This narrator is my absolute favorite - I listened to him also read 'Rise and Fall of the Third Reich' and 'Collapse of the Third Republic' (both by William L. Shirer). Absolutely amazing
It seems that one of the chief builders of the British Empire was Frederick of Prussia. He tied up French armies and resources while the British took over Canada and India. The British navy ruled the seas. Getting Frederick to do the dirty work on the Continent was a brilliant British strategy.
Massive misunderstanding. The Prussian war effort was completely bankrolled by the Brits, who also mounted 3 separate invasions of northern France at strategic points, to distract French troops, who otherwise would have easily defeated Prussia Britain's rise to dominance was guaranteed, due to being the 1st relatively free nation, having beheaded Charles 1 and forced the English Bill of Rights on William of Orange.The main benefits of this were that most European wealthy merchants and some entrepreneurial aristocrats were storing their wealth in English banks and "Goldsmith's" of London. The banks were already practising fractional reserve deployment of investment into new capitalist business ventures, with the knowledge that that wealth was safe from any Royal confiscation, which had happened numerous times in history before this.William of Orange was in no position to do that in England. Parliament had completely marginalised the King, by 1750 and Parliament, being decentralised, had no power to act unilaterally - therefore the funds were "Relatively" safe. *If France had successfully mounted an invasion of England during this war, there would have been civil wars all over Europe for certain, with different sectors of elites realising that their wealth was massively at risk
What struck me was the vast difference in historical outcome had so little to do with the expenditure of blood and treasure in Europe, where tens of thousands of men perished in countless battles that changed so little compared to the paltry expenditures made in troops and treasure in India and America where so little achieved so much more. A mere 9,000 British troops at Quebec kicked the French out of America, and not many more than that expelled them from India - and kicked off nearly 200 years of British hegemony worldwide. Meanwhile, vast armies of French, Prussians, Russians, Austrians, Hungarians and sundry Germans slaughtered each other over seven years for so little effect.
Yes, but people need to realise that this is only the military aspect. You should also be thinking of the political, economic, legal, cultural and social aspects In this. Since 1689 and the English Bill of Rights,, everything in modern history changed in favour of England, simply because European elites were storing their wealth in English banks due to the safety from Royal confiscation for ridiculous purposes, such as whimsical wars. William of Orange in England was in no position to do this, and Parliament was run by the Whigs, who were free market investment capitalists, whose entire ethos was to be entrepreneurial and use investment for growth. *If the French had mounted a successful invasion of England, this would have kicked off civil wars all over the continent, as wealthy elites started to realise that their wealth was no longer safe from the French king confiscating them *Even in the military aspect you need to realise that the 3 different mounted invasions of northern France, by the Royal Navy, stopped the French army from overwhelming Frederick and also the Brits were bankrolling Frederick's war effort, which couldn't have continued otherwise
@@Rowlph8888 Yes, but 9,000 soldiers THAT far oversees is far, far more expensive to transport, manage, supply, maintain, and command than soldiers on The Continent. It might be equivalent more to 40,000 soldiers or something. Also, to have any hope of supplying and having an army overseas, you need to have a navy that's capable of contending with the very best in the world. So you need a world-class navy, and vast expenditures to maintain that overseas army. Your point is true and interesting though -- maybe the other nations should have tried to contend for the sea more.
Actually, there is 6 million Quebecois, mostly all decedent of french people living in the Province of Quebec. CANADA is a bilingual because of the province of Quebec were we all speak french. French were not kick out of America. The French army lost a battle in Quebec city and later on, the French royalty gave up on the America for they were to busy fighting in Europe. All the french colonist remain in Quebec.
Quite so ! The British were clever enough to offer the Quebecois sufficient guarantees for their language and culture . And the Quebecois were clever enough to accept those terms. ? Somehow it worked....!
This is where the German Way of War - BEWEGUNGSKRIEG - that so shocked the world in 1940 was founded under Friedrich der Große, it was consolidated and developed under Molkte in the mid 19th century, and peaked in 1920 to 1941.
