History Groups of Two

Guess the members of these notable groups of two from history.
Quiz by Quizmaster
Rate:
Last updated: March 16, 2020
First submittedFebruary 3, 2016
Times taken27,823
Rating4.11
6:00
Enter answer here
0
 / 40 guessed
The quiz is paused. You have remaining.
Scoring
You scored / = %
This beats or equals % of test takers also scored 100%
The average score is
Your high score is
Your fastest time is
Keep scrolling down for answers and more stats ...
Hint
Answer
Cold War military alliances
NATO
Warsaw Pact
Oldest universities in England
Oxford
Cambridge
First people to summit Everest
Edmund Hillary
Tenzing Norgay
Twin founders of Rome
(legendary)
Remus
Romulus
Authors with last name Shelley
Mary
Percy
Countries lived in by Marie Curie
Poland
France
Former names of Istanbul
Byzantium
Constantinople
Biggest cities originally founded
by the Dutch
Jakarta
New York City
Mesopotamian Empires
(911 BC - 539 BC)
Neo-Assyrian Empire
Neo-Babylonian Empire
African countries not colonized
by Europe
Ethiopia
Liberia
Hint
Answer
German capitals (1945-1990)
Bonn
East Berlin
Most famous Viking explorers
Erik the Red
Leif Erikson
"Communist Manifesto" authors
Friedrich Engels
Karl Marx
Hebrew Kingdoms, 800 BC
Judah
Israel
Roman leaders who Cleopatra had
children with
Julius Caesar
Mark Antony
Cities ending in -grad besieged
in WWII
Leningrad
Stalingrad
Cities that fought the Punic Wars
Carthage
Rome
Founders of Cubism
Georges Braque
Pablo Picasso
Nicknames of the opposing sides
of the English Civil War
Cavaliers
Roundheads
Rival factions of Italy, circa 1200s
(hint: both start with G)
Guelphs
Ghibellines
+7
Level 83
Feb 4, 2016
I like how guessing the surname of one viking gets you the other.
+3
Level 46
Apr 26, 2020
God dammit, why did I decide to write his first name too
+4
Level 86
Feb 5, 2016
Didn't the Italians colonize in Ethiopia in the 1930s?
+1
Level 48
Feb 5, 2016
They colonized Eritrea, and when they moved farther in than the border, the Ethiopian Emperor saw it as an invasion.
+5
Level 86
May 2, 2016
And yet the Italians established colonies, in Ethiopia. Sure, they were repulsed a few years later, but does that mean it didn't happen? Really just playing devil's advocate. I'll bow to conventional wisdom... and the Ethiopian tourism department.
+9
Level 37
May 2, 2016
Gaining some footholds isn't the same as colonizing a country, I would say. To earn that credit you would need full control.
+6
Level 45
May 4, 2016
Not really. Typically colonisation refers to the 19th century scramble for Africa and long term settlement after that. Italy in the 1930s was more of an occupation than colonisation, though I suppose if they'd been left in power there long enough it would've been. Basically Italy "colonised" Ethiopia the same way that Germany "colonised" Poland, France etc during the war.
+3
Level 65
Feb 21, 2016
Am I wrong, or were supporters of the king in the English Civil War also called Royalists?
+3
Level 56
Feb 22, 2016
Yes, but I think that doesn't count as a 'nickname' here. Tried that one myself though.
+2
Level 67
May 2, 2016
If I knew how to spell Guelphs and Ghibellines, that would be awesome!
+2
Level 79
May 2, 2016
Oh Liberia... I thought that was one of the most obviously wrong answers. But I guess the key word here was "Europe."

I visited Ethiopia. They like to brag about being the only Africans never colonized. Though this seems like a hollow boast, as the Italians did control most of the country, albeit briefly. Most of the oldest buildings in Addis Ababa have an Italian signature. They still call the downtown area the Piazza. And they still have restaurants serving pizza everywhere. Doesn't seem very uncolonized.
+9
Level 37
May 2, 2016
By that criterium the USA has also been colonized by Italy.
+1
Level 65
May 2, 2016
Never forget the Italian conquest of America!
+2
Level 67
Aug 29, 2019
Good point
+1
Level 79
Apr 26, 2020
You missed the point. Italian colonizers brought piazzas, pizzas, and Italian colonial architecture to Addis Ababa. Italian immigrants brought their culinary traditions to America where they invented the foodstuff called pizza that the world knows and enjoys today. (and the American cultural and economic empire brought this to most of the rest of the world) There's quite a big difference between colonists and immigrants, wouldn't you say? And New York was built before any Italians got there and we've built other things after the Italians arrived.
+2
Level 79
Apr 26, 2020
Most of the immigrants arriving at Ellis Island weren't driving tanks.
+2
Level 38
Mar 6, 2017
To colonize is to impose your will, government, religion, politics and culture upon the place that you usurp. Ethiopia may still serve pizza, but that does not mean that they embraced the culture, religion or politics of Italy into the mainstream.
+1
Level 79
Apr 26, 2020
Italy invaded and occupied Addis Ababa and most of East Africa. They imposed their will, government, politics and culture upon the place for half a decade. And remnants of this imposition remain to this day.

