Ameisen t1_jatk04m wrote

I imagine that it changed in 1524 and 1551 when the Imperial gulden was redefined (though they may have charged in Reichsthaler instead), in 1754 when the South German gulden was introduced, 1873 when the Imperial German Goldmark replaced it, 1914 when the Papiermark replaced that, 1924 when the Rentenmark and then the Reichsmark replaced that, 1948 when the Deutsche Mark replaced that, and lastly in 2002 when the Euro replaced that.


Ameisen t1_jajvqo0 wrote

Germany alone today has tens of thousands of castles (though not as many in the 13th century). It would have been a strange place for the Mongols, especially as the Emperor's orders were to heavily stock the castles and cities, avoid direct engagements, and force the Mongols into sieges.

This AskHistorians reply goes into more detail aa well., including other, more important factors.


Ameisen t1_jajr3u4 wrote

Mongols would have had a lot of difficulty with central European terrain, and the sheer density of fortifications - Europe had a lot of castles, forts, and fortified cities, since they were constantly at war. Fortifications in Europe and Asia were also quite different.

It would have been a very difficult campaign for the Mongols.


Ameisen t1_ja574tw wrote

Slavery played a part, but the Texan Revolution was a part of a larger, general set of insurrections within Mexico at the time (the Mexican Federalist War) against Santa Anna.

Slavery was absolutely a cause, but the general trigger was the increasing centralization of the Mexican government. It wasn't that they violated the constitution, but that they replaced it with a centralist one in 1835.


Ameisen t1_j585zeq wrote

The diapsid infratemporal fenestra is homologous to the synapsid single temporal fenestra, so this asserts that the amniote line first developed a single fenestra (the [infra]temporal fenestra) and then later one lineage gained another (the supratemporal fenestra), with this lineage becoming the diapsids while the other being synapsids.

With this in mind, why are the early amniotes who first developed a fenestra not considered synapsids? Is it to maintain synapsida and diapsida as monophyletic that we only consider them synapsids a while after their defining trait developed?

Or, rather, why are diapsida not considered a clade of synapsida given that the common ancestor of both lines already possessed the infratemporal fenestra? It would seem sensible to me to put them both in a clade specifying a single fenestra ("monapsid"?) with the synapsids just being those more closely related to [insert synapsid here] than to diapsids.


Ameisen t1_ixiemvo wrote

> A. It's "The United States of America", not "America" that uses the the ridiculous system

The colloquial name of the United States of America in English is 'America'.

The only people who care about this are people who originate in cultures where a continent model is used that doesn't distinguish North and South America as continents (and thus really shouldn't care about what it's called in English), or people who want to be edgy. There is zero ambiguity in English - nobody refers to 'America' as a continent because there is no single continent in the system English-speakers use. They use 'North American' or 'South American'.

> B. The USA actually uses the metric system (, and converts dumbwards to freedom units

I find it utterly bizarre that anyone ever posts YouTube videos as evidence of anything when you can literally just link to the US Code instead. You're not wrong, but your argument is dumb... and you provided the stupidest source possible.

But what can be expected from someone who wrote A?


Ameisen t1_ixie4e3 wrote

> Many people in the US think they do not use imperial at all.

Because they don't. The US never adopted Imperial measures, which are adopted in Britain 50 years after the American Revolution.

The United States customary units are similar to Imperial measures, and in many places identical, but only because they are both based upon earlier English units. There are significant differences between the systems.

(unless you mean that people in the US think that the British don't, and that's just untrue - we regularly make fun of them for using 'stone')