I understand that the Soviet Union was a bit less free to have certain political opinions, but I was curious if there were any sections of society that might be stereotyped as being "hotbeds of pro-capitalist ideas"? And if so, what sort of ideas did these groups generally promote?

I also mean pro-capitalist as opposed to groups that generally criticized the Soviet Union for failing to live up to its ideals, which also appears to have been something that writers did with some frequency but not necessarily promoting any capitalist ideas by themselves.

Possible subquestions: How big were they and how large was the text? Was the variation between existing texts significant, or were only a very few people producing similar works? How were they bound? How many physically exist today?

I've often encountered records of notable 19th-century figures being fluent in multiple different languages, often with two or three living languages and a couple of dead languages (Latin, Ancient Greek, etc.). A few examples:

• Carl Friedrich Gauss understood most of the principal European languages, and "at the age of 62 he started learning Russian and in less than two years wrote and spoke it."

• Chester A. Arthur conversed in Latin and Greek with other people who knew the languages.

• Thomas Jefferson spoke English, French, Latin, and Italian, and claimed to be able to read Greek and Spanish. He also studied and wrote about Old English and German.

• Helmuth von Moltke the Elder spoke and wrote German, Danish, French, English, Italian and Turkish.

• Pedro II, Emperor of Brazil was claimed to speak and write in Portuguese, Latin, French, German, English, Italian, Spanish, Greek, Arabic, Hebrew, Sanskrit, Chinese, Occitan and Tupi.

• Nikola Tesla was capable of reading, writing, and speaking Serbo-Croatian, Slovenian, Czech, English, French, German, Hungarian, Italian, and Latin.

With our current understanding of language learning and development, were 19th-century Polyglots really proficient at these languages, or are they moreso parlor tricks for entertaining guests and diplomats? Languages are difficult to learn today, even with lifetimes of learning material available on the internet and instant audio communication available with native speakers.

This has been mentioned a couple times in r/Titanic. I've found several websites claiming this and quoting that “third class passengers were unfamiliar with indoor plumbing and may not remember {or understand} the need to flush the toilets themselves," but no source for this quote, and all of the toilet history websites state that automatic flush toilets weren't invented until the 1980s. Would such technology have been developed by 1912?

In S01E08 one of the storylines is that on first impression many people thought Chandler was gay and in fact a friend from work tries to set him up with a guy named Lowell

At the end of the episode Chandler finds Lowell in the break room and Lowell explains he always knew Chandler wasn't gay because they have a "radar"

I imagine that maybe gay people found this joke really funny and began using it in conversation, eventually leading up to the term "gaydar"

However I imagine it's also possible the term already existed but it wasn't popular, one of the writers was aware of it and that's why they decided to use it, making this usage of the world mainstream

Or maybe that word was already mainstream and it had already been used that way in another movie or tv show

I am a huge fan of 70's British and American music, especially rock, and it just struck me how few mentions of nuclear war there is in this genre. I can only think of a passing mention of that threat in American Pie in 1971 (Helter skelter in a summer swelter/ The birds flew off with a fallout shelter) and then some mentions in Roger Water's Two suns in the Sunset, from 1983 (And as the windshield melts/My tears evaporate)

I guess my real questions should be "why seems that this problem was ignored in 70s rock?", but I know that questions about why something didn't happen are next to imposible to answer.

I’m currently reading ‘Morality’ by Jonathan Sacks and it is discussing the current lack of freedom of thought in British and US universities.

He says “only someone lacking in historical knowledge of what happened in French and German universities in the 1920s and 1830s could fail to find this first step to lead down a very dangerous path indeed”.

Presumably they became a hot bed for nationalist rhetoric and thought, thus leading to a stifling of opposing views? Can someone please elaborate on this for me. Thank you!

The impression I've gotten is that copper and bronze knives were prestige items, not necessarily something that every household would have used for cutting meat or fibers, but what about stone knives? Obsidian blades? How common a tool was a knife for the average person? Do we know?