No modern-day African country still has claims on it by European colonial powers. So... if an empire eventually relinquishing its claim on a land means that that land was never colonized, then no part of Africa was ever colonized by Europeans except maybe that one Spanish exclave that borders Morocco. Is there a time limit? Like the 5 second rule for food that falls on the floor? If you are colonized for 5 years it doesn't count?
+4
Level 50
Apr 26, 2020
You're mistaking 'colonised' and 'occupied.' Italy controlled the capital and around a third of the country and were resisted throughout by the Ethiopian Patriots. No lasting significant infrastructure or Italian population developed because they didn't have full control nor adequate resources. Italy 'colonised' Ethiopia no more than Nazi Germany 'colonised' France.
+1
Level 79
Apr 27, 2020
No lasting infrastructure? You've never been to Addis Ababa, have you? And still, why is this a rule for what constitutes colonization? You're just making stuff up. There is not really a lot left in the USA that was built by the British. Are you going to say that North America was not colonized by the British Empire? The Spanish held the the Philippines as a colony for 333 years. But there is barely more evidence of them having been in Cebu or Manila than there is of the Italians being in Addis. Arguably less. According to Wikipedia there were 4,500 km of roads and 900 km of railway built in Italian Ethiopia. There are tons of buildings still standing. Like I said in my original comment, until recently the Ethiopians had not really built much else. Why doesn't anyone actually look stuff up before they comment? No lasting infrastructure... I'm sure you just typed that because it seemed true to you. But a simple google search would reveal it's not.
+1
Level 79
Apr 27, 2020
It is the Ethiopian's version of events that the war between Hailie Selassie and the Italian invaders went on this entire time and eventually ended in an Ethiopian victory. That's why they make the claim that the Italians never colonized them. I humbly submit this is inaccurate. Italy won the war. Hailie Selassie fled the country and went to London. The Italians set up shop, completely in control of the capital city and most of the country for years, and built a sh*t ton of infrastructure, much of which remains to this day. They only left later when, as part of World War 2, they got forced out by the Allies. I'm sorry if this hurts Ethiopian pride.
+1
Level 79
Apr 27, 2020
What is the difference between occupation and colonization? I know both terms carry with them a lot of political connotations and can be used, and misused, to try and prop up certain narratives. But I think realistically the difference between the two is an intent to stay on the part of the occupiers/colonizers.

If one country enters another country's territory uninvited, and they build only temporary military structures like barracks and fortifications before being forced out, this is an invasion.
If they do this but manage to largely defeat the defenders, and then build permanent structures like military bases or communications and transportation infrastructure, but they have no intent of actually sticking around permanently themselves and the presence is largely militaristic in nature, this is an occupation.
If they intend to stay and bring in people and families to live there, and they build permanent structures like churches, restaurants, administrative buildings
+1
Level 79
Apr 27, 2020
entertainment venues, permanent domiciles, court houses, schools, et cetera... then this is colonization.

The Italian Empire intended to stay in Ethiopia. They built many of these things. If the war had gone differently, they would have still been there for another 40 years.
+7
Level 50
Apr 27, 2020
Yes, I just type random things because they seem true and have never researched anything, ever. I spent over a year there so I find your incohorent ranting bizarre - you contradict yourself, for one thing. In the broadest sense, the main difference IS permanency. The war DID happen, they didn't have the resources to stick around, and were ousted within 5 years. Why are you so upset?
+1
Level 79
Apr 27, 2020
If you spent a year there it's surprising that you are so ignorant about this and have to resort to making inaccurate ad hominem attacks instead of actually engaging in the conversation. but that's the Internet for you. Though 80% of your comment is insults, the 20% that tries to be a response I already refuted if you actually read what I wrote. Not going to waste my time on the semi-literate.
+1
Level 79
Apr 29, 2020
If any intelligent people out there actually wanted to have a civil discussion about this I'm legitimately interested in why anyone outside of Ethiopia takes this claim seriously. It's definitely not that the Italians built no lasting infrastructure (they did). Or that they weren't intending to stay there permanently (they were). Or that they were resisted by partisan fighters during the time that Italian East Africa was part of the Italian Empire (as the same thing occurred in most countries that were colonized in history). Or that they eventually left (as all colonial powers in Africa eventually did the same thing).

