I've just been reading up on imperialism and the creation of Israel and was wondering if the actual creation of Israel after the British Mandate was actually imperialism.

It seems to differ from the other forms of imperialism that Britain took part in and with what little reading i've done, there doesn't seem to be any economic imperative for the creation of Israel.

Would you say creating Israel is expansionist on the part of Britain? To me it seems they are appeasing a state/landless population of emancipated Jews who survived WW1 and don't seem to be actually creating the state for any obvious gain to Britain.

Or (and i'm just throwing this out there without thinking much about it) could you say the creation of Israel was a result of the influences of zionism on Britain rather than Britain acting in their own interest.

I'm going to be giving an informal presentation on this event by the end of this month and could use some recommendations. I've got a biography on Constantine XI and Mehmed II along with some general reading on the Byzantine Empire and it's decline but none of these works so far provide an in-depth, retrospective account of the battle itself from both sides in terms of tactics, equipment fielded by respective armies and the general progression of the siege. I know mainly how it started and ended, but not the in between.

Pretty much all the books we have from Ancient Rome were preserved by Christian monks. Why did the monks choose to preserve Meditations? Or did we gain it by some other means?

Just wondering if it has always been a typical part of growing up or something that has resulted from cultural influences/lifestyle changes.

I've read that at the time of Constantine's death, around 50% of the population was at least nominally Christian. What compelled these people to abandon their ancient traditions in favor of a new faith so quickly? It's difficult for me to imagine this. Were they simply following their emperor's lead or was there something inherent in Christianity that appealed to people at that time?

As a follow-up, is "Okie" the appropriate term to use when discussing this question or is it outdated? My knowledge of Dust Bowl refugees in California in the 1930s is primarily based off of Grapes of Wrath, so I apologize if this is an outdated term.

I am going to be taking a module on the British Empire in Africa between 1900 and 1960 next semester and I am looking for any papers/articles on the subject before I start.

Any suggestions would be appreciated

Growing up I remember homeless people holding signs stating they were Vietnam War vets, and we have popular characters like Lieutenant Dan (let's count SRO's as borderline-homelessness). Did WWII vets face the same problems? Is the homeless Vietnam Vet just exaggerated?

I have 3 questions:

1: Hamilton was an incredibly influential power broker back in the day, but seemed pretty content to stay behind the scenes. I know that the Hamilton–Reynolds sex scandal hurt his reputation, but how big of a role did that play in his decision to keep his hat out of the ring? Did he have any ambition to run for office before the scandal broke?

2: Could someone put his sex scandal in modern day context? Would it be equivalent to an Eliot Spitzer or Bill Clinton type scandal?

3: What did the other founding fathers think of Hamilton's death at the hands of Aaron Burr? I can't find much information about direct reaction from his contemporaries and peers of the day about it.

Thanks a lot!

Specifically, when did they start to industrialize? I read somewhere that the reason that they moved away from slave labor was because of the high overhead and the short crop season. Was it more of an agrarian economy post Revolutionary War? Or did it already start showing signs of textile manufacturing?

I'm thinking of "power" of the sort you might expect to see wielded by an absolute (secular) monarch.

Often in history the eastern half is more or less seen as the succesor/remnant of the entire roman empire, but how and when did the two halfs differ from each other in political,cultural,administrative and religious terms.

I assume a lot of them were Scripture from the Old (and eventually New) Testaments. I'd be interested in those, as well as the first prayers not pulled directly from Scripture.

Thanks!

Was there a particular reason they never changed their titles despite having an Empire?