. Charles George Gordon is known as the saint of all British colonial officers. A dedicated Christian, he spent his time between assignments living among the poor and donating his salary on their behalf. <hl> He won Ottoman confidence as a junior officer in the Crimean War . <hl> In his later career he became a high official in the Ottoman Empire, working as Governor of Egypt for the Ottoman khedive for the purpose of conducting campaigns against slavers and slavery in Egypt and the Sudan.

This view reveals a somewhat less than altruistic Christian intent of the British Empire; however, it was paradoxical from the beginning, as Simpson and most other writers pointed out. The Ottomans were portrayed as the slavers, but even as the American and British fleets were striking at the Barbary pirates on behalf of freedom, their countries were promulgating a vigorous African slave trade of their own. Charles George Gordon is known as the saint of all British colonial officers. A dedicated Christian, he spent his time between assignments living among the poor and donating his salary on their behalf. He won Ottoman confidence <hl> as a junior officer in the Crimean War <hl>. In his later career he became a high official in the Ottoman Empire, working as Governor of Egypt for the Ottoman khedive for the purpose of conducting campaigns against slavers and slavery in Egypt and the Sudan.

He won Ottoman confidence <hl> as a junior officer in the Crimean War <hl> .


Question: What did he become in his later career?

Answer: a high official in the Ottoman Empire

This view reveals a somewhat less than altruistic Christian intent of the British Empire; however, it was paradoxical from the beginning, as Simpson and most other writers pointed out. The Ottomans were portrayed as the slavers, but even as the American and British fleets were striking at the Barbary pirates on behalf of freedom, their countries were promulgating a vigorous African slave trade of their own. Charles George Gordon is known as the saint of all British colonial officers. A dedicated Christian, he spent his time between assignments living among the poor and donating his salary on their behalf. He won Ottoman confidence as a junior officer in the Crimean War. <hl> In his later career he became a high official in the Ottoman Empire , working as Governor of Egypt for the Ottoman khedive for the purpose of conducting campaigns against slavers and slavery in Egypt and the Sudan. <hl>

This view reveals a somewhat less than altruistic Christian intent of the British Empire; however, it was paradoxical from the beginning, as Simpson and most other writers pointed out. The Ottomans were portrayed as the slavers, but even as the American and British fleets were striking at the Barbary pirates on behalf of freedom, their countries were promulgating a vigorous African slave trade of their own. Charles George Gordon is known as the saint of all British colonial officers. A dedicated Christian, he spent his time between assignments living among the poor and donating his salary on their behalf. He won Ottoman confidence as a junior officer in the Crimean War. In his later career he became <hl> a high official in the Ottoman Empire <hl>, working as Governor of Egypt for the Ottoman khedive for the purpose of conducting campaigns against slavers and slavery in Egypt and the Sudan.

In his later career he became <hl> a high official in the Ottoman Empire <hl> , working as Governor of Egypt for the Ottoman khedive for the purpose of conducting campaigns against slavers and slavery in Egypt and the Sudan.


Question: When did the term "Near and Middle East" hold stage?

The term "Near and Middle East," held the stage for a few years before World War I. It proved to be less acceptable to a colonial point of view that saw the entire region as one. In 1916 Captain T.C. Fowle, 40th Pathans (troops of British India), wrote of a trip he had taken from Karachi to Syria just before the war. The book does not contain a single instance of "Near East." Instead, the entire region is considered "the Middle East." The formerly Near Eastern sections of his trip are now "Turkish" and not Ottoman.

Answer: a few years before World War I

<hl> The term "Near and Middle East," held the stage for a few years before World War I . <hl> It proved to be less acceptable to a colonial point of view that saw the entire region as one. In 1916 Captain T.C. Fowle, 40th Pathans (troops of British India), wrote of a trip he had taken from Karachi to Syria just before the war. The book does not contain a single instance of "Near East." Instead, the entire region is considered "the Middle East." The formerly Near Eastern sections of his trip are now "Turkish" and not Ottoman.

