You should accept "Maria Sklodowska-Curie" in "Marie Curie" as she was Polish and took her husband's surname only as a second one. Therefore officially she was known 'till the end of her life as Maria Sklodowska-Curie
I agree that both her maiden name and her married name should be accepted, but the "official" part is wrong. According to French naming rules of the time, she took the name "Curie" upon marrying her husband. Her official documentation would have said "Marie Curie, née Sklodoswka" (probably without the bar through the L). And, while she was born Polish, she also took up French citizenship, so she was both French and Polish for most of her life. That doesn't make her any less Polish - or any less French. First and foremost, she was a groundbreaking scientist - and science has no nationality!
The maiden - hyphen - married surname is a habit peculiar to Americans and a tiny number of recent imitators. To refer to Marie Curie the way you want to is an anachronism.
I'm bound to remark that the German emperor's answer should not be filled in when you type "Kaiser". That is simply the name of his rank. I will admit to never having heard reference to any previous or succeeding Kaiser, nevertheless you should get the point for putting his actual name.
It is not the same at all.. Kaiser really is just a title like emperor. While caesar really was his family name. It was only after him that variations of his name became titles (kaiser, keizer, tzar etc).
I completely agree. Whereas "Caesar" was a title that turned into a name, "Kaiser" has always remained a title, which in fact is derived from "Caesar". Accepting "Kaiser" is akin to accepting "Roi" for Louis XIV, or "President" for Wilson.
I've been to Poland a few times. It's a great country, with a lot to see, and, in my opinion, a wonderful under-appreciated cuisine. Very nice people, too. But man, how much better it would be without the constant, tiresome nationalism of some of its citizens!
History doesn't retroactively change to fit itself towards modern conceptions of gender equality. The history of the world up until very recent times was almost entirely the history of men.
"Imaginatively she [the woman] is of the highest importance; practically she is completely insignificant. She pervades poetry from cover to cover; she is all but absent from history." - Virginia Woolf, A Room of One's Own
The fact is that women have been oppressed throughout history, often generally not even being considered for anything important. Women often shared these views along with men. Therefore, before recent history, females as individuals commonly have less importance, as they have committed fewer influential acts. If this had been a history quiz without only modern history, there'd be no women at all. If you don't like it, maybe go make one yourself. No offense, by the way, just sharing my opinion.
I think Elvis just doesn't sit right in this company. He will slowly fade into obscurity generation by generation, much like Rudolph Valentino or Al Jolson, not really historical figures.
Hm. I don't know. The classical composers are still well-known. One is even in this quiz. And no, I'm not suggesting Elvis is on par with Beethoven or Bach, but there is no guarantee he will fade from memory any time soon. You do raise an interesting point though. I think he'll be remembered a lot longer than Chaplin will.
Maybe not historical but I dont think he well be faded into obscurity very soon. I think similar shelvelife as famous old actors. I dont think I agree with the fact that chaplin will be forgotten sooner though.
Anyone with even a rudimentary knowledge of the cultural icons of the 1920's knows who Valentino and Jolson are. Elvis is no less appropriate to this quiz than Beethoven.
He'll be remembered shorter than, say, the Beatles, or Bob Dylan, probably, but more than many other important artists, just based off of his influence to modern music.
Elvis will be remembered much longer that Dylan. Elvis was more than just music, he was a cultural phenomenon, movies are still made about him and he still sell millions of records/millions of downloads every month.
*every* historical figure is doomed to eventually fade into obscurity, and eventually into complete oblivion, on a long enough time line. Even Jesus and Muhammad and Alexander. Eventually. Elvis will, too.
Hard to say if, 500 years from now, he'll be as well remembered as Beethoven. Probably not. But maybe. If humans even still exist then. I think Malbaby is probably right.
Hard to predict what history remembers, and what it forgets! We live in a period with unprecedented means of recording and record-keeping, and it may well be that, as long as ours civilisations don't collapse, comparatively minor figures will live on in memory a lot longer than more ancient figures that might have deserved it more (as far as such a thing as "merit" as any objective meaning). It's a really interesting question - one I fear we won't live to know the answer to!
Late 20th century American history will always shine a little brighter than other places/times.
For example, if people learn anything about the history of the Netherlands, it's typically focused on the Dutch Golden Age.
In 500 years, students of history, if there are any, will likely be very interested in the explosion of music, art, and technology that happened in the U.S. from 1945–2000. It was a unique time and place in history. For a brief moment in history, the things that mattered happened in America.
You dont get % per answer... You either scored 67% on the whole quiz. Or if it was behind the answer you took the quiz 3 times and only guessed it right two of the times..
Please accept "Churchhill" as a type-in, if only because it is clear to me that I will never cease to double H it for the rest of my natural-born life.
Hard to say if, 500 years from now, he'll be as well remembered as Beethoven. Probably not. But maybe. If humans even still exist then. I think Malbaby is probably right.
For example, if people learn anything about the history of the Netherlands, it's typically focused on the Dutch Golden Age.
In 500 years, students of history, if there are any, will likely be very interested in the explosion of music, art, and technology that happened in the U.S. from 1945–2000. It was a unique time and place in history. For a brief moment in history, the things that mattered happened in America.
I forgot the one T and that's that?
It took just writing 'Ho' for Ho Chi Minh!
And then it only gave me 67% for that answer.
Elvis look like he is gonna sneeze, I thought kfc when seeing twain.. and mcarthur looks like bruce willis.
The others were very easy. Tolstoy was moderately easy.
Very euro-centric