Wikipedia:Reference desk/Humanities: Difference between revisions
→Coca Romano's portraits of Ferdinand and Marie of Romania: I've uploaded the image to Flickr, if anyone wants a look |
|||
Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
<noinclude>{{Wikipedia:Reference desk/header|WP:RD/H}} |
|||
[[Category: |
[[Category:Pages automatically checked for incorrect links]] |
||
[[Category:Wikipedia resources for researchers]] |
[[Category:Wikipedia resources for researchers]] |
||
[[Category:Wikipedia help forums]] |
|||
[[Category:Wikipedia reference desk|Humanities]] |
|||
[[Category:Wikipedia help pages with dated sections]] |
|||
[[Category:Non-talk pages that are automatically signed]]</noinclude> |
|||
= December 11 = |
|||
{{Wikipedia:Reference_desk/Archives/Humanities/2008 May 25}} |
|||
== Shopping carts == |
|||
{{Wikipedia:Reference_desk/Archives/Humanities/2008 May 26}} |
|||
Where were the first shopping carts introduced? |
|||
{{Wikipedia:Reference_desk/Archives/Humanities/2008 May 27}} |
|||
*[[shopping cart]] and [[Sylvan Goldman]] say the Humpty Dumpty chain |
|||
*[[Piggly Wiggly]] says the Piggly Wiggly chain and quotes the Harvard Business Review |
|||
Both articles agree it was in 1937 in Oklaholma. I believe that Humpty Dumpty is more likely, but some high quality sources would be useful. [[User:TSventon|TSventon]] ([[User talk:TSventon|talk]]) 11:55, 11 December 2024 (UTC) |
|||
:It seems to be a matter of some dispute, but [https://sova.si.edu/record/nmah.ac.0739 ''Guide to the Telescoping Shopping Cart Collection, 1946-1983, 2000''] by the Smithsonian Institution has the complex details of the dispute between Sylvan Goldman [of Humpty Dumpty] and [[Orla Watson]]. No mention of Piggly Wiggly, but our article on Watson notes that in 1946, he donated the first models of his cart to 10 grocery stores in Kansas City. |
|||
= May 28 = |
|||
:[https://books.google.co.uk/books?id=WBH3rhiWsm4C&pg=PA205 ''The Illustrated History of American Military Commissaries'' (p. 205)] has both Watson and Goldman introducing their carts in 1947 (this may refer to carts that telescope into each other for storage, a feature apparently lacking in Goldman's first model). |
|||
:[https://books.google.co.uk/books?id=JCUwEQAAQBAJ&pg=PT17 ''Scalable Innovation: A Guide for Inventors, Entrepreneurs, and IP Professionals''] says that Goldman's first cart was introduced to Humpty Dumty in 1937. |
|||
:Make of that what you will. [[User:Alansplodge|Alansplodge]] ([[User talk:Alansplodge|talk]]) 13:30, 11 December 2024 (UTC) |
|||
::Absolutely. I remember that the power lift arrangement mentioned in the Smithsonian's link was still an object of analysis for would-be inventors in the mid-sixties, and possibly later, even though the soon to be ubiquituous checkout counter conveyor belt was very much ready making it unnecessary. Couldn't help curiously but think about those when learning about [[Bredt's rule]] at school later, see my user page, but it's true "Bredt" sounded rather like "Bread" in my imagination. --[[User:Askedonty|Askedonty]] ([[User talk:Askedonty|talk]]) 15:33, 11 December 2024 (UTC) |
|||
:On Newspapers.com (pay site), I'm seeing shopping carts referenced in Portland, Oregon in 1935 or earlier, and occasionally illustrated, at a store called the Public Market; and as far as the term itself is concerned, it goes back to at least the 1850s. ←[[User:Baseball Bugs|Baseball Bugs]] <sup>''[[User talk:Baseball Bugs|What's up, Doc?]]''</sup> [[Special:Contributions/Baseball_Bugs|carrots]]→ 15:18, 11 December 2024 (UTC) |
|||
::But perhaps referring to a cart brought by the shopper to carry goods home with, rather than one provided by the storekeeper for use in-store? [[User:Alansplodge|Alansplodge]] ([[User talk:Alansplodge|talk]]) 16:14, 11 December 2024 (UTC) |
|||
{{ping|Alansplodge|Askedonty|Baseball Bugs}} thank you for your help, it seems that the Harvard Business Review is mistaken and the Piggly Wiggly chain did not introduce the first shopping baskets, which answers my question. The shopping cart article references a [https://www.csi.minesparis.psl.eu/working-papers/WP/WP_CSI_006.pdf paper by Catherine Grandclément], which shows that several companies were selling early shopping carts in 1937, so crediting Sylvan Goldman alone is not the whole story. [[User:TSventon|TSventon]] ([[User talk:TSventon|talk]]) 17:22, 11 December 2024 (UTC) |
|||
== Paul Nicklen Art == |
|||
== Lilacs/flowers re: Allies in Europe WWII == |
|||
My son is doing a project for school and has a print out of Paul Nicklen's "A Brilliant Aurorae over Grey Mountains" painting. He has to have the name of the painting, artist name, and date of the painting. We obviously have the name of the painting and the artist. Can you tell me the date of the painting? |
|||
At 53:20 in [[Dunkirk (1958 film)]], British soldiers talk about [paraphrasing] 'flowers on the way into Belgium, raspberries on the way out', and specifically reference lilacs. I imagine this was very clear to 1958 audiences, but what is the significance of lilacs? Is it/was it a symbol of Belgium? [[User:Valereee|Valereee]] ([[User talk:Valereee|talk]]) 21:40, 11 December 2024 (UTC) |
|||
Thank you, |
|||
:I think it's just that the BEF [[Operation David|entered Belgium]] in the Spring, which is lilac time. [[User:DuncanHill|DuncanHill]] ([[User talk:DuncanHill|talk]]) 22:04, 11 December 2024 (UTC) |
|||
:There are contemporary reports of the streets being strewn with lilac blossom. See [https://trove.nla.gov.au/newspaper/article/75930659/7411364 here] "Today the troops crossed the frontier along roads strewn with flowers. Belgian girls, wildly enthusiastic, plucked lilac from the wayside and scattered it along the road to be torn and twisted by the mighty wheels of the mechanised forces." [[User:DuncanHill|DuncanHill]] ([[User talk:DuncanHill|talk]]) 22:26, 11 December 2024 (UTC) |
|||
::Ah! That would explain it, thanks! [[User:Valereee|Valereee]] ([[User talk:Valereee|talk]]) 16:14, 13 December 2024 (UTC) |
|||
= December 12 = |
|||
Sherman, TX <small>—Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[Special:Contributions/71.96.233.174|71.96.233.174]] ([[User talk:71.96.233.174|talk]]) 01:36, 28 May 2008 (UTC)</small><!-- Template:UnsignedIP --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot--> |
|||
== The USA adding a new state == |
|||
: Hi Sherman, why not show your son how to search google for Paul Nicklen. The first hit is the photographer's website. Your son can send him an email to ask when he took the picture (it is a photograph, not a painting, as far as I can tell - is it [http://pictopia.com/perl/gal?gallery_id=S339053&sequencenum=60&provider_id=318&process=gallery&page=thumbnails one of these]?). A few hits further down you can show your son Nicklen's official biography from National Geographic, which might help with the project too. [[User:WikiJedits|WikiJedits]] ([[User talk:WikiJedits|talk]]) 01:53, 28 May 2008 (UTC) |
|||
If my understanding is correct, the following numbers are valid at present: (a) number of Senators = 100; (b) number of Representatives = 435; (c) number of electors in the Electoral College = 538. If the USA were to add a new state, what would happen to these numbers? Thank you. [[Special:Contributions/32.209.69.24|32.209.69.24]] ([[User talk:32.209.69.24|talk]]) 06:30, 12 December 2024 (UTC) |
|||
== dominating force == |
|||
:The number of senators would increase by 2, and the number of representatives would probably increase by at least 1. ←[[User:Baseball Bugs|Baseball Bugs]] <sup>''[[User talk:Baseball Bugs|What's up, Doc?]]''</sup> [[Special:Contributions/Baseball_Bugs|carrots]]→ 09:23, 12 December 2024 (UTC) |
|||
::Thus, to answer the final question, the minimum number of Electors would be 3… more if the new state has more Representatives (based on population). [[User:Blueboar|Blueboar]] ([[User talk:Blueboar|talk]]) 13:54, 12 December 2024 (UTC) |
|||
:In the short term, there would be extra people in congress. The [[86th United States Congress]] had 437 representatives, because Alaska and Hawaii were granted one upon entry regardless of the apportionment rules. Things were smoothed down to 435 at the next census, two congresses later. --[[User:Golbez|Golbez]] ([[User talk:Golbez|talk]]) 14:58, 12 December 2024 (UTC) |
|||
Thanks. Hmmmmmmmmmmm. Let me re-phrase my question. (a) The number of Senators is always 2 per State, correct? (b) The number of Representatives is what? Is it "capped" at 435 ... or does it increase a little bit? (c) The number of Electors (per State) is simply a function of "a" + "b" (per State), correct? Thanks. [[Special:Contributions/32.209.69.24|32.209.69.24]] ([[User talk:32.209.69.24|talk]]) 21:12, 12 December 2024 (UTC) |
|||
who was the dominating force in WWII |
|||
:As I understand it, it is indeed capped at 435, though Golbez brings up a point I hadn't taken into account -- apparently it can go up temporarily when states are added, until the next reapportionment. --[[User:Trovatore|Trovatore]] ([[User talk:Trovatore|talk]]) 21:21, 12 December 2024 (UTC) |
|||
in terms of military might and effectiveness |
|||
:{{br}}I suggest that (b) would probably depend on whether the hypothetical new state was made up of territory previously part of one or more existing states, or territory not previously part of any existing state. And I suspect that the eventual result would not depend on any pre-calculable formula, but on cut-throat horsetrading between the two main parties and other interested bodies. {The poster formerly nown as 87.81.230.195} [[Special:Contributions/94.1.211.243|94.1.211.243]] ([[User talk:94.1.211.243|talk]]) 21:21, 12 December 2024 (UTC) |
|||
not necessarily in terms of number of men <small>—Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[Special:Contributions/71.98.97.66|71.98.97.66]] ([[User talk:71.98.97.66|talk]]) 04:07, 28 May 2008 (UTC)</small><!-- Template:UnsignedIP --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot--> |
|||
::Nope, it's capped at 435. See [[Reapportionment Act of 1929]]. (I had thought it was fixed in the Constitution itself, but apparently not.) --[[User:Trovatore|Trovatore]] ([[User talk:Trovatore|talk]]) 21:23, 12 December 2024 (UTC) |
|||
:The [[Allies of World War II|Allies]] generally, and either the [[Soviet Union]] or the [[United States]] specifically, depending on your criteria. If you want a different scale, the [[tank]] and/or [[blitzkrieg]] tactics and the [[aircraft carrier]] would be good suggestions, much as trenches and the machine gun defined the Great War battlefield. — [[User talk :Lomn|Lomn]] 04:38, 28 May 2008 (UTC) |
|||
::The |
:::The Constitution has a much higher cap, currently around eleven thousand. [[User:Tamfang|—Tamfang]] ([[User talk:Tamfang|talk]]) 20:09, 21 December 2024 (UTC) |
||
:Oh, one other refinement. The formula you've given for number of electors is correct, for states. But it leaves out the [[District of Columbia]], which gets as many electors as it would get if it were a state, but never <s>less</s> <u>more</u> than those apportioned to the smallest state. In practice that means DC gets three electors. That's why the total is 538 instead of 535. --[[User:Trovatore|Trovatore]] ([[User talk:Trovatore|talk]]) 21:58, 12 December 2024 (UTC) <small>Oops; I remembered the bit about the smallest state wrong. It's actually never ''more'' than the smallest state. Doesn't matter in practice; still works out to 3 electors for the foreseeable future, either way, because DC would get 3 electors if it were a state, and the least populous state gets 3. --[[User:Trovatore|Trovatore]] ([[User talk:Trovatore|talk]]) 23:23, 12 December 2024 (UTC) </small> |
|||
:::The atomic bomb didn't fight the war; all it did was convince Japan to surrender at a time when they were at their weakest anyway. As has been said, radar won the war, the atomic bomb just ended it. The import of the atomic bomb even as a military weapon during WWII has been greatly exaggerated, to say nothing of the fact that after Hiroshima and Nagasaki the US supplies of them dwindled to almost nothing until the late 1940s. Carpet bombing had far more military consequences than the atomic bomb did. --[[Special:Contributions/98.217.8.46|98.217.8.46]] ([[User talk:98.217.8.46|talk]]) 17:13, 28 May 2008 (UTC) |
|||
= December 13 = |
|||
:Not for the most part of the war, though. [[User:SGGH|SGGH]] <sup>[[User_talk:SGGH|speak!]]</sup> 09:48, 28 May 2008 (UTC) |
|||
:::The problem with this question is that the [[Second World War]] had different stages. There just isn't a single answer for the whole of the War. [[User:Xn4|<span style="color:#9911DD">Xn4</span>]] 16:25, 28 May 2008 (UTC) |
|||
== economics: coffee prices question == |
|||
== US Air Force Distinguished Service Medal == |
|||
in news report "On Tuesday, the price for Arabica beans, which account for most global production, topped $3.44 a pound (0.45kg), having jumped more than 80% this year. " [https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/c36pgrrjllyo] how do they measure it? some other report mention it is a commodity price set for trading like gold silver etc. what is the original data source for this report? i checked a few other news stories and did not find any clarification about this point, they just know something that i don't. thank you in advance for your help. [[User:Gryllida|Gryllida]] ([[User talk:Gryllida|talk]], [[Special:EmailUser/Gryllida|e-mail]]) 01:32, 13 December 2024 (UTC) |
|||
I've asked several people this, including Air Force public relations, and gotten no answer. What is the blue stone that is used at the center of the Distinguished Service Medal? [[User:Fonce Diablo|Fonce Diablo]] ([[User talk:Fonce Diablo|talk]]) 05:17, 28 May 2008 (UTC) |
|||
:::The [[US Military]] site [http://usmilitary.about.com/library/milinfo/afmedals/bldsm.htm here] discusses the "obverse design has a sunburst of thirteen gold rays separated by thirteen white enameled stars, with a semiprecious blue stone in the center." while [http://www.gruntsmilitary.com/afdsm.shtml this site] says "The blue stone in the center represents the vault of the heavens" but I can't find the specific material. [http://books.google.co.uk/books?hl=en&safe=off&q=Air%20Force%20Distinguished%20Service%20Medal%20blue%20stone&um=1&ie=UTF-8&sa=N&tab=wp No books] seem to name is as anything other than "blue stone" either. [[User:SGGH|SGGH]] <sup>[[User_talk:SGGH|speak!]]</sup> 09:47, 28 May 2008 (UTC) |
|||
:[[User:Gryllida|Gryllida]], they seem to be talking about the "Coffee C" contract in the [[List of traded commodities]]. The price seems to have peaked and then fallen a day later |
|||
:::: What if you called air force pr back and asked them who is the manufacturer of the medal? Then call that company - they should know. [[User:WikiJedits|WikiJedits]] ([[User talk:WikiJedits|talk]]) 13:12, 28 May 2008 (UTC) |
|||
:*explanation [https://www.ice.com/products/15/Coffee-C-Futures here] |
|||
:*I googled "coffee c futures price chart" and the first link was uk.investing.com which I can't link here |
|||
:*if you have detailed questions about [[futures contract]]s they will probably go over my head. [[User:TSventon|TSventon]] ([[User talk:TSventon|talk]]) 01:54, 13 December 2024 (UTC) |
|||
::thanks. i see the chart which you cannot link here. why did it peak and then drop shortly after? [[User:Gryllida|Gryllida]] ([[User talk:Gryllida|talk]], [[Special:EmailUser/Gryllida|e-mail]]) 04:08, 13 December 2024 (UTC) |
|||
:::Financial markets tend to have periods of increase followed by periods of decrease (bull and bear markets), see [[market trend]] for background. [[User:TSventon|TSventon]] ([[User talk:TSventon|talk]]) 04:55, 13 December 2024 (UTC) |
|||
== source for an order of precedence for abbotts == |
|||
== DHL company in Malaysia == |
|||
Hi friends. The article for [[Ramsey Abbey]] in the UK refers to an "order of precedence for abbots in Parliament". (Sourced to an encyclopedia, which uses the wording "The abbot had a seat in Parliament and ranked next after Glastonbury and St. Alban's"). Did a ranking/order of precedence exist and if yes where can it be found? Presumably this would predate the dissolution of monasteries in england. Thanks.[[Special:Contributions/70.67.193.176|70.67.193.176]] ([[User talk:70.67.193.176|talk]]) 06:49, 13 December 2024 (UTC) |
|||
How to explain the general environment of DHL company in Malaysia using the Pestel analysis and it`s competative environment using porter`s five forces. <small>—Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[Special:Contributions/203.188.235.131|203.188.235.131]] ([[User talk:203.188.235.131|talk]]) 05:18, 28 May 2008 (UTC)</small><!-- Template:UnsignedIP --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot--> |
|||
:The abbots called to parliament were called "Mitred Abbots" although not all were entitled to wear a mitre. Our [[Mitre]] article has much the same information as you quote, and I suspect the same citations. The only other reference I could find, also from an encyclopedia; |
|||
: Have you seen our pages [[PEST analysis]] and [[Porter 5 forces analysis]]? Look at the criteria and then find out how DHL matches those. --[[Special:Contributions/71.236.23.111|71.236.23.111]] ([[User talk:71.236.23.111|talk]]) 09:29, 28 May 2008 (UTC) |
|||
:{{xt|Of the abbots, the abbot of Glastonbury had the precedence till A.D. 1154, when [[Pope Adrian IV]], an Englishman, from the affection he entertained for the place of his education, assigned this precedence to the abbot of St. Alban's. In consequence, Glastonbury ranked next after him, and Reading had the third place.}} |
|||
:[https://books.google.co.uk/books?id=GZnQtCA-a2kC&pg=PA2 ''A Church Dictionary: A Practical Manual of Reference for Clergymen and Students'' (p. 2)] |
|||
:[[User:Alansplodge|Alansplodge]] ([[User talk:Alansplodge|talk]]) 21:47, 16 December 2024 (UTC) |
|||
:Sources differ on the order. There is a list published in 1842 of 26 abbots as "generally ... reckoned" in order here |
|||
== My religion is between my god and me == |
|||
:[https://books.google.co.uk/books?id=MBZjBKtuIQkC&newbks=1&newbks_redir=0&printsec=frontcover&pg=PA182 ''The Church History of Britain Volume 2'' (p.182)] [[User:TSventon|TSventon]] ([[User talk:TSventon|talk]]) 22:15, 16 December 2024 (UTC) |
|||
::"Mean lords" in that reference should presumably be [[Mesne lord]]s. [[Special:Contributions/194.73.48.66|194.73.48.66]] ([[User talk:194.73.48.66|talk]]) 14:25, 20 December 2024 (UTC) |
|||
:::"Mean lords" looks like an alternative spelling that was used in the 19th century, so it was probably a correct spelling in 1842. [[User:TSventon|TSventon]] ([[User talk:TSventon|talk]]) 15:07, 20 December 2024 (UTC) |
|||
:Thank you everyone very much for your time and research, truly appreciated. all the best,[[Special:Contributions/70.67.193.176|70.67.193.176]] ([[User talk:70.67.193.176|talk]]) 23:44, 20 December 2024 (UTC) |
|||
== Are the proposed Trump tariffs a regressive tax in disguise? == |
|||
I read the quote somewhere, but I can't remember who said it. At first I thought it was from Gandhi, but I can't find any site that attributed the quote to him. Can anyone help me identify who said it? Although now that I think about it, it could have been from an anonymous person. Anyway, your help in clarifying it would be appreciated. Thanks. <small>—Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[Special:Contributions/58.69.217.138|58.69.217.138]] ([[User talk:58.69.217.138|talk]]) 08:13, 28 May 2008 (UTC)</small><!-- Template:UnsignedIP --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot--> |
|||
::[[Malcolm X]] said "Island is my religion, but I believe my religion is my personal business. It governs my personal like and my personal morals. And my religious philosophy is personal between me and the God in whom I believe", that's the closest I can find. [[User:SGGH|SGGH]] <sup>[[User_talk:SGGH|speak!]]</sup> 09:43, 28 May 2008 (UTC) |
|||
I'm wondering if there has been analysis of this. The US government gets the tariff money(?) and biggest chunk will be on manufactured goods from China. Those in turn are primarily consumer goods, which means that the tariff is something like a sales tax, a type of tax well known to be regressive. Obviously there are leaks in the description above, so one would have to crunch a bunch of numbers to find out for sure. But that's what economists do, right? Has anyone weighed in on this issue? Thanks. [[Special:Contributions/2601:644:8581:75B0:0:0:0:327E|2601:644:8581:75B0:0:0:0:327E]] ([[User talk:2601:644:8581:75B0:0:0:0:327E|talk]]) 08:58, 13 December 2024 (UTC) |
|||
== inherit the throne == |
|||
:There have been many public comments about how this is a tax on American consumers. It's only "in disguise" to those who don't understand how tariffs work. ←[[User:Baseball Bugs|Baseball Bugs]] <sup>''[[User talk:Baseball Bugs|What's up, Doc?]]''</sup> [[Special:Contributions/Baseball_Bugs|carrots]]→ 11:34, 13 December 2024 (UTC) |
|||
::Thanks, I'll see what I can find. Do you remember if the revenue collected is supposed to be enough for the government to care about? I.e. enough to supposedly offset the inevitable tax cuts for people like Elon Musk? [[Special:Contributions/2601:644:8581:75B0:0:0:0:327E|2601:644:8581:75B0:0:0:0:327E]] ([[User talk:2601:644:8581:75B0:0:0:0:327E|talk]]) 22:36, 13 December 2024 (UTC) |
|||
Import duties are extremely recessive in that (a) they are charged at the same rate for any given level of income; and (b) those with less income tend to purchase far more imported goods than those with more income (define “more” and “less” any way you wish). Fiscally, they border on insignificant, running an average of 1.4% of federal revenue since 1962 (or, 0.2% of GDP), compared to 47.1% (8.0%) for individual income tax and 9.9% (1.7%) for corporate tax receipts.[[User:DOR (HK)|DOR (ex-HK)]] ([[User talk:DOR (HK)|talk]]) 22:52, 13 December 2024 (UTC) |
|||
:Curious about your point (b); why would this be? It seems to me that as my income has risen I have probably bought more stuff from abroad, at least directly. It could well be that I've bought less indirectly, but I'm not sure why that would be. --[[User:Trovatore|Trovatore]] ([[User talk:Trovatore|talk]]) 00:02, 14 December 2024 (UTC) |
|||
::More like, those with less income spend a larger fraction of their income on imported goods, instead of services. [[User:PiusImpavidus|PiusImpavidus]] ([[User talk:PiusImpavidus|talk]]) 10:48, 14 December 2024 (UTC) |
|||
Trovatore, most daily use items are imported: toothbrushes, combs, kitchenware, shopping bags. Most durable goods are imported: phones, TVs, cars, furniture, sporting goods, clothes. These items are more likely to be imported because it is MUCH cheaper / more profitable to make them abroad. Wander through Target, Sam's Club, or Wal-Mart and you'll be hard pressed to find "Made in America" goods. But, in a hand-crafted shop, where prices have to reflect the cost of living HERE, rather than in Bangladesh, prices soar. [[User:DOR (HK)|DOR (ex-HK)]] ([[User talk:DOR (HK)|talk]]) 19:13, 15 December 2024 (UTC) |
|||
::::Um, sure, but surely it's a fairly rare person of any income level who spends a significant portion of his/her income on artisanal goods. --[[User:Trovatore|Trovatore]] ([[User talk:Trovatore|talk]]) 06:03, 18 December 2024 (UTC) |
|||
:::PiusImpavidus, Every income strata (in America) spends far more on services than on goods. Services tend to be more of a repeated purchase: laundry (vs. washing machine), Uber (vs. car), rent (vs. purchase), internet (vs. books), etc. [[User:DOR (HK)|DOR (ex-HK)]] ([[User talk:DOR (HK)|talk]]) 19:17, 15 December 2024 (UTC) |
|||
== Ron A. Dunn: Australian arachnologist == |
|||
Why does gender sometimes matter in inheriting the throne and sometimes it doesn't? Princess Anne goes lower than her younger brothers, but why then does Princess Beatrice go higher than Peter Philips even though he's a male? [[Special:Contributions/67.68.32.13|67.68.32.13]] ([[User talk:67.68.32.13|talk]]) <small>—Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|comment]] was added at 10:50, 28 May 2008 (UTC)</small><!--Template:Undated--> <!--Autosigned by SineBot--> |
|||
For {{q|Q109827858}} I have given names of "Ron. A.", an address in 1958 of 60 Mimosa Road, Carnegie, {{nowrap|Victoria, Australia S.E. 9}} (he was also in Carnegie in 1948) and an ''uncited'' death date of 25 June 1972. |
|||
:I think if all else is equal then it goes males first then females, but if they are 'steps' ahead then they don't get jumped up the queue. I have no idea if Beatrice is a closer relative than Peter Phillips, but presumably she is and that is why she is ahead. Whereas Anne is no closer than her younger brothers so they will 'overtake' her by virtue of being male. There's probably a wiki article on it under something like [[succession]] or [[British Monarchy]] [[Special:Contributions/194.221.133.226|194.221.133.226]] ([[User talk:194.221.133.226|talk]]) 11:15, 28 May 2008 (UTC) |
|||
:[[Line of succession to the British throne]] is probably the best article. Beatrice outranks Peter because sons outrank daughters, and children come before siblings. Andrew's children come immediately after Andrew, and thus before Anne and her children. [[User talk:Algebraist|Algebraist]] 11:26, 28 May 2008 (UTC) |
|||
::::This is [[Primogeniture|Cognatic Primogeniture]], because they can't be bothered to change it to a more modern and equal system. Although some countries have. And I think some are even worse, hardly ever letting women rule.[[User:Hidden secret 7|HS7]] ([[User talk:Hidden secret 7|talk]]) 15:15, 28 May 2008 (UTC) |
|||
:::::Japan for example ([[Japanese succession controversy]]), although there have been talk of changing it because of the lack of a suitable male heir. The birth of one seems to have delayed/reduced calls for this but the current PM for example, still supports it. The Windsor case is complicated by the fact that the support of the [[Commonwealth realms]] will be ideal to avoid the situation where the various laws are out of sync with each other on succession and the fact that many of those most supportive of the idea probably want to do away with the monarch anyway. The fact that the current line means it's likely to make no difference is another factor. If William gets married and his first born is a daughter with at least one son after that, there may be a stronger impetus (but it'll likely have to happen when the male heirs are still fairly young otherwise there will be complaints it's unfair to those who were raised expecting to be the next in line after their father) [[User:Nil Einne|Nil Einne]] ([[User talk:Nil Einne|talk]]) 16:12, 28 May 2008 (UTC) |
|||
::::::::It's also complicated by the facts that certain female members of the Royal Family reportedly desperately don't want to be higher up in the succession list, and that even if sex differences were wiped out the three closest heirs would remain the same. Therefore nobody feels an urgent need to change things. (Also, the change must be made by an act of Parliament, and I suspect the government of the day doesn't want the hassle.) --[[User:NellieBly|NellieBly]] ([[User talk:NellieBly|talk]]) 03:44, 29 May 2008 (UTC) |
|||
:::::: To avoid controversy, it may be best to make changes before the younger brother is born. Some people here in [[Sweden]] are still bothered about [[Prince Carl Philip]] getting bumped from being first in line to the throne at the age of seven or so months, when the reforms of the [[Swedish_Act_of_Succession|Act of Succession]] were adopted to [[equal primogeniture]]. /[[Special:Contributions/85.194.44.18|85.194.44.18]] ([[User talk:85.194.44.18|talk]]) 16:30, 28 May 2008 (UTC) |
|||
He was an Australian arachnologist with the honorifics AAA AAIS. |
|||
:::::::It's an odd hangover, particularly these days when discrimination by gender is generally outlawed in most other areas of life. They also discriminate on religious grounds - the monarch can technically be a member of any religion except Roman Catholicism. I believe Tony Blair talked about changing the law to make the succession arrangements more in line with modern thinking on inclusivity in employment, but it hasn't got past that stage. -- [[User:JackofOz|JackofOz]] ([[User talk:JackofOz|talk]]) 22:49, 28 May 2008 (UTC) |
|||
::::::::Actually, according to [http://www.royal.gov.uk/output/page5655.asp the Windsors' website], the religious requirements are more restrictive (must be a protestant and in communion with the CofE). Any such change would (I think) be hotly contested, and like Nil, I doubt any government will try to push it through until it actually matters. [[User talk:Algebraist|Algebraist]] 22:57, 28 May 2008 (UTC) |
|||
Can anyone find the full given names, and a source or the death date, please? What did the honorifics stand for? Do we know how he earned his living? <span class="vcard"><span class="fn">[[User:Pigsonthewing|Andy Mabbett]]</span> (<span class="nickname">Pigsonthewing</span>); [[User talk:Pigsonthewing|Talk to Andy]]; [[Special:Contributions/Pigsonthewing|Andy's edits]]</span> 12:54, 13 December 2024 (UTC) |
|||
::::::::I don't see how ordering by age is any fairer than ordering by sex and then age. It's not as though any of these people did anything to earn their place in the line of succession. The only benefit to changing the order that I can see would be a larger proportion of queens, which certainly wouldn't be a bad thing. I prefer queens anyway, kings are a lot less mobile and have to be carefully protected. But ultimately it seems like it would be much "fairer" to do away with the royal family and promote pawns instead—by general election presumably, or we could bring back the old system of quests perilous. Or get rid of the monarch entirely, but I'm not sure that's a good idea. There are advantages to having separate ceremonial and political heads of state. -- [[User:BenRG|BenRG]] ([[User talk:BenRG|talk]]) 23:01, 28 May 2008 (UTC) |
|||
:[[User:Pigsonthewing|Pigsonthewing]] Have you tried ancestry.com? For a start |
|||
:::::::::@ Algebraist: Putting aside the facts that Charles was the first-born anyway, and that his first-born child is also a male, one could argue that it matters a great deal already. It matters because the succession rules incorporate examples of structural discrimination that are out of step with the way the rest of the Commonwealth is expected to operate. A lot of people still look to the Royal Family as role models. The Queen and her various governors-general have given royal assent to all the various bits of anti-discrimination legislation throughout the Commonwealth, and I'm sure all the assenters would have agreed these are good laws that make for a better and fairer world. The Queen has done a lot of things to modernise the monarchy and ensure she's seen as being in touch with community expectations, e.g. paying taxes she's not legally required to pay etc. Many people want to see the outright removal of the monarchy, but even they would welcome a change to the succession laws to bring them more into line with the access and equity framework that we mere mortals live by. Granted, any such change would not have any actual effect until such time as the death of a monarch whose first-born child happens to be a female. The earliest possible occasion would be the death of William V (currently Prince William), assuming he has a daughter first. That's probably at least 60 years down the track, and who knows if there'll even be monarchies by then (Nepal has just abolished its monarchy). I'm more interested in the implicit unfairness in the British model that has always applied and continues to this day. Symbolic changes are just as important as practicable changes, and constitutional monarchies are all about symbolism. -- [[User:JackofOz|JackofOz]] ([[User talk:JackofOz|talk]]) 23:43, 28 May 2008 (UTC) |
|||
:A scan of the 1954 Carnegie electoral roll has |
|||
:*Dunn, Ronald Albert, 60 Mimosa Road, S.E. 9, accountant |
|||
:*Dunn, Gladys Harriet I, 60 Mimosa Road, S.E. 9, home duties |
|||
:I can't check newspapers.com, but The Age apparently had a report about Ronald Albert Dunn on 27 Jun 1972 [[User:TSventon|TSventon]] ([[User talk:TSventon|talk]]) 14:49, 13 December 2024 (UTC) |