The term "Near and Middle East," held the stage for <hl> a few years before World War I <hl>. It proved to be less acceptable to a colonial point of view that saw the entire region as one. In 1916 Captain T.C. Fowle, 40th Pathans (troops of British India), wrote of a trip he had taken from Karachi to Syria just before the war. The book does not contain a single instance of "Near East." Instead, the entire region is considered "the Middle East." The formerly Near Eastern sections of his trip are now "Turkish" and not Ottoman.

The term "Near and Middle East," held the stage for <hl> a few years before World War I <hl> .


Question: What proved to be less acceptable to a colonial point of view?

Answer: The term "Near and Middle East,"

<hl> The term "Near and Middle East," held the stage for a few years before World War I. It proved to be less acceptable to a colonial point of view that saw the entire region as one. <hl> In 1916 Captain T.C. Fowle, 40th Pathans (troops of British India), wrote of a trip he had taken from Karachi to Syria just before the war. The book does not contain a single instance of "Near East." Instead, the entire region is considered "the Middle East." The formerly Near Eastern sections of his trip are now "Turkish" and not Ottoman.

<hl> The term "Near and Middle East," <hl> held the stage for a few years before World War I. It proved to be less acceptable to a colonial point of view that saw the entire region as one. In 1916 Captain T.C. Fowle, 40th Pathans (troops of British India), wrote of a trip he had taken from Karachi to Syria just before the war. The book does not contain a single instance of "Near East." Instead, the entire region is considered "the Middle East." The formerly Near Eastern sections of his trip are now "Turkish" and not Ottoman.


Question: When did Captain T.C. Fowle write of a trip he had taken from Karachi to Syria?

Answer: 1916

The term "Near and Middle East," held the stage for a few years before World War I. It proved to be less acceptable to a colonial point of view that saw the entire region as one. <hl> In 1916 Captain T.C. Fowle, 40th Pathans (troops of British India), wrote of a trip he had taken from Karachi to Syria just before the war. <hl> The book does not contain a single instance of "Near East." Instead, the entire region is considered "the Middle East." The formerly Near Eastern sections of his trip are now "Turkish" and not Ottoman.

The term "Near and Middle East," held the stage for a few years before World War I. It proved to be less acceptable to a colonial point of view that saw the entire region as one. In <hl> 1916 <hl> Captain T.C. Fowle, 40th Pathans (troops of British India), wrote of a trip he had taken from Karachi to Syria just before the war. The book does not contain a single instance of "Near East." Instead, the entire region is considered "the Middle East." The formerly Near Eastern sections of his trip are now "Turkish" and not Ottoman.


Question: Who were the 40th Pathans?

Answer: (troops of British India

The term "Near and Middle East," held the stage for a few years before World War I. It proved to be less acceptable to a colonial point of view that saw the entire region as one. <hl> In 1916 Captain T.C. Fowle, 40th Pathans (troops of British India ), wrote of a trip he had taken from Karachi to Syria just before the war. <hl> The book does not contain a single instance of "Near East." Instead, the entire region is considered "the Middle East." The formerly Near Eastern sections of his trip are now "Turkish" and not Ottoman.

The term "Near and Middle East," held the stage for a few years before World War I. It proved to be less acceptable to a colonial point of view that saw the entire region as one. In 1916 Captain T.C. Fowle, 40th Pathans <hl> (troops of British India <hl>), wrote of a trip he had taken from Karachi to Syria just before the war. The book does not contain a single instance of "Near East." Instead, the entire region is considered "the Middle East." The formerly Near Eastern sections of his trip are now "Turkish" and not Ottoman.

In 1916 Captain T.C. Fowle, 40th Pathans <hl> (troops of British India <hl> ), wrote of a trip he had taken from Karachi to Syria just before the war.


Question: In the book Fowle wrote, what is the entire region considered?

Answer: "the Middle East.

