I was recently reading the next of Stimson's note to Japan and China and found this puzzling passage:

I am not forgetful of the fact that the foreign policy of every nation is devoted primarily to its own interest. It also rises and falls with the character and wisdom of the individuals or groups who from time to time are in power. I do not close my eyes to the occasional dark spot which have been charged to that record, particularly seventy-five or eighty years ago.

But the actions which were the foundation for the most serious of these charges were directly attributable to the influence of slavery in this country, then at the height of its political power, and that influence has long since been wiped out in the blood of a great Civil War. They have no more reflected the democratic idealism which has generally characterized our foreign policy at its best than the fugitive slave act has fairly reflected our domestic social policy.

The note was published in 1932, so it seems he's referring to an event or policy from 1852-1857. What injustice is he talking about?

Gadsden Purchase, Indian Removal?

Could one make the claim that the so called "Byzantines" were simply a continuation of the ERE and that nothing really changed?

I have an innocuous photo of my great-grandmother standing in her garden in the US. I'm sure it was taken during WWII. The back is stamped "Velox" and "PASSED BY CENSOR" and "DEUR DIE SENSOR -----EKEUR". Can't quite read the first five letters of that last word.

My question is, who censored the photo and why? Were their censors in the US photo labs checking pictures? Was it passed by a US censor so that someone could send it to a relative in Germany? Or...???

Thanks for your help!

Curious, what happened to people who were already in prison for unrelated crimes during WWII (IN Germany or any occupied territories)? Were they liquidated as well or were they simply left in prison? I've never heard this discussed in history.

I know that annexing Cuba was pretty much off the table, but why didn't the US acquire more Caribbean/central American territories from Spain instead of just Puerto Rico? And who made the decision to acquire an overseas territory, despite many Americans rejecting imperialism?

As a side question, I've heard that the colonization of the Philippines directly relates to the bombing of Pearl Harbor, and I'd like to hear more details on that, or other long-term effects that this decision had on US foreign relations with SE Asia.

There might be practical reasons (they can't run away and the corpse is easier to dispose of) but was there a specific, maybe symbolic meaning?

I was recently listening to the Tarascan episode of the AskHistorians podcast (great job by the way everyone!) During the episode an incident was described wherein the conquistadors looted a bunch of religious idols and possessions from a religious shrine (as I best recall). I assume the idols and such were made of valuable materials, but what did they do with them? How did they translate that booty into wealth in Europe? Did they have them melted down and recast or sold? Did the government buy them? I suppose I'm just unclear how the variety of different possessions they stole had actual value to them.

Thanks!

Been pushing ahead on my Bachelors Senior Thesis. My question is, are there connections that can be made between the Gallic and Civil War that followed? I am trying to figure out what my main argument will be and I was thinking something along the lines of what happened in Gaul kind of leads to the Civil War. Another area I was thinking of looking into was the use of propaganda by Caesar. Any other suggestions of main thesis points would be greatly appreciated. Thank you

Anything other then the Old Testament?

We went from being allies with Russia in WWII, to a cold war with barely any direct communication. I know plenty about the cold war itself, but nothing at all about the transition. And I wonder how much our relationship with Putin's Russia mirrors this time period.

With 2 large rivers at the same latitude as the Mississippi River basin, which is one of the most, if not most, agriculturally productive regions on Earth, one might wonder why Iraq is mostly a desert.

Seriously in all their major settler colonies( of course, excluding new Zealand) of the British empire, natives were generally forcibly moved off their lands (so did the Afrikaners) but they rarely intermarried with native populations unlike the french & Spanish in the new world.

Even Afrikaners intermarried more with the native population.

Why is this?

Apologies for the fairly broad question.

For a start, how do I get into athletics? Are there regular competitions within the army, and the best are invited to further events? If I am one of the best, how many times a year do I compete? Will people offer to train me, and will I be famous and have fans? What would be yearly salary be like?

Any information regarding the Isthmian/Nemean/Pythian games would be appreciated also.

On the net, all I seem to be able to find about is Santiago de Compostella.

ETA: pilgrimage destinations/routes

I've recently been reading on the Jacobite conflicts, and as someone of Scottish heritage it got me thinking - when did the kilt and tartan become popular?

I've read late 1600s by some accounts, but I've also seen tartan referenced of early Celtic peoples.

I feel as though the style had to have some kind of gradual origin that is not often discussed, otherwise it would seem to be a very drastic departure from clothing styles throughout Europe during those times?

[deleted]