|||
::Thank you. I don't have access to the former, but that's great. AAA seems to be (member of the) Association of Accountants of Australia: [https://trove.nla.gov.au/newspaper/article/206190746]. <span class="vcard"><span class="fn">[[User:Pigsonthewing|Andy Mabbett]]</span> (<span class="nickname">Pigsonthewing</span>); [[User talk:Pigsonthewing|Talk to Andy]]; [[Special:Contributions/Pigsonthewing|Andy's edits]]</span> 16:18, 13 December 2024 (UTC) |
|||
:::I accessed Ancestry.com via the Wikipedia Library, so you should have access. Newspapers.com is also available via the library if you register, which I haven't. An editor with a Newspapers.com account would be able to make a clipping which anyone could access online. |
|||
:::I agree AAA is probably the Australian Society of Accountants, a predecessor of [[CPA Australia]]. They merged in 1953 ([https://trove.nla.gov.au/people/458467 source]) so the information would have been outdated in 1958. AAIS could be Associate [of the] Amalgamated Institute of Secretaries (source [https://books.google.co.uk/books?id=vxQ6AQAAIAAJ Who's Who in Australia, Volume 16, 1959] Abbreviations page 9). [[User:TSventon|TSventon]] ([[User talk:TSventon|talk]]) 16:48, 13 December 2024 (UTC) |
|||
::::Last time I tried, Ancestry wasn't working for WP-Lib users. Thank you again. <span class="vcard"><span class="fn">[[User:Pigsonthewing|Andy Mabbett]]</span> (<span class="nickname">Pigsonthewing</span>); [[User talk:Pigsonthewing|Talk to Andy]]; [[Special:Contributions/Pigsonthewing|Andy's edits]]</span> 20:50, 13 December 2024 (UTC) |
|||
:::::There is a phabricator problem about loading a second page of results. My workaround is to try to add more information to the search to get more relevant results on the first page of results. [[User:TSventon|TSventon]] ([[User talk:TSventon|talk]]) 21:03, 13 December 2024 (UTC) |
|||
::::::Or perhaps someone at [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Resource Exchange/Resource Request]] could help? [[User:Alansplodge|Alansplodge]] ([[User talk:Alansplodge|talk]]) 12:35, 14 December 2024 (UTC) |
|||
:::::::They already have at [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Resource Exchange/Resource Request#The Age (Melbourne) 27 June 1972]]. [[User:TSventon|TSventon]] ([[User talk:TSventon|talk]]) 12:42, 14 December 2024 (UTC) |
|||
:Given his specialty, I suggest the honorific stands for "Aaaaaaaaagh It's (a) Spider!" [[User:Chuntuk|Chuntuk]] ([[User talk:Chuntuk|talk]]) 12:33, 18 December 2024 (UTC) |
|||
= December 15 = |
|||
==Romani/Gipsy brass band music== |
|||
Hello. I've searched the articles on [[Romani music]], but haven't been able to find what I am looking for. Quite specifically, I am looking for a piece of brass band music. It's very enthralling and cheery, but I don't know what is being sung. I recently saw a surrealistic Yugoslavian film (though recently made) about two Yugoslavs who fought the German occupation. Not sure about the title. Anyway, the brass band was prominent, because it'd follow them and perform this same piece over and over again. Performed instrumentally (as it was in that film), it had good potential for repeating over again. Trumpets and bass drums were important, but there were many other brass instruments. It would go something like DAdahdah(dadada), DAdahdah(dadada), DAdahdah(dadada), DAdahdah(dadada)-aaa-*wild and chaotic, writing doesn't really suffice*. |
|||
== Schisms and Byzantine Roman self-perception == |
|||
I know you've been able to answer vaguer questions about pieces of art, literature and music before, so I hope this will suffice. :) [[User:Scaller|Scaller]] ([[User talk:Scaller|talk]]) 13:11, 28 May 2008 (UTC) |
|||
Did the [[Rome-Constantinople schism|three schisms between Rome and Constantinople]] tarnish Rome's reputation to the degree that it affected the Byzantine self-perception as the "Roman Empire" and as "Romans"? Including Constantinople's vision of succession to the Roman Empire and its notion of [[Second Rome]]. [[User:Brandmeister|Brandmeister]]<sup>[[User talk:Brandmeister|talk]]</sup> 15:34, 15 December 2024 (UTC) |
|||
::The movie is [[Underground (film)]], the soundtrack is "Kalasjnikov". Thank you! [[User:Scaller|Scaller]] ([[User talk:Scaller|talk]]) 13:45, 28 May 2008 (UTC) |
|||
:Various maneuverings in the middle ages (including the infamous Fourth Crusade) certainly gave many Byzantines a negative view of western Catholics, so that toward the end some frankly preferred conquest by Muslims to a Christian alliance which would involve Byzantine religious and political subordination to the European West (see discussion at [[Loukas Notaras]]). But the Byzantines generally considered themselves to be the real Romans, and called themselves "Romaioi" much more often than they called themselves Greek (of course, "Byzantine" is a later retroactive term). [[User:AnonMoos|AnonMoos]] ([[User talk:AnonMoos|talk]]) 17:09, 15 December 2024 (UTC) |
|||
== Are there social movements using wikis? And how? == |
|||
:I think these religious schisms had nothing to do with the secular political situation. In 330, before Christianity became an established religion that could experience schisms, [[Constantine the Great]] moved the capital of the unitary Roman Empire from Rome to the city of [[Byzantium]] and dubbed it the [[New Rome]] – later renamed to Constantinople. During the later periods in which the [[Western Roman Empire|Western]] and [[Eastern Roman Empire]] were administered separately, this was not considered a political split but an expedient way of administering a large polity, of which Constantinople remained the capital. So when the Western wing of the Roman Empire fell to the [[Ostrogoths]] and even the later [[Exarchate of Ravenna]] disappeared, the Roman Empire, now only administered by the Constantinopolitan court, continued in an unbroken succession from the [[Roman Kingdom]] and subsequent [[Roman Republic|Republic]]. --[[User talk:Lambiam#top|Lambiam]] 10:48, 16 December 2024 (UTC) |
|||
I am trying to find information on whether there are any social movements using the wiki technology, and if so, how are they using it. If you can provide any examples (of social movement wikis, or works discussing that, or just anything you've heard) I would appreciate it.--<sub><span style="border:1px solid #228B22;padding:1px;">[[User:Piotrus|Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus]]|[[User_talk:Piotrus|<font style="color:#7CFC00;background:#006400;"> talk </font>]]</span></sub> 13:55, 28 May 2008 (UTC) |
|||
::In Ottoman Turkish, the term {{large|[[wikt:روم#Ottoman Turkish|روم]]}} (''Rum''), ultimately derived from Latin ''Roma'', was used to designate the Byzantine Empire, or, as a geographic term, its former lands. Fun fact: After the conquest of Constantinople in 1453, [[Mehmet the Conqueror]] and his successors claimed the title of [[Caesar of Rome]], with the Ottoman Empire being the successor of the [[Byzantine Empire]]. IMO this claim has merit; Mehmet II was the first ruler of yet another dynasty, but rather than replacing the existing Byzantine administrative apparatus, he simply continued its use for the empire he had become the ruler of. If you recognize the claim, the [[Republic of Turkey]] is today's successor of the Roman Kingdom. --[[User talk:Lambiam#top|Lambiam]] 12:01, 17 December 2024 (UTC) |
|||
:::The Ottomans basically continued the Byzantine tax-collection system, for a while. [[User:AnonMoos|AnonMoos]] ([[User talk:AnonMoos|talk]]) 23:13, 17 December 2024 (UTC) |
|||
== Foreign Presidents/Heads of State CURRENTLY Buried in the USA == |
|||
:Anytime a widespread group of people want to share information and collaborate, a wiki is a free and easy way to do so. They're easy enough to find. Google an issue and the word wiki. After you get past the wikipedia stuff, most major issues have at least one. ex: [http://autism.wikia.com/wiki/Autism_Wiki Autism Wiki] or [http://globalwarming.wikidot.com/ Global Warming Wiki]. [[Special:Contributions/160.10.98.34|160.10.98.34]] ([[User talk:160.10.98.34|talk]]) 16:21, 28 May 2008 (UTC) |
|||
How many foreign presidents are CURRENTLY buried in the USA? (I am aware of previous burials that have since been repatriated) |
|||
:Depends on what you mean by "social movement"? I'd say Wikipedia qualifies. --[[User:D Monack|D. Monack]] | [[User talk:D Monack|''talk'']] 19:38, 28 May 2008 (UTC) |
|||
For example, In Woodlawn Cemetery in Miami, FL, there are two Cuban presidents and a Nicaraguan president. |
|||
Are there any other foreign presidents, heads of state, that are buried in the USA? [[User:Exeter6|Exeter6]] ([[User talk:Exeter6|talk]]) 17:54, 15 December 2024 (UTC) |
|||
== What is the name for the study of the history of printing / writing / the book? == |
|||
:As far as I know, all 4 of the presidents of the [[Republic of Texas]] are buried in Texas, which is currently in the US. [[User:Blueboar|Blueboar]] ([[User talk:Blueboar|talk]]) 18:04, 15 December 2024 (UTC) |
|||
I may want to study the above in graduate school. Assuming that I could get in to most programs, what would the best choice be? |
|||
::[[Andrés Domingo y Morales del Castillo]] was President of Cuba in 1954-55 and died in Miami. Not sure where he's buried though. |
|||
In other words, would it be better to study history, English, or even anthropology? Where are the best programs located? Who are the leading scholars in this field? |
|||
::Also [[Anselmo Alliegro y Milá]] (President of Cuba for a few hours on January 1, 1959) similarly went to Florida and died there. |
|||
::And [[Arnulfo Arias]], ousted as President of Panama in the [[1968 Panamanian coup d'état]], died in Florida (a pattern emerging here...) |
|||
::[[User:Alansplodge|Alansplodge]] ([[User talk:Alansplodge|talk]]) 19:28, 15 December 2024 (UTC) |
|||
:For ease of reference, the Woodlawn Cemetery in question is [[Caballero Rivero Woodlawn Park North Cemetery and Mausoleum]], housing: |
|||
:# [[Gerardo Machado]], president of Cuba from 1925 to 1933 |
|||
:# [[Carlos Prío Socarrás]], president of Cuba from 1948 to 1952 |
|||
:# [[Anastasio Somoza Debayle]], president of Nicaragua from 1967 to 1972, and from 1974 to 1979 (not to be confused with his father [[Anastasio Somoza García]] and brother [[Luis Somoza Debayle]], both former presidents of Nicaragua, buried together in Nicaragua) |
|||
:[[User:GalacticShoe|GalacticShoe]] ([[User talk:GalacticShoe|talk]]) 20:09, 15 December 2024 (UTC) |
|||
::Searching Findagrave could be fruitful. Machado's entry:[https://www.findagrave.com/memorial/6881438/gerardo-machado_y_morales] ←[[User:Baseball Bugs|Baseball Bugs]] <sup>''[[User talk:Baseball Bugs|What's up, Doc?]]''</sup> [[Special:Contributions/Baseball_Bugs|carrots]]→ 21:45, 15 December 2024 (UTC) |
|||
:Polish prime minister and famous musician Ignacy Paderewski had his grave in the United States until 1992. [[User:AnonMoos|AnonMoos]] ([[User talk:AnonMoos|talk]]) 07:32, 16 December 2024 (UTC) |
|||
Your help in answering my questions is greatly appreciated. <small>—Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[Special:Contributions/204.87.70.194|204.87.70.194]] ([[User talk:204.87.70.194|talk]]) 14:57, 28 May 2008 (UTC)</small><!-- Template:UnsignedIP --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot--> |
|||
::I guess not current, though... [[User:AnonMoos|AnonMoos]] ([[User talk:AnonMoos|talk]]) 01:12, 17 December 2024 (UTC) |
|||
:This is a very general question. You haven't mentioned for example, whether you're likely to be restriced to one country. It sounds to me that you're an American, but whatever the case, are you willing to consider universities in the US? Canada? the UK? Australia? What about e.g. Germany or France or Japan (which will almost definitely entail learning French or German if you don't know it already). [[User:Nil Einne|Nil Einne]] ([[User talk:Nil Einne|talk]]) 15:41, 28 May 2008 (UTC) |
|||
:You can find some with the following Wikidata query: [https://query.wikidata.org/#SELECT%20%3Fperson%20%3Flabel%0AWHERE%0A%7B%0A%20%20%3Fperson%20wdt%3AP39%20%3Foffice%20.%20%23%20held%20office%0A%20%20%3Foffice%20wdt%3AP279%2a%20wd%3AQ48352%20.%20%23%20office%20is%20head%20of%20state%0A%20%20%3Fperson%20wdt%3AP119%20%3Flocation%20.%20%23%20burial%20location%0A%20%20%3Flocation%20wdt%3AP17%20wd%3AQ30%20.%20%23%20burial%20location%20in%20the%20USA%0A%20%20FILTER%28%3Foffice%20%21%3D%20wd%3AQ11696%29%20.%20%23%20Office%20is%20not%20POTUS%0A%20%20%3Fperson%20rdfs%3Alabel%20%3Flabel%20.%0A%20%20FILTER%28LANG%28%3Flabel%29%20%3D%20%22en%22%29%20.%0A%7D%0AGROUP%20BY%20%3Fperson%20%3Flabel%0ALIMIT%20100]. Some notable examples are [[Liliʻuokalani]], [[Pierre Nord Alexis]], [[Dương Văn Minh]], [[Lon Nol]], [[Bruno Carranza]], [[Victoriano Huerta]], and [[Mykola Livytskyi]]. Note that [[Alexander Kerensky]] died in the US but was buried in the UK. Unfortunately, the query also returns others who were presidents, governors, etc. of other than sovereign states. --[[User:Amble|Amble]] ([[User talk:Amble|talk]]) 19:09, 16 December 2024 (UTC) |
|||
::Printing, of course, has a history which is very different from that of writing, and the history of writing divides into the history of the act of writing itself ([[palaeography]], etc) and that of writing as a literary art. Books are part of the history of all of them. So your question really needs more focus, as suggested by Nil Einne. [[User:Xn4|<span style="color:#9911DD">Xn4</span>]] 16:20, 28 May 2008 (UTC) |
|||
:I suppose we should also consider [[Jefferson Davis]] as a debatable case. And [[Peter II of Yugoslavia]] was initially buried in the USA but later reburied in Serbia. He seems to have been the only European monarch who was at one point buried in the USA. --[[User:Amble|Amble]] ([[User talk:Amble|talk]]) 00:13, 17 December 2024 (UTC) |
|||
:[[Manuel Quezon]] was initially buried at Arlington. [[User:DuncanHill|DuncanHill]] ([[User talk:DuncanHill|talk]]) 00:20, 17 December 2024 (UTC) |
|||
:I don't think the above really falls into anthropology; I've seen people studying such things in both English programs as well as History programs, as well as History of Science programs (in the latter venue, look at the works by Jim Secord or Adrian Johns). There are a lot of links at the bottom of the [[History of the book]] page that might be useful. From what I understand of it, the specific venue you will want will depend on what time period and location you are interested in (19th century Britain? 15th century France? etc.) or whether you have thematic interests (the book as a way of transmitting scientific knowledge? the book as reflective of changing literary patterns of the middle class?), etc. --[[Special:Contributions/98.217.8.46|98.217.8.46]] ([[User talk:98.217.8.46|talk]]) 17:10, 28 May 2008 (UTC) |
|||
:And of course I should rather think that most monarchs of Hawaii are buried in the USA. [[User:DuncanHill|DuncanHill]] ([[User talk:DuncanHill|talk]]) 00:27, 17 December 2024 (UTC) |
|||
::If burial was the custom there. (I'd guess it was, but I certainly don't know.) --[[Special:Contributions/142.112.149.206|142.112.149.206]] ([[User talk:142.112.149.206|talk]]) 02:50, 17 December 2024 (UTC) |
|||
:::[[Royal Mausoleum (Mauna ʻAla)]] answers that question with a definitive "yes, it was". [[User:Cullen328|Cullen328]] ([[User talk:Cullen328|talk]]) 22:04, 17 December 2024 (UTC) |
|||
:[[Antanas Smetona]] was initially buried in Cleveland, but then reburied elsewhere in Ohio. --[[User:Amble|Amble]] ([[User talk:Amble|talk]]) 06:36, 17 December 2024 (UTC) |
|||
::To be specific, All Souls Cemetery in [[Chardon, Ohio|Chardon]] according to Smetona's article. [[User:GalacticShoe|GalacticShoe]] ([[User talk:GalacticShoe|talk]]) 06:51, 17 December 2024 (UTC) |
|||
:There are a number of Egyptian mummies in US museums ([[List of museums with Egyptian mummies in their collections]]), but I can't find any that are currently known to be the mummy of a pharaoh. The mummy of [[Ramesses I]] was formerly in the US, but was returned to Egypt in 2003. --[[User:Amble|Amble]] ([[User talk:Amble|talk]]) 22:47, 17 December 2024 (UTC) |
|||
To clarify: yes, I am an American. I have studied English at both a small liberal arts school in the U.S. as well as an Oxbridge college in the U.K. and would prefer to continue studying in a country where English is the native language. I am interested in the medium of the book itself, its history, and its place in anthropological and cultural studies. I suppose I was wondering if English is the best path to studying the medium of the book (in graduate school). Thank you for your responses thus far. [[Special:Contributions/204.87.70.194|204.87.70.194]] ([[User talk:204.87.70.194|talk]]) 18:43, 28 May 2008 (UTC) |
|||
= December 17 = |
|||
:You'll probably want to read up on some of the basic seminal texts in the field, just so you have a better idea of what it is you want to do and how it compares with what has already been done. After having done that it will be much easier to talk with potential professors about their programs, whether they would be apt for you. (And while I have no doubt that there would be anthropological insights to be gained, again, I have never seen anything that would make me think that this sort of study would be considered appropriate in an Anthropology department. They would wonder what you were doing had to do with their discipline. Just a tip. You might look into [[Science and Technology Studies]], a discipline which includes anthropology and history and would probably be more accepting to that approach, if you really want to go the Anthropology route. In general though I think you're looking at English programs or History programs.) --[[Special:Contributions/98.217.8.46|98.217.8.46]] ([[User talk:98.217.8.46|talk]]) 19:29, 28 May 2008 (UTC) |
|||
:To answer a part of the question, I don't know of a word for the study of the ''history'' etc. of books. There are plenty of nifty words in that general area, though. "Bibliogony" is the production of books. "Bibliology" is the scientific description of books. "Bibliopegy" is bookbinding. "Bibliopoesy" is the making of books. --[[User:Milkbreath|Milkbreath]] ([[User talk:Milkbreath|talk]]) 19:46, 28 May 2008 (UTC) |
|||
== Geographic extent of an English parish c. 1800 == |
|||
:There is a program at the University of Toronto (in collaboration with various departments) called "Book History and Print Culture", which covers all of this. [[User:Adam Bishop|Adam Bishop]] ([[User talk:Adam Bishop|talk]]) 21:09, 28 May 2008 (UTC) |
|||
What would have been the typical extent (in square miles or square kilometers) of an English parish, circa 1800 or so? Let's say the median rather than the mean. With more interest in rural than urban parishes. -- [[User:Avocado|Avocado]] ([[User talk:Avocado|talk]]) 00:05, 17 December 2024 (UTC) |
|||
:There were tensions involved in a unit based on the placement of churches being tasked to administer the poor law; that was why "civil parishes" were split off a little bit later... [[User:AnonMoos|AnonMoos]] ([[User talk:AnonMoos|talk]]) 01:11, 17 December 2024 (UTC) |
|||
== What is the Marxist Scientific Method? == |
|||
:[[User:Avocado|Avocado]] As a start the mean area of a parish in England and Wales in around 1832 seems to have been around 5.6 square miles. |
|||
Is there any work that outlines the Marxist scientific method? --[[User:Gary123|Gary123]] ([[User talk:Gary123|talk]]) 15:16, 28 May 2008 (UTC) |
|||
:Source [https://books.google.com/books?id=pJZGAQAAMAAJ&pg=PA494 The Edinburgh Encyclopædia Volume 8]. It also has figures by county if you are interested. |
|||
:*p.494 38,498,572 acres, i.e. 60,154 square miles |
|||
:*p.497 10,674 parishes and parochial chapelries |
|||
:*Average 3,607 acres, i.e. 5.64 square miles [[User:TSventon|TSventon]] ([[User talk:TSventon|talk]]) 02:33, 17 December 2024 (UTC) |
|||
::Thank you -- that's a starting point, at least! -- [[User:Avocado|Avocado]] ([[User talk:Avocado|talk]]) 13:14, 17 December 2024 (UTC) |
|||
:::But regionally variable: |
|||
:What do you mean by the Marxist scientific method? Do you mean the Marxist philosophy of science and nature? That is a subset of what is known as [[dialectical materialism]] (I don't think our page is very clear on the philosophy of nature aspects of it—it is really about hierarchical levels of knowledge that cannot affect one another, but that's a whole other story). Do you mean, the way in which Marxism calls itself a "science"? That is just hogwash with no methodology supporting it. --[[Special:Contributions/98.217.8.46|98.217.8.46]] ([[User talk:98.217.8.46|talk]]) 17:03, 28 May 2008 (UTC) |
|||
:::{{xt|By the early nineteenth century the north-west of England, including the expanding cities of Manchester and Liverpool, had just over 150 parishes, each of them covering an average of almost 12,000 acres, whereas the more rural east of the country had more than 1,600 parishes, each with an average size of approximately 2,000 acres.}} |
|||
:::[https://books.google.co.uk/books?id=grdvBQAAQBAJ&pg=PT34 ''OCR A Level History: Britain 1603-1760''] |
|||
:::[[User:Alansplodge|Alansplodge]] ([[User talk:Alansplodge|talk]]) 21:46, 17 December 2024 (UTC) |
|||
::::{{xt|On the contrary , in England , which contains 38,500,000 statute acres, the parishes or [[Benefice|living]]s comprehend about 3,850 acres the average; and if similar allowance be made for those livings in cities and towns , perhaps about 4,000.}} |
|||
::Probably not what you're looking for, but Ben Goldacre's [http://www.badscience.net/?p=141 Bad Science] mentions [[Trofim Lysenko]], a top Soviet biologist who: ''"thought natural selection was too individualistic, and spent his career growing plants really close together, in the hope they would develop collectivist tendencies."'' [[User:Dooky|Dooky]] ([[User talk:Dooky|talk]]) 15:20, 29 May 2008 (UTC) |
|||
::::[https://books.google.co.uk/books?id=fCtdAAAAcAAJ&pg=PA165 ''An Essay on the Revenues of the Church of England'' (1816) p. 165] |
|||
::::The point about urban parishes distorting the overall average is supported by [[St Ethelburga's Bishopsgate]] for instance, that had a parish of only 3 acres (or two football pitches of 110 yards by 70 yards placed side by side). [https://www.londonparishclerks.com/Parishes-Churches/Individual-Parish-Info/St-Ethelburga-Bishopsgate] [[User:Alansplodge|Alansplodge]] ([[User talk:Alansplodge|talk]]) 21:46, 17 December 2024 (UTC) |
|||
::::Oh, that's great info -- ty! I can't seem to get a look at the content of the book. Does it say anything else about other regions? -- [[User:Avocado|Avocado]] ([[User talk:Avocado|talk]]) 23:24, 17 December 2024 (UTC) |
|||
:::::The OCR book doesn't mention other regions. I have found where the figure of 10,674 came from: [https://books.google.co.uk/books?id=fCtdAAAAcAAJ&pg=PA112 page 112 of the 1816 essay] has a note that {{tq|Preliminary Observations ( p . 13. and 15. ) to the Popu-lation Returns in 1811 ; where the Parishes and Parochial Chapelries are stated at 10,674 .}} The text of page 112 says that {{tq|churches are contained in be-tween 10 , and 11,000 parishes † ; and probably after a due allowance for consolidations , & c . they constitute the Churches of about 10,000 Parochial Benefices}}, so the calculation on p.165 of the 1816 essay is based on around 10,000 parishes in England (and Wales) in 1800 (38,500,000 divided by 3,850). [[User:TSventon|TSventon]] ([[User talk:TSventon|talk]]) 01:40, 18 December 2024 (UTC) |
|||
::::: The primary source is [https://books.google.com/books?id=6wUSAAAAYAAJ ''Abstract of the Answers and Returns Made Pursuant to an Act Passed in the Fifty-first Year of His Majesty King George III, Intituled, "An Act for Taking an Account of the Population of Great Britain, and of the Increase Or Diminution Thereof" : Preliminary Observations, Enumeration Abstract, Parish Register Abstract, 1811''] and the table of parishes by county is on page xxix. [[User:TSventon|TSventon]] ([[User talk:TSventon|talk]]) 01:46, 18 December 2024 (UTC) |
|||
::::::Thank you! -- [[User:Avocado|Avocado]] ([[User talk:Avocado|talk]]) 17:19, 18 December 2024 (UTC) |
|||
:Parishes, like political constituencies etc, were in theory decided by the number of inhabitants, not the area covered. What the average was at particular points, I don't know. No doubt it rose over recent centuries as the population expanded, but rural parishes generally did not. [[User:Johnbod|Johnbod]] ([[User talk:Johnbod|talk]]) 03:09, 20 December 2024 (UTC) |
|||
::But whatever the population changes, the parish boundaries in England (whether urban or rural) remained largely fixed between the 12th and mid-19th centuries. [[User:Alansplodge|Alansplodge]] ([[User talk:Alansplodge|talk]]) 13:53, 20 December 2024 (UTC) |
|||
::Right, I'm not asking because I thought parish boundaries had been drawn to equalize the geographic area covered or I wanted to know how those boundaries came about. I'm asking because I'm curious what would have been typical in terms of geographic area in order to better understand certain aspects of the society of the time. |
|||
::For instance, how far (and thus how long) would people have to travel to get to their church? How far might they live from other people who attended the same church? How far would the rector/vicar/curate have to range to attend to his parishioners in their homes? |
|||
::Questions like that. Does that make the reason for this particular inquiry make more sense? -- [[User:Avocado|Avocado]] ([[User talk:Avocado|talk]]) 15:04, 20 December 2024 (UTC) |
|||
:::[https://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/pdwhr8/how_widespread_were_priests_and_churches_in_the/ Someone on Reddit] had a similar question and the answer there suggested [[Christopher N. L. Brooke|C. N. L. Brooke]]’s ''Churches and Churchmen in Medieval Europe'' (1999) [https://books.google.co.uk/books?id=q8rBaGKeWbgC on Google books]. You may find the first chapter, '' Rural Ecclesiastical Institutions in England : The Search for their Origins'' interesting. [[User:TSventon|TSventon]] ([[User talk:TSventon|talk]]) 15:44, 20 December 2024 (UTC) |
|||
::::Thanks for the link! |
|||
::::Fwiw, I'm not really seeing any answers to questions of actual geographic extent in that first chapter, mostly info on the "how they came to be" that, again, isn't really the focus of the question. Or maybe the info I'm looking for is in the pages that are omitted from the preview? |
|||
::::The rest of the book is clearly focused on a much earlier period than I'm interested in (granted, parish boundaries may not have changed much between the start of the Reformation and the Georgian era, but culture, practices, and the relationship of most people to their church and parish certainly would have!) -- [[User:Avocado|Avocado]] ([[User talk:Avocado|talk]]) 16:09, 20 December 2024 (UTC) |
|||
:::::The chapter is relevant to how far people had to travel in the middle ages, which I can see is not the period you are interested in. [[User:TSventon|TSventon]] ([[User talk:TSventon|talk]]) 21:25, 20 December 2024 (UTC) |
|||
::::::Yeah, it looks to me as if the pages I need are probably among the unavailable ones, then. Oh well. Thank you for the suggestion regardless! -- [[User:Avocado|Avocado]] ([[User talk:Avocado|talk]]) 22:47, 20 December 2024 (UTC) |
|||
:One last link, the introduction of which might be helpful, describing attempts to create new parishes for the growing population in the early 19th century (particularly pp. 19-20): |
|||
:::That's amusing, but is not actually what Lysenko believed. Our page on Lysenko is much more accurate. He was scientifically wrong, but not for reasons that are very entertaining. --[[Special:Contributions/98.217.8.46|98.217.8.46]] ([[User talk:98.217.8.46|talk]]) 15:30, 29 May 2008 (UTC) |
|||
:[https://books.google.co.uk/books?id=hrIOAAAAQAAJ&pg=PA1 ''The New parishes acts, 1843,1844, & 1856. With notes and observations &c''] |
|||
:[[User:Alansplodge|Alansplodge]] ([[User talk:Alansplodge|talk]]) 12:30, 21 December 2024 (UTC) |
|||
== When was the first bat mitzvah? == |
|||
== Historical Religious Flag == |
|||
[[Bar and bat mitzvah]] has a short history section, all of which is about bar mitzvah. When was the first bat mitzvah? What is its history? <span style="position: relative; top: -0.5em;">꧁</span>[[User:Zanahary|Zanahary]]<span style="position: relative; top: -0.5em;">꧂</span> 01:52, 17 December 2024 (UTC) |
|||
I need more information concerning an old flag with a red cross on the right side and the words "By This Sign Conquer" next to the cross. I have a picture of the flag. Need instructions to download the picture. Please contact me (here). |
|||
<small>—Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[Special:Contributions/69.151.178.27|69.151.178.27]] ([[User talk:69.151.178.27|talk]]) 18:06, 28 May 2008 (UTC)</small><!-- Template:UnsignedIP --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot--> |
|||
:To be clear, I am more asking when the bat mitzvah ritual became part of common Jewish practice. <span style="position: relative; top: -0.5em;">꧁</span>[[User:Zanahary|Zanahary]]<span style="position: relative; top: -0.5em;">꧂</span> 01:53, 17 December 2024 (UTC) |
|||
:(I removed your contact info as per the instructions at the top of this page -[[User:SandyJax|SandyJax]] ([[User talk:SandyJax|talk]]) 18:35, 28 May 2008 (UTC)) |
|||
:Parts from Google's translation of [[:he:בת מצווה]]: |
|||
::As early as the early 19th century, in the early days of Reform Judaism, confirmation ceremonies for boys and girls began to be held in which their knowledge of the religion was tested, similar to that practiced among Christians. It spread to the more liberal circles of German Jewry, and by the middle of the century had also begun to be widespread among the Orthodox bourgeoisie. Rabbi Jacob Etlinger of Altona was forced by the community's regulations to participate in such an event in 1867, and published the sermon he had prepared for the purpose later. He emphasized that he was obligated to do so by law, and that Judaism did not recognize that the principles of the religion should be adopted in such a public declaration, since it is binding from birth. However, as part of his attempt to stop the Reform, he supported a kind of parallel procedure that was intended to take place exclusively outside the synagogue. |
|||
::The idea of confirmation was not always met with resistance, especially with regard to girls: the chief rabbi of the Central Consistory of French Jews, Shlomo Zalman Ullmann, permitted it for both sexes in 1843. In 1844, confirmation for young Jews was held for the first time in Verona, Italy. In the 1880s, Rabbi Zvi Hermann Adler agreed to the widespread introduction of the ceremony, after it had become increasingly common in synagogues, but refused to call it 'confirmation'. In 1901, Rabbi Eliyahu Bechor, cantor in Alexandria, permitted it for both boys and girls, inspired by what was happening in Italy. Other rabbis initially ordered a more conservative event. |
|||
::At the beginning of the twentieth century, the attitude towards the bat mitzvah party was reserved, because it was sometimes an attempt to imitate symbols drawn from the confirmation ceremony, and indeed there were rabbis, such as Rabbi Aharon Volkin, who forbade the custom on the grounds of gentile laws, or who treated it with suspicion, such as Rabbi Moshe Feinstein, who in a 1950s recantation forbade holding an event in the synagogue because it was "a matter of authority and a mere vanity...there is no point and no basis for considering it a matter of a mitzvah and a mitzvah meal". The Haredi community also expressed strong opposition to the celebration of the bat mitzvah due to its origins in Reform circles. In 1977, Rabbi Yehuda David Bleich referred to it as one of the "current problems in halakhah", noting that only a minority among the Orthodox celebrate it and that it had spread to them from among the Conservatives. |
|||
::On the other hand, as early as the beginning of the twentieth century, rabbis began to encourage holding a Bat Mitzvah party for a daughter, similar to a party that is customary for a son, with the aim of strengthening observance of the mitzvot among Jewish women. |
|||
