Hacker News Reader

Comment by learc83 | Hacker News Reader

The age of majority was traditionally 21 for men in the US and the UK. There were many rights and privileges that were restricted until then. You couldn't vote in most of the US until 21, for instance.

The only generals I can think of who were teenagers were nobility who inherited positions or people like Lafayette who managed to use his nobility to convince Washington to make him an honorary general when he was I believe 19.

Teenagers as a whole weren't respected members of adults society in the pre-modern time, even if they did usually have jobs.

View on HN

Much younger children had jobs too, working in the fields and such. That's why schools have the summer break - gotta put that child labor to good use.

'teenager' is a modern construct, so your comment is anachronistic.

The term teenager is a modern construct, but the idea of a time period where someone is no longer a child but not yet a full adult is ancient.

In some pre-modern cultures even though a 14 year-old could work, they couldn't inherit, hold office, fully own property, serve in the military, or even marry (without parental consent).

This applies differently to men and women and even in the same culture it can vary between social classes.

Some cultures had marriage in the 14s and earlier.

Sure did. Some still do.

Also Alexander was a teenager if i remember correctly.

I assume you're talking about Alexander Hamilton. He never rose past the rank of colonel. He did use connections to form a militia of college students that he led as captain. I believe he was either 18 or 20 at the time (there's a debate over when he was actually born). And he was later elevated to a colonel in the continental army, but he wasn't a teenager when that happened.

I rather suspect the reference was to Alexander the Great.

I thought that could be the case, but since I'd mentioned Washington and Lafayette I leaned towards Hamilton being the intended reference.

As for Alexander the Great he was probably a general as a teenager, but he falls squarely in the "nobility who inherited positions" camp. So much about Alexander is wrapped up in legends and comes from much later sources that we really have no idea how fantastic a "general" he was as a teenager.

I would think that children might be some of the best military leaders, since they'll have no preconceptions about how a war must be fought, but will take the most direct route to victory.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com