The term "Near and Middle East," held the stage for a few years before World War I. It proved to be less acceptable to a colonial point of view that saw the entire region as one. In 1916 Captain T.C. Fowle, 40th Pathans (troops of British India), wrote of a trip he had taken from Karachi to Syria just before the war. The book does not contain a single instance of "Near East." <hl> Instead, the entire region is considered "the Middle East. " The formerly Near Eastern sections of his trip are now "Turkish" and not Ottoman. <hl>

The term "Near and Middle East," held the stage for a few years before World War I. It proved to be less acceptable to a colonial point of view that saw the entire region as one. In 1916 Captain T.C. Fowle, 40th Pathans (troops of British India), wrote of a trip he had taken from Karachi to Syria just before the war. The book does not contain a single instance of "Near East." Instead, the entire region is considered <hl> "the Middle East. <hl>" The formerly Near Eastern sections of his trip are now "Turkish" and not Ottoman.

Instead, the entire region is considered <hl> "the Middle East. <hl> " The formerly Near Eastern sections of his trip are now "Turkish" and not Ottoman.


Question: What prevailed with the disgrace of "Near East"?

Subsequently with the disgrace of "Near East" in diplomatic and military circles, "Middle East" prevailed. However, "Near East" continues in some circles at the discretion of the defining agency or academic department. They are not generally considered distinct regions as they were at their original definition.

Answer: "Middle East"

<hl> Subsequently with the disgrace of "Near East" in diplomatic and military circles, "Middle East" prevailed. <hl> However, "Near East" continues in some circles at the discretion of the defining agency or academic department. They are not generally considered distinct regions as they were at their original definition.

Subsequently with the disgrace of "Near East" in diplomatic and military circles, <hl> "Middle East" <hl> prevailed. However, "Near East" continues in some circles at the discretion of the defining agency or academic department. They are not generally considered distinct regions as they were at their original definition.


Question: What continues in some circles at the discretion of the defining agency or academic department?

Answer: Near East

<hl> Subsequently with the disgrace of " Near East " in diplomatic and military circles, "Middle East" prevailed. <hl> However, "Near East" continues in some circles at the discretion of the defining agency or academic department. They are not generally considered distinct regions as they were at their original definition.

Subsequently with the disgrace of "<hl> Near East <hl>" in diplomatic and military circles, "Middle East" prevailed. However, "Near East" continues in some circles at the discretion of the defining agency or academic department. They are not generally considered distinct regions as they were at their original definition.

Subsequently with the disgrace of " <hl> Near East <hl> " in diplomatic and military circles, "Middle East" prevailed.


Question: What term was disgraced in diplomatic and military circles?

Answer: Near East

<hl> Subsequently with the disgrace of " Near East " in diplomatic and military circles, "Middle East" prevailed. <hl> However, "Near East" continues in some circles at the discretion of the defining agency or academic department. They are not generally considered distinct regions as they were at their original definition.

Subsequently with the disgrace of "<hl> Near East <hl>" in diplomatic and military circles, "Middle East" prevailed. However, "Near East" continues in some circles at the discretion of the defining agency or academic department. They are not generally considered distinct regions as they were at their original definition.

Subsequently with the disgrace of " <hl> Near East <hl> " in diplomatic and military circles, "Middle East" prevailed.


Question: What sentiment persists even though racial and colonial definitions of the Middle East are no longer ideologically sound?

Although racial and colonial definitions of the Middle East are no longer considered ideologically sound, the sentiment of unity persists. For much, but by no means all, of the Middle East, the predominance of Islam lends some unity, as does the transient accident of geographical continuity. Otherwise there is but little basis except for history and convention to lump together peoples of multiple, often unrelated languages, governments, loyalties and customs.

Answer: sentiment of unity

<hl> Although racial and colonial definitions of the Middle East are no longer considered ideologically sound, the sentiment of unity persists. <hl> For much, but by no means all, of the Middle East, the predominance of Islam lends some unity, as does the transient accident of geographical continuity. Otherwise there is but little basis except for history and convention to lump together peoples of multiple, often unrelated languages, governments, loyalties and customs.