: --[[User talk:Lambiam#top|Lambiam]] 11:23, 17 December 2024 (UTC) |
|||
::Thank you! Surprising how recent it is. <span style="position: relative; top: -0.5em;">꧁</span>[[User:Zanahary|Zanahary]]<span style="position: relative; top: -0.5em;">꧂</span> 21:51, 17 December 2024 (UTC) |
|||
= December 18 = |
|||
:The order of the [[Knights Templar]] uses a red cross and, on the seal, the Latin inscription "[[In hoc signo vinces]]". I could not find an image in WP, but there must be one in Google somewhere. --[[User:Cookatoo.ergo.ZooM|Cookatoo.ergo.ZooM]] ([[User talk:Cookatoo.ergo.ZooM|talk]]) 18:23, 28 May 2008 (UTC) |
|||
== Major feminist achievements prior to 18th century == |
|||
::The actual Templars did not use that motto, so you've probably got a fake, or some modern recreation that claims to be Templars. "In hoc signo" was [[Constantine I]]'s motto. [[User:Adam Bishop|Adam Bishop]] ([[User talk:Adam Bishop|talk]]) 21:06, 28 May 2008 (UTC) |
|||
What would be the most important feminist victories prior to the 18th and 19th centuries? I'm looking for specific laws or major changes (anywhere in the world), not just minor improvements in women's pursuit of equality. Something on the same scale and importantance as the women's suffrage. [[User:DuxCoverture|DuxCoverture]] ([[User talk:DuxCoverture|talk]]) 11:54, 18 December 2024 (UTC) |
|||
:::Oops, I must have mixed it up with that other saint, [[Simon Templar]] :) --[[User:Cookatoo.ergo.ZooM|Cookatoo.ergo.ZooM]] ([[User talk:Cookatoo.ergo.ZooM|talk]]) 21:27, 28 May 2008 (UTC) |
|||
:I'm not aware of any occuring without being foreseable a set of conditions such as the perspective of a minimal equal representation both in the judiciary and law enforcement. Those seem to be dependent on technological progress, maybe particularly law enforcement although the judiciary sometimes heavily relies on recording capabilities. Unfortunately [[Ancient Egypt#Social status|Ancient Egypt]] is not very explicitly illustrating the genesis of its sociological dynamics. --[[User:Askedonty|Askedonty]] ([[User talk:Askedonty|talk]]) 16:25, 18 December 2024 (UTC) |
|||
:Before universal male suffrage became the norm in the 19th century, also male [[commoner]]s did not pull significant political weight, at least in Western society, so any feminist "victories" before then can only have been minor improvements in women's rights in general. --[[User talk:Lambiam#top|Lambiam]] 22:40, 18 December 2024 (UTC) |
|||
::Changes regarding divorce, property rights of women, protections against sexual assault or men's mistreatment of women could have have been significant, right? (Though I don't know what those changes were) [[Special:Contributions/2601:644:907E:A70:9072:5C74:BC02:CB02|2601:644:907E:A70:9072:5C74:BC02:CB02]] ([[User talk:2601:644:907E:A70:9072:5C74:BC02:CB02|talk]]) 06:09, 19 December 2024 (UTC) |
|||
:::I don't think many of those were widely, significantly changed prior to the 18th century, though the World is large and diverse, and history is long, so it's difficult to generalise. See [[Women's rights]]. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} [[Special:Contributions/94.1.223.204|94.1.223.204]] ([[User talk:94.1.223.204|talk]]) 11:05, 19 December 2024 (UTC) |
|||
:In the English monarchy, when [[Henry I of England|King Henry I]] died in 1135 with no living male legitimate child, [[The Anarchy|a civil war]] followed over whether [[Empress Matilda|his daughter]] or [[Stephen, King of England|his nephew]] should inherit the throne. (It was settled by [[Treaty of Wallingford|a compromise]].) But in 1553 when [[Edward VI|King Edward VI]] died, [[Mary I of England|Queen Mary I]] inherited the throne and those who objected did it on religious grounds and not because she was a woman: in fact there was an attempt to place [[Lady Jane Grey]] on the throne instead. --[[Special:Contributions/142.112.149.206|142.112.149.206]] ([[User talk:142.112.149.206|talk]]) 01:50, 20 December 2024 (UTC) |
|||
== Meaning of the name Pen Argyl , and the people who founded the town . == |
|||
:::Although Mary's detractors believed that her [[List_of_Protestant_martyrs_of_the_English_Reformation#Persecution_of_Protestants_under_Mary_I_(1553–1558)|Catholic zeal]] was a result of her gender; a point made by the [[Calvinist]] reformer [[John Knox]], who published a [[polemic]] entitled ''[[The First Blast of the Trumpet Against the Monstruous Regiment of Women]]''. When the Protestant [[Elizabeth I]] inherited the throne, there was a quick about face; Elizabeth was compared to the Biblical [[Deborah]], who had freed the Israelites from the [[Canaan]]ites and led them to an era of peace and prosperity, and was obviously a divine exception to the principle that females were unfit to rule. [[User:Alansplodge|Alansplodge]] ([[User talk:Alansplodge|talk]]) 12:21, 20 December 2024 (UTC) |
|||
:A possibly fictional account in the film [[Agora]] has the proto-feminist [[Hypatia]] anticipating [[Johannes Kepler|Kepler's]] orbits about two millenia before that gentleman, surely a significant feminine achievement. [[User:Philvoids|Philvoids]] ([[User talk:Philvoids|talk]]) 01:17, 21 December 2024 (UTC) |
|||
::{{xt|"The film contains numerous historical inaccuracies: It inflates Hypatia's achievements and incorrectly portrays her as finding a proof of Aristarchus of Samos's heliocentric model of the universe, which there is no evidence that Hypatia ever studied."}} (from our Hypatia article linked above). [[User:Alansplodge|Alansplodge]] ([[User talk:Alansplodge|talk]]) 14:59, 22 December 2024 (UTC) |
|||
:::Even if true (we have no proof she did not embrace the heliocentric model while developing the theory of gravitation to boot), it did not result in a major change in the position of women. --[[User talk:Lambiam#top|Lambiam]] 03:22, 23 December 2024 (UTC) |
|||
:::: To some extent it is going to depend on what is considered a "feminist victory". |
|||
:::: There has steadily been more evidence of numerous female Viking warriors, and similarly the [[Onna-musha]] in Japan. |
|||
:::: Many Native American tribal cultures had strong roles for women. Iroquois women, for example, played the major role in appointing and removing chiefs (though the chiefs were all male, as far as we know). |
|||
:::: And, of course, a certain number of women have, one way or another, achieved a great deal in a society that normally had little place for female achievement, though typically they eventually were brought down one way or another. Besides queens regnant and a number of female regents (including in the Roman Empire), two examples that leap to mind are [[Joan of Arc]] and [[Sor Juana de la Cruz]]. - [[User:Jmabel|Jmabel]] | [[User talk:Jmabel|Talk]] 04:36, 25 December 2024 (UTC) |
|||
== Intolerance by D. W. Griffith == |
|||
The name Pen Argyl ( pronounced Pehn Argil , or Pehn Arjil ) derives from 2 words : Pen , meaning the mountain region ; Argyl , from the word " argylite " , a type of slate . Together , the two words mean " Mountain of Slate " . This name was giving to the town by the immigrants ( the ancestors or grandparents of the people of Pen Aygyl ) who arrived to the United States from the town of Delabole ; Cornwall , England . Many of the men arriving from Cownwall were slate quarry workers ; having worked in the Delabole Slate Quarry . They left their homeland because of lack of work in the tin mines . Many were forced to leave their homes and find work in other places in United Kingdom , Canada , United States , and Australia . With them they brought their history , language , culture , and recipes . Although they are English ; they prefer to be known as Cornish people . Their Food : The people of Pen Argyl are known for making two of their most popular Cornish dishes : Saffron Buns ( or Saffron Cake ), and their Cornish Pasties ( sometimes called English Pasties ) ; which is beef ( cubed or ground beef ) , onions , and diced - cubed potatoes ; stuffed in a half - folded pastry pie crust . They also like making Rhubarb Pie . Pen Argyl is the home of the famous " Mr. Pasties " pasty shop , where they make the pasties homemade ; home of " Weona Park " (pronounced : we - own - a - park )and its carousel . <small>—Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[Special:Contributions/205.130.17.219|205.130.17.219]] ([[User talk:205.130.17.219|talk]]) 23:13, 28 May 2008 (UTC)</small><!-- Template:UnsignedIP --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot--> |
|||
:This is the Wikipedia reference desk. Do you have a question? If not, you're probably lost. We have an article on Pen Argyl [[Pen Argyl, Pennsylvania|here]]. [[User talk:Algebraist|Algebraist]] 23:24, 28 May 2008 (UTC) |
|||
:: I have copied the info onto the talk page there. 205... if you'd like to add this information to the article, find sources (references) in reliable books or magazines. Put that source in < source > into the text you are adding in the edit window. It will show up as a footnote. Good luck with your edit. --[[Special:Contributions/71.236.23.111|71.236.23.111]] ([[User talk:71.236.23.111|talk]]) 02:10, 29 May 2008 (UTC) |
|||
Why did [[D. W. Griffith]] make the film [[Intolerance (film)|Intolerance]] after making the very popular and racist film [[The Birth of a Nation]]? What did he want to convey? [[Special:Contributions/174.160.82.127|174.160.82.127]] ([[User talk:174.160.82.127|talk]]) 18:22, 18 December 2024 (UTC) |
|||
:The lead of our article states that, in numerous interviews, Griffith made clear that the film was a rebuttal to his critics and he felt that they were, in fact, the intolerant ones. --[[User talk:Lambiam#top|Lambiam]] 22:26, 18 December 2024 (UTC) |
|||
= May 29 = |
|||
::<small>For not tolerating his racism? [[User:DuncanHill|DuncanHill]] ([[User talk:DuncanHill|talk]]) 15:20, 19 December 2024 (UTC)</small> |
|||
:::Precisely. Griffith thought he was presenting the truth, however unpopular, and that the criticism was meant to stifle his voice, not because the opinions he expressed were wrong but because they were unwelcome. --[[User talk:Lambiam#top|Lambiam]] 03:14, 23 December 2024 (UTC) |
|||
== |
== Term for awkward near-similarity == |
||
Is there a term for the feeling produced when two things are nearly but not quite identical, and you wish they were either fully identical or clearly distinct? I think this would be reminiscent of [[Narcissism of small differences|the narcissism of small differences]], but applied to things like design or aesthetics – or like a broader application of the [[uncanny valley]] (which is specific to imitation of humans). --[[Special:Contributions/71.126.56.235|71.126.56.235]] ([[User talk:71.126.56.235|talk]]) 20:19, 18 December 2024 (UTC) |
|||
I'm trying to think of the general name for the belief that consuming something will bring the consumer the attributes of that thing. For instance, if you consume the sexual organs of a tiger, you will be virile, or that if you consume a turtle you will be slow. Ring any bells? -- [[User:Beland|Beland]] ([[User talk:Beland|talk]]) 00:49, 29 May 2008 (UTC) |
|||
:The uncanniness of the [[uncanny valley]] would be a specific subclass of this. --[[User talk:Lambiam#top|Lambiam]] 22:29, 18 December 2024 (UTC) |
|||
:[[James George Frazer]] in ''[[The Golden Bough]]'' calls it "sympathetic magic", or, more specifically, the branch of that magic he calls "homeopathic magic" or "imitative magic", the other being "contagious magic". (That book is [http://www.gutenberg.org/etext/3623 on line at Gutenberg] and is a must-read for anyone interested in stuff like this.) He proposes that one of the two principles on which magic is based is that like produces like. --[[User:Milkbreath|Milkbreath]] ([[User talk:Milkbreath|talk]]) 01:08, 29 May 2008 (UTC) |
|||
== Yearbooks == |
|||
::See also the article Chinese medicine[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chinese_medicine#Model_of_the_body] for brief intro and article [[Sympathetic magic]]. Great link by the way MB, [[User:Julia Rossi|Julia Rossi]] ([[User talk:Julia Rossi|talk]]) 01:25, 29 May 2008 (UTC) |
|||
Why [[yearbook]]s are often named '''after''' years that they concern? For example, a yearbook that concerns year 2024 and tells statistics about that year might be named '''2025''' Yearbook, with 2024 Yearbook instead concerning 2023? Which is the reason for that? --[[User:40bus|40bus]] ([[User talk:40bus|talk]]) 21:33, 18 December 2024 (UTC) |
|||
:::And somewhat related is [[Lamarckism]]. --—<i><b>— [[User:Gadget850|<font color = "gray">Gadget850 (Ed)</font>]]<font color = "darkblue"> <sup>[[User talk:Gadget850|''talk'']]</sup></font></b> - </i> 23:15, 29 May 2008 (UTC) |
|||
:It is good for marketing, a 2025 yearbook sounds more up to date than a 2024 one. [[User:TSventon|TSventon]] ([[User talk:TSventon|talk]]) 21:45, 18 December 2024 (UTC) |
|||
::::Not really... Lamarck's idea was that acquired characteristics were passed to the next generation: our article gives an example of a blacksmith passing his strong arms on to his children. A theory of evolution based on sympathetic magic would say that dragonflies evolved to become fast by their habit of eating quick moving insects. [[User:Matt Deres|Matt Deres]] ([[User talk:Matt Deres|talk]]) 16:52, 30 May 2008 (UTC) |
|||
:One argument may be that it is the year of publication, being the 2025 edition of whatever. --[[User talk:Lambiam#top|Lambiam]] 22:31, 18 December 2024 (UTC) |
|||
:In the example of a high school yearbook, 2025 would be the year in which the 2024-2025 school year ended and the students graduated. Hence, "the Class of 2025" though the senior year started in 2024. ←[[User:Baseball Bugs|Baseball Bugs]] <sup>''[[User talk:Baseball Bugs|What's up, Doc?]]''</sup> [[Special:Contributions/Baseball_Bugs|carrots]]→ 23:42, 18 December 2024 (UTC) |
|||
::Sometimes evolution comes close, as it might say dragonflies became fast (evolved) in order to eat quick moving insects. Is it like that? [[User:Julia Rossi|Julia Rossi]] ([[User talk:Julia Rossi|talk]]) 01:57, 31 May 2008 (UTC) |
|||
:The purpose of a yearbook is to highlight the past year activities, for example a 2025 yearbook is to highlight the activities of 2024. [[User:Stanleykswong|Stanleykswong]] ([[User talk:Stanleykswong|talk]]) 06:21, 19 December 2024 (UTC) |
|||
::Are there any yearbooks that are named after the same years that they concern, e.g. 2024 yearbook concerning 2024, 2023 yearbook concerning 2023 etc. --[[User:40bus|40bus]] ([[User talk:40bus|talk]]) 13:04, 19 December 2024 (UTC) |
|||
:::A professional baseball team will typically have a "2024 Yearbook" for the current season, since the entire season occurred in 2024. Though keep in mind that the 2024 yearbook would have come out at the start of the season, hence it actually covers stats from 2023 as well as rosters and schedules for 2024. ←[[User:Baseball Bugs|Baseball Bugs]] <sup>''[[User talk:Baseball Bugs|What's up, Doc?]]''</sup> [[Special:Contributions/Baseball_Bugs|carrots]]→ 14:40, 19 December 2024 (UTC) |
|||
:::In the UK, the magazine ''[[Private Eye]]'' releases an annual at the end of every year which is named in this way. It stands out from all the other comic/magazine annuals on the rack which are named after the following year. I worked in bookselling for years and always found this interesting. [[User:Turner Street|Turner Street]] ([[User talk:Turner Street|talk]]) 11:26, 20 December 2024 (UTC) |
|||
Distinguish between [[Almanac]] (for predictions) and [[Yearbook]] (for recollections). ¨[[User:Philvoids|Philvoids]] ([[User talk:Philvoids|talk]]) 01:03, 21 December 2024 (UTC) |
|||
= December 21 = |
|||
== Everything You Can Do, We Can Do Meta: source? == |
|||
When a villain can only be killed if a certain object is destroyed, eg in Lord of the rings, Sauron dies if the One Ring is destroyed; the genie Jafar dies if his lamp is destroyed; and in Harry Potter, Voldemort dies if all his horcruxes, which contain pieces of his soul, are destroyed. Is there a word for this objecting being more than just standing for, (apart from effigy) the villain? [[User:Julia Rossi|Julia Rossi]] ([[User talk:Julia Rossi|talk]]) 01:39, 29 May 2008 (UTC) |
|||
I once read in a [[George Will]] article (or it might have been in one of his short columns) that the [[University of Chicago]] or one of its departments used "Everything You Can Do, We Can Do Meta" as a motto, but it turned out this was completely (if unintentionally, at least on Will's part) made up. Does anyone else remember George Will making that claim? Regardless, has anyone any idea how George Will may have mis-heard or mis-remembered it? (I could never believe that he intentionally made it up.) Anyway, does anyone know the source of the phrase, or at least an earliest source. (Obviously it may have occurred to several people independently.) The earliest I've found on Google is a 2007 article in the MIT Technology Review. Anything earlier? [[Special:Contributions/178.51.16.158|178.51.16.158]] ([[User talk:178.51.16.158|talk]]) 04:09, 21 December 2024 (UTC) |
|||
:Would "soul vessel" or "icon" fit the bill?--[[Special:Contributions/71.236.23.111|71.236.23.111]] ([[User talk:71.236.23.111|talk]]) 01:52, 29 May 2008 (UTC) |
|||
:[https://pure.eur.nl/ws/portalfiles/portal/72947677/Smith_Kloosterhuis_De_betekenis_van_de_concepten.pdf] describes it as "[[John Bell (legal scholar)|John Bell’s]] motto" and uses the reference {{tq|J. Bell, ‘Legal Theory in Legal Education – “Everything you can do, I can do meta…”’, in: S. Eng (red.), Proceedings of the 21st IVR World Congress: Lund (Sweden), 12-17 August 2003, Wiesbaden: Frans Steiner Verlag, p. 61.}}. [[User:Polygnotus|Polygnotus]] ([[User talk:Polygnotus|talk]]) 05:51, 21 December 2024 (UTC) |
|||
::How about [[phylactery]]?--[[User:Lenticel|<span style="color: teal; background: white; font-weight: bold">Lenticel</span>]] <sup>([[User talk:Lenticel|<span style="color: green; font-weight: bold">talk</span>]])</sup> 02:07, 29 May 2008 (UTC) |
|||
:In his book ''I've Been Thinking'', [[Daniel C. Dennett]] writes: '{{tq|Doug Hofstadter and I once had a running disagreement about who first came up with the quip “Anything you can do I can do meta”; I credited him and he credited me.}}'<sup>[https://books.google.com/books?id=Cn6pEAAAQBAJ&pg=PT53&dq=%22Anything+you+can+do+I+can+do+meta%22&hl=en]</sup> Dennett credited Hofstadter (writing ''meta-'' with a hyphen) in ''Brainchildren: Essays on Designing Minds'' (1998).<sup>[https://books.google.com/books?id=G2iYMnSuhL4C&pg=PA236&dq=%22Anything+you+can+do+I+can+do+meta-%22&hl=en]</sup> Hofstadter disavowed this claim in ''I am a Strange Loop'', suggesting that the quip was Dennett's brainchild, writing, '{{tq|To my surprise, though, this “motto” started making the rounds and people quoted it back to me as if I had really thought it up and really believed it.}}'<sup>[https://books.google.com/books?id=OwnYF1SCpFkC&pg=PT455&dq=%22Anything+you+can+do+I+can+do+meta%22&hl=en]</sup> |
|||
:::That looks like a [[medicine bag]] to me. --[[Special:Contributions/71.236.23.111|71.236.23.111]] ([[User talk:71.236.23.111|talk]]) 02:27, 29 May 2008 (UTC) |
|||
:It is, of course, quite possible that this witty variation on Irving Berlin's "[[Anything You Can Do (I Can Do Better)]]" was invented independently again and again. In 1979, [[Arthur Allen Leff]] wrote, in an article in ''Duke Law Journal'': '{{tq|My colleague, Leon Lipson, once described a certain species of legal writing as, “Anything you can do, I can do meta.”}}'<sup>[https://scholarship.law.duke.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=2724&context=dlj]</sup> (Quite likely, John Bell (mis)quoted [[Lipson]].) For other, likely independent examples, in 1986, it is used as the title of a technical report stressing the importance of metareasoning in the domain of machine learming (Morik, Katharina. ''Anything you can do I can do meta''. Inst. für Angewandte Informatik, Projektgruppe KIT, 1986), and in 1995 we find this ascribed to cultural anthropologist [[Richard Shweder]].<sup>[https://books.google.com/books?id=9k7XZiQ81RIC&pg=PA251&dq=%22Any+thing+you+can+do,+I+can+do+meta%22&hl=en]</sup> --[[User talk:Lambiam#top|Lambiam]] 14:40, 21 December 2024 (UTC) |
|||
:(ec) He may have been mixing this up with "That's all well and good and practice, but how does it work in theory?" which is associated with the University of Chicago and attributed to [[Shmuel Weinberger]], who is a professor there. [[User:Dekimasu|Dekimasu]]<small>[[User talk:Dekimasu|よ!]]</small> 14:42, 21 December 2024 (UTC) |
|||
== Did Sir John Hume get entrapped in his own plot (historically)? == |
|||
::::They all sound like it. I'll put those in a see also at the end of the article and maybe a section with links. Thanks for your help. [[User:Julia Rossi|Julia Rossi]] ([[User talk:Julia Rossi|talk]]) 04:23, 29 May 2008 (UTC) |
|||
In Shakespeare's "First Part of the Contention..." (First Folio: "Henry VI Part 2") there's a character, Sir John Hume, a priest, who manages to entrap the Duchess of Gloucester in the conjuring of a demon, but then gets caught in the plot and is sentenced to be "strangled on the gallows". |
|||
:::::You are no doubt aware that "phylactery" is a word in its own right having nothing to do with all this, borrowed without permission for the obscure fictional mumbo-jumbo. [[The Golden Bough|Frazer]] could come up with nothing better than "soul-box" (p. 680) to contain the "external soul". Incidentally. in poking around I discovered what I think I used to know, that the "Host" of the [[Eucharist]] is not the same word as the ordinary "host" but instead derives from the Latin for "sacrifice". I was hoping it would have to do with "hosting" the soul or something of Christ, but no. --[[User:Milkbreath|Milkbreath]] ([[User talk:Milkbreath|talk]]) 10:58, 29 May 2008 (UTC) |
|||
My question: Was Sir John Hume, the priest, a historical character? If he was, did he really get caught in the plot he laid for the Duchess, and end up being executed? |
|||
: [[Katschei]] is also famous for this. [[Special:Contributions/134.96.105.72|134.96.105.72]] ([[User talk:134.96.105.72|talk]]) 08:16, 29 May 2008 (UTC) |
|||
:<nitpick alert> [[Sauron]] doesn't die. He is just rendered impotent ([[Viagra]] endorsement time?). </nitpick alert> [[User:Clarityfiend|Clarityfiend]] ([[User talk:Clarityfiend|talk]]) 16:06, 29 May 2008 (UTC) |
|||
::One of the other examples has a similar inaccuracy. [[Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows#Second act and final confrontation|Spoiler here.]] --Anon, 00:06 UTC, May 30, 2008. |
|||
:This is so helpful, I'm copying the whole thread to the [[Talk:Sympathetic magic|talk page]]. [[User:Julia Rossi|Julia Rossi]] ([[User talk:Julia Rossi|talk]]) 00:10, 31 May 2008 (UTC) |
|||
Here's what goes on in Shakespeare's play: |
|||
== Tin Woodman == |
|||
In Act 1, Scene 2 [Oxford Shakespeare 1988] Sir John Hume and the Duchess of Gloucester are talking about using Margery Jordan "the cunning witch of Eye" and Roger Bolingbroke, the conjuror, to raise a spirit that will answer the Duchess's questions. It is clear Hume is being paid by the Duke of Suffolk to entrap the Duchess. His own motivation is not political but simple lucre. |
|||
Why would the Tin Woodman in the Wizard of Oz be [[The_Wonderful_Wizard_of_Oz#Cultural_impact|replaced by a snake in Hindu countries]]? Just curious, not wanting formal legal advice. :) [[User:Abeg92|Ab]][[User:Abeg92/ea|<span style="color:#00FF00;">e</span>]][[User talk:Abeg92|g92]]<small>[[Special:Contributions/Abeg92|contribs]]</small> 03:17, 29 May 2008 (UTC) |
|||
In Act 1, Scene 4 the witch Margery Jordan, John Southwell and Sir John Hume, the two priests, and Roger Bolingbroke, the conjuror, conjure a demon (Asnath) in front of the Duchess of Gloucester in order that she may ask him questions about the fate of various people, and they all get caught and arrested by the Duke of York and his men. (Hume works for Suffolk and Cardinal Beaufort, bishop of Winchester, not for York, so it is not through Hume that York knows of these goings on, but York on his part was keeping a watch on the Duchess) |
|||
:This is a very interesting question. I've had a good trawl round via Google, but the only sites that assert this look like [[WP:Mirrors]]; I can't find anything that looks independent or gives any explanation of why this would be the case. |
|||
Act 2, Scene 3 King Henry: (to Margery Jordan, John Southwell, Sir John Hume, and Roger Bolingbroke) "You four, from hence to prison back again; / From thence, unto the place of execution. / The witch in Smithfield shall be burned to ashes, / And you three shall be strangled on the gallows." |
|||
:The information appears to have been added by [[User:Woggly]] in this diff [http://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?title=The_Wonderful_Wizard_of_Oz&diff=3079498&oldid=3079463] four years ago. Since they are still an active contributor, I've dropped a note on their talk page asking if they can help shed any more light on the matter. -- <strong>[[User:Karenjc|<font color="red">Ka</font>]][[User_talk:Karenjc|renjc]]</strong> 12:26, 29 May 2008 (UTC) |
|||
::This is cited to someone's website, but the website provides no additional reference beyond the assertion that it is so. I question whether this satisfys the [[WP:V|verifiability]] requirement and have tagged the assertion in the article as needing a better reference. [[User:Edison|Edison]] ([[User talk:Edison|talk]]) 19:27, 29 May 2008 (UTC) |
|||
[[Special:Contributions/178.51.16.158|178.51.16.158]] ([[User talk:178.51.16.158|talk]]) 16:14, 21 December 2024 (UTC) |
|||
::[[User:Woggly]] has provided the following additional info: |
|||
::Hi. I learned about the Tinman/snake substition in a presentation given by Dick Rutter in the year 2000, at the Wizard of Oz Centennial Convention that was held in Bloomington, Indiana, by the International Wizard of Oz Club. Rutter is an orthodonist and Oz enthusiast, who owns what very well may be the world's largest collection of international editions of the Wizard of Oz. He gave a slideshow presentation of books from his collection, including several books from Hindu countries, and reported the snake anecdote. I hope this information helps. --woggly (talk) 22:50, 29 May 2008 (UTC) |
|||
:John Home or Hume (Home and Hume are pronounced identically) was [[Eleanor, Duchess of Gloucester]]'s confessor. According to [https://murreyandblue.org/2022/10/03/the-downfall-of-eleanor-cobham-duchess-of-gloucester/ this] and [https://www.susanhigginbotham.com/posts/eleanor-cobham-the-duchess-and-her-downfall/ this] "Home, who had been indicted only for having knowledge of the activities of the others, was pardoned and continued in his position as canon of Hereford. He died in 1473." He does not seem to have been Sir John. I'm sure someone who knows more than me will be along soon. [[User:DuncanHill|DuncanHill]] ([[User talk:DuncanHill|talk]]) 16:35, 21 December 2024 (UTC) |
|||
::Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Karenjc" --<strong>[[User:Karenjc|<font color="red">Ka</font>]][[User_talk:Karenjc|renjc]]</strong> 22:57, 29 May 2008 (UTC) |
|||
:::At this period "Sir" (and "Lady") could still be used as a vague title for people of some status, without really implying they had a knighthood. [[User:Johnbod|Johnbod]] ([[User talk:Johnbod|talk]]) 20:46, 21 December 2024 (UTC) |
|||
::Identically /hjuːm/ (HYOOM), to be clear. [[User:Card_Zero|<span style=" background-color:#fffff0; border:1px #995; border-style:dotted solid solid dotted;"> Card Zero </span>]] [[User_talk:Card_Zero|(talk)]] 20:17, 21 December 2024 (UTC) |
|||
:Oh, and the ''[[First Part of the Contention]]'' is Henry Sixt Part II, not Part I! We also have articles about [[Roger Bolingbroke]] and [[Margery Jourdemayne]], the Witch of Eye. [[User:DuncanHill|DuncanHill]] ([[User talk:DuncanHill|talk]]) 16:59, 21 December 2024 (UTC) |
|||
::Thanks. I corrected it now. [[Special:Contributions/178.51.16.158|178.51.16.158]] ([[User talk:178.51.16.158|talk]]) 20:34, 21 December 2024 (UTC) |
|||
::There's also an article for a [[Thomas Southwell (priest)]]. In Shakespeare he is "John Southwell". The name "John Southwell" does appear in the text of the play itself (it is mentioned by Bolingbroke). I haven't checked if the quarto and the folio differ on the name. His dates seem to be consistent with this episode and [[Roger Bolingbroke]] does refer to the other priest as "Thomas Southwell". But nothing is mentioned in the article [[Thomas Southwell (priest)]] itself, so that article may be about some other priest named Thomas Southwell. In any case [[Roger Bolingbroke]] points out that only Roger Bolingbroke and Margery Jourdemayne were executed in connection with this affair. Shakespeare has them all executed. He must have been in a bad mood when he wrote that passage. Either that, or he just wanted to keep things simple. [[Special:Contributions/178.51.16.158|178.51.16.158]] ([[User talk:178.51.16.158|talk]]) 11:42, 22 December 2024 (UTC) |
|||
:::I think that may well be our Southwell, according to "[https://www.allabouthistory.co.uk/History/England/Person/Thomas-Southwell-1441.html?akolhvRj Chronicle of Gregory 1441. 27 Oct 1441. And on Syn Symon and Jude is eve was the wycche (age 26) be syde Westemyster brent in Smethefylde, and on the day of Symon and Jude <nowiki>[28 Oct 1441]</nowiki> the person <nowiki>[parson]</nowiki> of Syn Stevynnys in Walbroke, whyche that was one of the same fore said traytours <nowiki>[Thomas Southwell]</nowiki>, deyde in the Toure for sorowe.]" The ''Chronicle of Gregory'', written by [[William Gregory (lord mayor)|William Gregory]] is [https://www.british-history.ac.uk/camden-record-soc/vol17 published by the Camden Society] [[User:DuncanHill|DuncanHill]] ([[User talk:DuncanHill|talk]]) 12:26, 22 December 2024 (UTC) |
|||
::::Some experienced editor may then want to add these facts to his article, possibly using the Chronicle of Gregory as a source. [[Special:Contributions/178.51.16.158|178.51.16.158]] ([[User talk:178.51.16.158|talk]]) 12:39, 23 December 2024 (UTC) |
|||
= December 22 = |
|||
:::Emailed Dr Rutter and requested help in tracking down the source. -- <strong>[[User:Karenjc|<font color="red">Ka</font>]][[User_talk:Karenjc|renjc]]</strong> 23:26, 29 May 2008 (UTC) |
|||
== |
== Mike Johnson == |
||
I saw [[Mike Johnson]] on TV a day or two ago. (He was speaking from some official podium ... I believe about the recent government shutdown possibility, the Continuing Resolution, etc.) I was surprised to see that he was wearing a [[yarmulke]]. The color of the yarmulke was a close match to the color of Johnson's hair, so I had to look closely and I had to look twice. I said to myself "I never knew that he was Jewish". It bothered me, so I looked him up and -- as expected -- he is not Jewish. Why would he be wearing a yarmulke? Thanks. [[Special:Contributions/32.209.69.24|32.209.69.24]] ([[User talk:32.209.69.24|talk]]) 07:40, 22 December 2024 (UTC) |
|||
I remember reading on the internet about some author who cranked out science fiction books (by dictation) at a rate of about one every week and a half. Supposedly they were full of filler, including a long tooth-brushing scene. Also, he was said to be the most prolific science fiction writer ever. I can't remember the name! Argh! [[Special:Contributions/98.199.17.3|98.199.17.3]] ([[User talk:98.199.17.3|talk]]) 03:20, 29 May 2008 (UTC) |
|||
: |
:Presumably to show his support for Israel and anti-semitism (and make inroads into the traditional Jewish-American support for the Democratic Party). Trump wore one too. [[User:Clarityfiend|Clarityfiend]] ([[User talk:Clarityfiend|talk]]) 10:39, 22 December 2024 (UTC) |
||
:: OK, thanks. I did not know that was a "thing". To wear one to show support. First I ever heard of that or seen that. Thanks. [[Special:Contributions/32.209.69.24|32.209.69.24]] ([[User talk:32.209.69.24|talk]]) 13:12, 22 December 2024 (UTC) |
|||
::[[Philip K. Dick]] wrote a lot. However, he was rather crazy and was writing more to write than to create science fiction. In his worst states, I would not be surprised if he wrote an entire story about brushing teeth. In his better states, he created the foundation of many great stories. -- [[User:Kainaw|<font color='#ff0000'>k</font><font color='#cc0033'>a</font><font color='#990066'>i</font><font color='#660099'>n</font><font color='#3300cc'>a</font><font color='#0000ff'>w</font>]][[User talk:Kainaw|™]] 13:02, 29 May 2008 (UTC) |
