I know Method acting involves a lot of specific training techniques and whatnot, but the general principle behind it, that the actor should imagine themselves with the thoughts and feelings of the person they're portraying: I'm under the impression this was a revolutionary idea at the time. It seems like such a simple idea, though, to focus on the character's inner state rather than external actions and things. It seems like someone must have tried doing that before Method acting became a thing.

Has there been a style of acting focused around the character's inner thoughts and emotions before Method acting came about? Was it successful?

My (German) father always told me that his aunt was the first female pilot observer in World War One, meaning that she flew across the front. I have no further information regarding this, I don't even know, which front he was talking about. Also, I don't know if she has any living descendants, I could ask. I spent a lot of time in libraries, sruching old lists of pilots or reading about the history of female pilots. But I only get that there were no female pilots in German military during World War One, because they were only allowed to make a pilot's licence for civilians. I know, this is a tough one to ask, but can anybody tell me, if it is possible that there was a female pilot in the German army during WWI? And how I could find information on her?

what were his/her options for what to do? I realise that the slaves could simply be freed but I assume that would merely leave many destitute and vulnerable to re-enslavement- were there organised relief efforts? I am principally interested in the American South but am also curious about the Caribbean.

I couldn't think of a better way to word this so sorry if it's confusing. I'm specifically curious as to any ethical concerns raised by writers when a new weapon was introduced onto the battlefield but my question could apply more broadly.

For example, when gunpowder weapons were introduced onto Western battlefields were there any writers who opposed this on ethical grounds? (and advocated for older technologies)

I always hear that the resurrection story was taken from Egyptian mythology and same goes for the virgin Mary. But I've never read anything that sites sources or stories. Specifically, how much of the story from the gospels in the Bible was taken from other religions? And what religions were they taken from? Are there any books that speak on this?

I think I read somewhere that he refrained from publicly supporting it. If that was the case, does anyone know what his private opinion of it was?

Possibly the most random and obscure question ever asked on this subreddit, but it occurred to me, and I would love to know the answer.

I use "cowboy culture" for lack of a better term, but I don't necessarily mean actual cattle drovers. I mean (to the extent the following examples even properly define the "Old West") the boomtowns and settlements, the six-shooters and ten-gallon hats, the conflicts with/fear of natives, and the trade with more cosmopolitan areas. I'm relatively aware of what was going on in the mid-late 19th-Century in the Southwestern U.S., but how far did that culture extend? Would it be similar in a rural town in, say, Cuba?

I am finishing up a project for a class on European relations after WWII, and was wondering if anyone could provide demographic details about German men and women after the war. I believe I read in a a book that after the war, German women outnumbered German men a ridiculous number, but was curious if someone could provide better details, and sources!

In the beginning there had to be only the great leaders and wealthy who "decided" how history would be recorded. How has it changed in modern times when the views and perspectives from minorities and new sources surface?

Was he anti religion? What did he feel about atheism?

Firstly, I want to say I'm sure this is a touchy subject, and I'm trying to phrase it as delicately as possible. Please forgive and correct me if I say anything super ignorant.

That being said... Clearly Europeans treated Native Americans awfully anyway, so why draw the line at slavery, especially when it seems so much overhead could be saved by not having to ship slaves from Africa? Was it a racial thing? Were Africans somehow considered to be more "fit" for slavery than Native Americans? Or were Africans easier to control since they were out of their element, whereas Native Americans knew the land since it was their home? Or something else altogether?

Thank you!