@@PalleRasmussen That's a distortion.Frederick was a master tactician, but the Germans in World War I, and World War II, simply benefited from 1st mover advantage and specifically in World War II, the lack of preparation from the Brits and the French in considering the Ardennes was impenetrable. *Letters from these German archives recently exposed, from, both Moltke and Falconhyn at various points during World war, 1 desperately requesting that the Kaiser sue for peace, acquiescing to whatever the British and French demands were, showed that they were no more superior to the French in army capabilities and were defeatist, even going into the war. But they believed it had to be fought, regardless. The Germans have the Kaiser to thank for the continued existence as a unified nation, because in continuing to fight the war against his generals advice, meant that once the US got involved Woodrow Wilson ended up having the main influence, and after war proceedings - without this, the French president would have ensured the breaking up of Germany back to the situation close to when it states were part of the HRE. The Germans Only managed to carry on competing in the First World War, because they were camped close to Paris, which meant that they could use any innovative tactics they wanted, with no imminent threat to Berlin, whereas the bricks French and Belgians, were having to fight a mass frenzy for years, with any mistake, leading to the loss of the war - after all, that was the Germans plan, to take Paris and win the war quickly before anyone could mobilise probably.
"Madame Petticoat IV" That's just savage--and not just for the direct insult leveled at Madame de Pompadour...Louis needed to be admitted to the burn unit after this!
I am ashamed to admit that I know so little about this conflict that I can't even voice an opinion. It usually takes me three books, read, digested and then read again, before I slowly get to wrap my mind around any historical era. And, then, not being a historian, my understanding is limited at best.
Only way you can understand something is to have full appreciation for it. I think this conflict is interesting because of the subject of Frederick the Great
For those wondering about the quality of the writing, Will Durant is one of America's greatest historians, famous for penetrant observations and excellent expression. He's a good read as well as a good historian who makes history "functional" as well as interesting, not just a biased recital of events.His wife, Ariel, is also a major force in his books.
In short, everyone was left devastated except Britain who became an economic powerhouse with unmatched naval power. Edit: Let me clarify that this wasn’t meant to insult others, only as a mere observation pertaining to the aftermath of such a devastating war.
Lucky Chops Politically, it was. The sudden turnabout due to their Prussian-sympathetic leader damaged Russia. They were beating Prussia back, losing little themselves until this change.
It say that but it also explain that Britain cpulda conquered all the growing euro. Countries due to it's naval power and there wealth in commerce and global control also to detain Germany financial and expansion motives. While doing this Germany could not build a fleet to till Bismarck so since they have a good land army the Brits wanted an ally...so in short the British needed an ally against France while the colony's can be maintained and contained while at sea and at this time a catch 22 occurred while in america there fleet was scattered and there army is in the colonized nations the French made an ally with Russia and so then a few years later a war was imminent and a few years later a war was immediate due to Europe for neglect of that continent because the spoils of america and new ideas from the new went back to the old..America is full of ideas!
Young Archivest Yes and no. Great Britain’s economic growth skyrocketed after the war through its growing trade and newly acquired colonial possessions. However the country’s coffers were indeed dwindling after years of financing Prussia and raising regiments of foot. This of course, is a primary reason for the American Revolution.
One particular comment caught my eye: @bill6687 said, "This was the humanities before they were infiltrated by communists." I had to listen to the video again with his comment in mind. It's not that I don't know the story, but Will Durant artfully presents geopolitical ideologies in a way that takes us back to the middle of the 18th century.
I just found that yesterday. I read his introduction, then ploughed through the first 200 pages. A thought provoking thesis and such an enjoyable style. I strongly second this recommendation!
@@sdporres the Audible read is excellent as well, however, one needs the footnotes and maps. And the Audible doesn’t incl the Epilogue for some reason. FA is writing the 2nd vol of the Oxford series. I hope this is published sooner than later.
It was Friedrich der Große's success in The Seven Years War that made Germany focus so much on operations and tactics that they came to rule supreme in that area, while lacking so horrendously in strategy and logistics that they went to war with the world's largest naval power and island kingdom in 1940, without a navy of their own. While they could not cross the Channel, the US waged war across three oceans. Rob Citino has written an excellent book on the matter and Sönke Neitzel one this year that I have yet to read, but which is by all accounts quite good also as it loks also at the privates and does not stop with 1945. Rob has three lectures on UA-cam also and is a good lecturer, well worth a watch (he is also a nice chap actually).