Although racial and colonial definitions of the Middle East are no longer considered ideologically sound, the <hl> sentiment of unity <hl> persists. For much, but by no means all, of the Middle East, the predominance of Islam lends some unity, as does the transient accident of geographical continuity. Otherwise there is but little basis except for history and convention to lump together peoples of multiple, often unrelated languages, governments, loyalties and customs.


Question: What definitions of the Middle East are no longer ideologically sound?

Answer: racial and colonial definitions

<hl> Although racial and colonial definitions of the Middle East are no longer considered ideologically sound, the sentiment of unity persists. <hl> For much, but by no means all, of the Middle East, the predominance of Islam lends some unity, as does the transient accident of geographical continuity. Otherwise there is but little basis except for history and convention to lump together peoples of multiple, often unrelated languages, governments, loyalties and customs.

Although <hl> racial and colonial definitions <hl> of the Middle East are no longer considered ideologically sound, the sentiment of unity persists. For much, but by no means all, of the Middle East, the predominance of Islam lends some unity, as does the transient accident of geographical continuity. Otherwise there is but little basis except for history and convention to lump together peoples of multiple, often unrelated languages, governments, loyalties and customs.


Question: What are racial and colonial definitions of the Middle East considered?

Answer: no longer considered ideologically sound

<hl> Although racial and colonial definitions of the Middle East are no longer considered ideologically sound , the sentiment of unity persists. <hl> For much, but by no means all, of the Middle East, the predominance of Islam lends some unity, as does the transient accident of geographical continuity. Otherwise there is but little basis except for history and convention to lump together peoples of multiple, often unrelated languages, governments, loyalties and customs.

Although racial and colonial definitions of the Middle East are <hl> no longer considered ideologically sound <hl>, the sentiment of unity persists. For much, but by no means all, of the Middle East, the predominance of Islam lends some unity, as does the transient accident of geographical continuity. Otherwise there is but little basis except for history and convention to lump together peoples of multiple, often unrelated languages, governments, loyalties and customs.

Although racial and colonial definitions of the Middle East are <hl> no longer considered ideologically sound <hl> , the sentiment of unity persists.


Question: When were terms such as "Near East", "Far East", and "Middle East" relegated to the experts?

In the 20th century after decades of intense warfare and political turmoil terms such as "Near East", "Far East" and "Middle East" were relegated to the experts, especially in the new field of political science. The new wave of diplomats often came from those programs. Archaeology on the international scene, although very much of intellectual interest to the major universities, fell into the shadow of international relations. Their domain became the Ancient Near East, which could no longer be relied upon to be the Near East. The Ottoman Empire was gone, along with all the other empires of the 19th century, replaced with independent republics. Someone had to reconcile the present with the past. This duty was inherited by various specialized agencies that were formed to handle specific aspects of international relations, now so complex as to be beyond the scope and abilities of a diplomatic corps in the former sense. The ancient Near East is frozen in time. The living Near East is primarily what the agencies say it is. In most cases this single term is inadequate to describe the geographical range of their operations. The result is multiple definitions.

Answer: the 20th century

<hl> In the 20th century after decades of intense warfare and political turmoil terms such as "Near East", "Far East" and "Middle East" were relegated to the experts, especially in the new field of political science. <hl> The new wave of diplomats often came from those programs. Archaeology on the international scene, although very much of intellectual interest to the major universities, fell into the shadow of international relations. Their domain became the Ancient Near East, which could no longer be relied upon to be the Near East. The Ottoman Empire was gone, along with all the other empires of the 19th century, replaced with independent republics. Someone had to reconcile the present with the past. This duty was inherited by various specialized agencies that were formed to handle specific aspects of international relations, now so complex as to be beyond the scope and abilities of a diplomatic corps in the former sense. The ancient Near East is frozen in time. The living Near East is primarily what the agencies say it is. In most cases this single term is inadequate to describe the geographical range of their operations. The result is multiple definitions.

