Would you like to have lived in the 19th century?

NBF fan

Private
Joined
Jul 22, 2021
Location
Dixie
I know most of us wonder what it would have been like if we were to have lived in the 19th century, especially during the Civil War era. Due to continued medical advancement, some might say it is a more desirable time to live now, but I think there are pros and cons to both time periods. Would you like to have lived in the 19th century? What would you like to have witnessed, or who is a person you would like to have met?
 
Last edited:
When looking back at a period one has to remember, that these people grew up in the period, and most simply did not really notice how people smelled. You would have smelled too, and you would not have paid it much mind. It was all in the times and the way people would have lived. Our standards were not simply theirs. The cleanliness and hygiene levels of the day were their norm. Ours is different as we have access to flushing toilets, running water, and hot to warm water to bathe everyday. They just did not this access, as we do today. To them we might just not smell right either. Think about it.
I know I wouldn't smell right. Especially after a muey grande Mexican combo plate. I bet they would make me sleep in the barn.
 
Vote Here:
I spent the weekend at Ft. Niagara. The French Castle is a gigantic cold stone fortress. It was a mild weekend, but it was still cold enough inside that I was comfortable wearing the French equivalent of my regimental coat all weekend. That´s like wearing a wool winter coat inside. Aaaaaaaaaand, I had a headcold. Warm teas only go so far in relieving sore throat and making breathing easier. If it had been 1755 for real, I´m sure I would have missed several days of duty, been stuck in that house of contagion that the military calls the infirmary and probably bleed a couple ounces a day. As it was, I drove by the cemetery as I left instead of ending up in it.
We used to occupy Fort Point under the Golden Gate Bridge in the early-mid 1980s. You ain't jokin' about that cold stone. Then the fog on top of that would go straight through to your bones.
 
Vote Here:
They certainly seem to have been made of tougher stuff then we are, whatever the reasons.

John
As a whole? Perhaps. But it was ancient times that gave us the term "sybarite". As a student, I read about an aristocrat in the court of Louis XIV who, as an elderly lady, was able to boast that she had never done so much as pick up a handkerchief. I suspect that ordinary, every day people lived more physical lives than we--but not the well-to-do or the aristocrats. Do we go to pieces more easily? Probably not though we push more limits.
 
Vote Here:
@Fairfield I had never heard of the sybarite thing so thanks very much for that. I was thinking of the large numbers of guys who sustained serious wounds and continued to serve in combat positions.

In my own family the men of generations past seemed to be a lot more physically and emotionally resilient than the younger generations. The women too for that matter.
 
Vote Here:
@Fairfield I had never heard of the sybarite thing so thanks very much for that. I was thinking of the large numbers of guys who sustained serious wounds and continued to serve in combat positions.

In my own family the men of generations past seemed to be a lot more physically and emotionally resilient than the younger generations. The women too for that matter.
The belief that former times were better and that people were tougher has always been an old commonality--and was in 1861 and in 861, etc. But we don't know how much we are capable of until we are called upon. I think of all those students at Oxford (or maybe it was Cambridge) who--in that period between the world wars--voted that they would never consider fighting & dying for King and Country. And yet, when push came to shove, that is exactly what they did.
 
Vote Here:
The belief that former times were better and that people were tougher has always been an old commonality--and was in 1861 and in 861, etc. But we don't know how much we are capable of until we are called upon. I think of all those students at Oxford (or maybe it was Cambridge) who--in that period between the world wars--voted that they would never consider fighting & dying for King and Country. And yet, when push came to shove, that is exactly what they did.
It was the Oxford Union debating society at Oxford University.
 
Vote Here:
@Fairfield It kinda surprised me that they would have voted that way in the first place. However my only knowledge about England between the world wars is from British movies of that era. It appears it was a good thing for Britain that they decided to change their minds.

Jonn
 
Vote Here:
One thing I have come to see about the attitude of many politicians and others in the interwar years was that they had come through the horror of the Great War so avoiding another was very attractive. Appeasement in this light looks a lot less silly. Hitler of course took the argument out of our political leaders hands but Chamberlain the prime Minister was soon out to be replaced by Churchill and a Government of National Unity.
 
Vote Here:
@Fairfield It kinda surprised me that they would have voted that way in the first place. However my only knowledge about England between the world wars is from British movies of that era. It appears it was a good thing for Britain that they decided to change their minds.

Jonn
The First World War had been pretty hard on the British. They died in the trenches in droves; they were gassed and shot to pieces. The Brits had gone into the war with such idealism and high hopes--and it must have seen that their only "reward" was unbearable. Perhaps it isn't surprising that the next generation wanted no part of a repeat performance. Yet, in the end, they didn't falter. So it may be with us.
 
Vote Here:
It is my impression that the Oxford students would normally be from the upper classes. In any case, would those kinds of sentiments expressed by the Oxford debating society be prevalent in the working class too, at that time?

John
I think so. They were completely played out. If anything, the working class might have been more adamant: in the end, the horrors of the battlefield play no favorites.
 
Vote Here:
I think so. They were completely played out. If anything, the working class might have been more adamant: in the end, the horrors of the battlefield play no favorites.
Very true. It also saw the rise of the Labour Party replacing the Liberal Party as the many representatives of the working class. 1918 saw the vote being given to all men over 21 and older Women. This meant that elections were very different from one where only property owning men could vote.

However, come the crisis the call was answered. However, in the Second World war recruitment was by conscription rather than the mass volunteering rush of the first. This also meant that key workers e;g; miners, shipbuilders, iron and steel workers (except reservists) were not allowed to join up.
 
Vote Here:
It is my impression that the Oxford students would normally be from the upper classes. In any case, would those kinds of sentiments expressed by the Oxford debating society be prevalent in the working class too, at that time?

John
The Oxford Union in no way represented the attitudes of the working class.

This paragraph explains the situation well.

‘The debate cannot be taken as evidence of what people of all classes were thinking. Oxford undergraduates were hardly typical of the population as a whole. They came largely from wealthy upper- or middle-class families; they were highly literate and well-read; and they were more prepared than most people to engage with abstract issues of principle. They were regarded - rightly - as the rising stars of politics and both the press and politicians took an interest in what the students were saying, especially in their debating societies. Remember also that the vote took place in 1933, before the full implications of Hitler's rise to power had become apparent. When war finally came in 1939 many of those who had taken part in the debate did indeed fight - and die - for King and Country.’

 
Vote Here:
Back
Top