WILL DURANT IS ARGUABLY THE GREATEST HISTORIAN OF ALL TIME. HE WAS STRAIGHT FORWARD & TOLD IT LIKE IT WAS. I REMEMBER MERV GRIFFIN ASKING HIM WHEN OUR CIVILIZATION WOULD COME TO AN END. HIS ANSWER: IT WOULD BEGIN TO UNRAVEL AFTER HOMOSEXUALS GAIN AFFLUENCE; I.E., WHEN THEY COME OUT OF THE CLOSET. HE SAID THAT THAT WAS WHAT HAD HAPPENED TO LITERALLY EVERY FALLEN CIVILIZATION SINCE THE BEGINNING OF RECORDED HISTORY.
Of course, when we take homosexuals out of the closet, we put those opposed to homosexuality in the same closet, and then kid ourselves into thinking we are more tolerant. But all that changes, I who we descrimate against. Lmao
@@clintonmiller1698 WHAT DOES THAT HAVE TO DO WITH WHAT WILL DURANT WAS TALKING ABOUT? AS FOR DISCRIMINATION, WHO/WHOM DO YOU REFER TO? PEOPLE IN THE U.S., WHO HAVE COME TO ACCEPT GAY MARRIAGES, OR THE PEOPLE OF ISLAM WHO REGULARLY PUT HOMOSEXUALS TO DEATH?
I think it's more to do with when civilizations get overindulgent with sex in general. It seems to precipitate the fall. Also Old Fritz(Frederick the Great) was said to be a homosexual. And he was a good king wouldn't you say?
IntermediateJesus The only reason people actually believe that is because people are constantly trying to make great people homosexual so they can feel good about themselves. Also like how people say the greeks were openly gay (if they were) and that is also a ridiculous.
Kartoffelbefehl, auch Kartoffelerlass, ist eine Bezeichnung für Anordnungen, Rundschreiben und Verordnungen Friedrichs II. von Preußen an die Beamten seiner Provinzen, in denen er sich bemühte, den Anbau der Kartoffel in den preußischen Provinzen durchzusetzen Das Menschenmaterial muss gefüttert sein um es Verwerten zu können
@@rickiandavis Thank You mate, I cannot belive it has been over a year since watching this. The channel change was a shock and a half. This was my first video as well.
So often I've heard in many historical accounts, including here, that it was the British who were the first to condemn and out law slavery. This is true but disgustingly misleading...the British offered freedom and land to all American slaves enlisting in their army to defeat the colonial army under Washington. In order to ensure this offer it was in their interest to claim slavery illegal. A difficult and highly debated decision within the Empire, for it was as the world leader in the slave trade did the British add substantially to their considerable wealth and power. Unfortunately for them a slave army was insignificant and of no aid in a war they were destined to lose. As a result maintaining the fight against slavery becoming unavoidable to the globally embarrassed British.
When the British lost the American Civil war to Lincoln and the North that's when the Brutish became anti slavery, before that world changing event (ACW), the Englanders along with their French/Spanish puppets wanted to create a slave empire (Neo Feudalism) of Southern U.S. Mexico, Central & South America.
@@harrym7544 Exactly, People do know critical reasoning on this stuff, to support a narrative.What about the hundreds of thousands of signatures on petitions from different British citizens in 1815, to put pressure on the Foreign Secretary to get practical solutions to support the antislavery movement, from other European superpowers in the Congress of Vienna. *Also, there was the small matter of the Royal Navy and British Army all over the globe for several decades, blockading slave markets, destroying ships suspected of slavery in all seas and the army crushing armies in the Middle East, to end the slave trade, despite certain defeats and losses of even aristocrats, such as This was an incredible movement globally, for over a century galvanising gradual support - this is also the only example in human history and a movement working and should be in inspiration for future movements which are obviously going to be needed
The first 3/4 minutes, I guess few pages of the book, are so filled with disgusting machist comments towards Maria Theresa to make it almost unbearable.
