[deleted]

[removed]

There are multiple ways of defining imperialism, but what's usually meant is what John Hobsin wrote about (though I'm going off memory here:) Imperialism is an attempt by one nation to force its own identity upon another.

Historically, that was very rarely the case: the Romans and Athenians did not seek to spread democracy, or togas, or their religions. They sought wealth and power, and their institutions only spread as far as it would take to acquire those things.

Imperialism is basically the inverse of that: spreading one's institutions and culture as a justification for acquiring more wealth and power. The first time I believe we see something like that is with Qin China and Legalism, but even that was limited to China itself.

I'm fairly certain any claim that Japan would accept the Potsdam Declaration before the nuclear bombings is just outright wrong: Japan was still operating under the assumption that the USSR might be willing to negotiate on Japan's behalf before the USSR's own invasion, so Japan still believed it might be able to hold on to something at that point.

I think this is just the most useful and easy way to count and bring/pay various amounts from small things like groceries to big stuff. Just easy to count. But it is actually an inyeresting question.

Medieval cureency was mad, heck, even quete recently UK had remnanet of that in form of guiness etc

[removed]

I don't know if this is the right place for this, but I came across a 1947 North American railway guide. It's basically a comprehensive schedule etc for all the rail lines of the time. I don't want anything for it, but I want to be sure no one wants it before getting rid of it. https://imgur.com/UGny3fO.jpg

Why most of world currency is 1, 2, 5, 10, 20, 50, 100 (x10, x100)? Does every country comes to this by its own way, or was it just copying one country? (Ancient or medieval)?

Are there any depictions of the Gutenberg printing press from around the time it was invented or prior? Such as sketches etc.

If not, what is the earliest depiction of the printing press? Earliest I could find was over 100 years after at around 1568

Thanks for any help!

Your right, on the technical level. Europe with its never ending wars (only be intermitted by short truces) was well ahead of the U.S. in that regard. But on the tactical level Prussia, until it started its war series, wasn't known for ability to put up a fight (Yes, Frederic the so called Great, but during the Napoleonic wars its performance was rather lackluster).

So the German High Command had its time to learn how to mobilize, equip, march, motivate, supply and prepare an army for battle. And they had an established High Command. And they had an established military culture. The U.S. didn't have a large scale war in its history until then and I don't count the Mexican - American war large scale war.

Asbridge's biography of Marshall is excellent - it was reading that earlier this year that persuaded me to finally give The Crusades a go.

And yes, the lack of dramatic portrayal of the crusades is interesting to note. Perhaps the depiction of a Them and Us narrative is too problematic these days, even if the actual truth is more nuanced. I think that instead of a movie, a multi season depiction of Outremer would be fascinating.

People tend to conflate some of the issues around the surrender for various reasons. The quick and dirty facts are that the surrender was unconditional and nothing short of complete acceptance of the allied occupation and creation of a post war constitution was going to fly. Now, the issue of the emperor was a little opaque. McArthur could have removed him day one, and that’s what Hirohito expected to happen, but McArthur decided he’d be better off with him at the head of a constitutional monarchy but he did require him to formally renounce his divinity in Jan. of 1946.

Prior to the formal surrender acceptance the Japanese had been steadfast that the emperor would remain, and remain divine.

The safe, swift and mostly violence free immediate landing of troops on Japan was an amazing result after such a brutal war.

Durant’s first volume is so badly dated that it is virtually obsolete. There are far better surveys of ancient history available now.

I wrote more about this in a previous post.

The US was about 20 years behind in technology not just tactics. They didn't have to fight another major power so they didn't have to have development programs like the europeans did. Single loading bolt action rifles with paper cartridges were around for military use in continental europe since the 1850s, well before the US Civil War. They were needle rifles, with the primer right behind the bullet instead of the black powder, but much more advanced and allowed for more individual flexibility than the muzzle loaders before them. The Mauser model 1871 then came out in europe and saw adoption in the new german empire with metallic cartridges.

The next thing to come out of the US for military adoption was a conversion system for their old muzzle loaders until around 1890 IIRC.

Yeah, that's about what I thought, which is why I thought it was so strange that a published author was saying that Truman did accept a conditional surrender. But I guess he is just wrong on this point

To be honest, Prussia had a couple of trials before the Franco Prussian War (against Denmark and Austria Hungary), while the U.S. didn't. So it's not a (big?) surprise, they were ready for the French.

you might take a look at the History of the World in 6 Glasses by Tom Standage, delightful book....

The best single volume (short) on this is Ronald Henkoff’s Inferno. In short, nothing short of unconditional surrender was acceptable to the US, and every offer from the Japanese prior to accepting the US’s position that the emperor renounce his divinity was off the table. There were even a couple of coup attempts after the 2nd bomb was dropped. Ultimately the emperor himself recorded his acceptance of the terms of surrender and that was broadcast to the country. Henkoff’s book is easily read in an afternoon and then if you want to dig further you’ll have a pretty solid base of knowledge.

Mother Nature just won’t let us have expansive immortal empires.

I also read Asbridge's book earlier this year and thought it was fantastic. Very well written, not too dry and not too 'pop-history' either. I've got another one of his on the backlog: The Greatest Knight: The Remarkable Life of William Marshal.

By the way, do you not find it fascinating how little movies we've got from the Crusade era? Like the siege of Acre, or the battle of Jaffa. There's so many stories to tell, but all that springs to mind is Ridley Scott's Kingdom of Heaven.

So I was watching the US National Archives interview with Peter Shinkle about his new book, and one thing he brings up towards the end is that, according to him

>"After the bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki on August 6 and 9, the Japanese formally offered to surrender, again on the condition that the Emperor keep his throne.

https://youtu.be/sRBes3Bs6I8?t=2730

He then goes on to say that Truman accepted this proposal from the Japanese. Also, if you rewind that video a bit, he says that the Japanese had made a similar offer before the atomic bombs were dropped.

This kind of contradicts a lot of what I have heard. My previous understanding was that prior to the August 14th, the Japanese had offered to surrender several times, but always with the condition that the Emperor would not only remain alive, but also retain his powers as an absolute monarch. Then on August 14th, they agreed to surrender unconditionally. I've occasionally heard things saying that prior to the Japanese agreeing to surrender we told them we would let the Emperor stay alive, but these seemed to come from less reliable sources.

Tl;dr, do any of you know exactly what kind of guarantees did the Japanese have about the treatment of the Emperor, and Japan in general, in the postwar environment in 1945?

To clarify I mean the actual luxury items they sold not the price of company.

Was just having a discussion with friends about the start of luxury brands. Would anyone be able to answer the starting prices of such brands? Like Gucci or Louis Vuitton etc

He is stating the definition. So that kind of makes the condition necessary.

[removed]