Wikipedia:Reference desk/Archives/Humanities/2012 March 27

Welcome to the Wikipedia Humanities Reference Desk Archives
The page you are currently viewing is an archive page. While you can leave answers for any questions shown below, please ask new questions on one of the current reference desk pages.

March 27

Banquet of Chestnuts

During the Banquet of Chestnuts, why were chestnuts spread on the floor? What's the point of having everyone pick them up? You want to throw a party? Okay, I get that. You like chestnuts, I can get that too. But why put them on the floor for people to pick up? It seems strange to say the least. Dismas|^(talk) 09:07, 27 March 2012 (UTC)

So they could crawl around naked and pick them up, and grope each other, etc. I suppose it would be like playing a game of naked Twister. Of course, it probably didn't happen anyway. Adam Bishop (talk) 10:14, 27 March 2012 (UTC)

Why haven't most Commonwealth realms abolish the death penalty if the UK has?

Yes I'm completely aware of the fact that Commonwealth realms, like Canada, Australia, New Zealand and the Solomon Islands are not "colonies" of the United Kingdom. They are just independent nations (but former British colonies) that decided to keep the queen and the royal family but call them their own (like Queen Elizabeth II is Queen of Australia, Queen of Canada, Queen of Barbados etc.). But I noticed that, most of them (except Canada, Australia, New Zealand, the Solomon Islands and Tuvalu) have kept the death penalty (although most, except for Saint Kitts and Nevis have not used it in a long time). I know that their governments are independent, and that they are considered independent countries where the Queen is virtually powerless with only a Governor-General representing her, but why haven't they followed the example of their colonizer, of the country where their Queen resides? Don't make the excuse that not all former colonies abolish the death penalty if their original colonizer abolishes it (like the U.S. retains the death penalty although the U.K. has abolished it.), because they do not share the same head of state. Look at Andorra. One of its Co-Princes is the President of France, but both France and Andorra have abolished capital punishment, even if only the former is part of the EU. Narutolovehinata5 ^tccsdnew 10:24, 27 March 2012 (UTC)

Why? Local political culture I imagine. Past connections would have become pretty irrelevant in most cases. HiLo48 (talk) 10:36, 27 March 2012 (UTC)

I think you've given the answer yourself: they're independent states. The laws of Australia and New Zealand, for example, are based on those of England and Wales and were once almost identical. As time has gone on, the bodies of law have diverged, as is natural. As for the Andorra/France example: both have ratified Protocol 13 of the European Convention on Human Rights, which abolishes the death penalty. It's got nothing to do with the EU.  Omg †  osh  10:54, 27 March 2012 (UTC)

The shared head of state - Elizabeth II - has no control over the politics or judiciary of any of the states of which she is the titular head. As has been said, she accepts the advice of those in each state, and they will come to different views. Ghmyrtle (talk) 13:00, 27 March 2012 (UTC)

Australians, for example, had to abolish the death penalty because the government kept killing people. In other common law countries, if the government isn't actually killing people, why spend the effort to abolish a law that is not implemented? Fifelfoo (talk) 00:23, 28 March 2012 (UTC)

Comment on "... kept killing people": The last executions to be held in Australia, by state, were: 1967 (Victoria), 1964 (SA and WA), 1952 (NT), 1946 (Tasmania), 1940 (NSW), 1913 (Qld). See Capital punishment in Australia. -- Jack of Oz ^{[your turn]} 21:58, 28 March 2012 (UTC)

Longest serving pope

In regards to a question asked here, who is the longest serving pope NOT just limited to the Roman church. (im asking on their behalf)Lihaas (talk) 11:04, 27 March 2012 (UTC)

According to our Pope article, the longest serving Roman Pope was Pius XI, at 31 years, 7 months and 23 days.

No, no! It was Pope Pius IX. -- Jack of Oz ^{[your turn]} 19:15, 27 March 2012 (UTC)

True. That was a typo on my part. AlexTiefling (talk) 19:17, 27 March 2012 (UTC)

Pope Cyril V of Alexandria was Coptic Pope for 52 years and 9 months.

We have a List of Greek Orthodox Patriarchs of Alexandria - can someone figure out from that who held that title longest?

Antipope Benedict XIII of Avignon pretended to the Roman Pontificate for 28 years, 7 months and 25 days.

Gregory XVII of the Apostles of Infinite Love pretended to the papacy for about 43 years.

