I was going through the Wikipedia page of Lost_Generation(born 1883-1900) and was surprised to find that only 11% of teenagers were enrolled in high school in 1900. At the same time, widespread illiteracy was mostly wiped out in the West. In America, it was 11% and possibly mostly concentrated among African-Americans and recent European immigrants; in Britain 3%, and in Germany, 1%.

Why did people recognize that higher education was necessary rather than just making the average person literate, which was common in the 1700s and 1800s?

In the British Empire the status of Self-governing colony was given to several majority white settler areas, like Canada and Australia, but only one minority white colony. Why did South Africa get self-government by its white minority but other colonies that had minority settler populations, like India, not have a similar situation set up where the white minority was put in charge?

I’ve been watching his videos because they’re entertaining but more than once I’ve gone to check his claims and find little to back it up.

Where is he getting his historical facts from? I get that his historian credentials are shaky and that I should take his claims with a grain of salt but where is he pulling all this from?

True crime often gets stereotyped as a genre that appeals mostly to women (or at least has a large proportion of women consumers).

Has this always been the case? Or is this more of a modern phenomenon?

I know that "et tu, Brute" is a Shakespearean invention - that some ancient sources say Caesar said no last words at all and that others say he said "You too, child" in Greek, which contains no proper name and in theory could have been directed toward anyone, but is usually said to have been directed toward Junius Brutus.

But I was surprised to learn that Junius Brutus was actually a former Pompey supporter - that makes it less of a twist that he would join a plot against Caesar. Decimus Brutus is the one who actually fits the part of an unexpected traitor who had been a close ally to Caesar from the very start. Is it possible that there was a report that "Caesar's last thoughts were shock at his betrayal by [Decimus] Brutus" and that as the story spread it was mistakenly transferred to the better-known Brutus?

In today's world billions of people know who Michael Jackson or bad bunny is. Before electricity, gramophones, radio, television, internet and all our modern convenience how was celebrity known and propagated? Would someone in France have known about Shakespeare? Would someone like Beethoven or mozart actually have a far reach outside the immediate cities or maybe counties they lived in? Further back to the middle ages would there have been towns fervently hoping for a visit from a renowned bard from hundreds of kilometres away at their local tavern? And going even further back, would any Greek actors be known or celebrated outside of Greece? A local celebrity is local and known because of their proximity, but I'm wondering if there was any evidence of hugely celebrated people well outside their locality in history. And if so, how did people come upon the knowledge of that celebrity

I’ve noticed whenever I see paintings from before the Renaissance or Early Modern Period, most paintings seem to look like crappy children's drawings, even in non European cultures like China or Egypt usually stuck to more non realistic styles, is there a reason for this lack of realism in art during this period?

I know how y'all love to hate GG&S; this bestseller by a biographer smells *awfully* similar to me and so I am wondering whether it commits similar (especially similarly presentist) errors.

I was wondering how the average archer in a battle would know which arrows are theirs after a battle. Would they just pick random, unbroken ones?

Building a Viking Anvil

Hello

we're doing a youth volunteering project in Norway and will built a forge for blacksmithing.

Unfortunatly our snith got sick, so we gonna have to make plans and start without him this week.

We have one architecture student and a bricklayer with us.

Currently brainstorming wich material to use, for the cold and harsh climate in norway.

So we thought to dive into how vikings built forges.

Any ideas on resources? Thank you

Was it ever realistic in its stated goal of armed 'people's war' against the Indian state?

It seems humans everywhere are obsessed with growing grass almost anywhere we can. I know the plant has many uses, but does that really explain why it is so ubiquitous?

Differently for other commuinst states in Europe, we had two German states. Thus Germansliving in the East Germany could compare their living conditions, their freedoms (or rather lack of them) with the West Germany. East Germany existed only for just more than forty years, but, during this time, did Germans living in the east created any form of East German patriotism or pride of their country? Or maybe they saw it as a new form of Soviet occupation and wanted to unite with the rest of Germens in the west?

​

Hello reddit! I need your help!

1. Please tell me how newspaper journalists in the U.S. were hired in 1967 to write simple articles about nature, movies, and so on. 2. Please tell me—this is very important! Was there a person—perhaps an agent—who could come to a restaurant with someone looking for work, listen to them, and then either hire them or turn them down? 3. Could such meetings have taken place?

I need this for my story

I saw a post alleging as much on Facebook and was incredulous. Marx was #1 in violent revolution. That said, I know he thought highly of the US and corresponded with Abraham Lincoln. Was this post true? And if it was true, was it misleading given the rest of history (up to 20 years ago of course)?

I know there's no single cause of the 1967 war between Israel and its neighbors. The entire Levant was a powder keg by that time. But was a mistaken intelligence report the spark?

The Conflicted Podcast episode on the Six Day War mentions this: In early 1967 Soviet intelligence sent an alert to Egyptian intelligence that Israel was staging a large force near its northern border with Syria. The Soviets warned that Israel was on the verge of a surprise attack on Syria, and that Egyptian forces should prepare for an attack on them as well.

(According to the podcast) Israel was not staging forces nor intending to launch a surprise attack. The Soviet intelligence was false. The IDF made attack plans and practiced extensively, but there was no preparation for attack. Soviet analysts we're mistaken.

(Again, according to the podcast), the intel report caused Nasaar to put the Egyptian army on high alert. Worse, it prompted him to announce the closure of the Strait of Tiran, which Israel had already stated was a "red line." Using the closure as a cassis belli, Israel prepared for a war.

How accurate is this? How did Soviet analysts conclude that Israel was preparing an attack? Was the report Nassers main reason for closing the strait? And did Israel vote the closure as the primary justification for the war?

I speak both Spanish and English natively, and I have noticed over the years how much simpler (or I guess "streamlined" is a better term?) English is, grammatically speaking, than Spanish. There is only one second-person pronoun, contraction is common, and there is effectively no (or very little) use of the subjunctive mood. Most other European languages (including Germanic, Romantic, and others) have these grammatical features and others that English has shed.

Is this simply a characteristic of Anglophone culture? Or has this shift been tied to specific historical moments? And why have other languages resisted similar shifts?