Is it some arbitrary cut-off in time? Have there been no efforts to colonize territory in history that failed after fewer than 6 years? And if so, what's the next shortest one? I'm not sure how to look this up. I know of numerous failed attempts by European colonial empires to colonize North America. Most of those failed in less than a year, though.
+1
Level 40
Apr 26, 2020
That question is also very problematic...
+2
Level 79
May 2, 2016
SEATO was a Cold War military alliance.
+1
Level 78
Apr 26, 2020
Agree. I thought of it too, even though it wasn't as well known and didn't function that well.
+3
Level 54
May 3, 2016
Wikipedia doesn't seem to suggest Jakarta was founded by the Dutch. Also, accept just "Leif" for Leif Eriksson, and just "Roundhead" and "Cavalier" (minus the plural s at the end?) And NATO and Warsaw Pact are fairly obvious, but might be better to make it more clear as so not to refer to SEATO, etc.
+1
Level 67
Aug 29, 2019
From what I gather this is the case. There allready used to be human settlement on the location of modern day jakarta, long before europeans arrived in indonesia. But around 1620 the old city (at that point in time called jayakarta) was destroyed and the dutch build a new city at/on the same location and called it batavia.

So in short you could say there allready was settlement, but the jakarta of today was build/established by the dutch ( I wouldnt really use founded..)

+1
Level 53
May 4, 2016
I'm amazed that so many more people know Mary Shelley than Percy Bysshe. He'd be so pissed off!
+2
Level 75
Aug 23, 2016
Frankenstein is pretty famous in popular culture. Percy Shelley perhaps not so.
+7
Level 69
Feb 17, 2017
"Look on my works ye mighty and despair!" Nothing beside remains.
+2
Level 44
Sep 12, 2017
Can you accept Julius for Julius Ceaser
+1
Level 38
Dec 5, 2017
As in Orange Julius or Julius Irving, perhaps?
+1
Level 46
Apr 26, 2020
On this site, last names are generally accepted without first names, but first names are rarely if ever accepted without last names.
+6
Level 78
Apr 26, 2020
If only his first name was accepted, that would be Gaius.
+1
Level 38
Dec 9, 2017
Why accept NATO, but require Warsaw Pact?
+1
Level 69
Oct 6, 2019
Because that’s what they’re both called?
+2
Level 70
Apr 26, 2020
I've never heard of the acronym WTO, only ever heard the alliance called Warsaw Pact. And NATO is still very current now. But if you prefer to write the acronym out in full, be my guest.
+3
Level 67
Dec 27, 2017
as long as they are Italians, please accept the Italian names: guelfi and ghibellini
+5
Level 80
Aug 3, 2018
I can only assume that the Ghibellines' mascot was Totoro.
+2
Level 46
Oct 4, 2019
Should really accept 'Abyssinia' for Ethiopia - after all that's what it was actually called at the time!
+2
Level 52
Apr 26, 2020
Former names of Istanbul : Byzantium, Constantinople, Tsargrad, Konstantiniyye, Lygos - there are more than 2 of them. It really isn't a group of 2.
+2
Level 40
Apr 26, 2020
Rival factions of Italy? Get rid of it.
+1
Level 40
Apr 26, 2020
I did genuinely enjoy this quiz - thanks! For the Istanbul one, I can hear my old Greek teacher (I studied Classics at uni) spelling it out as "Buzdantion" with a "delta" in the middle - is that correct?!
+1
Level 72
Apr 26, 2020
I was glad to learn about them. In fact, I'm always glad to learn about them whenever I take this quiz.
+1
Level 49
Apr 26, 2020
Am I the only one who tried Ragnar and Beorn Lothsbrook for the Viking explorers.
+1
Level 80
Apr 27, 2020
I tried both guelph and ghibeline, surprised that the plural "s" is required.
+1
Level 57
Apr 27, 2020
On my typical pedantic note: Istanbul had many more than two names before its current one as can be found here.
+1
Level 37
Apr 28, 2020
Last hint must be updated: Guelphs and Ghibellines were rival factions in Florence, and such rivalry went on a while and is heavily reference in the Divine Comedy whose story takes place in 1300. As an Italian I blanked out completely, I definitely suggest revising the hint
+1
Level 64
Apr 28, 2020
I don't think "Biggest cities originally founded by the Dutch" is particularly accurate. Both places have long histories before Dutch "arrival." In what sense did the Dutch originally found them? Even the names given by the Dutch didn't stick. Of course there is Dutch colonial history in both places, but this seems like one easy place to resist colonial narratives of history.
+1
Level ∞
Apr 28, 2020
It's quite accurate. Manhattan had nothing resembling a "city" before the Dutch showed up. Jakarta is a little more ambiguous, but it's clear that the reason that Jakarta is a major center today is because of Dutch settlement.