This narrator is my absolute favorite - I listened to him also read 'Rise and Fall of the Third Reich' and 'Collapse of the Third Republic' (both by William L. Shirer). Absolutely amazing
Who is it?
@@SimonJHeath Grove Gardner
@@jacobgilbert9667 aka Alexander Adams.
Mine too.
@@SimonJHeathpp
This guy and Mike Duncan are easily my favorite narrator's for the history genre
Second mike duncan. Miss that man
@@dustyfairview9062 oh he's still out there
Well read and clearly written. This story demonstrates history is a combination of drama and narrative with dashes of biography, colored by hubris.
It seems that one of the chief builders of the British Empire was Frederick of Prussia. He tied up French armies and resources while the British took over Canada and India. The British navy ruled the seas. Getting Frederick to do the dirty work on the Continent was a brilliant British strategy.
It did worked for both Prussia went to defeat catholicAustria and unified Germany
Massive misunderstanding. The Prussian war effort was completely bankrolled by the Brits, who also mounted 3 separate invasions of northern France at strategic points, to distract French troops, who otherwise would have easily defeated Prussia
Britain's rise to dominance was guaranteed, due to being the 1st relatively free nation, having beheaded Charles 1 and forced the English Bill of Rights on William of Orange.The main benefits of this were that most European wealthy merchants and some entrepreneurial aristocrats were storing their wealth in English banks and "Goldsmith's" of London. The banks were already practising fractional reserve deployment of investment into new capitalist business ventures, with the knowledge that that wealth was safe from any Royal confiscation, which had happened numerous times in history before this.William of Orange was in no position to do that in England. Parliament had completely marginalised the King, by 1750 and Parliament, being decentralised, had no power to act unilaterally - therefore the funds were "Relatively" safe.
*If France had successfully mounted an invasion of England during this war, there would have been civil wars all over Europe for certain, with different sectors of elites realising that their wealth was massively at risk
What struck me was the vast difference in historical outcome had so little to do with the expenditure of blood and treasure in Europe, where tens of thousands of men perished in countless battles that changed so little compared to the paltry expenditures made in troops and treasure in India and America where so little achieved so much more. A mere 9,000 British troops at Quebec kicked the French out of America, and not many more than that expelled them from India - and kicked off nearly 200 years of British hegemony worldwide. Meanwhile, vast armies of French, Prussians, Russians, Austrians, Hungarians and sundry Germans slaughtered each other over seven years for so little effect.
Yes, but people need to realise that this is only the military aspect. You should also be thinking of the political, economic, legal, cultural and social aspects In this. Since 1689 and the English Bill of Rights,, everything in modern history changed in favour of England, simply because European elites were storing their wealth in English banks due to the safety from Royal confiscation for ridiculous purposes, such as whimsical wars. William of Orange in England was in no position to do this, and Parliament was run by the Whigs, who were free market investment capitalists, whose entire ethos was to be entrepreneurial and use investment for growth.
*If the French had mounted a successful invasion of England, this would have kicked off civil wars all over the continent, as wealthy elites started to realise that their wealth was no longer safe from the French king confiscating them
*Even in the military aspect you need to realise that the 3 different mounted invasions of northern France, by the Royal Navy, stopped the French army from overwhelming Frederick and also the Brits were bankrolling Frederick's war effort, which couldn't have continued otherwise
@@Rowlph8888 Yes, but 9,000 soldiers THAT far oversees is far, far more expensive to transport, manage, supply, maintain, and command than soldiers on The Continent. It might be equivalent more to 40,000 soldiers or something. Also, to have any hope of supplying and having an army overseas, you need to have a navy that's capable of contending with the very best in the world. So you need a world-class navy, and vast expenditures to maintain that overseas army. Your point is true and interesting though -- maybe the other nations should have tried to contend for the sea more.
Actually, there is 6 million Quebecois, mostly all decedent of french people living in the Province of Quebec. CANADA is a bilingual because of the province of Quebec were we all speak french. French were not kick out of America. The French army lost a battle in Quebec city and later on, the French royalty gave up on the America for they were to busy fighting in Europe. All the french colonist remain in Quebec.
Quite so ! The British were clever
enough to offer the Quebecois
sufficient guarantees for their language and culture . And the
Quebecois were clever enough
to accept those terms. ? Somehow it worked....!
