In this context, “pouvait” and “aurait pu” convey very similar meanings. The only nuance I understand (quite subjective) is similar, in a weaker form, to the nuance between "he comes at 8" and "he is coming at 8". The first carries a "constant" sense, the second refers to a specific time.

To me, "aurait pu" might refers (to the narrator) to something special. For instance an event, potential recent, that has affected the place recently, which could have modified my perception of its peacefulness.

To be more specific, I could use the first sentence if I travel first the first time to a country at war since 30 years. I only know the country through the standard news, which periodically shows up as not peaceful. But arriving there, I am surprised of the peace of the country.

The second sentence might arise if I travel to a city that just made the news with a recent outbreak of riots throughout the city. The dramatization of the media made me await a state of havoc, which I just do not see when arriving.

In this context, “pouvait” and “aurait pu” convey very similar meanings. The only nuance I understand (quite subjective) is similar, in a weaker form, to the nuance between "he comes at 8" and "he is coming at 8". The first carries a "constant" sense, the second refers to a specific time.

To me, "aurait pu" might refers (to the narrator) to something special. For instance an event, potential recent, that has affected the place recently, which could have modified my perception of its peacefulness.

To be more specific, I could use the first sentence if I travel for the first time to a country at war since 30 years. I only know the country through the standard news, which periodically shows up as not peaceful. But arriving there, I am surprised of the peace of the country.

The second sentence might arise if I travel to a city that just made the news with a recent outbreak of riots throughout the city. The dramatization of the media made me await a state of havoc, which I just do not see when arriving.

In this context, “pouvait” and “aurait pu” convey very similar meanings. The only nuance I understand (quite subjective) is similar, in a weaker form, to the nuance between "he comes at 8" and "he is coming at 8". The first carries a "constant" sense, the second refers to a specific time.

To me, " aurait pu" might refers (to the reader) to something special: an event, potential recent, that had affected the place recently,

In this context, “pouvait” and “aurait pu” convey very similar meanings. The only nuance I understand (quite subjective) is similar, in a weaker form, to the nuance between "he comes at 8" and "he is coming at 8". The first carries a "constant" sense, the second refers to a specific time.

To me, "aurait pu" might refers (to the narrator) to something special. For instance an event, potential recent, that has affected the place recently, which could have modified my perception of its peacefulness.

To be more specific, I could use the first sentence if I travel first the first time to a country at war since 30 years. I only know the country through the standard news, which periodically shows up as not peaceful. But arriving there, I am surprised of the peace of the country.

The second sentence might arise if I travel to a city that just made the news with a recent outbreak of riots throughout the city. The dramatization of the media made me await a state of havoc, which I just do not see when arriving.