|||
:::[Edited to add – Edit Conflict with Lambiam below.] He may also have just come from, or be shortly going to, some (not necessarily religious) event held in a synagogue, where he would wear it for courtesy. I would do the same, and have my (non-Jewish) grandfather's kippah, which he wore for this purpose not infrequently, having many Jewish friends. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} [[Special:Contributions/94.1.223.204|94.1.223.204]] ([[User talk:94.1.223.204|talk]]) 16:39, 22 December 2024 (UTC) |
|||
:::Not [[L. Ron Hubbard bibliography|L. Ron Hubbard]], by any chance? --[[User:Richardrj|Richardrj]] [[User talk:Richardrj|<sup>talk </sup>]][[Special:Emailuser/Richardrj|<sup>email</sup>]] 13:13, 29 May 2008 (UTC) |
|||
:: I assume you mis-spoke: ''to show his support for ... anti-semitism''. [[Special:Contributions/32.209.69.24|32.209.69.24]] ([[User talk:32.209.69.24|talk]]) 13:16, 22 December 2024 (UTC) |
|||
:Sounds a bit dubious. A book every week and a half works out to just under 35 a year. Over say 20 years, that's nearly 700. Asimov (a freak, or an alien, or a whole gaggle of aliens) is considered by many to be the most prolific science-fiction author. By comparison, he wrote just over 500 books, not all science fiction, over a much longer period. Now it's possible for somebody to write drivel and call it science fiction, but would it be published? I think not. [[User:Clarityfiend|Clarityfiend]] ([[User talk:Clarityfiend|talk]]) 13:34, 29 May 2008 (UTC) |
|||
:It is somewhat customary, also for male goyim, to don a yarmulke when visiting a synagogue or attending a Jewish celebration or other ceremony, like Biden [https://prisonplanets.com/not-a-dimes-worth-of-difference-between-the-republicans-and-the-democrats/ here] while lecturing at a synagogue in Atlanta, Georgia (and under him Trump while groping the [[Western Wall]]). Was Johnson speaking at a synagogue? --[[User talk:Lambiam#top|Lambiam]] 16:38, 22 December 2024 (UTC) |
|||
::It may have been [https://www.gettyimages.com/detail/news-photo/speaker-of-the-house-mike-johnson-places-a-yarmulke-on-his-news-photo/2190446356 a Hanukkah reception]. --[[User talk:Lambiam#top|Lambiam]] 16:50, 22 December 2024 (UTC) |
|||
:::Precisely, {{u|Lambian}}. Here is Johnson's [https://mikejohnson.house.gov/news/documentsingle.aspx?DocumentID=1500 official statement]. [[User:Cullen328|Cullen328]] ([[User talk:Cullen328|talk]]) 17:17, 22 December 2024 (UTC) |
|||
::::This year Hanukkah begins unusually late in the Gregorian calendar, starting at sundown on December 25, when Congress will not be in session. This coincidence can be described by the portmanteau [[Chrismukkah]]. So, the Congressional observance of Hanukkah was ahead of schedule this year. Back in 2013, Hanukkah arrived unusually early, during the US holiday of [[Thanksgiving (United States)|Thanksgiving]], resulting in the portmanteau of [[Thanksgivukkah]]. [[User:Cullen328|Cullen328]] ([[User talk:Cullen328|talk]]) 17:15, 22 December 2024 (UTC) |
|||
:::::When you want to check the correlation between Jewish and Christian holidays, you can use the fact that Orthodox Christian months almost always correspond to Jewish months. For Chanucah, the relevant correlation is Emma/Kislev. From the table [[Special:Permalink/1188536894#The Reichenau Primer (opposite Pangur Bán)]], in 2024 (with [[Golden Number]] 11) ''Emma'' began on 3 December, so 24 ''Emma'' is 26 December. [[Special:Contributions/92.12.75.131|92.12.75.131]] ([[User talk:92.12.75.131|talk]]) 15:45, 23 December 2024 (UTC) |
|||
Thanks, all! Much appreciated! [[Special:Contributions/32.209.69.24|32.209.69.24]] ([[User talk:32.209.69.24|talk]]) 02:05, 25 December 2024 (UTC) |
|||
::I have heard this before - the toothbrushing scene story is very familiar. I did wonder whether it might be [[John Creasey]], who is known for his prolific output (well over 600 books) under a variety of names and who was capable of writing a short pulp novel (35,000 words) overnight. He's best known as a thriller writer, but he did write SF too. There's also [[Kenneth Bulmer]]. However, I have a niggling feeling it's another name, and one I ought to remember. Will keep looking. --<strong>[[User:Karenjc|<font color="red">Ka</font>]][[User_talk:Karenjc|renjc]]</strong> 17:28, 29 May 2008 (UTC) |
|||
== Joseph Mary Thouveau, Bishop of Sebastopol == |
|||
::Asimov's rate picked up over his lifetime, and during his final decade, he was producing about one book every two weeks. --[[User:Carnildo|Carnildo]] ([[User talk:Carnildo|talk]]) 20:50, 29 May 2008 (UTC) |
|||
Who was Joseph Mary Thouveau, Bishop of Sebastopol? There is only one reference online ("[https://zsl-archive.maxarchiveservices.co.uk/index.php/thouveau-joseph-mary Letter from Joseph Mary Thouveau. Bishop of Sebastopol, to Philip Lutley Sclater regarding Lady Amherst's Pheasant]", 1869), and that has no further details. <span class="vcard"><span class="fn">[[User:Pigsonthewing|Andy Mabbett]]</span> (<span class="nickname">Pigsonthewing</span>); [[User talk:Pigsonthewing|Talk to Andy]]; [[Special:Contributions/Pigsonthewing|Andy's edits]]</span> 22:03, 22 December 2024 (UTC) |
|||
::I have a vague idea that the guy had three names (ie not John Creasey). [[Special:Contributions/98.199.17.3|98.199.17.3]] ([[User talk:98.199.17.3|talk]]) 22:02, 29 May 2008 (UTC) |
|||
:After that search engine I used insisted I was looking for a Chauveau I finally located [https://catholic-hierarchy.org/diocese/d2s61.html this] Joseph Marie Chauveau - So the J M ''Thouveau'' item from [https://zsl-archive.maxarchiveservices.co.uk/index.php/thouveau-joseph-mary maxarchiveservices uk] must be one of the [[idiosyncrasy|eccentricities]] produced by that old fashioned hand-written communication they had in the past. --[[User:Askedonty|Askedonty]] ([[User talk:Askedonty|talk]]) 22:24, 22 December 2024 (UTC) |
|||
:Of interest that other notice [https://irfa.paris/en/missionnaire/0488-chauveau-joseph/ Joseph, Marie, Pierre]. The hand-written text scribbled on the portrait stands as 'Eveque de Sebastopolis'. Pierre-Joseph Chauveau probably, now is also mentioned as Pierre-Joseph in [https://www.google.fr/books/edition/Voyages_et_d%C3%A9couvertes_scientifiques_de/oL7RAAAAMAAJ?&gbpv=1&bsq=Joseph+Marie+Chauveau+,+faisan&dq=Joseph+Marie+Chauveau+,+faisan&printsec=frontcover Voyages] ..even though, Lady Amherst's Pheasant is referred, in the same, through an other missionary intermediary: [https://www.google.fr/books/edition/Encyclop%C3%A9die_biologique/bldMAAAAYAAJ?&gbpv=1&bsq=Lady+Amherst's&dq=Lady+Amherst's&printsec=frontcover similar]. --[[User:Askedonty|Askedonty]] ([[User talk:Askedonty|talk]]) 23:28, 22 December 2024 (UTC) |
|||
:Also in [https://www.google.fr/books/edition/Contribution_des_missionnaires_fran%C3%A7ais/WVfVAAAAMAAJ?gbpv=0 Contribution des missionnaires français au progrès des sciences naturelles au XIX et XX. (1932)]. Full texts are not accessible though it seems there is three times the same content in three different but more or less simultaneously published editions. [[User:Askedonty|Askedonty]] ([[User talk:Askedonty|talk]]) 23:59, 22 December 2024 (UTC) |
|||
::The toothbrushing thing reminded me of [[Kilgore Trout]], which lead me to [[Philip José Farmer]]. Mr Farmer does not seem to have written 700 books, but he is a SF writer with three names whose list of works in his article is quite long. [[Special:Contributions/161.222.160.8|161.222.160.8]] ([[User talk:161.222.160.8|talk]]) 23:22, 29 May 2008 (UTC) |
|||
::There is a stub at [[:fr:Joseph-Marie Chauveau]] (there is also a zh article) and a list of bishops at [[:fr:Évêché titulaire de Sébastopolis-en-Arménie]]. [[User:TSventon|TSventon]] ([[User talk:TSventon|talk]]) 03:31, 23 December 2024 (UTC) |
|||
:: {{Ping|Askedonty}} Awesome work, thank you; and really useful. I'll notify my contact at ZSL, so they can fix their transcription error. |
|||
:: [The Google Books links aren't showing me the search results, but that's a generic issue, nothing to do with your links]. <span class="vcard"><span class="fn">[[User:Pigsonthewing|Andy Mabbett]]</span> (<span class="nickname">Pigsonthewing</span>); [[User talk:Pigsonthewing|Talk to Andy]]; [[Special:Contributions/Pigsonthewing|Andy's edits]]</span> 16:34, 23 December 2024 (UTC) |
|||
:::Thank you. Those results were in fact detailed enough that we may even document the circumstances associated with Mgr. Chauveau writing the original letter to the Society. [https://irfa.paris/missionnaire/0881-carreau-louis/ Louis Pierre Carreau] recounts his buying of specimens in the country, then his learning about the interest for the species in British diplomatic circles about. The French text is available, with the [[Gallica]] servers not under excessive stress, in ''Bulletin de la Société zoologique d'acclimatation'' 2°sér t. VII aka "1870" p.502 at https://gallica.bnf.fr/ark:/12148/cb345084433/date; an other account mentioning the specific species is to be found p.194 . --[[User:Askedonty|Askedonty]] ([[User talk:Askedonty|talk]]) 22:42, 23 December 2024 (UTC) |
|||
= December 23 = |
|||
:::[[A. Bertram Chandler]] comes to mind, but his article shows "40 novels and 200 works of short fiction". --—<i><b>— [[User:Gadget850|<font color = "gray">Gadget850 (Ed)</font>]]<font color = "darkblue"> <sup>[[User talk:Gadget850|''talk'']]</sup></font></b> - </i> 23:25, 29 May 2008 (UTC) |
|||
== London Milkman photo == |
|||
::Most of Asimov's work over most of his lifetime wasn't science fiction, and a lot of works that are counted in his total are ones he only edited as an anthologist. Another prolific author best known for SF is [[Robert Silverberg]]; our article says he wrote a million words a year at his peak, and I once saw him quoted -- I think in the 1980s -- as saying he'd written more books than Asimov. But I haven't heard the story being asked about, for him or anyone else. --Anonymous, 00:18 UTC, May 30. |
|||
I am writing a rough draft of ''Delivery After Raid'', also known as ''The London Milkman'' in my [[User:Viriditas/sandbox15|sandbox]]. I’m still trying to verify basic information, such as the original publication of the photo. It was allegedly first published on October 10, 1940, in ''Daily Mirror'', but it’s behind a paywall in British Newspaper Archive, but from the previews I can see, I don’t know think the photo is there. Does anyone know who originally published it or publicized it, or which British papers carried it in the 1940s? For a photo that’s supposed to be famous, it’s almost impossible to find anything about it before 1998. [[User:Viriditas|Viriditas]] ([[User talk:Viriditas|talk]]) 04:01, 23 December 2024 (UTC) |
|||
==Relation== |
|||
Is [[Colin Campbell Ross]] related to [[John Campbell Ross]]? [[User:IntfictExpert|Interactive Fiction Expert]]/[[User talk:IntfictExpert|Talk to me]] 06:23, 29 May 2008 (UTC) |
|||
:Somewhat tellingly, [https://www.thetimes.com/article/daily-encounters-national-portrait-gallery-wc2-r3tbr2svwr2 this article] about this photo in ''The Times'' just writes, "{{tq|On the morning of October 10, 1940, a photograph taken by Fred Morley of Fox Photos was published in a London newspaper.}}" The lack of identification of the newspaper is not due to reluctance of mentioning a competitor, since further on in the article we read, "{{tq|... the Daily Mirror became the first daily newspaper to carry photographs ...}}". --[[User talk:Lambiam#top|Lambiam]] 11:45, 23 December 2024 (UTC) |
|||
:I doesn't seem very likely. Ross is a common surname, and Campbell as a given name, although less common, is not uncommon. In the absence of a specific reason to think the two are related, the most likely guess is that they aren't. In the same way it is unlikely that [[Charles Campbell Ross]] and [[Duncan Campbell Ross]] are related. Ditto for [[Lodge Hill Cemetery, Birmingham#Notable burials|Alan Strode Campbell Ross]] and [[List of Shortland Street characters#W|Callum Campbell Ross]]. --[[User talk:Lambiam|Lambiam]] 07:06, 30 May 2008 (UTC) |
|||
:I see it credited (by Getty Images) to "[[Edward George Warris Hulton|Hulton]] Archive", which might mean it was in [[Picture Post]]. [[User:Card_Zero|<span style=" background-color:#fffff0; border:1px #995; border-style:dotted solid solid dotted;"> Card Zero </span>]] [[User_talk:Card_Zero|(talk)]] 12:29, 23 December 2024 (UTC) |
|||
::It was Fox Photos, they were a major agency supplying pictures to all of Fleet Street. [[User:DuncanHill|DuncanHill]] ([[User talk:DuncanHill|talk]]) 13:22, 23 December 2024 (UTC) |
|||
:::You mean it might have appeared in multiple papers on October 10, 1940? [[User:Card_Zero|<span style=" background-color:#fffff0; border:1px #995; border-style:dotted solid solid dotted;"> Card Zero </span>]] [[User_talk:Card_Zero|(talk)]] 14:06, 23 December 2024 (UTC) |
|||
::::No, I mean the Hulton credit does not imply anything about where it might have appeared. [[User:DuncanHill|DuncanHill]] ([[User talk:DuncanHill|talk]]) 14:14, 23 December 2024 (UTC) |
|||
:::::I can't join the dots. Doesn't being credited to the photographic archive of ''Picture Post'' imply that it might have appeared in ''Picture Post''? How does the agency being Fox Photos negate the possibility? [[User:Card_Zero|<span style=" background-color:#fffff0; border:1px #995; border-style:dotted solid solid dotted;"> Card Zero </span>]] [[User_talk:Card_Zero|(talk)]] 14:21, 23 December 2024 (UTC) |
|||
::::::It wasn't a Hulton picture, it was a Fox picture. The Hulton Archive absorbed other archives over the years, before being itself absorbed by Getty. [[User:DuncanHill|DuncanHill]] ([[User talk:DuncanHill|talk]]) 14:31, 23 December 2024 (UTC) |
|||
:::::::Oh! Right, I didn't understand that about Hulton. [[User:Card_Zero|<span style=" background-color:#fffff0; border:1px #995; border-style:dotted solid solid dotted;"> Card Zero </span>]] [[User_talk:Card_Zero|(talk)]] 14:38, 23 December 2024 (UTC) |
|||
:Not in the ''Daily Mirror'' of Thursday 10 October 1940. [[User:DuncanHill|DuncanHill]] ([[User talk:DuncanHill|talk]]) 13:19, 23 December 2024 (UTC) |
|||
::{{Ping|DuncanHill}} Maybe the 11th, if they picked up on the previous day's London-only publication? <span class="vcard"><span class="fn">[[User:Pigsonthewing|Andy Mabbett]]</span> (<span class="nickname">Pigsonthewing</span>); [[User talk:Pigsonthewing|Talk to Andy]]; [[Special:Contributions/Pigsonthewing|Andy's edits]]</span> 16:38, 23 December 2024 (UTC) |
|||
:::a lot of searches suggest it was the ''Daily Mail''. [[User:Nthep|Nthep]] ([[User talk:Nthep|talk]]) 18:05, 23 December 2024 (UTC) |
|||
:::::{{Ping|Pigsonthewing}} I've checked the ''Mirror'' for the 11th, and the rest of the week. I've checked the ''News Chronicle'', the ''Express'', and the ''Herald'' for the 10th. ''Mail'' not on BNA. [[User:DuncanHill|DuncanHill]] ([[User talk:DuncanHill|talk]]) 19:38, 23 December 2024 (UTC) |
|||
::::As general context, from my professional experience of picture researching back in the day, photo libraries and agencies quite often tried to claim photos and other illustrations in their collections as their own IP even when they were in fact not their IP and even when they were out of copyright. Often the same illustration was actually available from multiple providers, though obviously (in that pre-digital era) one paid a fee to whichever of them you borrowed a copy from for reproduction in a book or periodical. Attributions in published material may not, therefore, accurately reflect the true origin of an image. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} [[Special:Contributions/94.1.223.204|94.1.223.204]] ([[User talk:94.1.223.204|talk]]) 18:06, 23 December 2024 (UTC) |
|||
:::::I just discovered this for myself with Bosman 2008 in ''The National Gallery in Wartime''. In the back of the book it says the ''London Milkman'' photo is licensed from [[BENlabs|Corbis]] on p. 127. I was leaning towards reading this as an error of some kind before I saw your comment. Interestingly, the Wikpedia article on Corbis illustrates part of the problem. [[User:Viriditas|Viriditas]] ([[User talk:Viriditas|talk]]) 21:47, 23 December 2024 (UTC) |
|||
*Are we sure it was published at the time? I haven't been able to find any meaningful suggestion of which paper it appeared in. I've found a few sources (eg [https://www.historytoday.com/archive/review/beneath-bombs History Today]) giving a date in September. I've found several suggesting it tied in with "[[Keep Calm and Carry On]]", which of course was almost unknown in the War. [[User:DuncanHill|DuncanHill]] ([[User talk:DuncanHill|talk]]) 20:14, 23 December 2024 (UTC) |
|||
== Question! == |
|||
*:That's the thing. There's no direct evidence it was ever published except for a few reliable sources asserting it was. ''However'', I did find older news sources contemporaneous to the October 1940 (or thereabouts) photograph referring to it in the abstract after that date, as if it ''had'' been widely published. Just going from memory here, and this is a loose paraphrase, but one early-1940s paper on Google newspapers says something like "who can forget the image of the milkman making his deliveries in the rubble of the Blitz"? One notable missing part of the puzzle is that someone, somewhere, did an exclusive interview with Fred Morley about the photograph, and that too is impossible to find. It is said elsewhere that he traveled around the world taking photographs and celebrated his silver jubilee with Fox Photos in 1950-something. Other than that, nothing. It's like he disappeared off the face of the earth. [[User:Viriditas|Viriditas]] ([[User talk:Viriditas|talk]]) 21:58, 23 December 2024 (UTC) |
|||
*::I should also add, the Getty archive has several images of Fred Morley, one of which shows him using an extremely expensive camera for the time. [[User:Viriditas|Viriditas]] ([[User talk:Viriditas|talk]]) 22:20, 23 December 2024 (UTC) |
|||
:And furthermore, I haven't found any uses of it that look like a scan from a newspaper or magazine. They all seem to use Getty's original. [[User:DuncanHill|DuncanHill]] ([[User talk:DuncanHill|talk]]) 20:16, 23 December 2024 (UTC) |
|||
:I've searched BNA for "Fox Photo" and "Fox Photos" in 1940, and while this does turn up several photos from the agency, no milkmen are among them. [[User:DuncanHill|DuncanHill]] ([[User talk:DuncanHill|talk]]) 22:14, 23 December 2024 (UTC) |
|||
:No relevant BNA result for "Fox Photo" plus "Morley" at any date. [[User:DuncanHill|DuncanHill]] ([[User talk:DuncanHill|talk]]) 22:32, 23 December 2024 (UTC) |
|||
::Has anyone checked the Gale ''Picture Post'' archive for October 1940?[https://www.gale.com/c/picture-post-historical-archive] I don't have access to it. [[User:Viriditas|Viriditas]] ([[User talk:Viriditas|talk]]) 22:10, 23 December 2024 (UTC) |
|||
Who were the most barbaric: Vikings, Goths, Mongols or Huns? <small>—Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[Special:Contributions/76.121.93.179|76.121.93.179]] ([[User talk:76.121.93.179|talk]]) 09:05, 29 May 2008 (UTC)</small><!-- Template:UnsignedIP --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot--> |
|||
== Belgia, the Netherlands, to a 16th c. Englishman? == |
|||
:That is a very subjective question, and not very useful as a question about history; to the monks of Lindisfarne, the Vikings were pretty barbaric, but the inhabitants of thirteenth century Baghdad would argue that the Mongols were the most barbarous. But what about all their good qualities, their civilization, their contributions to humanity? All of them founded extensive empires and had literature and art. Does that make them less barbaric? [[User:Adam Bishop|Adam Bishop]] ([[User talk:Adam Bishop|talk]]) 09:23, 29 May 2008 (UTC) |
|||
In Shakespeare's "[[Comedy of Errors]]" (Act 3, Scene 2) Dromio of Syracuse and his master Antipholus of Syracuse discuss Nell the kitchen wench who Dromio says "is spherical, like a globe. I could find out countries in her." After asking about the location of a bunch of countries on Nell (very funny! recommended!), Antipholus ends with: "Where stood Belgia, the Netherlands?" Dromio hints "Belgia, the Netherlands" stood in her privates ("O, sir, I did not look so low.") My question is not about how adequate the comparison is but on whether "Belgia" and "the Netherlands" were the same thing, two synonymous designations for the same thing to Shakespeare (the Netherlands being the whole of the Low Countries and Belgia being just a slightly more literate equivalent of the same)? Or were "the Netherlands" already the Northern Low Countries (i.e. modern Netherlands), i.e. the provinces that had seceded about 15 years prior from the Spanish Low Countries (Union of Utrecht) while "Belgia" was the Southern Low Countries (i.e. modern Belgium and Luxembourg), i.e. the provinces that decided to stay with Spain (Union of Arras)? [[Special:Contributions/178.51.16.158|178.51.16.158]] ([[User talk:178.51.16.158|talk]]) 13:40, 23 December 2024 (UTC) |
|||
:: As usual the answer depends on who wrote the book you're reading. Romans are great because the beat "barbaric" tribes into shaping their empire. Moguls are "barbaric" because they beat "great" nations to shape their empire (?!)--[[Special:Contributions/71.236.23.111|71.236.23.111]] ([[User talk:71.236.23.111|talk]]) 18:49, 29 May 2008 (UTC) |
|||
:Essentially they were regarded as the same - you might look at [[Leo Belgicus]], a visual trope invented in 1583, perhaps a decade before the play was written, including both (and more). In Latin at this period and later [[Belgica Foederata]] was the United Provinces, [[Belgica Regia]] the Southern Netherlands. The Roman province had included both. [[User:Johnbod|Johnbod]] ([[User talk:Johnbod|talk]]) 15:40, 23 December 2024 (UTC) |
|||
::Johnbod, I agree with your explanation, but I thought that [[Gallia Belgica]] was south of the Rhine, so it only included the southern part of the United Provinces. [[User:TSventon|TSventon]] ([[User talk:TSventon|talk]]) 16:39, 23 December 2024 (UTC) |
|||
:::Yes, it seems so - "parts of both" would be more accurate. The Dutch didn't want to think of themselves as [[Germania Inferior|Inferior Germans]], that's for sure! [[User:Johnbod|Johnbod]] ([[User talk:Johnbod|talk]]) 17:40, 23 December 2024 (UTC) |
|||
::::This general region was originally part of [[Middle Francia]] aka [[Lotharingia]], possession of whose multifarious territories have been fought over by themselves, West Francia (roughly, France) and East Francia (roughly, Germany) for most of the last 1,100 years. The status of any particular bit of territory was potentially subject to repeated and abrupt changes due to wars, treaties, dynastic marriages, expected or unexpected inheritances, and even being sold for ready cash. See, for an entertaining (though exhausting as well as exhaustive) account of this, [[Simon Winder]]'s ''Lotharingia: A Personal History of Europe's Lost Country'' (2019). {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} [[Special:Contributions/94.1.223.204|94.1.223.204]] ([[User talk:94.1.223.204|talk]]) 18:19, 23 December 2024 (UTC) |
|||
:::::Actually Middle Francia, Lotharingia, different birds: Middle Francia was allocated to Lothair 1 (795-855), Lotharingia was allocated to (and named after) his son Lothair 2 (835-869) (not after his father Lothair 1). Lotharingia was about half the size of Middle Francia, as Middle Francia also included Provence and the northern half of Italy. Upper Lotharingia was essentially made up of Bourgogne and Lorraine (in fact the name "Lorraine" goes back to "Lotharingia" etymologically speaking, through a form "Loherraine"), and was eventually reduced to just Lorraine, whereas Lower Lotharingia was essentially made up of the Low Countries, except for the county of Flanders which was part of the kingdom of France, originally "Western Francia". In time these titles became more and more meaningless. In the 11th c. Godefroid de Bouillon, the leader of the First Crusade and conqueror of Jerusalem was still styled "Duc de Basse Lotharingie" even though by then there were more powerful and important rulers in that same territory (most significantly the duke of Brabant) [[Special:Contributions/178.51.16.158|178.51.16.158]] ([[User talk:178.51.16.158|talk]]) 19:18, 23 December 2024 (UTC) |
|||
::::::Oh sure, the individual blocks of this historical lego construction were constantly splitting, mutating and recombining in new configurations, which is why I said 'general region'. Fun related fact: the grandson of the last Habsburg Emperor, who would now be Crown Prince if Austria-Hungary were still a thing, is the racing driver [[Ferdinand Habsburg (racing driver)|'Ferdy' Habsburg]], whose full surname is Habsburg-Lorraine if you're speaking French or von Habsburg-Lothringen if you're speaking German. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} [[Special:Contributions/94.1.223.204|94.1.223.204]] ([[User talk:94.1.223.204|talk]]) 22:54, 23 December 2024 (UTC) |
|||
:::::::Down, from the lego to the playmobil - a country <small> was a lot too much a fuzzy affair without a military detachment on the way to recoinnaitre! --[[User:Askedonty|Askedonty]] ([[User talk:Askedonty|talk]]) 00:07, 24 December 2024 (UTC)</small> |
|||
[[File:50nc ex leg copy.jpg|thumb|The Netherlands, 50 A.D.]] |
|||
:In Caesar's ''[[Commentarii de Bello Gallico]]'', the Belgians (''[[wikt:Belgae#Latin|Belgae]]'') were separated from the Germans (''[[wikt:Germani#Latin|Germani]]'') by the Rhine, so the Belgian tribes then occupied half of what now is the Netherlands. --[[User talk:Lambiam#top|Lambiam]] 00:11, 24 December 2024 (UTC) |
|||
::More like a third, but this is complicated by the facts that: (A) the Rhine is poorly defined, as it has many branches in its delta; (B) the branches shifted over time; (C) the relative importance of those branches changed; (D) the land area changed with the changing coastline; and (E) the coastline itself is poorly defined, with all those tidal flats and salt marshes. Anyway, hardly any parts of the modern Netherlands south of the Rhine were part of the Union of Utrecht, although by 1648 they were mostly governed by the Republic of the Seven United Netherlands. In Shakespeare's time, it was a war zone. [[User:PiusImpavidus|PiusImpavidus]] ([[User talk:PiusImpavidus|talk]]) 10:57, 24 December 2024 (UTC) |
|||
== Indigenous territory/Indian reservations == |
|||
== Simple Question .... Long answer == |
|||
Are there Indigenous territory in Ecuador, Suriname? What about Honduras, Guatemala, and Salvador? <!-- Template:Unsigned --><small class="autosigned">— Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[User:Kaiyr|Kaiyr]] ([[User talk:Kaiyr#top|talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/Kaiyr|contribs]]) 18:31, 23 December 2024 (UTC)</small> |
|||
This is not supposed to offend anyone but I have a feelinbg it might. The other day I was sitting with my partner watching a program about Steven Hawking and his wonderful theories. Then, my partner said to me,' so if this is true, it blows Christianity away and the creation of the world in seven days...' I have a huge amount of respect for both religion and science but I couldn't help feeling my partner had won me over on this one. Any ideas? |
|||
Kirk UK <small>—Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[Special:Contributions/87.82.79.175|87.82.79.175]] ([[User talk:87.82.79.175|talk]]) 17:27, 29 May 2008 (UTC)</small><!-- Template:UnsignedIP --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot--> |
|||
:In Suriname not as territories. There are some Amerindian villages. Their distribution can be seen on the map at {{section link|Indigenous peoples in Suriname#Distribution}}. --[[User talk:Lambiam#top|Lambiam]] 23:58, 23 December 2024 (UTC) |
|||
:The short answer is that Christianity doesn't depend on the world being created in seven days. Most Christians take the passage describing that as being theological rather than scientific. [[User:DJ Clayworth|DJ Clayworth]] ([[User talk:DJ Clayworth|talk]]) 17:30, 29 May 2008 (UTC) |
|||
::7 days doesnt necessarily refer to 7 literal days. = ) --[[User:Cameron|Cameron]] ([[User Talk:Cameron|T]]|[[Special:Contributions/Cameron|C]]) 17:52, 29 May 2008 (UTC) |
|||
= December 24 = |
|||
:::It should be noted that the Biblical description of the order of events, and not solely the timing between them, is spurious. [http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Genesis%201 Genesis] claims that plants were created before the Sun that drives their photosynthesis, and that land organisms were produced before life in water. This description of events, and their attribution to God, would seem very reasonable to an ignorant person 2000 years ago but not by an author inspired by an [[omniscient]] God. The Bible also includes appaling examples of cruelty, [[collective punishment]], and sadism, but again, these examples can easily be explained by the Bible's author's acceptance of comtemporary values. I think the Bible should, if rationality is not completely disregarded, be taken as simply the work of a mundane person 2000 years ago. --[[User:Bowlhover|Bowlhover]] ([[User talk:Bowlhover|talk]]) 04:27, 31 May 2008 (UTC) |
|||
== Testicles in art == |
|||
:::It only blows Christianity away if one assumes that the point of the Bible is to relay historical fact. I can similarly "blow away" the program you were watching by pointing out that Steven Hawking is three-dimensional and composed (principally) of carbon, while in the program you were watching he was a two-dimensional arrangement of photons. Of course, this misses the point that the program was meant to portray Steven Hawking's ideas, not to physically represent him. [[User:Wikiant|Wikiant]] ([[User talk:Wikiant|talk]]) 18:01, 29 May 2008 (UTC) |
|||
:[[File:Neptuno_colosal_(Museo_del_Prado)_01.jpg|right|100px]] |
|||
What are some famous or iconic depictions of testicles in visual art (painting, sculpture, etc)? Pre 20th century is more interesting to me but I will accept more modern works as well. [[Special:Contributions/174.74.211.109|174.74.211.109]] ([[User talk:174.74.211.109|talk]]) 00:11, 24 December 2024 (UTC) |
|||
:Unfortunately not pre-20th century, but the first thing that comes to mind is New York's ''[[Charging Bull]]'' (1989) sculpture, which has a famously well-rubbed scrotum. [[User:GalacticShoe|GalacticShoe]] ([[User talk:GalacticShoe|talk]]) 02:41, 24 December 2024 (UTC) |
|||
:What's "iconic"? There's nothing special about testicles in visual arts. All male nudes originally had testicles and penises, unless they fell off (penises tended to do that more, leaving just the testicles) or were removed. There was a pope who couldn't stand them so there's a big room in a basement in the Vatican full of testicles and penises. Fig leaves were late fashion statements, possibly a brainstorm of the aforementioned pope. Here's one example from antiquity among possibly hundreds, from the [[Moschophoros]] (genitals gone but they obviously were there once), through the [[Kritios Boy]], through this famous Poseidon that used apparently to throw a trident [https://www.meisterdrucke.ie/fine-art-prints/Greek/239739/Statue-of-Poseidon,-c.460-450-BC.html] (über-famous but I couldn't find it on Wikipedia, maybe someone else can; how do they know it's not Zeus throwing a lightning bolt? is there an inscription?), and so many more! [[Special:Contributions/178.51.16.158|178.51.16.158]] ([[User talk:178.51.16.158|talk]]) 05:07, 24 December 2024 (UTC) |
|||
::The article you're looking for is [[Artemision Bronze]]. [[User:GalacticShoe|GalacticShoe]] ([[User talk:GalacticShoe|talk]]) 07:09, 24 December 2024 (UTC) |
|||
:And maybe the [[Cerne Abbas Giant]]. [[User:Shantavira|Shantavira]]|[[User talk:Shantavira|<sup>feed me</sup>]] 10:21, 24 December 2024 (UTC) |
|||
:[[Bake-danuki]], somewhat well-known in the West through [[Pom Poko]]. [[User:Card_Zero|<span style=" background-color:#fffff0; border:1px #995; border-style:dotted solid solid dotted;"> Card Zero </span>]] [[User_talk:Card_Zero|(talk)]] 11:16, 24 December 2024 (UTC) |
|||
== European dynasties that inherit their name from a female: is there a genealogical technical term to describe that situation? == |
