In a very short period Spain lost all of their colonies but Cuba seemed to stay the same. I am aware of some failed uprisings throughout the 19th century but what prevented them from succeeding.

[deleted]

Today with easily transmittable currency, money exchange is easy. Prior to this, in the days of imperialism, how did travelers between countries that had distinct currencies trade their cash and how were exchange rates set consistently? Did traders so regularly travel that they accepted multiple currencies? Were there bureaus like today which transacted in bulk?

There aren't any books on the history of food in the FAQ. Anyone have some good reads on potatoes or any other important crop?

I'm talking about the soldiers of the Classical/Medieval world. I imagine they would have made camp and cooked supplies there, but are there any records of any soldiers also using "rations" whilst on the march? What supplies did they also consume whilst at camp?

It feels like there were few technological advances during the Middle Ages, but perhaps that's my own 21st-century-centrism. I'd love to know what they technologies they developed in the Middle Ages.

I am writing a script for a podcast regarding the cause of the agricultural revolution during the neolithic period and the effects it had. Please reply if you know any information, case studies or interesting facts relating to the subject. Thanks.

Per Wikipedia,

"A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed."

It sounds like the "right of the people to keep and bear Arms" is a means to an end. Has that end ever been met?

I'm not looking for a political debate on guns, unless it helps with historical context.

I've been trying to find a definitive answer to this question without much luck.

Generally, I've found reference to the fact that the Irish started using fixed last names around about the 10th century, and then English and French nobles started using fixed last names around about the Norman conquest. Adoption of fixed surnames by French and English commoners/peasants came later, but how much later?

I've also found that the Dutch were still using patronymic surnames up until 1811 when Napoleon occupied the Netherlands and required a civil registration of the Dutch populace, and made everyone adopt a fixed surname. So I'd assume that surnames in France were fixed among the working class sometime before that, but how much before?

In other words, I know that French nobility were using fixed last names as early as the year 1000, and French peasants were using fixed last names at least by 1811, but can anyone narrow it down even further? Obviously, there's probably not a specific date that it happened, but if I were to meet a French peasant in 1300, would they be likely to have a fixed last name? What about in 1600?

Can anybody with knowledge of France in the Middle Ages answer this question?

And if anybody's feeling particularly ambitious, when did fixed surnames spread to German-speaking commoners? (A little bit more difficult, I know, since Germany had a much longer road to unification than many of its neighbors.)

I know this may not be where to post this question, please advise me where else to go if not.

I was asked today by a 17 yr old about what careers would be available linked to ancient history. They are very hard working and keen, I just didn't have an inspiring answer, and was hoping that someone here would be able to help me.

"When the treaty was in force, Attila again sent envoys to the eastern Romans demanding the fugitives. They received the envoys, honoured them with many gifts, and sent them away saying they had no fugitives. Again, he sent others, and, when they had been enriched, he sent a third embassy and a fourth after it. For the barbarian, mindful of the Romans’ liberality, which they showed out of caution lest the treaty be broken, sent to them those of his retinue whom he wished to benefit, inventing new reasons and discovering new pretexts. The Romans heeded his bidding and obeyed whatever their master issued. They were not only wary of starting a war with Attila, but they were afraid also of the Parthians [i.e. Sasanids] who were preparing for hostilities, the Vandals who were harrying the coastal regions, the Isaurians whose banditry was reviving, the Saracens who were ravaging the eastern parts of their dominions, and the Ethiopian tribes who were in the process of uniting. Therefore, having been humbled by Attila, they paid him court while they tried to organise themselves to face the other peoples by collecting their forces and appointing generals." - Priscus of Panium, fr. 10 (Blockley): Attila exploits Roman weakness (443/7)

While the East was occupied by wars with Persia, Saracens, Ethiopia, Vandal coastal raids and Isaurian revolt, how was it that the West was weakened so much by Alaric, Geiseric, Attila etc. to be at the point of no return in the 5th century?

Is there any documentation from the Mongols or Chinese that mentions Marco Polo?

What was the justification for the large number of U.S. Marines casualties sustained in the effort to clear all the tiny Pacific islands of Japanese soldiers? Why not just take key islands over and cut off supplies to the insignificant islands with the dominant marine and air superiority?

I'm not sure this is the right sub based on the rules but I don't know where else to go with this (if you know of a better/more appropriate sub, PLEASE let me know!)

I'm really interested in the modern period of history but have recently recognized that I know very little about WWI, especially compared to WWII and I think this is generally true of most people. I think it's unfortunate considering the importance and unprecedented scale of the war. I have a professor who has lamented this and stressed the importance of remembering and commemorating the war and I'm considering approaching him about attempting to get some sort of programming off the ground at my university as over the next 2 years we'll continue to hit centennial anniversaries of important war events. Do you have any ideas/suggestions for ways to do this? I know in the UK and commonwealth nations they sell remembrance poppies at the end of each year, though I understand those represent a more general military remembrance (though I could be wrong about that) but beyond that I don't know of any programs regarding WWI.

This is an excerpt from Will Kymlicka's Contemporary Political Philosophy: An Introduction discussing utilitarianism:

A less extreme form of indirect utilitarianism is what [Bernard Williams] calls 'Government House' Utilitarianism. On this view, a small elite would know that utilitarianism was the right moral theory, and they would employ utilitarian decision-procedures to design utility-maximizing rules or institutions. The cast bulk of the population, however, would not be taught to believe in utilitarianism. They would be taught to view social rules and conventions as intrinsically justified. (This is called ' Government House' utilitarianism since it seems to have been the view of some British colonial officials in India and other British Colonies: the British officials would understand that rights are simply ingenious devices for maximizing utility; the natives would be taught to think of rights as intrinsically justified and inviolable). [Emphasis Mine]

Moral philosophy aside, I'm curious about the veracity of the historical claim. Was an esoteric utilitarianism ever an established policy in British colonialism? Was it ever the de facto policy, if not formal one?

Written in English and/or German

It seemed to be a common and popular instrument until after the Baroque period.