The "This Might Be A Stupid Question, But...." Thread

[Thipu1]

Many documents from the Tudor period did survive.  Papers of notable people were often preserved by the family. Paper then was rag paper which holds up beautifully. 

Printed books were also becoming more common.  We have one that was printed around 1620.  The binding is shot but the text block is clean and perfectly readable.  This book is a record of funerary monuments.  It's full of interesting quotations some, from as far back as the 14th century.  This sort of publication was quite common in the 17th century.   

Also, in the 18th and 19th centuries, it was a popular pastime to keep a 'Commonplace book'.  These were essentially scrapbooks in which people would copy out poetry, prose passages and quotations they found appealing.  Often, these would come from earlier centuries. 

I'm sure others will have different ideas.  these are just things that your question called to mind. 

[Hillia]

That's really interesting.  I had no idea that documents could survive that long.

[magicdomino]

Good paper can last for centuries if it is stored properly.  Mass-market paperback books, and even most hardbacks will be lucky if they make it over a century because the acidic paper crumbles, and the glued spines become unglued.  The ridges on the the spine of old books aren't there for show; they cover where the book was tied/sewn together before glueing. 

[Thipu1]

Documents can survive for very long times and ancient documents can be surprisingly familiar.

The Vindolanda letters give us a good idea of what life was like for Roman soldiers serving on Hadrian's Wall.  One that sticks in my mind was sent by a woman.  It tells the soldier that she has sent him, 'X pair of socks and Y pair of underpants'. 

There's also a whining letter from a kid who lived in Egypt about 200 BCE. His father had promised him a trip to Alexandria but, due to business pressures, had to renege on his promise and make the trip alone.  The letter may be over 2000 years old but every parent can relate to it.  The boy's letter essentially says,

YOU'RE THE WORST DAD IN THE WORLD AND I CAN NEVER TRUST YOU AGAIN !!!!

   

[Nibsey]

Here's one for the historians.

I'm reading a lot of English history, particularly around the Tudor period.  There are lots of quotes from letters, personal accounts, etc.  How many of these source documents actually survive to be quoted by historians, and how many are quotes of quotes of quotes going back hundreds of years?  It seems unlikely that all these papers have survived and are still legible after so long, but quoting quotes seems like the longest game of Telephone ever, with tons of chances for inaccuracies to creep in.

I do research in the 1600's, so it's pretty much my job to look at these letters and they are really cool. People kept their letters to each other. One of my best experiences in studying history happened after a week of scanning through a ton of letters looking for a particular piece of gossip. After a while you start recognising handwriting and I began to look forward to seeing Lord So&So letters because his handwriting was so easy to read and he was a pretty funny guy. To then notice at the end of the week that there was a huge portrait of the person in question right in front of me and he was exactly how I pictured him!

[violinp]

Here's one for the historians.

I'm reading a lot of English history, particularly around the Tudor period.  There are lots of quotes from letters, personal accounts, etc.  How many of these source documents actually survive to be quoted by historians, and how many are quotes of quotes of quotes going back hundreds of years?  It seems unlikely that all these papers have survived and are still legible after so long, but quoting quotes seems like the longest game of Telephone ever, with tons of chances for inaccuracies to creep in.

The reason we know about Pompeii (other than discovering the site) was Pliny the Younger's epistulae about the event (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pliny_the_Younger#Epistles_concerning_the_eruption_of_Mount_Vesuvius), and that was from the first century A.D. It's entirely possible that letters from that time would have been preserved.

[camlan]

Here's one for the historians.

I'm reading a lot of English history, particularly around the Tudor period.  There are lots of quotes from letters, personal accounts, etc.  How many of these source documents actually survive to be quoted by historians, and how many are quotes of quotes of quotes going back hundreds of years?  It seems unlikely that all these papers have survived and are still legible after so long, but quoting quotes seems like the longest game of Telephone ever, with tons of chances for inaccuracies to creep in.

When I started grad school for a degree in English, there was one required course we all had to take. A good part of it dealt with original sources, how to find them and how to use them. It was drilled into us that you had to make an effort to see the original manuscript or book and not just re-quote a quotation that you found elsewhere. Our professor had a story about a mis-quotation that had happened long ago, and the incorrect quotation had been quoted and re-quoted several times before it was caught. Several scholarly works had been published, with the incorrect quotation forming part of the argument of the text. All the authors were somewhat embarrassed when the truth became known.

[exitzero]

Here's one for the historians.

I'm reading a lot of English history, particularly around the Tudor period.  There are lots of quotes from letters, personal accounts, etc.  How many of these source documents actually survive to be quoted by historians, and how many are quotes of quotes of quotes going back hundreds of years?  It seems unlikely that all these papers have survived and are still legible after so long, but quoting quotes seems like the longest game of Telephone ever, with tons of chances for inaccuracies to creep in.