|||
Hang on, seven days is seven days surely? Seven phases I can understand as being interpreted in many different ways but seven days equals seven blocks of twenty four hours. If not, then why say seven days? <small>—Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[Special:Contributions/87.82.79.175|87.82.79.175]] ([[User talk:87.82.79.175|talk]]) 18:22, 29 May 2008 (UTC)</small><!-- Template:UnsignedIP --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot--> |
|||
The Habsburg were descended (in the male line) from a female (empress [[Maria-Theresa]]). They were the Habsburg rulers of Austria because of her, not because of their Lorraine male ancestor. So their name goes against general European patrilinear naming customs. Sometimes, starting with [[Joseph II]] they are called Habsburg-Lorraine, but that goes against the rule that the name of the father comes first (I've never heard that anyone was called Lorraine-Habsburg) and most people don't even bother with the Lorraine part, if they even know about it. |
|||
:During the program, would you have thought it odd if someone had pointed to the TV and said, "That's Steven Hawking"? It seems a straightforward statement -- surely, Steven Hawking is Steven Hawking. But it wasn't Steven Hawking; it was an image. In fact, the point of the program wasn't that the image was or was not Steven Hawking. The point was the information the program was trying to get across -- Hawking (or his image) was merely a vehicle for the information. Similarly, the specific words in the Bible are vehicles for transmitting an idea -- the idea is that (1) God is the source of all things; (2) God loves us. [[User:Wikiant|Wikiant]] ([[User talk:Wikiant|talk]]) 18:34, 29 May 2008 (UTC) |
|||
::In other words, ''[[The Treachery of Images|ceci n'est pas une semaine]]''? [[User:Deor|Deor]] ([[User talk:Deor|talk]]) 18:44, 29 May 2008 (UTC) |
|||
As far as I can tell this mostly occurs in states where the sovereign happens at some point to be a female. The descendants of that female sovereign (if they rule) sometimes carry her family name (how often? that must depend on how prominent the father is), though not always (cf. queen Victoria's descendants). Another example would be king James, son of Mary queen of Scots and a nobody. But sometimes this happens in families that do not rule over anything (cf. the Chigi-Zondadari in Italy who were descended from a male Zondadari who married a woman from the much more important family of the Chigi and presumably wanted to be associated with them). |
|||
This is not what I'm asking, I'm familiar with the Rene Magritte ananagy of 'C’est Ne Pas Ne Pas Une Pipe', that's not what I'm referring to in the Hawking Statements. Moving away from Hawking statements, whether it be big bang theory, string theory or whatever, can the two exist simultaneously? Can a god creation of the universe exist alongside a scientific explanation of gravitational fields, probability fields and black holes. If we ignore the phrase 'on the first day, God said let there be light' in the bible, then does that mean that any phrases in the bible can be ignored if they 'don't fit'? Keeping to the original question, is there any research that explains how a religious and scientific explanation can co exist. Thanks - Kirk Uk <small>—Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[Special:Contributions/87.82.79.175|87.82.79.175]] ([[User talk:87.82.79.175|talk]]) 19:51, 29 May 2008 (UTC)</small><!-- Template:UnsignedIP --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot--> |
|||
What do genealogists, especially those dealing with royal genealogies, call this sort of situation? I'm looking for something that would mean in effect "switch to the mother's name", but the accepted technical equivalent if it exists. |
|||
:The issue is, what do you mean by "don't fit?" If you take the words in the Bible as statements of fact, then not only do they "not fit" with science, they don't even "fit" with themselves (do a google search on "contradictions in the bible" -- there's a lot of them). Now, if you take the words as conveying the idea that God created the universe, then there need not be a contradiction with science. Science explains *how* the universe came into being, but religion addresses *why* the universe came into being. [[User:Wikiant|Wikiant]] ([[User talk:Wikiant|talk]]) 20:00, 29 May 2008 (UTC) |
|||
Also do you know of other such situations in European history? |
|||
::You may find [http://www.watchtower.org/e/200609/article_03.htm this article] interesting. Particularly the second subheading 'The Marriage of Teachings—Does It Work?'. Best, --[[User:Cameron|Cameron]] ([[User Talk:Cameron|T]]|[[Special:Contributions/Cameron|C]]) 20:34, 29 May 2008 (UTC) |
|||
:::Don't get hung up on the "7 days" of Genesis 1. If you read Genesis 2, you will find the story of creation told in quite a different way (and order). From a Christian perspective, both are the Word of God, and thus speak of the Truth. Yet they appear to contradict each other. That doesn't fit with our modern preference for describing facts in a scientific, analytical way, so it seems nonsense. But, as Wikiant says, that is to take the passages in a way they were never intended. Think instead of traditional story telling as a way of conveying truths and ideas. There's a hundred versions of ''Robin Hood'', yet we all understand the gist of it; we tell of [[the Tortoise and the Hare]], when that never occurred ("How stupid, as if a hare and a tortoise could ''talk'', and run a race"), yet we use it to demonstrate severals truths & concepts (that of not being too confident; that slow and steady often wins, etc). Even now we use fiction to portray truth. There never was a [[Saving Private Ryan|Private Ryan]]; do we then doubt [[D-Day]] happened? So, no, faith and science don't have to tie up ''exactly'': they speak of different things. Can they be held together? There is much in the way of research, philosophy, discussion regarding that. Check out, for a start, [[Intelligent Design]], [[Theistic evolution]], [[Jewish views on evolution]]. There are plenty of links to follow from those. Also consider JRR Tolkein's [[On Fairy-Stories]], where he addresses the idea that where fairy stories tell of truths, the Bible is the ultimate "fairy story" to portray the ultimate truth. Basically, science hasn't "blown away" religion. There are many intellectually satisfied people of faith (of all persuasions). [[User:Gwinva|Gwinva]] ([[User talk:Gwinva|talk]]) 22:02, 29 May 2008 (UTC) |
|||
::::Addit: to clarify: I am NOT claiming that the Bible is merely story, and the various events described within it didn't happen. I was merely suggesting that each part of the Bible must be read as it was intended to be read; some is story, some is poetry, some contains historical records, some are personal letters, etc etc. Studies of ''any'' texts must start first with an analysis of style, and asking "why was this written". [[User:Gwinva|Gwinva]] ([[User talk:Gwinva|talk]]) 22:14, 29 May 2008 (UTC) |
|||
::::I've known a few fundamentalist Christians who are so tied to the idea that the Bible is the inerrant word of God, that they believe the world was created, destroyed and then created again ''just'' to deal with the dual creation stories in Genesis. — <b>[[User:HandThatFeeds|<span style="font-family:Comic Sans MS; color:DarkBlue">The Hand That Feeds You]]</span>:<sup>[[User talk:HandThatFeeds|Bite]]</sup></b> 22:44, 29 May 2008 (UTC) |
|||
In England where William (Orange) and Mary (Stuart) were joint sovereign did anyone attempt to guess what a line descended from them both would be called (before it became clear such a line would not happen)? |
|||
:::::Yes, it seems to me that a hard-core fundamentalist view of the Bible is not overly dissimilar from idolatry. [[User:Wikiant|Wikiant]] ([[User talk:Wikiant|talk]]) 22:50, 29 May 2008 (UTC) |
|||
[[Special:Contributions/178.51.16.158|178.51.16.158]] ([[User talk:178.51.16.158|talk]]) 03:46, 24 December 2024 (UTC) |
|||
Hawking and the Bible can both be right for one very simple reason: We really don't know what "seven days" means in the Bible. The only thing we can be reasonably sure of is that it wasn't the equivalent of one week in our time. Why? The sun wasn't even created until the "fourth day" of Genesis (Gen 1:16). If the sun wasn't created yet, and the sun is the most natural way we tell one day from another |
|||
, how can we say that each of these days is twenty-four hours? We can't. Your friend's analysis was a bit simplistic. Hawking hasn't blown the Bible away, and the Bible hasn't blown Hawking away. [[User:Wrad|Wrad]] ([[User talk:Wrad|talk]]) 23:19, 29 May 2008 (UTC) |
|||
:It happens a fair amount in European history, but I'm not sure it means what you think it means. It's generally a dynastic or patrilineal affiliation connected with the woman which is substituted, not the name of the woman herself. The descendents of Empress Matilda are known as Plantagenets after her husband's personal nickname. I'm not sure that the Habsburg-Lorraine subdivision is greatly different from the [[Capetian dynasty]] (always strictly patrilineal) being divided into the House of Artois, House of Bourbon, House of Anjou, etc. [[User:AnonMoos|AnonMoos]] ([[User talk:AnonMoos|talk]]) 09:52, 24 December 2024 (UTC) |
|||
Note as well [[Day]] describes the issues to some extent and bear in mind that the Bible was not originally written in English [[User:Nil Einne|Nil Einne]] ([[User talk:Nil Einne|talk]]) 10:16, 30 May 2008 (UTC) |
|||
::By the name of the mother I didn't mean her personal name (obviously!) but her line. The example I used of Maria Theresa should have been enough to clarify that. The cases of the Plantagenets (like that of the descendants of Victoria who became known as Saxe-Cobourg, not Hanover) are absolutely regular and do fall precisely outside the scope of my question. The Habsburg-Lorraine are not a new dynasty. The addition of "Lorraine" has no importance, it is purely decorative. It is very different from the switch to collateral branches that happened in France with the Valois, the Bourbon, which happened because of the Salic law, not because of the fact that a woman became the sovereign. Obviously such situations could never occur in places where the Salic law applied. It's happened regularly recently (all the queens of the Netherlands never prevented the dynasty continuing as Oranje or in the case of England as Windsor, with no account whatsoever taken of the father), but I'm not sure how much it happened in the past, where it would have been considered humiliating for the father and his line. In fact I wonder when the concept of that kind of a "prince consort" who is used to breed children but does not get to pass his name to them was first introduced. Note neither Albert nor Geoffrey were humiliated in this way and I suspect the addition of "Lorraine" was just to humor Francis (who also did get to be Holy Roman Emperor) without switching entirely to a "Lorraine" line and forgetting altogether about the "Habsburg" which in fact was the regular custom, and which may seem preposterous to us now given the imbalance of power, but was never considered so in the case of Albert even though he was from an entirely inconsequential family from an entirely inconsequential German statelet. I know William of Orange said he would refuse such a position and demanded that he and Mary be joint sovereign hence "William and Mary". [[Special:Contributions/178.51.16.158|178.51.16.158]] ([[User talk:178.51.16.158|talk]]) 10:29, 24 December 2024 (UTC) |
|||
:::As a sidenote, the waters of this question are somewhat muddied by the fact that [[Surnames]] as we know them were not (even confining ourselves to Europe) always a thing; they arose at different times in different places and in different classes. Amongst the ruling classes, people were often 'surnamed' after their territorial possessions (which could have been acquired through marriage or other means) rather than their parental name(s). Also, in some individual family instances (in the UK, at any rate), a man was only allowed to inherit the property and/or title of/via a female heiress whom they married on the condition that they adopted her family name rather than her, his, so that the propertied/titled family name would be continued. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} [[Special:Contributions/94.1.223.204|94.1.223.204]] ([[User talk:94.1.223.204|talk]]) 13:57, 24 December 2024 (UTC) |
|||
:In the old style of dynastic reckoning, Elizabeth II would have been transitional from Saxe-Coburg to Glucksberg, and even under the current UK rules, descendants of Prince Philip (and only those descendants) who need surnames use [[Mountbatten-Windsor]]. -- [[User:AnonMoos|AnonMoos]] ([[User talk:AnonMoos|talk]]) 14:06, 24 December 2024 (UTC) |
|||
== [[Gold State Coach]] == |
|||
= December 25 = |
|||
The state coach of the UK, has it been valued, it must be worth hundreds of thousands --[[User:Hadseys|Hadseys]] 19:25, 29 May 2008 (UTC) |
|||
== Death Row commutations by Biden == |
|||
:Well, it's part of the [[Royal Collection]], and I don't think anyone's valued that specifically. I remember somewhere, someone saying that they had an insurer in at Buckingham Palace one day, and he was in just one room and gave up! But it's value would be hundreds of thousands if not millions; after all, it's a work of art, and it's royal provenance is pretty immense, having carried every sovereign since George III. [[User:PeterSymonds|PeterSymonds]] [[User talk:PeterSymonds|<small>(talk)</small>]] 19:29, 29 May 2008 (UTC) |
|||
::*And its coated in gold leaf all over and got lots of paintings by famous artists, wonder how much it'd fetch on ebay :P --[[User:Hadseys|Hadseys]] 19:33, 29 May 2008 (UTC) |
|||
:::Lol, they probably won't know what it is and it'll go for £75 as a nice novelty item. ;) [[User:PeterSymonds|PeterSymonds]] [[User talk:PeterSymonds|<small>(talk)</small>]] 20:04, 29 May 2008 (UTC) |
|||
::::*Bargain then :D |
|||
:::::Well it's got my bid! And if things get desperate she can throw in six horses. I did always get fed up with taking the bus into town... [[User:PeterSymonds|PeterSymonds]] [[User talk:PeterSymonds|<small>(talk)</small>]] 21:10, 29 May 2008 (UTC) |
|||
Biden commuted nearly all of the Federal Death Row sentences a few days ago. Now, what’s the deal with the Military Death Row inmates? Are they considered "federal" and under the purview of Biden? Or, if not, what’s the distinction? Thanks. [[Special:Contributions/32.209.69.24|32.209.69.24]] ([[User talk:32.209.69.24|talk]]) 02:29, 25 December 2024 (UTC) |
|||
::Once removed from its context, the state coach belongs in [[Las Vegas]] as much as anywhere. In Las Vegas the publicized amount it would be insured for would essentially be a publicity stunt. The problem: you're asking to evaluate something that embodies ineffable cultural values in terms of something without any intrinsic value. Two conventional systems that don't intersect: "invaluable", "priceless" give hints...--[[User:Wetman|Wetman]] ([[User talk:Wetman|talk]]) 23:52, 29 May 2008 (UTC) |
|||
:::*Ye but if it was robbed how much would the queen be able to claim in insurance? --[[User:Hadseys|Hadseys]] 11:18, 30 May 2008 (UTC) |
|||
== Coca Romano's portraits of Ferdinand and Marie of Romania == |
|||
:::Plus we value the invaluable all the time. QUALYs (Quality of Life Years?) for deciding what drugs to put on the nhs. Life insurance policies valuing the loss of income if a partner/person was to die. Auctions selling all manner of cultural artefacts. I expect that given that it is A) a work of art, B) Part of the British Royal Family and C) Famous that this thing would be worth well over £1m, probably 10x that (if not more) to a collector. Of course this is based on purely knowledge of auctions/antiques built up from years of watching [[The Antiques Roadshow]] as a child. [[Special:Contributions/194.221.133.226|194.221.133.226]] ([[User talk:194.221.133.226|talk]]) 11:33, 30 May 2008 (UTC) |
|||
I am trying to work out when Coca Romano's coronation portraits of Ferdinand and Marie of Romania were actually completed and unveiled. This is with an eye to possibly uploading a photo of them to this wiki: they are certainly still in copyright in Romania (Romano lived until 1983), but probably not in the U.S. because of publication date. |
|||
== Pear and Fig dish == |
|||
The coronation took place in 1922 at Alba Iulia. The portraits show Ferdinand and Marie in their full regalia that they wore at the coronation. They appear to have been based on photographs taken at the coronation, so they must have been completed after the event, not before. |
|||
Is there a traditional Chinese or middle eastern Pear and fig dish? If so, what is it called? --[[User:Ghostexorcist|Ghostexorcist]] ([[User talk:Ghostexorcist|talk]]) 19:36, 29 May 2008 (UTC) |
|||
A few pieces of information I have: there is no date on the canvasses. The pieces are in the collection of the Brukenthal National Museum in Sibiu (inventory numbers 2503 for the picture of Marie and 2504 for Ferdinand) [Reference for undated and for inventory numbers: [ [https://biblioteca-digitala.ro/reviste/Brukenthal-Acta-Musei/dl.asp?filename=10-4_Brukenthal-Acta-Musei_X-4-restaurare_2015.pdf], p. 36-37], and were on display this year at Art Safari in Bucharest, which is where I photographed them. If they were published (always a tricky concept for a painting, but I'm sure they were rapidly and widely reproduced) no later than 1928, or in a few days 1929, we can upload my photo in this wiki. - [[User:Jmabel|Jmabel]] | [[User talk:Jmabel|Talk]] 04:58, 25 December 2024 (UTC) |
|||
:I have three large traditional Chinese recipe books. There are only two recipes that include figs. One is a fig/vinegar syrup intended for pork. The other is a fig-filling for sesame balls. Neither recipe includes pears. -- [[User:Kainaw|<font color='#ff0000'>k</font><font color='#cc0033'>a</font><font color='#990066'>i</font><font color='#660099'>n</font><font color='#3300cc'>a</font><font color='#0000ff'>w</font>]][[User talk:Kainaw|™]] 21:58, 29 May 2008 (UTC) |
|||
::I've come across a pear-and-fig chutney, which I'm pretty sure comes originally from India, but don't ask me if it's from any particular part of the sub-continent. If you focus on chutneys, you may be able to get nearer to it. [[User:Xn4|<span style="color:#9911DD">Xn4</span>]] 23:21, 29 May 2008 (UTC) |
|||
::::What is the name of this chutney? --[[User:Ghostexorcist|Ghostexorcist]] ([[User talk:Ghostexorcist|talk]]) 00:58, 30 May 2008 (UTC) |
|||
:::::One name for it is (ahem) 'Pear and Fig Chutney', as made, for instance, by Maison Therese Ltd. I can't say it's traditional, but for all I know it may be, somewhere. [[User:Xn4|<span style="color:#9911DD">Xn4</span>]] 11:02, 30 May 2008 (UTC) |
|||
(I've uploaded the image to Flickr, if anyone wants a look: https://www.flickr.com/photos/jmabel/54225746973/). - [[User:Jmabel|Jmabel]] | [[User talk:Jmabel|Talk]] 05:25, 25 December 2024 (UTC) |
|||
:::Where figs ripen dependably in the open (i.e., not cossetted against a warm, south-facing brick wall), pears don't get enough winter cold to set fruit dependably. That's the basic reason why there is not a "traditional" Chinese or Middle Eastern dish combining pears and figs: the ingredients come out of separate cultural contexts. --[[User:Wetman|Wetman]] ([[User talk:Wetman|talk]]) 23:44, 29 May 2008 (UTC) |
|||
== Secret codes in france WWII == |
|||
I was watching the movie 'The Longest Day' over the weekend, and was left wondering how the secret code words played over the radio to the French Resistance were distributed to various cells? Every movie or book I've read with this concept has just taken it for granted that the right people will know what some random assortment of words will mean, but historically, how did they decide upon the meanings?[[Special:Contributions/142.33.70.60|142.33.70.60]] ([[User talk:142.33.70.60|talk]]) 20:03, 29 May 2008 (UTC) |
|||
:[[Philippe de Vomécourt]], at least, was given the code in London:<blockquote>When would they come? In London I had been told to listen to the B.B.C. on the first and the fifteenth of each month. The message announcing the invasion would be broadcast after the 9 P.M. news—among the other curious messages that were put out night after night, like my own messages to tell my family I was well. April 15, May 1, May 15—each of them passed without the message I was waiting to hear.<p>Then the first of June.<p>"''Les sanglots longs des violons de l'automne....''" It was the first line of a poem by Verlaine. And it meant the invasion was soon to be launched. Only a few of us in the Resistance knew the significance of this message, and we could not tell our friends. We must now wait for the second half of the message, which would tell us that the invasion was to be launched within the next forty-eight hours. It was big news to carry about with me, and it was hard to hold it back from the others, but it could scarcely have added to the feverish excitement with which all were now possessed. Everyone could feel, despite all the disappointments of the past, that the invasion must come very soon. I looked at their faces, the faces of men whose friendship I held dear: men like Vincent and "Dédé," my adjutant, Captain Makowski, known as Maurice, and Colon, in charge of the Cher. I thought to myself, "You have not long to wait now."<p>And on the fifth of June, the imperturbable voice of the B.B.C. announcer, unaware of the momentous importance of the words he was speaking, said:<p>"''Blessent mon coeur d'une langueur monotone....''" It was the following line of the Verlaine poem, and it was the second part of the message. It signified that within two days Allied forces would be fighting once more on French soil.<p>Then followed a long string of "action messages," the coded messages by which each réseau received its orders to carry out the various prearranged operations against the railways, bridges, lines of communication, and so on. It was soon apparent that all notions of "graduated" action, on a selective basis, had been abandoned. About 300 "action" messages were broadcast that night, which meant, in effect, an order for a general uprising in every county in France. The messages went on and on, taking up far, far more time than usual. The Germans are said to have known the meaning of the two lines from Verlaine. Had they needed other proof that the invasion was imminent, those 300 "action" messages must have given it to them. That the Germans did not react more urgently, that the invasion, launched in bad weather, should have found them relatively so unprepared, with Rommel on leave with his family in Germany, was the purest fortune for the Allies. But, of course, there had been false alarms about the invasion for the past three years, when, just as now, the code words signaling imminent landings had been broadcast, and our hearts leaped in vain. Perhaps the Germans had also become skeptical by now of these messages.De Vomécourt, Philippe. (1961). ''An Army of Amateurs''. pp. 229-30. {{OCLC|1634632}}</blockquote>—[[User:EricR|eric]] 21:18, 29 May 2008 (UTC) |
|||
::I assume that only a few trusted people in the Resistance would know the codewords, and they would tell the others at the appropriate time. Given the huge effort that went into the deception operation I would be surprised if a few 'false' codewords hadn't been planted for the Germans to hear about in the hope that if they did find the real ones they would ignore them. The above passage would seem to bear that out. [[User:DJ Clayworth|DJ Clayworth]] ([[User talk:DJ Clayworth|talk]]) 17:57, 30 May 2008 (UTC) |
|||
== Governments & bank accounts == |
|||
A local government is similar to a business as they both take in revenue and pay expenses and employees. But a business stores its money in a bank account. How does a government treasury store its money? <small>—Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[Special:Contributions/71.218.11.128|71.218.11.128]] ([[User talk:71.218.11.128|talk]]) 23:34, 29 May 2008 (UTC)</small><!-- Template:UnsignedIP --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot--> |
|||
:The U.S. Treasury is the U.S. Government's bank. Also, the two entities are dissimilar in that the firm's goal is to maximize profit while the (implicit) goal of governments tends to be to maximize revenue. [[User:Wikiant|Wikiant]] ([[User talk:Wikiant|talk]]) 23:38, 29 May 2008 (UTC) |
|||
I'm talking more of a local government.[[Special:Contributions/71.218.11.128|71.218.11.128]] ([[User talk:71.218.11.128|talk]]) 23:47, 29 May 2008 (UTC) |
|||
:I'm pretty sure local goverments keep their money in bank accounts like everyone else. [[User talk:Algebraist|Algebraist]] 10:23, 30 May 2008 (UTC) |
|||
It's really too simplistic to say "a business stores its money in a bank account". Most businesses have their capital tied up in property, equipment, trading stock, vehicles, infrastructure, etc., and beyond what's needed for cashflow purposes few have much cash in the bank, because businesses can generally find better uses for their money. If there's a company pension fund, it's likely to be invested in property, stocks and shares, bonds, etc. on the advice of fund managers, although there are times when a large part of a pension fund may be held in cash on deposit. |
|||
In the UK, principal local authorities are (as you say) similar to businesses, and all of the above applies to them, except that they are more likely to have significant reserves, especially after selling major assets, and those are usually invested (on professional advice) to provide the best possible return without excessive risk. Like businesses, local authorities are likely to have borrowed money, especially for developing new housing or other major schemes. However, the lowest tier of local authorities in the UK (town, parish, or community councils) are more limited in their room for manoeuvre: there are restrictions on their powers to borrow money and to hold reserves. [[User:Xn4|<span style="color:#9911DD">Xn4</span>]] 10:37, 30 May 2008 (UTC) |
|||
Ok, that was a bad comparison. But a city still has to pay its workers, like a business, so that paycheck has to come from somewhere. [[Special:Contributions/71.218.1.96|71.218.1.96]] ([[User talk:71.218.1.96|talk]]) 17:28, 30 May 2008 (UTC) |
|||
= May 30 = |
|||
== what are these buildings == |
|||
what are these buildings located on treasure island in san Francisco |
|||
[http://maps.live.com/default.aspx?v=2&FORM=LMLTCP&cp=q935tp4t20jq&style=b&lvl=1&tilt=-90&dir=0&alt=-1000&scene=13255276&phx=0&phy=0&phscl=1&encType=1] <small>—Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[Special:Contributions/71.98.97.66|71.98.97.66]] ([[User talk:71.98.97.66|talk]]) 04:04, 30 May 2008 (UTC)</small><!-- Template:UnsignedIP --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot--> |
|||
:When I Googled for "star shaped buildings" on Treasure Island, [http://www.popularmechanics.com/science/earth/4239381.html?page=2 this] said they are barracks, part of the former naval base. [[User:Adam Bishop|Adam Bishop]] ([[User talk:Adam Bishop|talk]]) 07:39, 30 May 2008 (UTC) |
|||
::That's kinda weird. The armed forces aren't usually noted for odd architecture. Was the navy trying to subtly one-up [[The Pentagon]]? [[User:Clarityfiend|Clarityfiend]] ([[User talk:Clarityfiend|talk]]) 22:14, 30 May 2008 (UTC) |
|||
== The River Nile == |
|||
To what extent is the current management of the river Nile sustainable? <small>—Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[Special:Contributions/78.146.164.190|78.146.164.190]] ([[User talk:78.146.164.190|talk]]) 08:09, 30 May 2008 (UTC)</small><!-- Template:UnsignedIP --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot--> |
|||
:{{dyoh}} [[User:Krator]] ([[User talk:Krator|t]] [[Special:Contributions/Krator|c]]) 12:14, 30 May 2008 (UTC) |
|||
::And here's the aforementioned help with pointing towards articles. You may want to look at [[Sustainability]] [[Nile]] [[Hydropolitics in the Nile Basin]]. Don't forget to look at linked pages (click on words in blue in the text) and "See also" pages mentioned. [[Water management]] is still under construction, but may also hold useful links. --[[Special:Contributions/76.111.32.200|76.111.32.200]] ([[User talk:76.111.32.200|talk]]) 19:34, 30 May 2008 (UTC) |
|||
== Walibri's strange custom == |
|||
I've read on the net that when men of the Walibri tribe of central Australia greet each other, they shake genitals instead of hands. The web pages saying this story are all unreliable, of course, (blogs or discussion forums) but I was wondering if there is some truth in the story? --[[Special:Contributions/211.243.246.207|211.243.246.207]] ([[User talk:211.243.246.207|talk]]) 08:10, 30 May 2008 (UTC) |
|||
:I'm not sure the tribe even exists (apologies to any member of the tribe if I'm wrong) but on a quick google search every reference to them talks about this genitals shaking custom. I can't find any reference to anything else about the tribe. Other aboriginal tribes seem well represented on the net so why not this one?[[User:Iiidonkeyiii|Iiidonkeyiii]] ([[User talk:Iiidonkeyiii|talk]]) 08:32, 30 May 2008 (UTC) |
|||
::[[List of Indigenous Australian group names]] doesn't list them.[[User:Iiidonkeyiii|Iiidonkeyiii]] ([[User talk:Iiidonkeyiii|talk]]) 08:37, 30 May 2008 (UTC) |
|||
:::Perhaps you mean the [[Warlpiri]], whose language kept coming up in my linguistics classes... but I've never heard of this supposed custom. [[Special:Contributions/134.96.105.72|134.96.105.72]] ([[User talk:134.96.105.72|talk]]) 12:17, 30 May 2008 (UTC) |
|||
::::Our leg is being pulled. [[User:Xn4|<span style="color:#9911DD">Xn4</span>]] 23:21, 30 May 2008 (UTC) |
|||
== Is there a website with the names of clothes? == |
|||
I never paid ANY attention to clothing, like, I wouldn't know what twill is or what pleated meant. Now I have a job that requires me to... any web sites that would show pictures of all the clothes and parts and what they are called? I barely know what a shirt is... THANKS. <small>—Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[Special:Contributions/87.88.122.226|87.88.122.226]] ([[User talk:87.88.122.226|talk]]) 09:26, 30 May 2008 (UTC)</small><!-- Template:UnsignedIP --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot--> |
|||
:You may be interested in [[:Category:Textiles]] and [[:Category:Clothing]]. [[Special:Contributions/152.16.16.75|152.16.16.75]] ([[User talk:152.16.16.75|talk]]) 10:21, 30 May 2008 (UTC) |
|||
::And a [http://www.google.ca/search?hl=en&q=fashion+glossary&btnG=Google+Search&meta= google search for "fashion glossary"] brings up some useful sites. [[User:WikiJedits|WikiJedits]] ([[User talk:WikiJedits|talk]]) 10:42, 30 May 2008 (UTC) |
|||
:::We have an article on [[nudism]]. I am certain that it covers relevant parts. --[[User:Cookatoo.ergo.ZooM|Cookatoo.ergo.ZooM]] ([[User talk:Cookatoo.ergo.ZooM|talk]]) 17:02, 30 May 2008 (UTC) |
|||
::::I thought nudism ''didn't'' cover relevant parts. [[User:DJ Clayworth|DJ Clayworth]] ([[User talk:DJ Clayworth|talk]]) 17:50, 30 May 2008 (UTC) |
|||
:: Have a look here [[http://www.infovisual.info/06/pano_en.html]] for clothing show and tell. --[[Special:Contributions/76.111.32.200|76.111.32.200]] ([[User talk:76.111.32.200|talk]]) 19:11, 30 May 2008 (UTC) |
|||
== Eastern Europe and Cluster Bombs == |
|||
See: [[Convention on Cluster Munitions]]. |
|||
[[Image:Cononclubom.png|thumb|300px|right]] |
|||
In the map to the right several countries are missing. That large nations such as the US and China didn't sign the convention is no surprise. However, Poland, Romania and Greece (?) didn't sign the convention either. Why would that be? This seems like a very good way to lose credibility within the EU. [[User:Krator]] ([[User talk:Krator|t]] [[Special:Contributions/Krator|c]]) 12:11, 30 May 2008 (UTC) |
|||