In <hl> the 20th century <hl> after decades of intense warfare and political turmoil terms such as "Near East", "Far East" and "Middle East" were relegated to the experts, especially in the new field of political science. The new wave of diplomats often came from those programs. Archaeology on the international scene, although very much of intellectual interest to the major universities, fell into the shadow of international relations. Their domain became the Ancient Near East, which could no longer be relied upon to be the Near East. The Ottoman Empire was gone, along with all the other empires of the 19th century, replaced with independent republics. Someone had to reconcile the present with the past. This duty was inherited by various specialized agencies that were formed to handle specific aspects of international relations, now so complex as to be beyond the scope and abilities of a diplomatic corps in the former sense. The ancient Near East is frozen in time. The living Near East is primarily what the agencies say it is. In most cases this single term is inadequate to describe the geographical range of their operations. The result is multiple definitions.


Question: Where did the new wave of diplomats often come from?

Answer: the new field of political science

<hl> In the 20th century after decades of intense warfare and political turmoil terms such as "Near East", "Far East" and "Middle East" were relegated to the experts, especially in the new field of political science . <hl> The new wave of diplomats often came from those programs. Archaeology on the international scene, although very much of intellectual interest to the major universities, fell into the shadow of international relations. Their domain became the Ancient Near East, which could no longer be relied upon to be the Near East. The Ottoman Empire was gone, along with all the other empires of the 19th century, replaced with independent republics. Someone had to reconcile the present with the past. This duty was inherited by various specialized agencies that were formed to handle specific aspects of international relations, now so complex as to be beyond the scope and abilities of a diplomatic corps in the former sense. The ancient Near East is frozen in time. The living Near East is primarily what the agencies say it is. In most cases this single term is inadequate to describe the geographical range of their operations. The result is multiple definitions.

In the 20th century after decades of intense warfare and political turmoil terms such as "Near East", "Far East" and "Middle East" were relegated to the experts, especially in <hl> the new field of political science <hl>. The new wave of diplomats often came from those programs. Archaeology on the international scene, although very much of intellectual interest to the major universities, fell into the shadow of international relations. Their domain became the Ancient Near East, which could no longer be relied upon to be the Near East. The Ottoman Empire was gone, along with all the other empires of the 19th century, replaced with independent republics. Someone had to reconcile the present with the past. This duty was inherited by various specialized agencies that were formed to handle specific aspects of international relations, now so complex as to be beyond the scope and abilities of a diplomatic corps in the former sense. The ancient Near East is frozen in time. The living Near East is primarily what the agencies say it is. In most cases this single term is inadequate to describe the geographical range of their operations. The result is multiple definitions.

In the 20th century after decades of intense warfare and political turmoil terms such as "Near East", "Far East" and "Middle East" were relegated to the experts, especially in <hl> the new field of political science <hl> .


Question: Where did archaeology on the international scene fall into?

Answer: the shadow of international relations

In the 20th century after decades of intense warfare and political turmoil terms such as "Near East", "Far East" and "Middle East" were relegated to the experts, especially in the new field of political science. The new wave of diplomats often came from those programs. <hl> Archaeology on the international scene, although very much of intellectual interest to the major universities, fell into the shadow of international relations . <hl> Their domain became the Ancient Near East, which could no longer be relied upon to be the Near East. The Ottoman Empire was gone, along with all the other empires of the 19th century, replaced with independent republics. Someone had to reconcile the present with the past. This duty was inherited by various specialized agencies that were formed to handle specific aspects of international relations, now so complex as to be beyond the scope and abilities of a diplomatic corps in the former sense. The ancient Near East is frozen in time. The living Near East is primarily what the agencies say it is. In most cases this single term is inadequate to describe the geographical range of their operations. The result is multiple definitions.

In the 20th century after decades of intense warfare and political turmoil terms such as "Near East", "Far East" and "Middle East" were relegated to the experts, especially in the new field of political science. The new wave of diplomats often came from those programs. Archaeology on the international scene, although very much of intellectual interest to the major universities, fell into <hl> the shadow of international relations <hl>. Their domain became the Ancient Near East, which could no longer be relied upon to be the Near East. The Ottoman Empire was gone, along with all the other empires of the 19th century, replaced with independent republics. Someone had to reconcile the present with the past. This duty was inherited by various specialized agencies that were formed to handle specific aspects of international relations, now so complex as to be beyond the scope and abilities of a diplomatic corps in the former sense. The ancient Near East is frozen in time. The living Near East is primarily what the agencies say it is. In most cases this single term is inadequate to describe the geographical range of their operations. The result is multiple definitions.