When I started grad school for a degree in English, there was one required course we all had to take. A good part of it dealt with original sources, how to find them and how to use them. It was drilled into us that you had to make an effort to see the original manuscript or book and not just re-quote a quotation that you found elsewhere. Our professor had a story about a mis-quotation that had happened long ago, and the incorrect quotation had been quoted and re-quoted several times before it was caught. Several scholarly works had been published, with the incorrect quotation forming part of the argument of the text. All the authors were somewhat embarrassed when the truth became known.

Reminds me of a story about the monks who were copying some religious scrolls that dealt with rules and regulations of the monastery. The scrolls were copies of copies of copies. Finally, one monk decided to back to the original scroll, hundreds of years old. He came out of room looking absolutely stricken. In a strangled whisper, he said, "Celebrate, brothers. It says celebrate.

[Outdoor Girl]

Reminds me of a story about the monks who were copying some religious scrolls that dealt with rules and regulations of the monastery. The scrolls were copies of copies of copies. Finally, one monk decided to back to the original scroll, hundreds of years old. He came out of room looking absolutely stricken. In a strangled whisper, he said, "Celebrate, brothers. It says celebrate.

*snerk*

[GreenEyedHawk]

Is there a way to tell the "doneness" of poached eggs?  I like my eggs poached so that the whites are cooked through, but the yolks are warm and runny.  How do I tell?  I try to err on the side of caution because I don't want to undercook the whites (ewww) but they always end up with hard yolks. 

[Slartibartfast]

Is there a way to tell the "doneness" of poached eggs?  I like my eggs poached so that the whites are cooked through, but the yolks are warm and runny.  How do I tell?  I try to err on the side of caution because I don't want to undercook the whites (ewww) but they always end up with hard yolks.

The only way I know is how to tell raw from hard-boiled (which might also help you tell runny from cooked whites) - put the egg on a flat surface and spin it quickly, then stop it with a tap on the top.  Eggs with raw/liquid insides will resume spinning, while eggs with cooked/solid insides will stop.

[NyaChan]

I think timing it is your best bet.

[Hillia]

Is there a way to tell the "doneness" of poached eggs?  I like my eggs poached so that the whites are cooked through, but the yolks are warm and runny.  How do I tell?  I try to err on the side of caution because I don't want to undercook the whites (ewww) but they always end up with hard yolks.

The only way I know is how to tell raw from hard-boiled (which might also help you tell runny from cooked whites) - put the egg on a flat surface and spin it quickly, then stop it with a tap on the top.  Eggs with raw/liquid insides will resume spinning, while eggs with cooked/solid insides will stop.

Now I'm picturing lining up my poached eggs on the countertop and spinning them like little board game spinners...

[Slartibartfast]

Is there a way to tell the "doneness" of poached eggs?  I like my eggs poached so that the whites are cooked through, but the yolks are warm and runny.  How do I tell?  I try to err on the side of caution because I don't want to undercook the whites (ewww) but they always end up with hard yolks.

The only way I know is how to tell raw from hard-boiled (which might also help you tell runny from cooked whites) - put the egg on a flat surface and spin it quickly, then stop it with a tap on the top.  Eggs with raw/liquid insides will resume spinning, while eggs with cooked/solid insides will stop.

Now I'm picturing lining up my poached eggs on the countertop and spinning them like little board game spinners...

You laugh, but that's what I do whenever I'm about to make egg salad - mostly because I've been known to forget to mark the eggs after I hard-boil them, so there's a significant chance at least one of the eggs I thought was hard-boiled actually wasn't 

[wheeitsme]

Is there a way to tell the "doneness" of poached eggs?  I like my eggs poached so that the whites are cooked through, but the yolks are warm and runny.  How do I tell?  I try to err on the side of caution because I don't want to undercook the whites (ewww) but they always end up with hard yolks.

The only way I know is how to tell raw from hard-boiled (which might also help you tell runny from cooked whites) - put the egg on a flat surface and spin it quickly, then stop it with a tap on the top.  Eggs with raw/liquid insides will resume spinning, while eggs with cooked/solid insides will stop.

Now I'm picturing lining up my poached eggs on the countertop and spinning them like little board game spinners...

You laugh, but that's what I do whenever I'm about to make egg salad - mostly because I've been known to forget to mark the eggs after I hard-boil them, so there's a significant chance at least one of the eggs I thought was hard-boiled actually wasn't 

Poached, Slartibarfast    Not Hard boiled.  You take them out of the shells before cooking them in water...