Absolutely thrilling account. I never realised this war was so exciting
This is where the German Way of War - BEWEGUNGSKRIEG - that so shocked the world in 1940 was founded under Friedrich der Große, it was consolidated and developed under Molkte in the mid 19th century, and peaked in 1920 to 1941.
World War Zero.
George Washington started the 7yrs war when he massacred a French Peace Part, executing most of the survivors.
@@PalleRasmussen
That's a distortion.Frederick was a master tactician, but the Germans in World War I, and World War II, simply benefited from 1st mover advantage and specifically in World War II, the lack of preparation from the Brits and the French in considering the Ardennes was impenetrable.
*Letters from these German archives recently exposed, from, both Moltke and Falconhyn at various points during World war, 1 desperately requesting that the Kaiser sue for peace, acquiescing to whatever the British and French demands were, showed that they were no more superior to the French in army capabilities and were defeatist, even going into the war. But they believed it had to be fought, regardless.
The Germans have the Kaiser to thank for the continued existence as a unified nation, because in continuing to fight the war against his generals advice, meant that once the US got involved Woodrow Wilson ended up having the main influence, and after war proceedings - without this, the French president would have ensured the breaking up of Germany back to the situation close to when it states were part of the HRE.
The Germans Only managed to carry on competing in the First World War, because they were camped close to Paris, which meant that they could use any innovative tactics they wanted, with no imminent threat to Berlin, whereas the bricks French and Belgians, were having to fight a mass frenzy for years, with any mistake, leading to the loss of the war - after all, that was the Germans plan, to take Paris and win the war quickly before anyone could mobilise probably.
This was worth every second! Thank you.
This accounting of the war is awesome man!
Thanks a lot!
Superb storytelling on what has been described as the alternative First World War .
World war zer0
Another great contender for the First World War is the Thirty Years War.
"Madame Petticoat IV"
That's just savage--and not just for the direct insult leveled at Madame de Pompadour...Louis needed to be admitted to the burn unit after this!
We We have a lot the last
Thanks! More like this please.
Hi y
And still they come! Wonderful.
what a video, tnks
I am ashamed to admit that I know so little about this conflict that I can't even voice an opinion. It usually takes me three books, read, digested and then read again, before I slowly get to wrap my mind around any historical era. And, then, not being a historian, my understanding is limited at best.
same
Clinton Miller yeah any tips how to understand all this in a short version?
I’d keep that to yourself if I was you, otherwise you’ll get kicked off social media and UA-cam comments 😀
watch sunmaries and how it started.
the austrian succession
Only way you can understand something is to have full appreciation for it. I think this conflict is interesting because of the subject of Frederick the Great
I've heard this one narration of this book forever. It is pretty good.
Thanks Rocky!
For those wondering about the quality of the writing, Will Durant is one of America's greatest historians, famous for penetrant observations and excellent expression. He's a good read as well as a good historian who makes history "functional" as well as interesting, not just a biased recital of events.His wife, Ariel, is also a major force in his books.
Which leads to him being bias especially when concerning Jewish history
In short, everyone was left devastated except Britain who became an economic powerhouse with unmatched naval power.
Edit: Let me clarify that this wasn’t meant to insult others, only as a mere observation pertaining to the aftermath of such a devastating war.
A Noir Story, Russia was not devastated.
Lucky Chops Politically, it was. The sudden turnabout due to their Prussian-sympathetic leader damaged Russia. They were beating Prussia back, losing little themselves until this change.
It say that but it also explain that Britain cpulda conquered all the growing euro. Countries due to it's naval power and there wealth in commerce and global control also to detain Germany financial and expansion motives. While doing this Germany could not build a fleet to till Bismarck so since they have a good land army the Brits wanted an ally...so in short the British needed an ally against France while the colony's can be maintained and contained while at sea and at this time a catch 22 occurred while in america there fleet was scattered and there army is in the colonized nations the French made an ally with Russia and so then a few years later a war was imminent and a few years later a war was immediate due to Europe for neglect of that continent because the spoils of america and new ideas from the new went back to the old..America is full of ideas!
Britain become broke as shit after this war...