On the basis of this, it appears that unless there's a truly remarkable record among the Greek Orthodox Patriarchs of Alexandria, Cyril V is the longest-serving Pope ever, and the only one to serve more than half a century. AlexTiefling (talk) 12:07, 27 March 2012 (UTC)

Well, here is something "truly remarkable". Apparently, Patriarch Joachim of Alexandria served as Greek Patriarch of Alexandria between 1486 and 1567. According to this source, the official web site of Greek Orthodox Patriarchate of Alexandria and All Africa, he was elected Patriarch of Alexandria when he was 38, and died at the age of 119. More details here. Ghmyrtle (talk) 12:48, 27 March 2012 (UTC)

Thanks! That's an outstanding record, and I think that means we've now identified the longest-serving Popes of every tradition (except for a few like the Palmarian Catholic Church who have had no exceptionally long-serving leaders). AlexTiefling (talk) 13:06, 27 March 2012 (UTC)

Genres of writing

how does the purpose of writing direct genres? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 152.106.99.10 (talk) 11:08, 27 March 2012 (UTC)

I'd take a reception theory approach here. Most writing, with a few specific exceptions in outsider art contexts, has an expected audience. The form of the writing is crafted in relation to the perceived expectations of the audience - to meet them, challenge them, subvert them, exploit them, and so on.

So for example, if you are writing an essay or assignment, your principal audience is your tutor. The tutor's expectation will be that you produce an original work based on your own understanding of the subject, presumably related to what your tutor and their colleagues have lately been teaching you. If, instead, you produce something which has demonstrably been cribbed from the internet, you have not met your audience's expectations. It is unlikely that your audience will regard this as an innovative subversion or internal critique of the genre; it is much more likely that you will be seen to have failed to fit within the existing idea of the essay genre, and instead have produced a work of plagiarism - which may reasonably be viewed as a intrinsically failed genre, much like a shallow parody. AlexTiefling (talk) 11:32, 27 March 2012 (UTC)

Did a lot of people who had the same surname as but were unrelated to Adolf Hilter change their names after WW II?

Did a lot of people who had the same surname as but were unrelated to Adolf Hilter change their names after WW II? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.49.12.200 (talk) 11:53, 27 March 2012 (UTC)

Yes. The subject has been discussed before at the reference desk, see Wikipedia:Reference_desk/Archives/Humanities/2010_August_28#Hitler_as_a_Surname. (see also Wikipedia:Reference_desk/Archives/Humanities/2010_June_6#Hitler_-_Not_a_Typical_German_Surmame.3F and Wikipedia:Reference_desk/Archives/Humanities/2011_July_15#2_part_question_about_ADOLF_HITLER). --Soman (talk) 13:25, 27 March 2012 (UTC)

Others positively embraced it.--Shantavira|^{feed me} 13:52, 27 March 2012 (UTC)

There is also Adolf Lu Hitler Marak. --Soman (talk) 13:56, 27 March 2012 (UTC)

India is a strange country. Indians love the names of dictators. There is M. K. Stalin. Hitler is viewed positively in India. --SupernovaExplosion ^Talk 16:09, 27 March 2012 (UTC)

In a choice betwen Stalin and Dikshit, I'm really not sure which way I'd go. -- Jack of Oz ^{[your turn]} 19:13, 27 March 2012 (UTC)

LOL, the "c" is missing! --SupernovaExplosion ^Talk 05:51, 28 March 2012 (UTC)

Quit Stalin: make a choice. Clarityfiend (talk) 21:48, 27 March 2012 (UTC)

India is full of noble names, like Anil Gupta. StuRat (talk) 21:29, 28 March 2012 (UTC)

Chinese time zone

I know that China is just one single time zone, but how does this work practically? It's a big country that should have 3-4 of them if the followed the way other large countries do it. In other words, is sunrise and sunset in the far west of the country really that early? I can't imagine them behaving in daily life with a 2 pm sunset in the winter. But maybe they do... that's why I'm asking, I guess. Mingmingla (talk) 14:32, 27 March 2012 (UTC)

China's time zone is the "natural" time zone for Beijing and eastern China. It is maybe a bit "early" for places in the far northeast, but no more than one hour early. So in northeastern China, if the region had its own time zone, the winter sun might set at 4:00. Since it is on the Beijing time zone, it sets at 3:00. The real distortion is in western China, whose natural time zone is 2 to 3 hours earlier than Beijing's. If farthest west China had its own time zone, the winter sun might set at 4:30 (since it is farther south than northeast China). However, it actually sets at 7:30. In the same region, the winter sun doesn't rise until after 10:00 a.m., and the summer sun sets close to midnight. My understanding is that, in western China, while government offices mostly adhere to standard (Beijing) time, many local businesses operate on a more natural schedule, opening and closing several hours later than their counterparts in eastern China. Marco polo (talk) 14:56, 27 March 2012 (UTC)