:It depends on who are the ruling parties of a country and its public interest/perception. This issue might seem like a no-brainer to sign-up to, but unless it scores you politically positive press/media coverage - or your party is generally anti-war/anti-weaponary there is little incentive to change. The nations you mention will probably receive very little detriment from not signing up. People tend to be too black & white in their consideration of the issue. Those who didn't sign the treaty are not necessarily disinterested/uncaring of the effects of cluster bombs, they may simply believe this convention is unmanageable, not worth signing up for, would cause additional issues. They may have their own internal defense-measures that prevent use of them, or they may not use them so see no value in signing up for something. The reasons can be numerous and many could be quite reasonable (similar is how people get excited by Kyoto by ignoring that just because you don't sign-up doesn't mean you don't take the issue seriously, you may just disagree with the method of control). [[Special:Contributions/194.221.133.226|194.221.133.226]] ([[User talk:194.221.133.226|talk]]) 13:51, 30 May 2008 (UTC) |
|||
:I'd also suspect that there's a strong correlation to how many countries found it politically easy to sign up and how many countries did not have any cluster munitions in their armaments in the first place. --[[Special:Contributions/98.217.8.46|98.217.8.46]] ([[User talk:98.217.8.46|talk]]) 14:51, 30 May 2008 (UTC) |
|||
::According to the article, technically no countries have signed - that doesn't happen until December. [[User:Rmhermen|Rmhermen]] ([[User talk:Rmhermen|talk]]) 17:30, 30 May 2008 (UTC) |
|||
Having read this question, I started to search Polish websites for some info on cluster bombs and I found out that, sadly, cluster munition is produced in Poland and that Polish Armed Forces maintain and keep expanding their cluster munition stockpiles. Poland participated in the Oslo conference but refrained from signing the convention, saying it must first "analyze it thouroghly". This has been criticized by Polish NGOs such as Helsinki Foundation for Human Rights in Poland and Polish Red Cross. [http://www.podbeskidzie.biz/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=2765&Itemid=55] — [[User:Kpalion|Kpalion]]<sup>[[User talk:Kpalion|(talk)]]</sup> 08:16, 31 May 2008 (UTC) |
|||
== Australian Experience == |
|||
The question about an Australian Aboriginal group earlier got me thinking. So here's my question: I'm a white European who has lived in Australia for 5 years, in that time I've met many different people from many different countries - Chinese, Spanish, Iranian's, Ugandans -you name them, I've met them socially. But in that whole time I've only ever met ONE Aboriginal Australian. |
|||
I'm not really sure what my question is, but I think it's something like - Am I moving in the wrong circles? Have other migrant Australian's noticed this? –[[User:Iiidonkeyiii|Iiidonkeyiii]] ([[User talk:Iiidonkeyiii|talk]]) 12:51, 30 May 2008 (UTC) |
|||
:You don't mentioned where precisely you live. The indigenous population in Australia nowadays is rather small about 2% of the population. Even for those, a fair percentage of them are isolated in certain areas I believe. So it's not surprising it's fairly uncommon to meet one. [[Indigenous Australians]] may interest you. [[User:Nil Einne|Nil Einne]] ([[User talk:Nil Einne|talk]]) 15:50, 30 May 2008 (UTC) |
|||
::Many people who live in the Australian metropolises will go through their entire lives without ever meeting an indigenous person that they're aware of. I say "that they're aware of" because indigenous people don't go around with an "Indigenous person" sign around their neck, and many self-identified indigenous people have mixed blood lines and don't have any of the stereotypical visible characteristics that some people assume they all have. You may in fact have met a number of indigenous people who didn't choose to reveal this information in a social setting. -- [[User:JackofOz|JackofOz]] ([[User talk:JackofOz|talk]]) 16:05, 30 May 2008 (UTC) |
|||
::I've lived in Australia for all of my 36 years, and I have met very few Aboriginal people, although I acknowledge what Jack says, that I may have met some who didn't mention it. Most of the Aboriginal people I have met were those I met up north, when I went to Onslow (north-west coast of Western Australia). When I was there, I actually met very few white people, because I was staying in an Aboriginal community there. There is an informal apartheid in Australia, which reaches near-formal status at various times. In some country pubs, so Aboriginal people have told me, there are still "whites-only" and "blacks-only" sections. You will eventually meet an Aboriginal person if you are open and tolerant, but to guage the degree of separation, watch when you see Aboriginal people in public: see who else they are with. You guessed it, they will be Aboriginal also. |
|||
::Thanks for the question, because I like hearing sympathetic people who are concerned about these issues. You might care to read ''My Place'' by Sally Morgan, which was quite a famous book in its time, at least in WA. It's the autobiography of an Aboriginal woman who, for a long time, didn't know anything about her heritage, and went through rediscovering it, and dealing with the pain, and conquering any hatred and anger she might have felt. [[Special:Contributions/203.221.127.63|203.221.127.63]] ([[User talk:203.221.127.63|talk]]) 18:05, 30 May 2008 (UTC) |
|||
:::The wrong circles. The circles you need to move in in Sydney would be openings of Aboriginal art gallery exhibitions (not the same as exhibitions of Aboriginal art) where the gallery is run by Aboriginal people; and other Aboriginal interest groups such as Aboriginal rights, housing, health, dance company, theatre etc. Everleigh Street in Redfern is an Aborigines only place, and as other concentrations of ethnic groups are found in certain districts (such as Leichhardt/Italians; Liverpool Street/Spanish etc) , Redfern is regarded as the Aboriginal one. Otherwise, country areas moreso, and I found that Western Australia gives more media coverage in general especially through their editions of national news media (The Australian, The Age etc). [[User:Julia Rossi|Julia Rossi]] ([[User talk:Julia Rossi|talk]]) 00:29, 31 May 2008 (UTC) |
|||
== Christian beliefs about life after death == |
|||
Hi do non Catholic Christians believe that a person is judged as soon as they die or is the fate of going to heaven or hell only determined on the day of judgement? If so is a person considered dead and unaware of anything until they are physically resurrected on the day of judgement? Any biblical quotes to do with this will be very helpful. Thanks [[User:Richie1001|Richie1001]] ([[User talk:Richie1001|talk]]) 14:08, 30 May 2008 (UTC) |
|||
:There are a lot of non-Catholic Christians. I doubt there is unity in their belief in this matter [[User:Nil Einne|Nil Einne]] ([[User talk:Nil Einne|talk]]) 15:45, 30 May 2008 (UTC) |
|||
:Even Catholic theologians aren't in agreement on this. [[User:Wikiant|Wikiant]] ([[User talk:Wikiant|talk]]) 16:55, 30 May 2008 (UTC) |
|||
::This was discussed with verses on Yahoo answers here: [http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20061002005411AA5rAAt]. [[User:Rmhermen|Rmhermen]] ([[User talk:Rmhermen|talk]]) 17:20, 30 May 2008 (UTC) |
|||
== Child-in-Common == |
|||
What does the phrase "have a child-in-common" mean? Does it only refer to biological children? Or does it include stepchildren? |
|||
Pskudnik30[[User:Pskudnik30|Pskudnik30]] ([[User talk:Pskudnik30|talk]]) 14:30, 30 May 2008 (UTC) |
|||
== early 20th-century Scandinavian criminal == |
|||
I have tried in vain to find an article (that I read a year or so ago) about an unidentified Scandinavian criminal who targeted women sometime during the early 20th century. According to the article, he was never caught. I am fairly certain it was in the "Mysterious People" category. Does anyone know who I am talking about ? Thank you in advance. [[User:Philippe Laurichesse|Philippe Laurichesse]] ([[User talk:Philippe Laurichesse|talk]]) 22:37, 30 May 2008 (UTC) |
|||
== cremated remains found in a box == |
|||
An article seems to have disappeared from Wikipedia (from the category, I believe, of "Mysterious People") concerning the cremated remains of a woman in a box which arrived at a police station in Australia. Her name and her dates of birth and death were written on the box. It was never discovered who had sent the box nor why it had been sent. Any help identifying the article or its source would be greatly appreciated. [[User:Philippe Laurichesse|Philippe Laurichesse]] ([[User talk:Philippe Laurichesse|talk]]) 22:40, 30 May 2008 (UTC) |
|||
:This sounds like nothing extraordinary or otherwise notable which was probably why the article was deleted if it is missing [[User:Nil Einne|Nil Einne]] ([[User talk:Nil Einne|talk]]) 06:55, 31 May 2008 (UTC) |
|||
:You might like to put your question on the [[:Category:Mysterious people]] talk page where someone might be able to help you, [[User:Julia Rossi|Julia Rossi]] ([[User talk:Julia Rossi|talk]]) 07:30, 31 May 2008 (UTC) |
|||
:::Google is your friend. This item appears in various places on the Internet: "Aug 14, 2007 POTTSTOWN, Pa. (AP) - Cremated human remains were found Tuesday inside a package placed in a mail collection box, police said. "In my 19 years of police work, never has something like this occurred," Pottstown police Capt. F. Richard Drumheller said. The letter carrier found the package wrapped haphazardly in a plastic bag, with no mailing address or return address, and notified police. A police dog did not detect any explosives, so officers opened it and found a box with a metal plate with the deceased person's name on it and the years "1957-2000." Police asked that the person's name not be released until relatives are found."--[[User:Shantavira|Shantavira]]|[[User talk:Shantavira|<sup>feed me</sup>]] 07:39, 31 May 2008 (UTC) |
|||
::::Thanks for the response. In fact, Google -- being a corporation that controls its results, privileging English-language results even when you type in words in other languages (for example, it refuses to give me non-English Wikipedia pages for certain subjects) -- is not my friend. (If I use it, it's because there's nothing better, as with a lot of commercial products.) But, of course, I realize that your comment was not meant to be taken that way. Believe it or not, I actually did look, at one point, and, as I recall, did not find anything, but it could very well be that I was slightly inebriated or not in my right mind at the time. Anyway, thanks again. [[User:Philippe Laurichesse|Philippe Laurichesse]] ([[User talk:Philippe Laurichesse|talk]]) 08:49, 31 May 2008 (UTC) |
|||
= May 31 = |
|||
== Hats == |
|||
I didn't know who else to ask this question to, and so I thought I'd throw it out to the Wikipedia community: Do people wear REAL hats anymore? I never see anyone with a nice [[Akubra]] or [[Fedora]], or any of the other types. Why and when did they go out of style, and does anyone wear them in the present day? I really miss the hats of old. They added a certain intangible sense of adventure and sophistication that is just not present in today's society. Unfortunately, I am too young to have experienced the hat wearing days. Would someone in a city look like a fool if he were to wear one of these types of hats, or is it still socially acceptable? When I am older, I would really like to wear some of these hats of old, but I'm just wondering if I would just be doing myself a disservice. I don't know what brought me to the topic, but I figured if anyone would know, it would be the Wikipedians! |
|||
Thanks! |
|||
Mike [[User:MAP91|MAP91]] ([[User talk:MAP91|talk]]) 02:36, 31 May 2008 (UTC) |
|||
: Off the top of my head :) - the Queen (of the UK) wears hats regularly, though perhaps she is of old. However, I believe hats similar to hers are often seen at UK weddings and funerals. <small>—Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[Special:Contributions/65.92.191.40|65.92.191.40]] ([[User talk:65.92.191.40|talk]]) 02:51, 31 May 2008 (UTC)</small><!-- Template:UnsignedIP --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot--> |
|||
:: Yeehaw. Come to Texas for hats. For ladies' hats "African American" churches usually give good shows. As for the hats you quoted. Unless you can pull them off with a certain "look", wait. Fashion tends to recycle trends. I think I saw a popstar wear one recently (Timber???) Not everyone looks good in a hat. If you do and can give it a modern twist (leather jacket and double wrap scarf maybe?), give it a try. --[[Special:Contributions/76.111.32.200|76.111.32.200]] ([[User talk:76.111.32.200|talk]]) 06:41, 31 May 2008 (UTC) |
|||
:It depends what you mean by 'real' hat too. [[Baseball cap|These]] are resonably common in certain crowds and I personally consider them real [[hats]] (as does our article on hats) even if [[Cap|this article]] suggests there is a difference. Hats with a fuller brim are less common in general perhaps but are still quite common in certain places, e.g. among the [[Amish]] (and some [[Mormons]]/LDS followers too I think) and [[Cowboys]]+[[Cowgirls]], where the functional usage is important (hot tropical ountries by people working under the sun, by more ordinary people when going out in the sun for extended periods especially tourists particularly Japanese ones), in certain occasions like the ones mentioned above and to some horse races ([http://www.aucklandcupweek.co.nz/aucklandcupweek/fashion/directory.cfm]) [[User:Nil Einne|Nil Einne]] ([[User talk:Nil Einne|talk]]) 06:49, 31 May 2008 (UTC) |
|||
::In country Australia you can still walk up to a hat-wearer and ask, Is that an [[Akubra]] you're wearing? because they do, as well as the high top 10-gallon type. Musicians and [[Daniel Johns]] of Silverchair does, another singer, Guy Sebastian constantly wears a compact brim hat; girls wear a British urchin type hat with a soft full crown and peak in winter. It depends on their peer group. The late [[Heath Ledger]] wore a hat. Maybe it's an Australian thing, though Michael Stipe of R.E.M. wore a hat. Some people wear "statement" hats as a personal badge. Racing men and other horsey types routinely wear hats. The cap's been putting cap-hair on people for decades. My guess is when hair was big for men and women, hats declined through association with their parents' generation and associations with formality. Now formality is good. If you miss hats, why not start them off again. You'll be in step with [[Indiana Jones]] whose variable [[Fedora]] is making a return. Hats are still being produced for both sexes. Unbelievably I still see artists wearing the [[beret]], though the Indian cotton brimless hat is popular too. As for me? I'm female and take my [[Panama hat]] (copy) to the beach. Goes well with sawnoff jeans... [[User:Julia Rossi|Julia Rossi]] ([[User talk:Julia Rossi|talk]]) 07:13, 31 May 2008 (UTC) |
|||
::PS The celebs I mentioned are hugely listed at the article for their preferred hat, the [[Trilby]] a tighter looking variant of the fed. [[User:Julia Rossi|Julia Rossi]] ([[User talk:Julia Rossi|talk]]) 07:23, 31 May 2008 (UTC) |
|||
== [[1969 White Paper]] == |
|||
Hello. Does the 1969 White Paper have a metaphoric meaning? I know that white papers denote reports that help politicians make decisions. I was wondering whether the word 'White' in the phrase '1969 White Paper' meant the assimilation of Canadian Aboriginals into the mainstream white society. Thanks in advance. --[[User:Mayfare|Mayfare]] ([[User talk:Mayfare|talk]]) 04:10, 31 May 2008 (UTC) |
|||
:No, as you implied yourself, [[white paper]] is a generic term for this sort of document not matter what its subject; so the fact that this one was on a racial topic is just a coincidence. I've added a link in the article. --Anonymous, edited 05:45 UTC, May 31, 2008. |
Latest revision as of 05:26, 25 December 2024
of the Wikipedia reference desk.
Main page: Help searching Wikipedia
How can I get my question answered?
- Select the section of the desk that best fits the general topic of your question (see the navigation column to the right).
- Post your question to only one section, providing a short header that gives the topic of your question.
- Type '~~~~' (that is, four tilde characters) at the end – this signs and dates your contribution so we know who wrote what and when.
- Don't post personal contact information – it will be removed. Any answers will be provided here.
- Please be as specific as possible, and include all relevant context – the usefulness of answers may depend on the context.
- Note:
- We don't answer (and may remove) questions that require medical diagnosis or legal advice.
- We don't answer requests for opinions, predictions or debate.
- We don't do your homework for you, though we'll help you past the stuck point.
- We don't conduct original research or provide a free source of ideas, but we'll help you find information you need.
How do I answer a question?
Main page: Wikipedia:Reference desk/Guidelines
- The best answers address the question directly, and back up facts with wikilinks and links to sources. Do not edit others' comments and do not give any medical or legal advice.
December 11
[edit]Shopping carts
[edit]Where were the first shopping carts introduced?
- shopping cart and Sylvan Goldman say the Humpty Dumpty chain
- Piggly Wiggly says the Piggly Wiggly chain and quotes the Harvard Business Review
Both articles agree it was in 1937 in Oklaholma. I believe that Humpty Dumpty is more likely, but some high quality sources would be useful. TSventon (talk) 11:55, 11 December 2024 (UTC)
- It seems to be a matter of some dispute, but Guide to the Telescoping Shopping Cart Collection, 1946-1983, 2000 by the Smithsonian Institution has the complex details of the dispute between Sylvan Goldman [of Humpty Dumpty] and Orla Watson. No mention of Piggly Wiggly, but our article on Watson notes that in 1946, he donated the first models of his cart to 10 grocery stores in Kansas City.
- The Illustrated History of American Military Commissaries (p. 205) has both Watson and Goldman introducing their carts in 1947 (this may refer to carts that telescope into each other for storage, a feature apparently lacking in Goldman's first model).
- Scalable Innovation: A Guide for Inventors, Entrepreneurs, and IP Professionals says that Goldman's first cart was introduced to Humpty Dumty in 1937.
- Make of that what you will. Alansplodge (talk) 13:30, 11 December 2024 (UTC)
- Absolutely. I remember that the power lift arrangement mentioned in the Smithsonian's link was still an object of analysis for would-be inventors in the mid-sixties, and possibly later, even though the soon to be ubiquituous checkout counter conveyor belt was very much ready making it unnecessary. Couldn't help curiously but think about those when learning about Bredt's rule at school later, see my user page, but it's true "Bredt" sounded rather like "Bread" in my imagination. --Askedonty (talk) 15:33, 11 December 2024 (UTC)
- On Newspapers.com (pay site), I'm seeing shopping carts referenced in Portland, Oregon in 1935 or earlier, and occasionally illustrated, at a store called the Public Market; and as far as the term itself is concerned, it goes back to at least the 1850s. ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 15:18, 11 December 2024 (UTC)
- But perhaps referring to a cart brought by the shopper to carry goods home with, rather than one provided by the storekeeper for use in-store? Alansplodge (talk) 16:14, 11 December 2024 (UTC)
@Alansplodge, Askedonty, and Baseball Bugs: thank you for your help, it seems that the Harvard Business Review is mistaken and the Piggly Wiggly chain did not introduce the first shopping baskets, which answers my question. The shopping cart article references a paper by Catherine Grandclément, which shows that several companies were selling early shopping carts in 1937, so crediting Sylvan Goldman alone is not the whole story. TSventon (talk) 17:22, 11 December 2024 (UTC)
Lilacs/flowers re: Allies in Europe WWII
[edit]At 53:20 in Dunkirk (1958 film), British soldiers talk about [paraphrasing] 'flowers on the way into Belgium, raspberries on the way out', and specifically reference lilacs. I imagine this was very clear to 1958 audiences, but what is the significance of lilacs? Is it/was it a symbol of Belgium? Valereee (talk) 21:40, 11 December 2024 (UTC)
- I think it's just that the BEF entered Belgium in the Spring, which is lilac time. DuncanHill (talk) 22:04, 11 December 2024 (UTC)
- There are contemporary reports of the streets being strewn with lilac blossom. See here "Today the troops crossed the frontier along roads strewn with flowers. Belgian girls, wildly enthusiastic, plucked lilac from the wayside and scattered it along the road to be torn and twisted by the mighty wheels of the mechanised forces." DuncanHill (talk) 22:26, 11 December 2024 (UTC)
- Ah! That would explain it, thanks! Valereee (talk) 16:14, 13 December 2024 (UTC)
December 12
[edit]The USA adding a new state
[edit]If my understanding is correct, the following numbers are valid at present: (a) number of Senators = 100; (b) number of Representatives = 435; (c) number of electors in the Electoral College = 538. If the USA were to add a new state, what would happen to these numbers? Thank you. 32.209.69.24 (talk) 06:30, 12 December 2024 (UTC)
- The number of senators would increase by 2, and the number of representatives would probably increase by at least 1. ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 09:23, 12 December 2024 (UTC)
- Thus, to answer the final question, the minimum number of Electors would be 3… more if the new state has more Representatives (based on population). Blueboar (talk) 13:54, 12 December 2024 (UTC)
- In the short term, there would be extra people in congress. The 86th United States Congress had 437 representatives, because Alaska and Hawaii were granted one upon entry regardless of the apportionment rules. Things were smoothed down to 435 at the next census, two congresses later. --Golbez (talk) 14:58, 12 December 2024 (UTC)
Thanks. Hmmmmmmmmmmm. Let me re-phrase my question. (a) The number of Senators is always 2 per State, correct? (b) The number of Representatives is what? Is it "capped" at 435 ... or does it increase a little bit? (c) The number of Electors (per State) is simply a function of "a" + "b" (per State), correct? Thanks. 32.209.69.24 (talk) 21:12, 12 December 2024 (UTC)
- As I understand it, it is indeed capped at 435, though Golbez brings up a point I hadn't taken into account -- apparently it can go up temporarily when states are added, until the next reapportionment. --Trovatore (talk) 21:21, 12 December 2024 (UTC)
I suggest that (b) would probably depend on whether the hypothetical new state was made up of territory previously part of one or more existing states, or territory not previously part of any existing state. And I suspect that the eventual result would not depend on any pre-calculable formula, but on cut-throat horsetrading between the two main parties and other interested bodies. {The poster formerly nown as 87.81.230.195} 94.1.211.243 (talk) 21:21, 12 December 2024 (UTC)- Nope, it's capped at 435. See Reapportionment Act of 1929. (I had thought it was fixed in the Constitution itself, but apparently not.) --Trovatore (talk) 21:23, 12 December 2024 (UTC)
- The Constitution has a much higher cap, currently around eleven thousand. —Tamfang (talk) 20:09, 21 December 2024 (UTC)
- Nope, it's capped at 435. See Reapportionment Act of 1929. (I had thought it was fixed in the Constitution itself, but apparently not.) --Trovatore (talk) 21:23, 12 December 2024 (UTC)
- Oh, one other refinement. The formula you've given for number of electors is correct, for states. But it leaves out the District of Columbia, which gets as many electors as it would get if it were a state, but never
lessmore than those apportioned to the smallest state. In practice that means DC gets three electors. That's why the total is 538 instead of 535. --Trovatore (talk) 21:58, 12 December 2024 (UTC) Oops; I remembered the bit about the smallest state wrong. It's actually never more than the smallest state. Doesn't matter in practice; still works out to 3 electors for the foreseeable future, either way, because DC would get 3 electors if it were a state, and the least populous state gets 3. --Trovatore (talk) 23:23, 12 December 2024 (UTC)
December 13
[edit]economics: coffee prices question
[edit]in news report "On Tuesday, the price for Arabica beans, which account for most global production, topped $3.44 a pound (0.45kg), having jumped more than 80% this year. " [1] how do they measure it? some other report mention it is a commodity price set for trading like gold silver etc. what is the original data source for this report? i checked a few other news stories and did not find any clarification about this point, they just know something that i don't. thank you in advance for your help. Gryllida (talk, e-mail) 01:32, 13 December 2024 (UTC)
- Gryllida, they seem to be talking about the "Coffee C" contract in the List of traded commodities. The price seems to have peaked and then fallen a day later
- explanation here
- I googled "coffee c futures price chart" and the first link was uk.investing.com which I can't link here
- if you have detailed questions about futures contracts they will probably go over my head. TSventon (talk) 01:54, 13 December 2024 (UTC)
- thanks. i see the chart which you cannot link here. why did it peak and then drop shortly after? Gryllida (talk, e-mail) 04:08, 13 December 2024 (UTC)
- Financial markets tend to have periods of increase followed by periods of decrease (bull and bear markets), see market trend for background. TSventon (talk) 04:55, 13 December 2024 (UTC)
source for an order of precedence for abbotts
[edit]Hi friends. The article for Ramsey Abbey in the UK refers to an "order of precedence for abbots in Parliament". (Sourced to an encyclopedia, which uses the wording "The abbot had a seat in Parliament and ranked next after Glastonbury and St. Alban's"). Did a ranking/order of precedence exist and if yes where can it be found? Presumably this would predate the dissolution of monasteries in england. Thanks.70.67.193.176 (talk) 06:49, 13 December 2024 (UTC)
- The abbots called to parliament were called "Mitred Abbots" although not all were entitled to wear a mitre. Our Mitre article has much the same information as you quote, and I suspect the same citations. The only other reference I could find, also from an encyclopedia;
- Of the abbots, the abbot of Glastonbury had the precedence till A.D. 1154, when Pope Adrian IV, an Englishman, from the affection he entertained for the place of his education, assigned this precedence to the abbot of St. Alban's. In consequence, Glastonbury ranked next after him, and Reading had the third place.
- A Church Dictionary: A Practical Manual of Reference for Clergymen and Students (p. 2)
- Alansplodge (talk) 21:47, 16 December 2024 (UTC)
- Sources differ on the order. There is a list published in 1842 of 26 abbots as "generally ... reckoned" in order here
- The Church History of Britain Volume 2 (p.182) TSventon (talk) 22:15, 16 December 2024 (UTC)
- "Mean lords" in that reference should presumably be Mesne lords. 194.73.48.66 (talk) 14:25, 20 December 2024 (UTC)
- "Mean lords" looks like an alternative spelling that was used in the 19th century, so it was probably a correct spelling in 1842. TSventon (talk) 15:07, 20 December 2024 (UTC)
- "Mean lords" in that reference should presumably be Mesne lords. 194.73.48.66 (talk) 14:25, 20 December 2024 (UTC)
- Thank you everyone very much for your time and research, truly appreciated. all the best,70.67.193.176 (talk) 23:44, 20 December 2024 (UTC)
Are the proposed Trump tariffs a regressive tax in disguise?
[edit]I'm wondering if there has been analysis of this. The US government gets the tariff money(?) and biggest chunk will be on manufactured goods from China. Those in turn are primarily consumer goods, which means that the tariff is something like a sales tax, a type of tax well known to be regressive. Obviously there are leaks in the description above, so one would have to crunch a bunch of numbers to find out for sure. But that's what economists do, right? Has anyone weighed in on this issue? Thanks. 2601:644:8581:75B0:0:0:0:327E (talk) 08:58, 13 December 2024 (UTC)
- There have been many public comments about how this is a tax on American consumers. It's only "in disguise" to those who don't understand how tariffs work. ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 11:34, 13 December 2024 (UTC)
- Thanks, I'll see what I can find. Do you remember if the revenue collected is supposed to be enough for the government to care about? I.e. enough to supposedly offset the inevitable tax cuts for people like Elon Musk? 2601:644:8581:75B0:0:0:0:327E (talk) 22:36, 13 December 2024 (UTC)
Import duties are extremely recessive in that (a) they are charged at the same rate for any given level of income; and (b) those with less income tend to purchase far more imported goods than those with more income (define “more” and “less” any way you wish). Fiscally, they border on insignificant, running an average of 1.4% of federal revenue since 1962 (or, 0.2% of GDP), compared to 47.1% (8.0%) for individual income tax and 9.9% (1.7%) for corporate tax receipts.DOR (ex-HK) (talk) 22:52, 13 December 2024 (UTC)
- Curious about your point (b); why would this be? It seems to me that as my income has risen I have probably bought more stuff from abroad, at least directly. It could well be that I've bought less indirectly, but I'm not sure why that would be. --Trovatore (talk) 00:02, 14 December 2024 (UTC)
- More like, those with less income spend a larger fraction of their income on imported goods, instead of services. PiusImpavidus (talk) 10:48, 14 December 2024 (UTC)
Trovatore, most daily use items are imported: toothbrushes, combs, kitchenware, shopping bags. Most durable goods are imported: phones, TVs, cars, furniture, sporting goods, clothes. These items are more likely to be imported because it is MUCH cheaper / more profitable to make them abroad. Wander through Target, Sam's Club, or Wal-Mart and you'll be hard pressed to find "Made in America" goods. But, in a hand-crafted shop, where prices have to reflect the cost of living HERE, rather than in Bangladesh, prices soar. DOR (ex-HK) (talk) 19:13, 15 December 2024 (UTC)
- Um, sure, but surely it's a fairly rare person of any income level who spends a significant portion of his/her income on artisanal goods. --Trovatore (talk) 06:03, 18 December 2024 (UTC)
- PiusImpavidus, Every income strata (in America) spends far more on services than on goods. Services tend to be more of a repeated purchase: laundry (vs. washing machine), Uber (vs. car), rent (vs. purchase), internet (vs. books), etc. DOR (ex-HK) (talk) 19:17, 15 December 2024 (UTC)
Ron A. Dunn: Australian arachnologist
[edit]For Ronald Albert Dunn (Q109827858) I have given names of "Ron. A.", an address in 1958 of 60 Mimosa Road, Carnegie, Victoria, Australia S.E. 9 (he was also in Carnegie in 1948) and an uncited death date of 25 June 1972.
He was an Australian arachnologist with the honorifics AAA AAIS.
Can anyone find the full given names, and a source or the death date, please? What did the honorifics stand for? Do we know how he earned his living? Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 12:54, 13 December 2024 (UTC)
- Pigsonthewing Have you tried ancestry.com? For a start
- A scan of the 1954 Carnegie electoral roll has
- Dunn, Ronald Albert, 60 Mimosa Road, S.E. 9, accountant
- Dunn, Gladys Harriet I, 60 Mimosa Road, S.E. 9, home duties
- I can't check newspapers.com, but The Age apparently had a report about Ronald Albert Dunn on 27 Jun 1972 TSventon (talk) 14:49, 13 December 2024 (UTC)
- Thank you. I don't have access to the former, but that's great. AAA seems to be (member of the) Association of Accountants of Australia: [2]. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 16:18, 13 December 2024 (UTC)
- I accessed Ancestry.com via the Wikipedia Library, so you should have access. Newspapers.com is also available via the library if you register, which I haven't. An editor with a Newspapers.com account would be able to make a clipping which anyone could access online.