I've read about the mass production of bone tools, and I imagine that stone knives were relatively common, but were they necessary for every individual, or were they the sort of thing a community leader might have and allow to be used as needed, like how bread ovens were basically one-per-community?

I'm trying to get a sense of when metal knives became a common household / personal item and what would have been normal before that time.

Also, I realize that "the Bronze Age" is pretty broad, but I'm interested in broad trends and would be happy with an answer about any region, urban or rural, settled or nomadic.

Thank you!

I am curious because the idea of hiding the location whole city doesn't seem viable, but maybe I am underestimating the size of the world and/or overestimating the spread of information and maps.

It is a bit of a different question, but if it is not based on historical ideas, what was the first work of fiction to feature such?

She says this is why Carr's "What is History" was so influential as it was their first introduction to radical different historical frameworks. If this is true, how could a history graduate in America possibly go through their entire degree without encountering Marxist interpretations of history?

The exact quote is "For some of us (I think it fair to say that most American history graduate students in the 1960s were unfamiliar with Marx) reading Carr was our first encounter with a serious alternative framework"

Its on the third page of chapter 6 entitled "What is Gender History Now" which is page 97 in the most up to date edition of the book.

Hey everyone, I was hoping to find some information in regards to the 16 Dynasties period in China for a podcast episode I am planning on publishing. So far my searches are coming up with very little in terms of detail. Any suggestions would be great!

Are there any good book on the Elamites? Other things such as Videos Podcasts and other

In Catholic School I was taught that Jews viewed their place of origin as their home and not where they lived. So if your family traced its lineage to Bethlehem, you had to go to Bethlehem to be counted for the census.

I’m wondering whether this was true, why this belief arose and how it worked out. How did the Romans react to it? Did it create a lot of turmoil in Judaea during the census with everyone moving around? What did Jews do if they lived far away like in Rome?

Nowadays most of us are aware of jet lag and different time zones, often having to adjust watches or switch out sim cards, but were there ancient equivalents? Or, did traveling by foot or by sea somehow mitigate those effects?

I've searched the internet and haven't found a response from someone I'd consider qualified to give one.

To me, "Now wait just a cotton picking minute" strikes me as a minced phrase where "cotton picking" is used as an intensifier instead of a curse, e.g. "Now wait just a god damn minute." Put to any of my friends, they'd say "cotton picking" refers to plantation slavery. But I'm not so sure.

The term "cotton picking", as far as I've found, isn't a common term the American lexicon when in reference to actually picking cotton, while the term "Cotten picking" very much is, because of the Seeger family's promotion of Elizabeth Cotten. Her song "Freight Train", written when Libba was just a teen, became a hit over in England and was played by literally every big name in American folk music history. The song was actually popularized by Peggy Seeger, who learned it from Libba as a child and played it during a tour in England. There it was misappropriated, copyrighted, and recorded by a skiffle singer named Chas McDevitt. The picking style she used (using her thumb for the melody and fingers for the bass lines, then became extremely popular in the folk music community.)

It was then re-recorded by McDevitt as a duet with Nancy Whisky, and the song then became a hit.

It was even popular with a band called The Quarrymen, who performed it a fair amount before rebranding. Subsequent to them, it's been covered by Jerry Garcia, Bob Dylan, Joan Baez, Doc Watson, Peter Paul & Mary, Taj Mahal, Laura Veirs, and countless others.

So it seems to me "cotton picking" might actually just be a mistake due to a homonym. Does anyone here know better?

Im doing an exam about the ideology and reasoning of the Khmer Rouge, particularily Pol Pot. Also any information regarding foreign entanglements by the tripolar powers which were ideologically contradictory, such as the Western support for the Syngman Rhee dictatorship.

Its a simple question, but I get confused due to the conflicting information.

The industrial revolution was infamous for its poor working conditions with long working hours and low wages along with abuses and health hazards etc... Yet people from the countryside migrated to the cities, sometimes leaving towns where their families had lived for centuries in search of work, along with people moving in from other nearby countries like Italy and Ireland. Why? Was the life outside the cities even worse? Did they not know about the awful work conditions? Or do I have the timing wrong?