I have an old autograph album with some dated (1912-1918) sketches in, some from members of the RNAS. Some of the names have A.C.C. next to them, but I can't find what it means. I'm wondering if you can help, or point me somewhere that can. (British, if it helps).
1 Answers 2015-03-16
What about the process made it "safer"? Was it because of the bacteria destroying nature of the alcohol or because of the distillation or pasteurization process?
More importantly, would they have ACTUALLY understood that this was killing harmful bacteria or is it something we miss-attribute in retrospect and they just were lucky boozehounds?
EDIT: Thank you for the responses and I apologize for the grammar in the title... really wish you could edit those bad boys.
4 Answers 2015-03-16
More specifically;
Today the US Constitution is, by all right, viewed by Americans as almost religious. It's a document of incredible importance, and something that all Americans will identify with and stand proud of.
But how was it back in 1787-1788 and on? Was it received with as much praise and positivity back then, or was it met with scepticism, etc?
Of course the reception would vary depending on if you had slaves or not and similar points, but the Consitution was still, when it comes down to it, a set of compromises. But overall, what was the reception like, and how did it develop with the Bill of Rights and further amendments?
If you have them, further sources of reading that are credible would be very interesting! As a European, this whole chain of events is slightly foreign, and I'd love to learn more.
Thanks!
1 Answers 2015-03-16
Sorry for language problems.
I wish to know how person get to university, how many there were students, how many teachers... Does there ware 1 in 1000 higher educated people or proportion was different?
How long they were studding?
What subject they were studying?
How job prospect for graduate they were?
1 Answers 2015-03-16
1 Answers 2015-03-16
3 Answers 2015-03-16
A modern history book is mainly just blocks of text, something which hasn't changed despite the access to computers everywhere.
The answer is probably an obvious one, that historians can't make use of the new media but I am wondering whether that is intentional. It shouldn't be a problem at all for a history department to collaborate with the computer science department.
As an example I could refer to science textbooks. They would often include CDs or links to their website where a student can access software which illustrates the subject better than a still image ever could. A medical student has access to webbrowser application which lets him surf through the body naming and describing every little anatomical feature. And a physics student can plug in numbers into a simulator and get his results in real time.
When I read a history textbook, the references are marked with a small number and I have to go to the end of the chapter to see what it refers to. If I am lucky, there is a small description of that reference. That could be made a hyperlink in today's media. I should be able to hover over any reference in the text and get a small portrait of that reference. Further, it should be possible to have high resolution images. So much detail is lost when an image is fitted to the page of a book.
And when we are talking about the study of material culture. Why wouldn't I be able to get a high resolution 3d image which rotates before my eyes? That by the way can be achieved by anyone at home with the very simple use of software. All it takes is 50 photos of that object. With the 3d image comes the availability of data. Material, dimensions, weight, gps coordinates of where it's found. That kind of data should be a simple click away from the text.
Or the use of maps as in this news article which recently garnered a lot of praise on reddit: A Game of Shark and Mirrow. The New York Times had the resources to put that much work into a single article.
3 Answers 2015-03-16
1 Answers 2015-03-16
2 Answers 2015-03-16
Questions asks it all. I've tried different .edu sites and some are contradicting, saying that they leaflets were dropped too late, some say none were dropped at all, and others say tens of millions were dropped.
1 Answers 2015-03-16
Was it just to show a connection to Charlemagne?
1 Answers 2015-03-16
How effective was plate armor really? I mean if it was as effective as some accounts say then how come the Ottomans had so many successes against heavily armored Europeans in the medieval era. It sounded like all Europeans had to do is produce more armor to win battles. Same with the 100 years war between England and France. The main weapon of the British was the bow vs the heavy Frankish knights and men at arms.
Another related question, If it was so effective how come there was no apparent decline in swords, they still seemed like the more popular arms in depictions from that period over anti-plate weapons like warhammers and maces.
1 Answers 2015-03-16
What did they think of. Spanish,Portuguese,Swedish and Italians? These were were European but would they be treated as subhumans? 2nd class people?
What about the occupied peoples such as Belgians, Czechs, Dutch, Danish, Norwegians and French? I recall reading something about the Dutch, Belgians and danish being "misguided Germans" and could be saved/reeducated.
What about the Bulgarian and Romanians? People who would fall under the "Slavic" Ethnicity and some parts of its cultural identity but fought as allies as part of the Axis.