- I agree AAA is probably the Australian Society of Accountants, a predecessor of CPA Australia. They merged in 1953 (source) so the information would have been outdated in 1958. AAIS could be Associate [of the] Amalgamated Institute of Secretaries (source Who's Who in Australia, Volume 16, 1959 Abbreviations page 9). TSventon (talk) 16:48, 13 December 2024 (UTC)
- Last time I tried, Ancestry wasn't working for WP-Lib users. Thank you again. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 20:50, 13 December 2024 (UTC)
- There is a phabricator problem about loading a second page of results. My workaround is to try to add more information to the search to get more relevant results on the first page of results. TSventon (talk) 21:03, 13 December 2024 (UTC)
- Or perhaps someone at Wikipedia:WikiProject Resource Exchange/Resource Request could help? Alansplodge (talk) 12:35, 14 December 2024 (UTC)
- There is a phabricator problem about loading a second page of results. My workaround is to try to add more information to the search to get more relevant results on the first page of results. TSventon (talk) 21:03, 13 December 2024 (UTC)
- Last time I tried, Ancestry wasn't working for WP-Lib users. Thank you again. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 20:50, 13 December 2024 (UTC)
- Thank you. I don't have access to the former, but that's great. AAA seems to be (member of the) Association of Accountants of Australia: [2]. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 16:18, 13 December 2024 (UTC)
- Given his specialty, I suggest the honorific stands for "Aaaaaaaaagh It's (a) Spider!" Chuntuk (talk) 12:33, 18 December 2024 (UTC)
December 15
[edit]Schisms and Byzantine Roman self-perception
[edit]Did the three schisms between Rome and Constantinople tarnish Rome's reputation to the degree that it affected the Byzantine self-perception as the "Roman Empire" and as "Romans"? Including Constantinople's vision of succession to the Roman Empire and its notion of Second Rome. Brandmeistertalk 15:34, 15 December 2024 (UTC)
- Various maneuverings in the middle ages (including the infamous Fourth Crusade) certainly gave many Byzantines a negative view of western Catholics, so that toward the end some frankly preferred conquest by Muslims to a Christian alliance which would involve Byzantine religious and political subordination to the European West (see discussion at Loukas Notaras). But the Byzantines generally considered themselves to be the real Romans, and called themselves "Romaioi" much more often than they called themselves Greek (of course, "Byzantine" is a later retroactive term). AnonMoos (talk) 17:09, 15 December 2024 (UTC)
- I think these religious schisms had nothing to do with the secular political situation. In 330, before Christianity became an established religion that could experience schisms, Constantine the Great moved the capital of the unitary Roman Empire from Rome to the city of Byzantium and dubbed it the New Rome – later renamed to Constantinople. During the later periods in which the Western and Eastern Roman Empire were administered separately, this was not considered a political split but an expedient way of administering a large polity, of which Constantinople remained the capital. So when the Western wing of the Roman Empire fell to the Ostrogoths and even the later Exarchate of Ravenna disappeared, the Roman Empire, now only administered by the Constantinopolitan court, continued in an unbroken succession from the Roman Kingdom and subsequent Republic. --Lambiam 10:48, 16 December 2024 (UTC)
- In Ottoman Turkish, the term روم (Rum), ultimately derived from Latin Roma, was used to designate the Byzantine Empire, or, as a geographic term, its former lands. Fun fact: After the conquest of Constantinople in 1453, Mehmet the Conqueror and his successors claimed the title of Caesar of Rome, with the Ottoman Empire being the successor of the Byzantine Empire. IMO this claim has merit; Mehmet II was the first ruler of yet another dynasty, but rather than replacing the existing Byzantine administrative apparatus, he simply continued its use for the empire he had become the ruler of. If you recognize the claim, the Republic of Turkey is today's successor of the Roman Kingdom. --Lambiam 12:01, 17 December 2024 (UTC)
- The Ottomans basically continued the Byzantine tax-collection system, for a while. AnonMoos (talk) 23:13, 17 December 2024 (UTC)
- In Ottoman Turkish, the term روم (Rum), ultimately derived from Latin Roma, was used to designate the Byzantine Empire, or, as a geographic term, its former lands. Fun fact: After the conquest of Constantinople in 1453, Mehmet the Conqueror and his successors claimed the title of Caesar of Rome, with the Ottoman Empire being the successor of the Byzantine Empire. IMO this claim has merit; Mehmet II was the first ruler of yet another dynasty, but rather than replacing the existing Byzantine administrative apparatus, he simply continued its use for the empire he had become the ruler of. If you recognize the claim, the Republic of Turkey is today's successor of the Roman Kingdom. --Lambiam 12:01, 17 December 2024 (UTC)
Foreign Presidents/Heads of State CURRENTLY Buried in the USA
[edit]How many foreign presidents are CURRENTLY buried in the USA? (I am aware of previous burials that have since been repatriated) For example, In Woodlawn Cemetery in Miami, FL, there are two Cuban presidents and a Nicaraguan president.
Are there any other foreign presidents, heads of state, that are buried in the USA? Exeter6 (talk) 17:54, 15 December 2024 (UTC)
- As far as I know, all 4 of the presidents of the Republic of Texas are buried in Texas, which is currently in the US. Blueboar (talk) 18:04, 15 December 2024 (UTC)
- Andrés Domingo y Morales del Castillo was President of Cuba in 1954-55 and died in Miami. Not sure where he's buried though.
- Also Anselmo Alliegro y Milá (President of Cuba for a few hours on January 1, 1959) similarly went to Florida and died there.
- And Arnulfo Arias, ousted as President of Panama in the 1968 Panamanian coup d'état, died in Florida (a pattern emerging here...)
- Alansplodge (talk) 19:28, 15 December 2024 (UTC)
- For ease of reference, the Woodlawn Cemetery in question is Caballero Rivero Woodlawn Park North Cemetery and Mausoleum, housing:
- Gerardo Machado, president of Cuba from 1925 to 1933
- Carlos Prío Socarrás, president of Cuba from 1948 to 1952
- Anastasio Somoza Debayle, president of Nicaragua from 1967 to 1972, and from 1974 to 1979 (not to be confused with his father Anastasio Somoza García and brother Luis Somoza Debayle, both former presidents of Nicaragua, buried together in Nicaragua)
- GalacticShoe (talk) 20:09, 15 December 2024 (UTC)
- Searching Findagrave could be fruitful. Machado's entry:[3] ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 21:45, 15 December 2024 (UTC)
- Polish prime minister and famous musician Ignacy Paderewski had his grave in the United States until 1992. AnonMoos (talk) 07:32, 16 December 2024 (UTC)
- I guess not current, though... AnonMoos (talk) 01:12, 17 December 2024 (UTC)
- You can find some with the following Wikidata query: [4]. Some notable examples are Liliʻuokalani, Pierre Nord Alexis, Dương Văn Minh, Lon Nol, Bruno Carranza, Victoriano Huerta, and Mykola Livytskyi. Note that Alexander Kerensky died in the US but was buried in the UK. Unfortunately, the query also returns others who were presidents, governors, etc. of other than sovereign states. --Amble (talk) 19:09, 16 December 2024 (UTC)
- I suppose we should also consider Jefferson Davis as a debatable case. And Peter II of Yugoslavia was initially buried in the USA but later reburied in Serbia. He seems to have been the only European monarch who was at one point buried in the USA. --Amble (talk) 00:13, 17 December 2024 (UTC)
- Manuel Quezon was initially buried at Arlington. DuncanHill (talk) 00:20, 17 December 2024 (UTC)
- And of course I should rather think that most monarchs of Hawaii are buried in the USA. DuncanHill (talk) 00:27, 17 December 2024 (UTC)
- If burial was the custom there. (I'd guess it was, but I certainly don't know.) --142.112.149.206 (talk) 02:50, 17 December 2024 (UTC)
- Royal Mausoleum (Mauna ʻAla) answers that question with a definitive "yes, it was". Cullen328 (talk) 22:04, 17 December 2024 (UTC)
- If burial was the custom there. (I'd guess it was, but I certainly don't know.) --142.112.149.206 (talk) 02:50, 17 December 2024 (UTC)
- Antanas Smetona was initially buried in Cleveland, but then reburied elsewhere in Ohio. --Amble (talk) 06:36, 17 December 2024 (UTC)
- To be specific, All Souls Cemetery in Chardon according to Smetona's article. GalacticShoe (talk) 06:51, 17 December 2024 (UTC)
- There are a number of Egyptian mummies in US museums (List of museums with Egyptian mummies in their collections), but I can't find any that are currently known to be the mummy of a pharaoh. The mummy of Ramesses I was formerly in the US, but was returned to Egypt in 2003. --Amble (talk) 22:47, 17 December 2024 (UTC)
December 17
[edit]Geographic extent of an English parish c. 1800
[edit]What would have been the typical extent (in square miles or square kilometers) of an English parish, circa 1800 or so? Let's say the median rather than the mean. With more interest in rural than urban parishes. -- Avocado (talk) 00:05, 17 December 2024 (UTC)
- There were tensions involved in a unit based on the placement of churches being tasked to administer the poor law; that was why "civil parishes" were split off a little bit later... AnonMoos (talk) 01:11, 17 December 2024 (UTC)
- Avocado As a start the mean area of a parish in England and Wales in around 1832 seems to have been around 5.6 square miles.
- Source The Edinburgh Encyclopædia Volume 8. It also has figures by county if you are interested.
- p.494 38,498,572 acres, i.e. 60,154 square miles
- p.497 10,674 parishes and parochial chapelries
- Average 3,607 acres, i.e. 5.64 square miles TSventon (talk) 02:33, 17 December 2024 (UTC)
- Thank you -- that's a starting point, at least! -- Avocado (talk) 13:14, 17 December 2024 (UTC)
- But regionally variable:
- By the early nineteenth century the north-west of England, including the expanding cities of Manchester and Liverpool, had just over 150 parishes, each of them covering an average of almost 12,000 acres, whereas the more rural east of the country had more than 1,600 parishes, each with an average size of approximately 2,000 acres.
- OCR A Level History: Britain 1603-1760
- Alansplodge (talk) 21:46, 17 December 2024 (UTC)
- On the contrary , in England , which contains 38,500,000 statute acres, the parishes or livings comprehend about 3,850 acres the average; and if similar allowance be made for those livings in cities and towns , perhaps about 4,000.
- An Essay on the Revenues of the Church of England (1816) p. 165
- The point about urban parishes distorting the overall average is supported by St Ethelburga's Bishopsgate for instance, that had a parish of only 3 acres (or two football pitches of 110 yards by 70 yards placed side by side). [5] Alansplodge (talk) 21:46, 17 December 2024 (UTC)
- Oh, that's great info -- ty! I can't seem to get a look at the content of the book. Does it say anything else about other regions? -- Avocado (talk) 23:24, 17 December 2024 (UTC)
- The OCR book doesn't mention other regions. I have found where the figure of 10,674 came from: page 112 of the 1816 essay has a note that
Preliminary Observations ( p . 13. and 15. ) to the Popu-lation Returns in 1811 ; where the Parishes and Parochial Chapelries are stated at 10,674 .
The text of page 112 says thatchurches are contained in be-tween 10 , and 11,000 parishes † ; and probably after a due allowance for consolidations , & c . they constitute the Churches of about 10,000 Parochial Benefices
, so the calculation on p.165 of the 1816 essay is based on around 10,000 parishes in England (and Wales) in 1800 (38,500,000 divided by 3,850). TSventon (talk) 01:40, 18 December 2024 (UTC) - The primary source is Abstract of the Answers and Returns Made Pursuant to an Act Passed in the Fifty-first Year of His Majesty King George III, Intituled, "An Act for Taking an Account of the Population of Great Britain, and of the Increase Or Diminution Thereof" : Preliminary Observations, Enumeration Abstract, Parish Register Abstract, 1811 and the table of parishes by county is on page xxix. TSventon (talk) 01:46, 18 December 2024 (UTC)
- Thank you! -- Avocado (talk) 17:19, 18 December 2024 (UTC)
- The OCR book doesn't mention other regions. I have found where the figure of 10,674 came from: page 112 of the 1816 essay has a note that
- Parishes, like political constituencies etc, were in theory decided by the number of inhabitants, not the area covered. What the average was at particular points, I don't know. No doubt it rose over recent centuries as the population expanded, but rural parishes generally did not. Johnbod (talk) 03:09, 20 December 2024 (UTC)
- But whatever the population changes, the parish boundaries in England (whether urban or rural) remained largely fixed between the 12th and mid-19th centuries. Alansplodge (talk) 13:53, 20 December 2024 (UTC)
- Right, I'm not asking because I thought parish boundaries had been drawn to equalize the geographic area covered or I wanted to know how those boundaries came about. I'm asking because I'm curious what would have been typical in terms of geographic area in order to better understand certain aspects of the society of the time.
- For instance, how far (and thus how long) would people have to travel to get to their church? How far might they live from other people who attended the same church? How far would the rector/vicar/curate have to range to attend to his parishioners in their homes?
- Questions like that. Does that make the reason for this particular inquiry make more sense? -- Avocado (talk) 15:04, 20 December 2024 (UTC)
- Someone on Reddit had a similar question and the answer there suggested C. N. L. Brooke’s Churches and Churchmen in Medieval Europe (1999) on Google books. You may find the first chapter, Rural Ecclesiastical Institutions in England : The Search for their Origins interesting. TSventon (talk) 15:44, 20 December 2024 (UTC)
- Thanks for the link!
- Fwiw, I'm not really seeing any answers to questions of actual geographic extent in that first chapter, mostly info on the "how they came to be" that, again, isn't really the focus of the question. Or maybe the info I'm looking for is in the pages that are omitted from the preview?
- The rest of the book is clearly focused on a much earlier period than I'm interested in (granted, parish boundaries may not have changed much between the start of the Reformation and the Georgian era, but culture, practices, and the relationship of most people to their church and parish certainly would have!) -- Avocado (talk) 16:09, 20 December 2024 (UTC)
- The chapter is relevant to how far people had to travel in the middle ages, which I can see is not the period you are interested in. TSventon (talk) 21:25, 20 December 2024 (UTC)
- Yeah, it looks to me as if the pages I need are probably among the unavailable ones, then. Oh well. Thank you for the suggestion regardless! -- Avocado (talk) 22:47, 20 December 2024 (UTC)
- The chapter is relevant to how far people had to travel in the middle ages, which I can see is not the period you are interested in. TSventon (talk) 21:25, 20 December 2024 (UTC)
- Someone on Reddit had a similar question and the answer there suggested C. N. L. Brooke’s Churches and Churchmen in Medieval Europe (1999) on Google books. You may find the first chapter, Rural Ecclesiastical Institutions in England : The Search for their Origins interesting. TSventon (talk) 15:44, 20 December 2024 (UTC)
- One last link, the introduction of which might be helpful, describing attempts to create new parishes for the growing population in the early 19th century (particularly pp. 19-20):
- The New parishes acts, 1843,1844, & 1856. With notes and observations &c
- Alansplodge (talk) 12:30, 21 December 2024 (UTC)
When was the first bat mitzvah?
[edit]Bar and bat mitzvah has a short history section, all of which is about bar mitzvah. When was the first bat mitzvah? What is its history? ꧁Zanahary꧂ 01:52, 17 December 2024 (UTC)
- To be clear, I am more asking when the bat mitzvah ritual became part of common Jewish practice. ꧁Zanahary꧂ 01:53, 17 December 2024 (UTC)
- Parts from Google's translation of he:בת מצווה:
- As early as the early 19th century, in the early days of Reform Judaism, confirmation ceremonies for boys and girls began to be held in which their knowledge of the religion was tested, similar to that practiced among Christians. It spread to the more liberal circles of German Jewry, and by the middle of the century had also begun to be widespread among the Orthodox bourgeoisie. Rabbi Jacob Etlinger of Altona was forced by the community's regulations to participate in such an event in 1867, and published the sermon he had prepared for the purpose later. He emphasized that he was obligated to do so by law, and that Judaism did not recognize that the principles of the religion should be adopted in such a public declaration, since it is binding from birth. However, as part of his attempt to stop the Reform, he supported a kind of parallel procedure that was intended to take place exclusively outside the synagogue.
- The idea of confirmation was not always met with resistance, especially with regard to girls: the chief rabbi of the Central Consistory of French Jews, Shlomo Zalman Ullmann, permitted it for both sexes in 1843. In 1844, confirmation for young Jews was held for the first time in Verona, Italy. In the 1880s, Rabbi Zvi Hermann Adler agreed to the widespread introduction of the ceremony, after it had become increasingly common in synagogues, but refused to call it 'confirmation'. In 1901, Rabbi Eliyahu Bechor, cantor in Alexandria, permitted it for both boys and girls, inspired by what was happening in Italy. Other rabbis initially ordered a more conservative event.
- At the beginning of the twentieth century, the attitude towards the bat mitzvah party was reserved, because it was sometimes an attempt to imitate symbols drawn from the confirmation ceremony, and indeed there were rabbis, such as Rabbi Aharon Volkin, who forbade the custom on the grounds of gentile laws, or who treated it with suspicion, such as Rabbi Moshe Feinstein, who in a 1950s recantation forbade holding an event in the synagogue because it was "a matter of authority and a mere vanity...there is no point and no basis for considering it a matter of a mitzvah and a mitzvah meal". The Haredi community also expressed strong opposition to the celebration of the bat mitzvah due to its origins in Reform circles. In 1977, Rabbi Yehuda David Bleich referred to it as one of the "current problems in halakhah", noting that only a minority among the Orthodox celebrate it and that it had spread to them from among the Conservatives.
- On the other hand, as early as the beginning of the twentieth century, rabbis began to encourage holding a Bat Mitzvah party for a daughter, similar to a party that is customary for a son, with the aim of strengthening observance of the mitzvot among Jewish women.
- --Lambiam 11:23, 17 December 2024 (UTC)
- Thank you! Surprising how recent it is. ꧁Zanahary꧂ 21:51, 17 December 2024 (UTC)
December 18
[edit]Major feminist achievements prior to 18th century
[edit]What would be the most important feminist victories prior to the 18th and 19th centuries? I'm looking for specific laws or major changes (anywhere in the world), not just minor improvements in women's pursuit of equality. Something on the same scale and importantance as the women's suffrage. DuxCoverture (talk) 11:54, 18 December 2024 (UTC)
- I'm not aware of any occuring without being foreseable a set of conditions such as the perspective of a minimal equal representation both in the judiciary and law enforcement. Those seem to be dependent on technological progress, maybe particularly law enforcement although the judiciary sometimes heavily relies on recording capabilities. Unfortunately Ancient Egypt is not very explicitly illustrating the genesis of its sociological dynamics. --Askedonty (talk) 16:25, 18 December 2024 (UTC)
- Before universal male suffrage became the norm in the 19th century, also male commoners did not pull significant political weight, at least in Western society, so any feminist "victories" before then can only have been minor improvements in women's rights in general. --Lambiam 22:40, 18 December 2024 (UTC)
- Changes regarding divorce, property rights of women, protections against sexual assault or men's mistreatment of women could have have been significant, right? (Though I don't know what those changes were) 2601:644:907E:A70:9072:5C74:BC02:CB02 (talk) 06:09, 19 December 2024 (UTC)
- I don't think many of those were widely, significantly changed prior to the 18th century, though the World is large and diverse, and history is long, so it's difficult to generalise. See Women's rights. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 94.1.223.204 (talk) 11:05, 19 December 2024 (UTC)
- Changes regarding divorce, property rights of women, protections against sexual assault or men's mistreatment of women could have have been significant, right? (Though I don't know what those changes were) 2601:644:907E:A70:9072:5C74:BC02:CB02 (talk) 06:09, 19 December 2024 (UTC)
- In the English monarchy, when King Henry I died in 1135 with no living male legitimate child, a civil war followed over whether his daughter or his nephew should inherit the throne. (It was settled by a compromise.) But in 1553 when King Edward VI died, Queen Mary I inherited the throne and those who objected did it on religious grounds and not because she was a woman: in fact there was an attempt to place Lady Jane Grey on the throne instead. --142.112.149.206 (talk) 01:50, 20 December 2024 (UTC)
- Although Mary's detractors believed that her Catholic zeal was a result of her gender; a point made by the Calvinist reformer John Knox, who published a polemic entitled The First Blast of the Trumpet Against the Monstruous Regiment of Women. When the Protestant Elizabeth I inherited the throne, there was a quick about face; Elizabeth was compared to the Biblical Deborah, who had freed the Israelites from the Canaanites and led them to an era of peace and prosperity, and was obviously a divine exception to the principle that females were unfit to rule. Alansplodge (talk) 12:21, 20 December 2024 (UTC)
- A possibly fictional account in the film Agora has the proto-feminist Hypatia anticipating Kepler's orbits about two millenia before that gentleman, surely a significant feminine achievement. Philvoids (talk) 01:17, 21 December 2024 (UTC)
- "The film contains numerous historical inaccuracies: It inflates Hypatia's achievements and incorrectly portrays her as finding a proof of Aristarchus of Samos's heliocentric model of the universe, which there is no evidence that Hypatia ever studied." (from our Hypatia article linked above). Alansplodge (talk) 14:59, 22 December 2024 (UTC)
- Even if true (we have no proof she did not embrace the heliocentric model while developing the theory of gravitation to boot), it did not result in a major change in the position of women. --Lambiam 03:22, 23 December 2024 (UTC)
- To some extent it is going to depend on what is considered a "feminist victory".
- There has steadily been more evidence of numerous female Viking warriors, and similarly the Onna-musha in Japan.
- Many Native American tribal cultures had strong roles for women. Iroquois women, for example, played the major role in appointing and removing chiefs (though the chiefs were all male, as far as we know).
- And, of course, a certain number of women have, one way or another, achieved a great deal in a society that normally had little place for female achievement, though typically they eventually were brought down one way or another. Besides queens regnant and a number of female regents (including in the Roman Empire), two examples that leap to mind are Joan of Arc and Sor Juana de la Cruz. - Jmabel | Talk 04:36, 25 December 2024 (UTC)
- Even if true (we have no proof she did not embrace the heliocentric model while developing the theory of gravitation to boot), it did not result in a major change in the position of women. --Lambiam 03:22, 23 December 2024 (UTC)
- "The film contains numerous historical inaccuracies: It inflates Hypatia's achievements and incorrectly portrays her as finding a proof of Aristarchus of Samos's heliocentric model of the universe, which there is no evidence that Hypatia ever studied." (from our Hypatia article linked above). Alansplodge (talk) 14:59, 22 December 2024 (UTC)
Intolerance by D. W. Griffith
[edit]Why did D. W. Griffith make the film Intolerance after making the very popular and racist film The Birth of a Nation? What did he want to convey? 174.160.82.127 (talk) 18:22, 18 December 2024 (UTC)
- The lead of our article states that, in numerous interviews, Griffith made clear that the film was a rebuttal to his critics and he felt that they were, in fact, the intolerant ones. --Lambiam 22:26, 18 December 2024 (UTC)
- For not tolerating his racism? DuncanHill (talk) 15:20, 19 December 2024 (UTC)
- Precisely. Griffith thought he was presenting the truth, however unpopular, and that the criticism was meant to stifle his voice, not because the opinions he expressed were wrong but because they were unwelcome. --Lambiam 03:14, 23 December 2024 (UTC)
- For not tolerating his racism? DuncanHill (talk) 15:20, 19 December 2024 (UTC)
Term for awkward near-similarity
[edit]Is there a term for the feeling produced when two things are nearly but not quite identical, and you wish they were either fully identical or clearly distinct? I think this would be reminiscent of the narcissism of small differences, but applied to things like design or aesthetics – or like a broader application of the uncanny valley (which is specific to imitation of humans). --71.126.56.235 (talk) 20:19, 18 December 2024 (UTC)
- The uncanniness of the uncanny valley would be a specific subclass of this. --Lambiam 22:29, 18 December 2024 (UTC)
Yearbooks
[edit]Why yearbooks are often named after years that they concern? For example, a yearbook that concerns year 2024 and tells statistics about that year might be named 2025 Yearbook, with 2024 Yearbook instead concerning 2023? Which is the reason for that? --40bus (talk) 21:33, 18 December 2024 (UTC)
- It is good for marketing, a 2025 yearbook sounds more up to date than a 2024 one. TSventon (talk) 21:45, 18 December 2024 (UTC)
- One argument may be that it is the year of publication, being the 2025 edition of whatever. --Lambiam 22:31, 18 December 2024 (UTC)
- In the example of a high school yearbook, 2025 would be the year in which the 2024-2025 school year ended and the students graduated. Hence, "the Class of 2025" though the senior year started in 2024. ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 23:42, 18 December 2024 (UTC)
- The purpose of a yearbook is to highlight the past year activities, for example a 2025 yearbook is to highlight the activities of 2024. Stanleykswong (talk) 06:21, 19 December 2024 (UTC)
- Are there any yearbooks that are named after the same years that they concern, e.g. 2024 yearbook concerning 2024, 2023 yearbook concerning 2023 etc. --40bus (talk) 13:04, 19 December 2024 (UTC)
- A professional baseball team will typically have a "2024 Yearbook" for the current season, since the entire season occurred in 2024. Though keep in mind that the 2024 yearbook would have come out at the start of the season, hence it actually covers stats from 2023 as well as rosters and schedules for 2024. ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 14:40, 19 December 2024 (UTC)
- In the UK, the magazine Private Eye releases an annual at the end of every year which is named in this way. It stands out from all the other comic/magazine annuals on the rack which are named after the following year. I worked in bookselling for years and always found this interesting. Turner Street (talk) 11:26, 20 December 2024 (UTC)
- Are there any yearbooks that are named after the same years that they concern, e.g. 2024 yearbook concerning 2024, 2023 yearbook concerning 2023 etc. --40bus (talk) 13:04, 19 December 2024 (UTC)
Distinguish between Almanac (for predictions) and Yearbook (for recollections). ¨Philvoids (talk) 01:03, 21 December 2024 (UTC)
December 21
[edit]Everything You Can Do, We Can Do Meta: source?
[edit]I once read in a George Will article (or it might have been in one of his short columns) that the University of Chicago or one of its departments used "Everything You Can Do, We Can Do Meta" as a motto, but it turned out this was completely (if unintentionally, at least on Will's part) made up. Does anyone else remember George Will making that claim? Regardless, has anyone any idea how George Will may have mis-heard or mis-remembered it? (I could never believe that he intentionally made it up.) Anyway, does anyone know the source of the phrase, or at least an earliest source. (Obviously it may have occurred to several people independently.) The earliest I've found on Google is a 2007 article in the MIT Technology Review. Anything earlier? 178.51.16.158 (talk) 04:09, 21 December 2024 (UTC)
- [6] describes it as "John Bell’s motto" and uses the reference
J. Bell, ‘Legal Theory in Legal Education – “Everything you can do, I can do meta…”’, in: S. Eng (red.), Proceedings of the 21st IVR World Congress: Lund (Sweden), 12-17 August 2003, Wiesbaden: Frans Steiner Verlag, p. 61.
. Polygnotus (talk) 05:51, 21 December 2024 (UTC) - In his book I've Been Thinking, Daniel C. Dennett writes: '
Doug Hofstadter and I once had a running disagreement about who first came up with the quip “Anything you can do I can do meta”; I credited him and he credited me.
'[7] Dennett credited Hofstadter (writing meta- with a hyphen) in Brainchildren: Essays on Designing Minds (1998).[8] Hofstadter disavowed this claim in I am a Strange Loop, suggesting that the quip was Dennett's brainchild, writing, 'To my surprise, though, this “motto” started making the rounds and people quoted it back to me as if I had really thought it up and really believed it.
'[9] - It is, of course, quite possible that this witty variation on Irving Berlin's "Anything You Can Do (I Can Do Better)" was invented independently again and again. In 1979, Arthur Allen Leff wrote, in an article in Duke Law Journal: '
My colleague, Leon Lipson, once described a certain species of legal writing as, “Anything you can do, I can do meta.”
'[10] (Quite likely, John Bell (mis)quoted Lipson.) For other, likely independent examples, in 1986, it is used as the title of a technical report stressing the importance of metareasoning in the domain of machine learming (Morik, Katharina. Anything you can do I can do meta. Inst. für Angewandte Informatik, Projektgruppe KIT, 1986), and in 1995 we find this ascribed to cultural anthropologist Richard Shweder.[11] --Lambiam 14:40, 21 December 2024 (UTC) - (ec) He may have been mixing this up with "That's all well and good and practice, but how does it work in theory?" which is associated with the University of Chicago and attributed to Shmuel Weinberger, who is a professor there. Dekimasuよ! 14:42, 21 December 2024 (UTC)
Did Sir John Hume get entrapped in his own plot (historically)?
[edit]In Shakespeare's "First Part of the Contention..." (First Folio: "Henry VI Part 2") there's a character, Sir John Hume, a priest, who manages to entrap the Duchess of Gloucester in the conjuring of a demon, but then gets caught in the plot and is sentenced to be "strangled on the gallows".
My question: Was Sir John Hume, the priest, a historical character? If he was, did he really get caught in the plot he laid for the Duchess, and end up being executed?
Here's what goes on in Shakespeare's play:
In Act 1, Scene 2 [Oxford Shakespeare 1988] Sir John Hume and the Duchess of Gloucester are talking about using Margery Jordan "the cunning witch of Eye" and Roger Bolingbroke, the conjuror, to raise a spirit that will answer the Duchess's questions. It is clear Hume is being paid by the Duke of Suffolk to entrap the Duchess. His own motivation is not political but simple lucre.
In Act 1, Scene 4 the witch Margery Jordan, John Southwell and Sir John Hume, the two priests, and Roger Bolingbroke, the conjuror, conjure a demon (Asnath) in front of the Duchess of Gloucester in order that she may ask him questions about the fate of various people, and they all get caught and arrested by the Duke of York and his men. (Hume works for Suffolk and Cardinal Beaufort, bishop of Winchester, not for York, so it is not through Hume that York knows of these goings on, but York on his part was keeping a watch on the Duchess)
Act 2, Scene 3 King Henry: (to Margery Jordan, John Southwell, Sir John Hume, and Roger Bolingbroke) "You four, from hence to prison back again; / From thence, unto the place of execution. / The witch in Smithfield shall be burned to ashes, / And you three shall be strangled on the gallows."
