Was it more difficult to learn mathematics in the past?

I do think it’s harder today to read a textbook from the 1920’s — harder than it was for students at the time. The language, the notation, the style, all of these have evolved. But that doesn’t mean things were more difficult then. They were just different.

Hardy’s “A Course of Pure Mathematics” was written in 1908. I have the tenth edition, printed in 1950, and though I’m sure typesetting has changed and likely some revisions took place, the substance of the book remained unchanged. It’s a wonderful, readable book — somewhat austere and definitely not easy going, but this reflects the personality and depth of the author.

Whoever studied with this book in 1910 didn’t need to possess a higher IQ than modern students. The best teachers of the time, as today, were masters of their domain and excellent expositors and mentors; they knew how to inspire and delight students.

Observe how little math and how much prose there is on this page. Hardy takes the time to explain ideas and rationale, not just the dry definitions and theorems.

I wouldn’t choose Hardy as a textbook today, but not because it’s bad. It’s just slightly anachronistic, the language feels a bit antiquated, it can’t benefit from pretty LaTeX formatting and it can’t provide beautiful visuals that would be easier to…