Young Archivest Yes and no. Great Britain’s economic growth skyrocketed after the war through its growing trade and newly acquired colonial possessions. However the country’s coffers were indeed dwindling after years of financing Prussia and raising regiments of foot. This of course, is a primary reason for the American Revolution.
Will Durrant ranks alongside Gibbon in the elegance and scope of his historical
analysis. I can think of no higher praise....
Winnipeg Manitoba Canada 🇨🇦
One particular comment caught my eye: @bill6687 said, "This was the humanities before they were infiltrated by communists." I had to listen to the video again with his comment in mind. It's not that I don't know the story, but Will Durant artfully presents geopolitical ideologies in a way that takes us back to the middle of the 18th century.
First true world war - multiple allies, fought all over the world on land sea, empires changed hands.
Britain was the superpower then !!!!
18th and 19th century European political history makes my eyes glaze over.
Then why are you listening to this? I'm sure a busy person like yourself has more serious business to attend to.
The narrator also did steven kings the stand. Keep waiting for him to talk about the walking dude
So amazing that napoleon beat all these countries single handedly in less than 2 years
Rxttcr really do TTCmkpmmmkllklmmomklmlklmml.mmmlkl.om
*almost all
@@Swift-mr5zi *all countries that were not protected by a sea
@@lahire4943neither Russia nor Spain are protected by a sea
@@davyroger3773he beat the Spanish come on. Didn't his brother sit on the Spanish throne for a time?
Read Fred Anderson “Crucible of War.”
I just found that yesterday.
I read his introduction, then ploughed through the first 200 pages.
A thought provoking thesis and such an enjoyable style.
I strongly second this recommendation!
@@sdporres the Audible read is excellent as well, however, one needs the footnotes and maps. And the Audible doesn’t incl the Epilogue for some reason. FA is writing the 2nd vol of the Oxford series. I hope this is published sooner than later.
Dauphin River First Nation Manitoba Canada 🇨🇦
Are there no other pictures of this era and the persons involved?
Evidently Germany inevitably gets left holding the bag. They should learn to only engage a few enemies at once
Smarter Allies really. They do quite well holding off the rest of the world actually. Haha
It was Friedrich der Große's success in The Seven Years War that made Germany focus so much on operations and tactics that they came to rule supreme in that area, while lacking so horrendously in strategy and logistics that they went to war with the world's largest naval power and island kingdom in 1940, without a navy of their own. While they could not cross the Channel, the US waged war across three oceans.
Rob Citino has written an excellent book on the matter and Sönke Neitzel one this year that I have yet to read, but which is by all accounts quite good also as it loks also at the privates and does not stop with 1945. Rob has three lectures on UA-cam also and is a good lecturer, well worth a watch (he is also a nice chap actually).
What about Eugen of savoya? Did Will wrote about him?
War of Spanish Succession. It preceeded the Seven Years War. One of the great captains
1761-63 would be a great 200min movie
what book is this
WILL DURANT IS ARGUABLY THE GREATEST HISTORIAN OF ALL TIME. HE WAS STRAIGHT FORWARD & TOLD IT LIKE IT WAS. I REMEMBER MERV GRIFFIN ASKING HIM WHEN OUR CIVILIZATION WOULD COME TO AN END. HIS ANSWER: IT WOULD BEGIN TO UNRAVEL AFTER HOMOSEXUALS GAIN AFFLUENCE; I.E., WHEN THEY COME OUT OF THE CLOSET. HE SAID THAT THAT WAS WHAT HAD HAPPENED TO LITERALLY EVERY FALLEN CIVILIZATION SINCE THE BEGINNING OF RECORDED HISTORY.
Of course, when we take homosexuals out of the closet, we put those opposed to homosexuality in the same closet, and then kid ourselves into thinking we are more tolerant. But all that changes, I who we descrimate against. Lmao
@@clintonmiller1698 WHAT DOES THAT HAVE TO DO WITH WHAT WILL DURANT WAS TALKING ABOUT? AS FOR DISCRIMINATION, WHO/WHOM DO YOU REFER TO? PEOPLE IN THE U.S., WHO HAVE COME TO ACCEPT GAY MARRIAGES, OR THE PEOPLE OF ISLAM WHO REGULARLY PUT HOMOSEXUALS TO DEATH?
