What did it mean to be a gentleman in Britain in the Victorian era? How did it change over time?

Are there any primary texts I could read?

I'm watching the Fresh Prince of Bel-Air where Will is embarrassed to tell his family about his job, and in a hilarious case of mistaken identity, Uncle Phil tries to compliment Will on getting a job, but it turns out he was talking to someone else, and that guy thought he was creeping on him.

The guy made the comment "I guess you didn't notice, but the parrot is sitting on my left shoulder" and walked away.

Given that this was a pirate themed restaurant, I figure this may be a historical joke of some sort.

Sortition is a process by which public officials are chosen through a lottery of citizens, not an election. I.e., one day, you get a call to become President of the United States.

On one hand, I’d think it would be decelerating, if all the big discoveries had been discovered. Or as urbanization paves over more places to dig.

On the other hand, I’d think accelerating, as there are more scientists, more construction projects breaking ground, more population in general, to find odd things poking out of the ground, and a global climate infrastructure to call in experts when something is found.

So, which is it?

(The above question is phrased more toward archaeology, but I’m equally curious about non-archeological historical finds, such as the occasional lost document found in an attic, etc.)

In a related question, are there any theories or statistical models that estimate how many such potential discoveries likely exist but haven’t been found yet, or will never be found, based on how difficult they would be to find?

In short, is the future of these fields going to get more exciting or less, as the decades (and centuries) go by?

The Julian Calendar adds a leap day to its 365 day year every 4 years, to bring the average year to 365.25 days

The real year is actually 365.24219 days, meaning that (365.25 - 365.24219 = 0.00781 days = ) roughly 11 minutes were erroneously gained a year, or ( 1/0.00781 =) 1 day was gained every 128 years.

The Gregorian calendar came into effect in 1582, and the Julian calendar in 46 BC, meaning that there are 1,628 years for the Julian calendar to lose sync to the real year.

1628 / 128 = 12.7 days askew

Why did the Gregorian calendar not add 12 or 13 days, but 11?

I am trying to find the joke that is referenced in this quote from Walter Lippmann's Public Opinion. I must assume that it was such a well known joke at the time that he did not bother to actually tell it in the book. I have included the surrounding quote for context, in case it helps jog someone's memory. Thank you for your time.

Quote, emphasis mine:

“There is in each set of stereotypes a point where effort ceases and things happen of their own accord, as you would like them to. The progressive stereotype, powerful to incite work, almost completely obliterates the attempt to decide what work and why that work. Laissez-faire, a blessed release from stupid officialdom, assumes that men will move by spontaneous combustion towards a pre-established harmony. Collectivism, an antidote to ruthless selfishness, seems, in the Marxian mind, to suppose an economic determinism towards efficiency and wisdom on the part of socialist officials. Strong government, imperialism at home and abroad, at its best deeply conscious of the price of disorder, relies at last on the notion that all that matters to the governed will be known by the governors. In each theory there is a spot of blind automatism.

That spot covers up some fact, which if it were taken into account, would check the vital movement that the stereotype provokes. If the progressive had to ask himself, like the Chinaman in the joke, what he wanted to do with the time he saved by breaking the record, if the advocate of laissez-faire had to contemplate not only free and exuberant energies of men, but what some people call their human nature, if the collectivist let the center of his attention be occupied with the problem of how he is to secure his officials, if the imperialist dared to doubt his own inspiration, you would find more Hamlet and less Henry the Fifth. For these blind spots keep away distracting images, which with their attendant emotions, might cause hesitation and infirmity of purpose. Consequently the stereotype not only saves time in a busy life and is a defense of our position in society, but tends to preserve us from all the bewildering effect of trying to see the world steadily and see it whole.”

Greek had been a very important language in the eastern mediterranean before the rize of the the Roman empire and continued to be widely used in the region even after centuries of Roman rule. With the collapse of the western half, the eastern Byzantine had Greek as their majority language.

While the germanic people that invaded and established their kingdoms in the western half adopted Latin (which later evolved into various romance languages) due to its prestige and how well established it already was with the population, the people who later settled in Byzantine lands didn't adopt Greek.

I can see why the Arabs and Ottomans had no desire to assimilate the Greek culture that they conquered since they were enemies to them but is there any reason as to why the Bulgarians, Serbs and Albanians didn't welcome it the same way the Germanic people embraced Latin in the west? Did they significantly outnumber the Greek speakers in the region even after centuries of Greek presence in the area?

​

Monasteries and Pagan Hof's often had a sizeable population, how did they keep a steady food supply? Did they grow it or traded for it?

I've read that colonial Americans would burn between 30-35 cords of wood per year. As someone who burns wood for their primary heat source, that seems like an absolute ton of wood.

For reference I burn 5-6 cords a year.

So, is the 30-35 cords an accurate number, if so, how did they possibly cut, buck, split, and stack that much. I have a hard enough time getting 6 cords ready and i have the luxury of a car with a trailer, chainsaw, and hydraulic splitter.

I imagine they needed wood to heat their water and for summer cooking, but I can't see how that would cause that much extra burning of wood.

I visited the citadel of Verdun this summer, and while visiting I witnessed some flags which I recognized all accept one, it was composed of three horizontal bands from top to bottom, black blue and white, and written in the center "HI". I searched a lot and I asked directly to the staff of the citadel and they told me that it was "a serbian flag but we don't know what the HI stands for" with no further explanation, and I can't find it on internet, I hope you'll help me, thanks.

Are there any sources for this, or can anyone make an educated guess? It seems like most of the men who were of fighting age would have been sent to Troy. Would this have opened up the country to banditry? Were supplies, and reinforcements sent to Troy on a regular basis? Did governing change due to the leaders being abroad?

If all of the gods were busy fighting in Troy, would this have any meaningful change regarding worship in Greece? For example: would less important, local gods prayed to more often?

I'd be curious about any other aspects of life in Greece during this time as well.

Hi, writing a novel where the MC runs away from the battlefield during an hypotethical medieval war. I'd ask to you: which are the punishments for military desertion in France/England/Germany during the early middle ages? Thanks in advance.

The border between ET and CT is wonky and seemingly arbitrary. TBH I don’t even understand why Ohio is on ET. The borders make a bit more sense out west where there are fewer people per square mile, but in the east major metropolitan areas straddle the border. An hour outside of Chicago is ET. Same for Louisville.

I had in mind early US elections but I guess the same questions could apply to any democratic system invented until the advent of radio.

I assume much of the campaigning was in person and in print, but a candidate can only hold so many rallies and write so many op-eds. Debates would have to be reported on the next day. Did the media have a larger role to play in shaping the election issues? Or were proxies of the candidate more important? Were most people literate at the time?

Realistically, could a candidate expect to be heard by even 10% of the country before election day? And yet third parties tended to crop up now and again much more often than they do now. How did they organize, if they did not have mass media except in print?

I am particularly interested in other factors than just lost wars.

Hello there,

I've seen numerous threads discussing naval "accuracy", but they always lead to answers about Fire Control Systems and I want to know instead what shot fall patterns are like.

Where, under ideal circumstances, would my shells land if I just shot at the water "X" distance away with "Y" weapon? I hope you understand my meaning and any help would be much appreciated.

Many thanks,

TheResplendency