What about the Hungarians? These unsual Magyar/Slavic/Uralic people?
3 Answers 2015-03-16
1 Answers 2015-03-16
In fact, not just any ballad, but specifically "Robyn and Gandeleyn" (Child 115). I've recently created a thread in /r/linguistics, but was redirected here. Whereas initially my question was chiefly about pronounciation of personal names (Robyn, Gandeleyn and Wrennok of Donne), the conversation led me to doubt the meter of the ballad as well. Having come to no definite conclusions in /r/linguistics, here's my second attempt at getting answers. Following is my original post. Any help would be appreciated. Thanks.
The text in question is "Robyn and Gandeleyn" (Child's ballad №115) found in one manuscript only, which was dated from ca. 1400 to ca. 1450 by different scholars. The first half of the XV century being a transitional period in the history of English language, I'm at a loss regarding proper pronounciation of the ballad. It is clear that some changes (like the terminal 'e' going silent) have already taken place by the time the manuscript was written, but other than that I have no idea. Specifically, I've been wondering about the personal names of two protagonists - Gandeleyn and Wrennok of Donne.
Firstly, how is the last syllable of Gandeleyn supposed to be pronounced? Is it <lein>, <lain>, or <lin>? In the ballad it is rhymed with both "ageyn" (meaning "back") and "wyn" ("wine" with an "y" in a closed syllable, which is supposed to sound as "i"). Moreover, the name itself is presumed by some to be a corruption of Gamelyn, which dates back to the Chaucerian times and most certainly sounded like <ga-me-lin>.
Secondly, is "W" in Wrennok silent or not? One other instance of the name appearing is in an Old French poem "Fouke le Fitz Waryn" where it is given to a Welsh adversary of the main hero. In Welsh the letter "w" confers a vowel sound, but judging by the "Robyn and Gandeleyn" jambic meter (albeit with certain amount of liberties taken), it does not form a syllable of it's own. Then again, Wrennok could be connected to "wren" as in a bird's name. Basically, the question is: what was the situation with the letter "w" in the aforementioned period? Also the apparent place name of Donne has not yet been linked with any real toponym on the British Isles, so is it <Don> or <Dun> (like in "done")? The ballad pairs it with "sunne" ("sun"), but for some reason I'm still unsure.
Finally, I believe both Gandeleyn and Wrennok are stessed on the last syllable, what with them appearing at the end of jambic lines. However, the same case seems to be with Robyn (especially if the ballad's refrain is a jambic tetrameter: RobYnn lyth In grene wOde bowndYn), and yet now we stress Robyn towards the first syllable. Is it applicable to the other two names as well?
Please note that I'm by no means a specialist and everything written above is pure conjecture. I would be most grateful if somebody more knowledgeable could clear things up.
1 Answers 2015-03-16
Apologies for the very specific question, but I would love any information at all on this. Did they exist? What sort of work did they do? How they were paid, what were social attitudes towards them at the time, etc. Anything and everything.
The closest source I've found only deals with late 19th century and is mostly regarding 20th century female prison guards.
If nothing comes up, I would also love to hear about female prisoners or female police officers in the same period, if anyone has any information on that instead.
2 Answers 2015-03-16
1 Answers 2015-03-16
1 Answers 2015-03-16
What was the goal?
1 Answers 2015-03-16
Today we see heaps of buildings having their year of construction displayed on their front. When did this start to become common? I'm assuming it would be a Christian church (with Jesus being the start of our current calendar).
1 Answers 2015-03-16
Unfortunately I have not had the chance to read through the entire volume of The Invention of Scotland. Nonetheless from what I could gather in his earlier essay The Highland Tradition of Scotland, his arguments were that much of highlander tradition were manufactured following the union with England to foster national unity and separate their culture identity from that of Ireland.
Knowing the amount of controversy surrounding a number of books by Trevor-Roper, how do historians view his stance on Scotland? Are there any good counter-arguments to read?
1 Answers 2015-03-16
It seems to me that Russia has always favored dictators over democratic rulers. I just finished War and Peace, in that book the monarch of Russia was considered godlike by some, although this was in the 1800's I don't find it unusual, everyone country had a phase where the monarch in power was basically seen as a god. But putting all that faith in one person never went away for Russia, the Tsars and Tsarinas, Lenin, Stalin, Krushchev, and now Putin, all consolidated power in some way and no movement stopped them. Why do they have such a history of it?
2 Answers 2015-03-16