Asklemmy

44151 readers

1447 users here now

A loosely moderated place to ask open-ended questions

Search asklemmy 🔍

If your post meets the following criteria, it's welcome here!

Open-ended question
Not offensive: at this point, we do not have the bandwidth to moderate overtly political discussions. Assume best intent and be excellent to each other.
Not regarding using or support for Lemmy: context, see the list of support communities and tools for finding communities below
Not ad nauseam inducing: please make sure it is a question that would be new to most members
An actual topic of discussion

Looking for support?

Looking for a community?

Lemmyverse: community search
sub.rehab: maps old subreddits to fediverse options, marks official as such
[email protected]: a community for finding communities

~Icon~ ~by~ ~@Double_[email protected]~

founded 5 years ago

MODERATORS

[email protected]

You must pick a point in human history before the 1950s to be spend the rest of your life in. What era and place would you choose? (lemmy.blahaj.zone)

submitted 1 year ago by [email protected] to c/[email protected]

106 comments fedilink hide all child comments

You would still have the same age, gender, personality, skin color, etc. and you would be able to speak at least one local language and would know basic information of the era and place. Your family, social standing, and such would be randomly picked.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] [email protected] 15 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Somewhere before the advent of mankind, really fuck with some historians

[–] [email protected] 3 points 1 year ago (2 children)

Sorry to nitpick, but this would be the field of paleontology, not historians.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 1 year ago

Im sure itd fuck with both fields

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 year ago (1 children)

@Akasazh historians could get messed with via paleoanthropologists.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

If there's one that could know its you, Livius.

But as I said it's a nitpick. Usually us historians keep to when language became involved. The rest would be prehistorical, but the distinction is not that clean cut (is it ever?).

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 year ago

@Akasazh fair enough; that's a nitpick worth making.

:-)