I think it's more to do with when civilizations get overindulgent with sex in general.
It seems to precipitate the fall.
Also Old Fritz(Frederick the Great) was said to be a homosexual.
And he was a good king wouldn't you say?
IntermediateJesus The only reason people actually believe that is because people are constantly trying to make great people homosexual so they can feel good about themselves. Also like how people say the greeks were openly gay (if they were) and that is also a ridiculous.
@@PennyDreadful1 That is a british myth just like Hitler having one testicle.
Nice
Frederick did not believe in miracles. Wait for it....
Kartoffelbefehl, auch Kartoffelerlass, ist eine Bezeichnung für Anordnungen, Rundschreiben und Verordnungen Friedrichs II. von Preußen an die Beamten seiner Provinzen, in denen er sich bemühte, den Anbau der Kartoffel in den preußischen Provinzen durchzusetzen
Das Menschenmaterial muss gefüttert sein um es Verwerten zu können
I assume you are reading from the 11 volume Story of Civilization?
Think its Durant reading.....just sayin
@@howeyhanley3947 it's a voice over artist. Durant died in 1981
This is an audiobook?
Yes, it’s in volume 10 of Will and Ariel Durant’s Story of Civilization series. The book is called Rousseau and Revolution.
great history lesson,long live germany.thanks a lot!
momentous times in history resulting in the inauguration of a new country (USA)
An Op Ed with one picture.
What book is this?
guessin' vol X, Rousseau and Revolution (1967). g.davis 19Feb2023
@@rickiandavis Thank You mate, I cannot belive it has been over a year since watching this. The channel change was a shock and a half. This was my first video as well.
You must respect my royal inviolability.
"He ordered her removed, she fled, and the documents were secured."
Sounds like 150% discipline.
Edit: Fredericks speech to his men before Luethen.
THATS 150% Discipline.
Frederick was such a sassy edgelord. 😆
The British Empire was a blessing? Fuck that.
what's the right response here? Agreement does what? Is it just another reconciliation pathway, or is there something else that I am not seeing?
3621
The world was just a chessboard to these imperial power players. An average citizen was meaningless to them.
So often I've heard in many historical accounts, including here, that it was the British who were the first to condemn and out law slavery. This is true but disgustingly misleading...the British offered freedom and land to all American slaves enlisting in their army to defeat the colonial army under Washington. In order to ensure this offer it was in their interest to claim slavery illegal. A difficult and highly debated decision within the Empire, for it was as the world leader in the slave trade did the British add substantially to their considerable wealth and power. Unfortunately for them a slave army was insignificant and of no aid in a war they were destined to lose. As a result maintaining the fight against slavery becoming unavoidable to the globally embarrassed British.
When the British lost the American Civil war to Lincoln and the North that's when the Brutish became anti slavery, before that world changing event (ACW), the Englanders along with their French/Spanish puppets wanted to create a slave empire (Neo Feudalism) of Southern U.S. Mexico, Central & South America.
@@harrym7544 Exactly, People do know critical reasoning on this stuff, to support a narrative.What about the hundreds of thousands of signatures on petitions from different British citizens in 1815, to put pressure on the Foreign Secretary to get practical solutions to support the antislavery movement, from other European superpowers in the Congress of Vienna.
*Also, there was the small matter of the Royal Navy and British Army all over the globe for several decades, blockading slave markets, destroying ships suspected of slavery in all seas and the army crushing armies in the Middle East, to end the slave trade, despite certain defeats and losses of even aristocrats, such as
This was an incredible movement globally, for over a century galvanising gradual support - this is also the only example in human history and a movement working and should be in inspiration for future movements which are obviously going to be needed
The first 3/4 minutes, I guess few pages of the book, are so filled with disgusting machist comments towards Maria Theresa to make it almost unbearable.
This is whiggish horseshit. Hapsburgs kept domination on Germany till 1805. Also lol at defense of British empire.
As far as I can see no one man has ever had domination over all Germans. What buch of disorganised, divided men they are.
Dauphin River First Nation Manitoba Canada 🇨🇦