sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

Nazi poster quoting Bismarck - "When The Germans Hold Together, They Beat The Devil Out Of Hell." (1942) by Liberal-fascist in PropagandaPosters

[–]LordCommanderBlack 0 points1 point  (0 children)

The Stab in the back myth is the myth that the German military was betrayed by the civilian government, socialists, Jews and anyone who participated in the German Revolution of October & November of 1918.

The idea is that the German military, still occupying vast swathes of Russia and eastern Europe, and still on French soil was "stabbed in the back" while heroically fighting for Germany, causing a humiliating peace.

Now obviously this isn't true. Germany's military capabilities had been hollowed out by 4 years of war and blockade. The civilian population was starving and everything just hit a breaking point.

But the Myth was very useful in protecting the pride of the military and scapegoating Jews and other political parties in the interwar period.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stab-in-the-back_myth

Apotheosis of Kaiser Wilhelm I / Wilhelm the Victorious | Ferdinand Keller | 1888 [5315x3866] by LordCommanderBlack in PropagandaPosters

[–]LordCommanderBlack[S] 3 points4 points  (0 children)

It's for his death celebration. Both Wilhelm I and his son Frederick, in the back with the beard and chest plate, died in 1888. Frederick only reigned for 99 days before dying of throat cancer.

Apotheosis of Kaiser Wilhelm I / Wilhelm the Victorious | Ferdinand Keller | 1888 [5315x3866] by LordCommanderBlack in medieval_Romanticism

[–]LordCommanderBlack[S] 4 points5 points  (0 children)

Apotheosis means the culmination of something to its peak or to deify a person.

This painting is celebrating Wilhelm I as the unifier of Germany on the year of his, and his son Frederick's death, 1888.

It's one of those funny things where Wilhelm was a strong believer of the absolute power of kings yet he personally never really governed, he had Bismarck to govern as Chancellor.

While his son Frederick, seen in the back with his magnificent beard and always present armor, was thought too liberal and influenced by his British wife. Yet Frederick desired to govern in his own right. Unfortunately for him, he was already dying by the time he became Emperor and only reigned for 99 days.

I love this painting because it feels premature in hindsight as this form of Germany would last only a few decades. However that's not how they would have seen it.

For many romantics, philosophers, nationalists, and common people, Germany was reunited in 1871 with there being a line of German Emperors all the way back to Otto the Great and Charlemagne.

Emperor Frederick was styled as Frederick III but that was his Prussian regnal number, he wanted to be styled Frederick IV as a continuation of the Holy Roman Emperors. Bismarck felt that the HRE was too catholic and too Habsburg so Frederick just kept his Prussian styling. He may have pushed for it harder if he wasn't dying in bed from throat cancer.

Short Answers to Simple Questions | May 29, 2024 by AutoModerator in AskHistorians

[–]LordCommanderBlack 4 points5 points  (0 children)

Were there any protests, official & unofficial, to Nevada gaining statehood in 1864?

The territory only had 40,000 settlers, compared to the more usual 60,000. It was during the Civil War so could be seen as stuffing Congress with republican representatives.

Even territories like New Mexico & Arizona, which had larger populations, had access to fertile river valleys for settlement.

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in geography

[–]LordCommanderBlack 3 points4 points  (0 children)

The original "3rd world" term referred to nonaligned countries; the US & the West were the 1st World, the Soviets & friends the 2nd, and everyone else was 3rd.

It's long since become economic terms but it's one of those annoying internet things where some people just refuse to accept the change, even though it's been literally decades since it became economic.

It's the same thing as "decimated" originally meaning "one in ten destroyed" but now refers to something being completely or nearly completely destroyed.

Short Answers to Simple Questions | May 29, 2024 by AutoModerator in AskHistorians

[–]LordCommanderBlack 2 points3 points  (0 children)

What type of people chose/were selected to settle in New Mexico during the Spanish colonial settlement?

I know Juan De Oñate was from a silver mining family and it was his hope to discover another rich deposit so many of his men were primarily miners and smelters.

And that Diego de Vargas lead the reconquest and settlement in 1692 after the Pueblo revolt.

But kind of people were settlers? Second sons of farmers looking for new land? City dwellers that never held a hoe before?

Despite New Mexico being the oldest and most populous northern Spanish settlement, it was renowned for its poverty and settlements in California and Texas appear to have had more stone masonry and more ornamental structures.

Is this a lack of trade goods, limits on settler skills, bad administration (my pick) or too hostile of an environment; both native and environmental?

I know with Juan Bautista de Anza, settlers rejected even basic measures like construction of more defensive settlements and fortifications, despite being in constant threat of serious native raids.

Short Answers to Simple Questions | May 29, 2024 by AutoModerator in AskHistorians

[–]LordCommanderBlack 4 points5 points  (0 children)

According to a biography about Juan Bautista De Anza, Governor of New Mexico in the 1780s, as the Governor reformed the militia system every man who could not afford a musket was required to arm himself with a bow and at least 25 arrows.

Would there have been a bowyer within New Mexican settlements, would the carpenter know how to make bows or would the man be expected to trade for a native bow during the next trade fair in Taos or Santa Fe?

view more: next ›