178.51.16.158 (talk) 16:14, 21 December 2024 (UTC)
- John Home or Hume (Home and Hume are pronounced identically) was Eleanor, Duchess of Gloucester's confessor. According to this and this "Home, who had been indicted only for having knowledge of the activities of the others, was pardoned and continued in his position as canon of Hereford. He died in 1473." He does not seem to have been Sir John. I'm sure someone who knows more than me will be along soon. DuncanHill (talk) 16:35, 21 December 2024 (UTC)
- At this period "Sir" (and "Lady") could still be used as a vague title for people of some status, without really implying they had a knighthood. Johnbod (talk) 20:46, 21 December 2024 (UTC)
- Identically /hjuːm/ (HYOOM), to be clear. Card Zero (talk) 20:17, 21 December 2024 (UTC)
- Oh, and the First Part of the Contention is Henry Sixt Part II, not Part I! We also have articles about Roger Bolingbroke and Margery Jourdemayne, the Witch of Eye. DuncanHill (talk) 16:59, 21 December 2024 (UTC)
- Thanks. I corrected it now. 178.51.16.158 (talk) 20:34, 21 December 2024 (UTC)
- There's also an article for a Thomas Southwell (priest). In Shakespeare he is "John Southwell". The name "John Southwell" does appear in the text of the play itself (it is mentioned by Bolingbroke). I haven't checked if the quarto and the folio differ on the name. His dates seem to be consistent with this episode and Roger Bolingbroke does refer to the other priest as "Thomas Southwell". But nothing is mentioned in the article Thomas Southwell (priest) itself, so that article may be about some other priest named Thomas Southwell. In any case Roger Bolingbroke points out that only Roger Bolingbroke and Margery Jourdemayne were executed in connection with this affair. Shakespeare has them all executed. He must have been in a bad mood when he wrote that passage. Either that, or he just wanted to keep things simple. 178.51.16.158 (talk) 11:42, 22 December 2024 (UTC)
- I think that may well be our Southwell, according to "Chronicle of Gregory 1441. 27 Oct 1441. And on Syn Symon and Jude is eve was the wycche (age 26) be syde Westemyster brent in Smethefylde, and on the day of Symon and Jude [28 Oct 1441] the person [parson] of Syn Stevynnys in Walbroke, whyche that was one of the same fore said traytours [Thomas Southwell], deyde in the Toure for sorowe." The Chronicle of Gregory, written by William Gregory is published by the Camden Society DuncanHill (talk) 12:26, 22 December 2024 (UTC)
- Some experienced editor may then want to add these facts to his article, possibly using the Chronicle of Gregory as a source. 178.51.16.158 (talk) 12:39, 23 December 2024 (UTC)
- I think that may well be our Southwell, according to "Chronicle of Gregory 1441. 27 Oct 1441. And on Syn Symon and Jude is eve was the wycche (age 26) be syde Westemyster brent in Smethefylde, and on the day of Symon and Jude [28 Oct 1441] the person [parson] of Syn Stevynnys in Walbroke, whyche that was one of the same fore said traytours [Thomas Southwell], deyde in the Toure for sorowe." The Chronicle of Gregory, written by William Gregory is published by the Camden Society DuncanHill (talk) 12:26, 22 December 2024 (UTC)
December 22
[edit]Mike Johnson
[edit]I saw Mike Johnson on TV a day or two ago. (He was speaking from some official podium ... I believe about the recent government shutdown possibility, the Continuing Resolution, etc.) I was surprised to see that he was wearing a yarmulke. The color of the yarmulke was a close match to the color of Johnson's hair, so I had to look closely and I had to look twice. I said to myself "I never knew that he was Jewish". It bothered me, so I looked him up and -- as expected -- he is not Jewish. Why would he be wearing a yarmulke? Thanks. 32.209.69.24 (talk) 07:40, 22 December 2024 (UTC)
- Presumably to show his support for Israel and anti-semitism (and make inroads into the traditional Jewish-American support for the Democratic Party). Trump wore one too. Clarityfiend (talk) 10:39, 22 December 2024 (UTC)
- OK, thanks. I did not know that was a "thing". To wear one to show support. First I ever heard of that or seen that. Thanks. 32.209.69.24 (talk) 13:12, 22 December 2024 (UTC)
- [Edited to add – Edit Conflict with Lambiam below.] He may also have just come from, or be shortly going to, some (not necessarily religious) event held in a synagogue, where he would wear it for courtesy. I would do the same, and have my (non-Jewish) grandfather's kippah, which he wore for this purpose not infrequently, having many Jewish friends. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 94.1.223.204 (talk) 16:39, 22 December 2024 (UTC)
- OK, thanks. I did not know that was a "thing". To wear one to show support. First I ever heard of that or seen that. Thanks. 32.209.69.24 (talk) 13:12, 22 December 2024 (UTC)
- I assume you mis-spoke: to show his support for ... anti-semitism. 32.209.69.24 (talk) 13:16, 22 December 2024 (UTC)
- It is somewhat customary, also for male goyim, to don a yarmulke when visiting a synagogue or attending a Jewish celebration or other ceremony, like Biden here while lecturing at a synagogue in Atlanta, Georgia (and under him Trump while groping the Western Wall). Was Johnson speaking at a synagogue? --Lambiam 16:38, 22 December 2024 (UTC)
- It may have been a Hanukkah reception. --Lambiam 16:50, 22 December 2024 (UTC)
- Precisely, Lambian. Here is Johnson's official statement. Cullen328 (talk) 17:17, 22 December 2024 (UTC)
- This year Hanukkah begins unusually late in the Gregorian calendar, starting at sundown on December 25, when Congress will not be in session. This coincidence can be described by the portmanteau Chrismukkah. So, the Congressional observance of Hanukkah was ahead of schedule this year. Back in 2013, Hanukkah arrived unusually early, during the US holiday of Thanksgiving, resulting in the portmanteau of Thanksgivukkah. Cullen328 (talk) 17:15, 22 December 2024 (UTC)
- When you want to check the correlation between Jewish and Christian holidays, you can use the fact that Orthodox Christian months almost always correspond to Jewish months. For Chanucah, the relevant correlation is Emma/Kislev. From the table Special:Permalink/1188536894#The Reichenau Primer (opposite Pangur Bán), in 2024 (with Golden Number 11) Emma began on 3 December, so 24 Emma is 26 December. 92.12.75.131 (talk) 15:45, 23 December 2024 (UTC)
- This year Hanukkah begins unusually late in the Gregorian calendar, starting at sundown on December 25, when Congress will not be in session. This coincidence can be described by the portmanteau Chrismukkah. So, the Congressional observance of Hanukkah was ahead of schedule this year. Back in 2013, Hanukkah arrived unusually early, during the US holiday of Thanksgiving, resulting in the portmanteau of Thanksgivukkah. Cullen328 (talk) 17:15, 22 December 2024 (UTC)
- Precisely, Lambian. Here is Johnson's official statement. Cullen328 (talk) 17:17, 22 December 2024 (UTC)
- It may have been a Hanukkah reception. --Lambiam 16:50, 22 December 2024 (UTC)
Thanks, all! Much appreciated! 32.209.69.24 (talk) 02:05, 25 December 2024 (UTC)
Joseph Mary Thouveau, Bishop of Sebastopol
[edit]Who was Joseph Mary Thouveau, Bishop of Sebastopol? There is only one reference online ("Letter from Joseph Mary Thouveau. Bishop of Sebastopol, to Philip Lutley Sclater regarding Lady Amherst's Pheasant", 1869), and that has no further details. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 22:03, 22 December 2024 (UTC)
- After that search engine I used insisted I was looking for a Chauveau I finally located this Joseph Marie Chauveau - So the J M Thouveau item from maxarchiveservices uk must be one of the eccentricities produced by that old fashioned hand-written communication they had in the past. --Askedonty (talk) 22:24, 22 December 2024 (UTC)
- Of interest that other notice Joseph, Marie, Pierre. The hand-written text scribbled on the portrait stands as 'Eveque de Sebastopolis'. Pierre-Joseph Chauveau probably, now is also mentioned as Pierre-Joseph in Voyages ..even though, Lady Amherst's Pheasant is referred, in the same, through an other missionary intermediary: similar. --Askedonty (talk) 23:28, 22 December 2024 (UTC)
- Also in Contribution des missionnaires français au progrès des sciences naturelles au XIX et XX. (1932). Full texts are not accessible though it seems there is three times the same content in three different but more or less simultaneously published editions. Askedonty (talk) 23:59, 22 December 2024 (UTC)
- There is a stub at fr:Joseph-Marie Chauveau (there is also a zh article) and a list of bishops at fr:Évêché titulaire de Sébastopolis-en-Arménie. TSventon (talk) 03:31, 23 December 2024 (UTC)
- @Askedonty: Awesome work, thank you; and really useful. I'll notify my contact at ZSL, so they can fix their transcription error.
- [The Google Books links aren't showing me the search results, but that's a generic issue, nothing to do with your links]. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 16:34, 23 December 2024 (UTC)
- Thank you. Those results were in fact detailed enough that we may even document the circumstances associated with Mgr. Chauveau writing the original letter to the Society. Louis Pierre Carreau recounts his buying of specimens in the country, then his learning about the interest for the species in British diplomatic circles about. The French text is available, with the Gallica servers not under excessive stress, in Bulletin de la Société zoologique d'acclimatation 2°sér t. VII aka "1870" p.502 at https://gallica.bnf.fr/ark:/12148/cb345084433/date; an other account mentioning the specific species is to be found p.194 . --Askedonty (talk) 22:42, 23 December 2024 (UTC)
December 23
[edit]London Milkman photo
[edit]I am writing a rough draft of Delivery After Raid, also known as The London Milkman in my sandbox. I’m still trying to verify basic information, such as the original publication of the photo. It was allegedly first published on October 10, 1940, in Daily Mirror, but it’s behind a paywall in British Newspaper Archive, but from the previews I can see, I don’t know think the photo is there. Does anyone know who originally published it or publicized it, or which British papers carried it in the 1940s? For a photo that’s supposed to be famous, it’s almost impossible to find anything about it before 1998. Viriditas (talk) 04:01, 23 December 2024 (UTC)
- Somewhat tellingly, this article about this photo in The Times just writes, "
On the morning of October 10, 1940, a photograph taken by Fred Morley of Fox Photos was published in a London newspaper.
" The lack of identification of the newspaper is not due to reluctance of mentioning a competitor, since further on in the article we read, "... the Daily Mirror became the first daily newspaper to carry photographs ...
". --Lambiam 11:45, 23 December 2024 (UTC) - I see it credited (by Getty Images) to "Hulton Archive", which might mean it was in Picture Post. Card Zero (talk) 12:29, 23 December 2024 (UTC)
- It was Fox Photos, they were a major agency supplying pictures to all of Fleet Street. DuncanHill (talk) 13:22, 23 December 2024 (UTC)
- You mean it might have appeared in multiple papers on October 10, 1940? Card Zero (talk) 14:06, 23 December 2024 (UTC)
- No, I mean the Hulton credit does not imply anything about where it might have appeared. DuncanHill (talk) 14:14, 23 December 2024 (UTC)
- I can't join the dots. Doesn't being credited to the photographic archive of Picture Post imply that it might have appeared in Picture Post? How does the agency being Fox Photos negate the possibility? Card Zero (talk) 14:21, 23 December 2024 (UTC)
- It wasn't a Hulton picture, it was a Fox picture. The Hulton Archive absorbed other archives over the years, before being itself absorbed by Getty. DuncanHill (talk) 14:31, 23 December 2024 (UTC)
- Oh! Right, I didn't understand that about Hulton. Card Zero (talk) 14:38, 23 December 2024 (UTC)
- It wasn't a Hulton picture, it was a Fox picture. The Hulton Archive absorbed other archives over the years, before being itself absorbed by Getty. DuncanHill (talk) 14:31, 23 December 2024 (UTC)
- I can't join the dots. Doesn't being credited to the photographic archive of Picture Post imply that it might have appeared in Picture Post? How does the agency being Fox Photos negate the possibility? Card Zero (talk) 14:21, 23 December 2024 (UTC)
- No, I mean the Hulton credit does not imply anything about where it might have appeared. DuncanHill (talk) 14:14, 23 December 2024 (UTC)
- You mean it might have appeared in multiple papers on October 10, 1940? Card Zero (talk) 14:06, 23 December 2024 (UTC)
- It was Fox Photos, they were a major agency supplying pictures to all of Fleet Street. DuncanHill (talk) 13:22, 23 December 2024 (UTC)
- Not in the Daily Mirror of Thursday 10 October 1940. DuncanHill (talk) 13:19, 23 December 2024 (UTC)
- @DuncanHill: Maybe the 11th, if they picked up on the previous day's London-only publication? Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 16:38, 23 December 2024 (UTC)
- a lot of searches suggest it was the Daily Mail. Nthep (talk) 18:05, 23 December 2024 (UTC)
- @Pigsonthewing: I've checked the Mirror for the 11th, and the rest of the week. I've checked the News Chronicle, the Express, and the Herald for the 10th. Mail not on BNA. DuncanHill (talk) 19:38, 23 December 2024 (UTC)
- As general context, from my professional experience of picture researching back in the day, photo libraries and agencies quite often tried to claim photos and other illustrations in their collections as their own IP even when they were in fact not their IP and even when they were out of copyright. Often the same illustration was actually available from multiple providers, though obviously (in that pre-digital era) one paid a fee to whichever of them you borrowed a copy from for reproduction in a book or periodical. Attributions in published material may not, therefore, accurately reflect the true origin of an image. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 94.1.223.204 (talk) 18:06, 23 December 2024 (UTC)
- I just discovered this for myself with Bosman 2008 in The National Gallery in Wartime. In the back of the book it says the London Milkman photo is licensed from Corbis on p. 127. I was leaning towards reading this as an error of some kind before I saw your comment. Interestingly, the Wikpedia article on Corbis illustrates part of the problem. Viriditas (talk) 21:47, 23 December 2024 (UTC)
- a lot of searches suggest it was the Daily Mail. Nthep (talk) 18:05, 23 December 2024 (UTC)
- @DuncanHill: Maybe the 11th, if they picked up on the previous day's London-only publication? Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 16:38, 23 December 2024 (UTC)
- Are we sure it was published at the time? I haven't been able to find any meaningful suggestion of which paper it appeared in. I've found a few sources (eg History Today) giving a date in September. I've found several suggesting it tied in with "Keep Calm and Carry On", which of course was almost unknown in the War. DuncanHill (talk) 20:14, 23 December 2024 (UTC)
- That's the thing. There's no direct evidence it was ever published except for a few reliable sources asserting it was. However, I did find older news sources contemporaneous to the October 1940 (or thereabouts) photograph referring to it in the abstract after that date, as if it had been widely published. Just going from memory here, and this is a loose paraphrase, but one early-1940s paper on Google newspapers says something like "who can forget the image of the milkman making his deliveries in the rubble of the Blitz"? One notable missing part of the puzzle is that someone, somewhere, did an exclusive interview with Fred Morley about the photograph, and that too is impossible to find. It is said elsewhere that he traveled around the world taking photographs and celebrated his silver jubilee with Fox Photos in 1950-something. Other than that, nothing. It's like he disappeared off the face of the earth. Viriditas (talk) 21:58, 23 December 2024 (UTC)
- I should also add, the Getty archive has several images of Fred Morley, one of which shows him using an extremely expensive camera for the time. Viriditas (talk) 22:20, 23 December 2024 (UTC)
- That's the thing. There's no direct evidence it was ever published except for a few reliable sources asserting it was. However, I did find older news sources contemporaneous to the October 1940 (or thereabouts) photograph referring to it in the abstract after that date, as if it had been widely published. Just going from memory here, and this is a loose paraphrase, but one early-1940s paper on Google newspapers says something like "who can forget the image of the milkman making his deliveries in the rubble of the Blitz"? One notable missing part of the puzzle is that someone, somewhere, did an exclusive interview with Fred Morley about the photograph, and that too is impossible to find. It is said elsewhere that he traveled around the world taking photographs and celebrated his silver jubilee with Fox Photos in 1950-something. Other than that, nothing. It's like he disappeared off the face of the earth. Viriditas (talk) 21:58, 23 December 2024 (UTC)
- And furthermore, I haven't found any uses of it that look like a scan from a newspaper or magazine. They all seem to use Getty's original. DuncanHill (talk) 20:16, 23 December 2024 (UTC)
- I've searched BNA for "Fox Photo" and "Fox Photos" in 1940, and while this does turn up several photos from the agency, no milkmen are among them. DuncanHill (talk) 22:14, 23 December 2024 (UTC)
- No relevant BNA result for "Fox Photo" plus "Morley" at any date. DuncanHill (talk) 22:32, 23 December 2024 (UTC)
- Has anyone checked the Gale Picture Post archive for October 1940?[12] I don't have access to it. Viriditas (talk) 22:10, 23 December 2024 (UTC)
Belgia, the Netherlands, to a 16th c. Englishman?
[edit]In Shakespeare's "Comedy of Errors" (Act 3, Scene 2) Dromio of Syracuse and his master Antipholus of Syracuse discuss Nell the kitchen wench who Dromio says "is spherical, like a globe. I could find out countries in her." After asking about the location of a bunch of countries on Nell (very funny! recommended!), Antipholus ends with: "Where stood Belgia, the Netherlands?" Dromio hints "Belgia, the Netherlands" stood in her privates ("O, sir, I did not look so low.") My question is not about how adequate the comparison is but on whether "Belgia" and "the Netherlands" were the same thing, two synonymous designations for the same thing to Shakespeare (the Netherlands being the whole of the Low Countries and Belgia being just a slightly more literate equivalent of the same)? Or were "the Netherlands" already the Northern Low Countries (i.e. modern Netherlands), i.e. the provinces that had seceded about 15 years prior from the Spanish Low Countries (Union of Utrecht) while "Belgia" was the Southern Low Countries (i.e. modern Belgium and Luxembourg), i.e. the provinces that decided to stay with Spain (Union of Arras)? 178.51.16.158 (talk) 13:40, 23 December 2024 (UTC)
- Essentially they were regarded as the same - you might look at Leo Belgicus, a visual trope invented in 1583, perhaps a decade before the play was written, including both (and more). In Latin at this period and later Belgica Foederata was the United Provinces, Belgica Regia the Southern Netherlands. The Roman province had included both. Johnbod (talk) 15:40, 23 December 2024 (UTC)
- Johnbod, I agree with your explanation, but I thought that Gallia Belgica was south of the Rhine, so it only included the southern part of the United Provinces. TSventon (talk) 16:39, 23 December 2024 (UTC)
- Yes, it seems so - "parts of both" would be more accurate. The Dutch didn't want to think of themselves as Inferior Germans, that's for sure! Johnbod (talk) 17:40, 23 December 2024 (UTC)
- This general region was originally part of Middle Francia aka Lotharingia, possession of whose multifarious territories have been fought over by themselves, West Francia (roughly, France) and East Francia (roughly, Germany) for most of the last 1,100 years. The status of any particular bit of territory was potentially subject to repeated and abrupt changes due to wars, treaties, dynastic marriages, expected or unexpected inheritances, and even being sold for ready cash. See, for an entertaining (though exhausting as well as exhaustive) account of this, Simon Winder's Lotharingia: A Personal History of Europe's Lost Country (2019). {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 94.1.223.204 (talk) 18:19, 23 December 2024 (UTC)
- Actually Middle Francia, Lotharingia, different birds: Middle Francia was allocated to Lothair 1 (795-855), Lotharingia was allocated to (and named after) his son Lothair 2 (835-869) (not after his father Lothair 1). Lotharingia was about half the size of Middle Francia, as Middle Francia also included Provence and the northern half of Italy. Upper Lotharingia was essentially made up of Bourgogne and Lorraine (in fact the name "Lorraine" goes back to "Lotharingia" etymologically speaking, through a form "Loherraine"), and was eventually reduced to just Lorraine, whereas Lower Lotharingia was essentially made up of the Low Countries, except for the county of Flanders which was part of the kingdom of France, originally "Western Francia". In time these titles became more and more meaningless. In the 11th c. Godefroid de Bouillon, the leader of the First Crusade and conqueror of Jerusalem was still styled "Duc de Basse Lotharingie" even though by then there were more powerful and important rulers in that same territory (most significantly the duke of Brabant) 178.51.16.158 (talk) 19:18, 23 December 2024 (UTC)
- Oh sure, the individual blocks of this historical lego construction were constantly splitting, mutating and recombining in new configurations, which is why I said 'general region'. Fun related fact: the grandson of the last Habsburg Emperor, who would now be Crown Prince if Austria-Hungary were still a thing, is the racing driver 'Ferdy' Habsburg, whose full surname is Habsburg-Lorraine if you're speaking French or von Habsburg-Lothringen if you're speaking German. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 94.1.223.204 (talk) 22:54, 23 December 2024 (UTC)
- Down, from the lego to the playmobil - a country was a lot too much a fuzzy affair without a military detachment on the way to recoinnaitre! --Askedonty (talk) 00:07, 24 December 2024 (UTC)
- Oh sure, the individual blocks of this historical lego construction were constantly splitting, mutating and recombining in new configurations, which is why I said 'general region'. Fun related fact: the grandson of the last Habsburg Emperor, who would now be Crown Prince if Austria-Hungary were still a thing, is the racing driver 'Ferdy' Habsburg, whose full surname is Habsburg-Lorraine if you're speaking French or von Habsburg-Lothringen if you're speaking German. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 94.1.223.204 (talk) 22:54, 23 December 2024 (UTC)
- Actually Middle Francia, Lotharingia, different birds: Middle Francia was allocated to Lothair 1 (795-855), Lotharingia was allocated to (and named after) his son Lothair 2 (835-869) (not after his father Lothair 1). Lotharingia was about half the size of Middle Francia, as Middle Francia also included Provence and the northern half of Italy. Upper Lotharingia was essentially made up of Bourgogne and Lorraine (in fact the name "Lorraine" goes back to "Lotharingia" etymologically speaking, through a form "Loherraine"), and was eventually reduced to just Lorraine, whereas Lower Lotharingia was essentially made up of the Low Countries, except for the county of Flanders which was part of the kingdom of France, originally "Western Francia". In time these titles became more and more meaningless. In the 11th c. Godefroid de Bouillon, the leader of the First Crusade and conqueror of Jerusalem was still styled "Duc de Basse Lotharingie" even though by then there were more powerful and important rulers in that same territory (most significantly the duke of Brabant) 178.51.16.158 (talk) 19:18, 23 December 2024 (UTC)
- This general region was originally part of Middle Francia aka Lotharingia, possession of whose multifarious territories have been fought over by themselves, West Francia (roughly, France) and East Francia (roughly, Germany) for most of the last 1,100 years. The status of any particular bit of territory was potentially subject to repeated and abrupt changes due to wars, treaties, dynastic marriages, expected or unexpected inheritances, and even being sold for ready cash. See, for an entertaining (though exhausting as well as exhaustive) account of this, Simon Winder's Lotharingia: A Personal History of Europe's Lost Country (2019). {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 94.1.223.204 (talk) 18:19, 23 December 2024 (UTC)
- Yes, it seems so - "parts of both" would be more accurate. The Dutch didn't want to think of themselves as Inferior Germans, that's for sure! Johnbod (talk) 17:40, 23 December 2024 (UTC)
- Johnbod, I agree with your explanation, but I thought that Gallia Belgica was south of the Rhine, so it only included the southern part of the United Provinces. TSventon (talk) 16:39, 23 December 2024 (UTC)
- In Caesar's Commentarii de Bello Gallico, the Belgians (Belgae) were separated from the Germans (Germani) by the Rhine, so the Belgian tribes then occupied half of what now is the Netherlands. --Lambiam 00:11, 24 December 2024 (UTC)
- More like a third, but this is complicated by the facts that: (A) the Rhine is poorly defined, as it has many branches in its delta; (B) the branches shifted over time; (C) the relative importance of those branches changed; (D) the land area changed with the changing coastline; and (E) the coastline itself is poorly defined, with all those tidal flats and salt marshes. Anyway, hardly any parts of the modern Netherlands south of the Rhine were part of the Union of Utrecht, although by 1648 they were mostly governed by the Republic of the Seven United Netherlands. In Shakespeare's time, it was a war zone. PiusImpavidus (talk) 10:57, 24 December 2024 (UTC)
Indigenous territory/Indian reservations
[edit]Are there Indigenous territory in Ecuador, Suriname? What about Honduras, Guatemala, and Salvador? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kaiyr (talk • contribs) 18:31, 23 December 2024 (UTC)
- In Suriname not as territories. There are some Amerindian villages. Their distribution can be seen on the map at Indigenous peoples in Suriname § Distribution. --Lambiam 23:58, 23 December 2024 (UTC)
December 24
[edit]Testicles in art
[edit]What are some famous or iconic depictions of testicles in visual art (painting, sculpture, etc)? Pre 20th century is more interesting to me but I will accept more modern works as well. 174.74.211.109 (talk) 00:11, 24 December 2024 (UTC)
- Unfortunately not pre-20th century, but the first thing that comes to mind is New York's Charging Bull (1989) sculpture, which has a famously well-rubbed scrotum. GalacticShoe (talk) 02:41, 24 December 2024 (UTC)
- What's "iconic"? There's nothing special about testicles in visual arts. All male nudes originally had testicles and penises, unless they fell off (penises tended to do that more, leaving just the testicles) or were removed. There was a pope who couldn't stand them so there's a big room in a basement in the Vatican full of testicles and penises. Fig leaves were late fashion statements, possibly a brainstorm of the aforementioned pope. Here's one example from antiquity among possibly hundreds, from the Moschophoros (genitals gone but they obviously were there once), through the Kritios Boy, through this famous Poseidon that used apparently to throw a trident [13] (über-famous but I couldn't find it on Wikipedia, maybe someone else can; how do they know it's not Zeus throwing a lightning bolt? is there an inscription?), and so many more! 178.51.16.158 (talk) 05:07, 24 December 2024 (UTC)
- The article you're looking for is Artemision Bronze. GalacticShoe (talk) 07:09, 24 December 2024 (UTC)
- And maybe the Cerne Abbas Giant. Shantavira|feed me 10:21, 24 December 2024 (UTC)
- Bake-danuki, somewhat well-known in the West through Pom Poko. Card Zero (talk) 11:16, 24 December 2024 (UTC)
European dynasties that inherit their name from a female: is there a genealogical technical term to describe that situation?
[edit]The Habsburg were descended (in the male line) from a female (empress Maria-Theresa). They were the Habsburg rulers of Austria because of her, not because of their Lorraine male ancestor. So their name goes against general European patrilinear naming customs. Sometimes, starting with Joseph II they are called Habsburg-Lorraine, but that goes against the rule that the name of the father comes first (I've never heard that anyone was called Lorraine-Habsburg) and most people don't even bother with the Lorraine part, if they even know about it.
As far as I can tell this mostly occurs in states where the sovereign happens at some point to be a female. The descendants of that female sovereign (if they rule) sometimes carry her family name (how often? that must depend on how prominent the father is), though not always (cf. queen Victoria's descendants). Another example would be king James, son of Mary queen of Scots and a nobody. But sometimes this happens in families that do not rule over anything (cf. the Chigi-Zondadari in Italy who were descended from a male Zondadari who married a woman from the much more important family of the Chigi and presumably wanted to be associated with them).
What do genealogists, especially those dealing with royal genealogies, call this sort of situation? I'm looking for something that would mean in effect "switch to the mother's name", but the accepted technical equivalent if it exists.
Also do you know of other such situations in European history?
In England where William (Orange) and Mary (Stuart) were joint sovereign did anyone attempt to guess what a line descended from them both would be called (before it became clear such a line would not happen)?
178.51.16.158 (talk) 03:46, 24 December 2024 (UTC)
- It happens a fair amount in European history, but I'm not sure it means what you think it means. It's generally a dynastic or patrilineal affiliation connected with the woman which is substituted, not the name of the woman herself. The descendents of Empress Matilda are known as Plantagenets after her husband's personal nickname. I'm not sure that the Habsburg-Lorraine subdivision is greatly different from the Capetian dynasty (always strictly patrilineal) being divided into the House of Artois, House of Bourbon, House of Anjou, etc. AnonMoos (talk) 09:52, 24 December 2024 (UTC)
- By the name of the mother I didn't mean her personal name (obviously!) but her line. The example I used of Maria Theresa should have been enough to clarify that. The cases of the Plantagenets (like that of the descendants of Victoria who became known as Saxe-Cobourg, not Hanover) are absolutely regular and do fall precisely outside the scope of my question. The Habsburg-Lorraine are not a new dynasty. The addition of "Lorraine" has no importance, it is purely decorative. It is very different from the switch to collateral branches that happened in France with the Valois, the Bourbon, which happened because of the Salic law, not because of the fact that a woman became the sovereign. Obviously such situations could never occur in places where the Salic law applied. It's happened regularly recently (all the queens of the Netherlands never prevented the dynasty continuing as Oranje or in the case of England as Windsor, with no account whatsoever taken of the father), but I'm not sure how much it happened in the past, where it would have been considered humiliating for the father and his line. In fact I wonder when the concept of that kind of a "prince consort" who is used to breed children but does not get to pass his name to them was first introduced. Note neither Albert nor Geoffrey were humiliated in this way and I suspect the addition of "Lorraine" was just to humor Francis (who also did get to be Holy Roman Emperor) without switching entirely to a "Lorraine" line and forgetting altogether about the "Habsburg" which in fact was the regular custom, and which may seem preposterous to us now given the imbalance of power, but was never considered so in the case of Albert even though he was from an entirely inconsequential family from an entirely inconsequential German statelet. I know William of Orange said he would refuse such a position and demanded that he and Mary be joint sovereign hence "William and Mary". 178.51.16.158 (talk) 10:29, 24 December 2024 (UTC)
- As a sidenote, the waters of this question are somewhat muddied by the fact that Surnames as we know them were not (even confining ourselves to Europe) always a thing; they arose at different times in different places and in different classes. Amongst the ruling classes, people were often 'surnamed' after their territorial possessions (which could have been acquired through marriage or other means) rather than their parental name(s). Also, in some individual family instances (in the UK, at any rate), a man was only allowed to inherit the property and/or title of/via a female heiress whom they married on the condition that they adopted her family name rather than her, his, so that the propertied/titled family name would be continued. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 94.1.223.204 (talk) 13:57, 24 December 2024 (UTC)
- By the name of the mother I didn't mean her personal name (obviously!) but her line. The example I used of Maria Theresa should have been enough to clarify that. The cases of the Plantagenets (like that of the descendants of Victoria who became known as Saxe-Cobourg, not Hanover) are absolutely regular and do fall precisely outside the scope of my question. The Habsburg-Lorraine are not a new dynasty. The addition of "Lorraine" has no importance, it is purely decorative. It is very different from the switch to collateral branches that happened in France with the Valois, the Bourbon, which happened because of the Salic law, not because of the fact that a woman became the sovereign. Obviously such situations could never occur in places where the Salic law applied. It's happened regularly recently (all the queens of the Netherlands never prevented the dynasty continuing as Oranje or in the case of England as Windsor, with no account whatsoever taken of the father), but I'm not sure how much it happened in the past, where it would have been considered humiliating for the father and his line. In fact I wonder when the concept of that kind of a "prince consort" who is used to breed children but does not get to pass his name to them was first introduced. Note neither Albert nor Geoffrey were humiliated in this way and I suspect the addition of "Lorraine" was just to humor Francis (who also did get to be Holy Roman Emperor) without switching entirely to a "Lorraine" line and forgetting altogether about the "Habsburg" which in fact was the regular custom, and which may seem preposterous to us now given the imbalance of power, but was never considered so in the case of Albert even though he was from an entirely inconsequential family from an entirely inconsequential German statelet. I know William of Orange said he would refuse such a position and demanded that he and Mary be joint sovereign hence "William and Mary". 178.51.16.158 (talk) 10:29, 24 December 2024 (UTC)
- In the old style of dynastic reckoning, Elizabeth II would have been transitional from Saxe-Coburg to Glucksberg, and even under the current UK rules, descendants of Prince Philip (and only those descendants) who need surnames use Mountbatten-Windsor. -- AnonMoos (talk) 14:06, 24 December 2024 (UTC)
December 25
[edit]Death Row commutations by Biden
[edit]Biden commuted nearly all of the Federal Death Row sentences a few days ago. Now, what’s the deal with the Military Death Row inmates? Are they considered "federal" and under the purview of Biden? Or, if not, what’s the distinction? Thanks. 32.209.69.24 (talk) 02:29, 25 December 2024 (UTC)
Coca Romano's portraits of Ferdinand and Marie of Romania
[edit]I am trying to work out when Coca Romano's coronation portraits of Ferdinand and Marie of Romania were actually completed and unveiled. This is with an eye to possibly uploading a photo of them to this wiki: they are certainly still in copyright in Romania (Romano lived until 1983), but probably not in the U.S. because of publication date.
The coronation took place in 1922 at Alba Iulia. The portraits show Ferdinand and Marie in their full regalia that they wore at the coronation. They appear to have been based on photographs taken at the coronation, so they must have been completed after the event, not before.
A few pieces of information I have: there is no date on the canvasses. The pieces are in the collection of the Brukenthal National Museum in Sibiu (inventory numbers 2503 for the picture of Marie and 2504 for Ferdinand) [Reference for undated and for inventory numbers: [ [14], p. 36-37], and were on display this year at Art Safari in Bucharest, which is where I photographed them. If they were published (always a tricky concept for a painting, but I'm sure they were rapidly and widely reproduced) no later than 1928, or in a few days 1929, we can upload my photo in this wiki. - Jmabel | Talk 04:58, 25 December 2024 (UTC)
(I've uploaded the image to Flickr, if anyone wants a look: https://www.flickr.com/photos/jmabel/54225746973/). - Jmabel | Talk 05:25, 25 December 2024 (UTC)