Archaeology on the international scene, although very much of intellectual interest to the major universities, fell into <hl> the shadow of international relations <hl> .


Question: What replaced the fallen empires of the 19th century?

Answer: independent republics

In the 20th century after decades of intense warfare and political turmoil terms such as "Near East", "Far East" and "Middle East" were relegated to the experts, especially in the new field of political science. The new wave of diplomats often came from those programs. Archaeology on the international scene, although very much of intellectual interest to the major universities, fell into the shadow of international relations. Their domain became the Ancient Near East, which could no longer be relied upon to be the Near East. <hl> The Ottoman Empire was gone, along with all the other empires of the 19th century, replaced with independent republics . <hl> Someone had to reconcile the present with the past. This duty was inherited by various specialized agencies that were formed to handle specific aspects of international relations, now so complex as to be beyond the scope and abilities of a diplomatic corps in the former sense. The ancient Near East is frozen in time. The living Near East is primarily what the agencies say it is. In most cases this single term is inadequate to describe the geographical range of their operations. The result is multiple definitions.

In the 20th century after decades of intense warfare and political turmoil terms such as "Near East", "Far East" and "Middle East" were relegated to the experts, especially in the new field of political science. The new wave of diplomats often came from those programs. Archaeology on the international scene, although very much of intellectual interest to the major universities, fell into the shadow of international relations. Their domain became the Ancient Near East, which could no longer be relied upon to be the Near East. The Ottoman Empire was gone, along with all the other empires of the 19th century, replaced with <hl> independent republics <hl>. Someone had to reconcile the present with the past. This duty was inherited by various specialized agencies that were formed to handle specific aspects of international relations, now so complex as to be beyond the scope and abilities of a diplomatic corps in the former sense. The ancient Near East is frozen in time. The living Near East is primarily what the agencies say it is. In most cases this single term is inadequate to describe the geographical range of their operations. The result is multiple definitions.

The Ottoman Empire was gone, along with all the other empires of the 19th century, replaced with <hl> independent republics <hl> .


Question: What is the chief remaining nation to assign official responsibilities to a region called the Near East?

The United States is the chief remaining nation to assign official responsibilities to a region called the Near East. Within the government the State Department has been most influential in promulgating the Near Eastern regional system. The countries of the former empires of the 19th century have in general abandoned the term and the subdivision in favor of Middle East, North Africa and various forms of Asia. In many cases, such as France, no distinct regional substructures have been employed. Each country has its own French diplomatic apparatus, although regional terms, including Proche-Orient and Moyen-Orient, may be used in a descriptive sense. The most influential agencies in the United States still using Near East as a working concept are as follows.

Answer: The United States

<hl> The United States is the chief remaining nation to assign official responsibilities to a region called the Near East. <hl> Within the government the State Department has been most influential in promulgating the Near Eastern regional system. The countries of the former empires of the 19th century have in general abandoned the term and the subdivision in favor of Middle East, North Africa and various forms of Asia. In many cases, such as France, no distinct regional substructures have been employed. Each country has its own French diplomatic apparatus, although regional terms, including Proche-Orient and Moyen-Orient, may be used in a descriptive sense. The most influential agencies in the United States still using Near East as a working concept are as follows.

<hl> The United States <hl> is the chief remaining nation to assign official responsibilities to a region called the Near East. Within the government the State Department has been most influential in promulgating the Near Eastern regional system. The countries of the former empires of the 19th century have in general abandoned the term and the subdivision in favor of Middle East, North Africa and various forms of Asia. In many cases, such as France, no distinct regional substructures have been employed. Each country has its own French diplomatic apparatus, although regional terms, including Proche-Orient and Moyen-Orient, may be used in a descriptive sense. The most influential agencies in the United States still using Near East as a working concept are as follows.