In Xinjiang, it can be a political issue, with unofficial Uighur time opposed to official government time... AnonMoos (talk) 15:56, 27 March 2012 (UTC)

See Time in China. I don't think there's a 2 pm sunset. Roughly speaking, the upper culmination would be about 11 am in Eastern China and about 3 pm in Western China. Oda Mari (talk) 16:09, 27 March 2012 (UTC)

I don't follow that last sentence. What is the "upper culmination" ? StuRat (talk) 16:43, 27 March 2012 (UTC)

Culmination (i.e., astronomical noon). Deor (talk) 16:55, 27 March 2012 (UTC)

I see, so just an overly complex way of saying "when the Sun is highest". StuRat (talk) 21:37, 27 March 2012 (UTC)

Which has more syllables? "The untrained man reads a paper on natural science and thinks: ‘Now why couldn’t he explain this in simple language.' He can't seem to realize that what he tried to read was the simplest possible language – for that subject matter. In fact, a great deal of natural philosophy is simply a process of linguistic simplification – an effort to invent languages in which half a page of equations can express an idea which could not be stated in less than a thousand pages of so-called ‘simple’ language." —Thon Taddeo in A Canticle for Leibowitz —Tamfang (talk) 05:49, 9 April 2012 (UTC)

Central European Time is quite similar in that it is commonly used both in Western Europe and Central Europe even though it would only seem "natural" in Central Europe. In the westernmost region of Europe that follows Central European Time together with daylight saving time, which is Galicia (Spain), solar noon may not occur until 2:30 PM or even later (here is an example for the city of A Coruña). Sabbut (talk) 08:48, 28 March 2012 (UTC)

In Urumqi, Xinjiang in far western China, people go to bed at say 1:00 AM (official clock time and Beijing time) which is a true local time of 11:00 PM, then get up at say 9:00AM clock time which is a true local time of 7:00AM; and their work times begin and end two hours later by the clock than they would in Beijing. So they actually do things by true time even while keeping clocks set at Beijing time (though I think that some ethnic Uighurs (I'm not sure how many) keep their clocks set to true time). Duoduoduo (talk) 19:47, 28 March 2012 (UTC)

american indian

how do i find out if i am an american indain or not?

Please sign you post. See WP:SIGN. --SupernovaExplosion ^Talk 16:15, 27 March 2012 (UTC)

I can think of a few methods:

1) Ask your parents, grandparents, etc. They would usually know and usually be truthful. This may not work if you are the child in a closed adoption, however.

2) Have your genealogy done, or do it yourself. This involves scanning public records for birth certificates, death certificates, marriage licenses, etc.

3) Submit a genetic sample of yourself to a lab which can determine if you contain any markers common in native Americans. However, since native Americans are descendants of Asians, it may not be possible to distinguish between the two. StuRat (talk) 16:38, 27 March 2012 (UTC)

I'd strongly endorse the genealogy option. If you have a good, reliable idea of who your ancestors were back to 1940, you can subscribe to any of several genealogy websites and start looking up birth and marriage records, and (in particular) the US Census, which has been released, digitised, and transcribed down to 1940. (I think the actual release takes place shortly.) Unless your family's names are highly generic (Joe Smith, etc) you should be able to go back several more generations on the strength of such data. AlexTiefling (talk) 16:45, 27 March 2012 (UTC)

Ancestry.com is supposed to have the 1940 census data available starting this Monday, the 2nd, and I would guess that most everyone else will have it then too. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 00:15, 28 March 2012 (UTC)

Your first step is to be clear about what you mean be "American Indian". Do you want to know if you have any American Indian ancestors (which is quite likely as long as your family has been in the US for several generations)? Or if you have exclusively American Indian ancestors (which is very unlikely)? Or that you have a particularly percentage American Indian ancestors? --Tango (talk) 23:21, 27 March 2012 (UTC)

It can be hard to be sure in many cases, if there isn't clear genealogical evidence—such as an ancestor officially enrolled as tribal member. In the US it isn't too uncommon for a family to have old stories claiming some Native American ancestry but no strong documentation proving it. A lot of older records have been lost, making it hard to be sure one way or another—even assuming marriages with Native Americans long ago were documented at all. Also, as I understand there are numerous examples of family stories claiming Native American ancestry in order to explain the darker skin of mixed African American ancestry or perhaps some other ethnicity like Turkish. It was (and probably still is) more respectable to claim Cherokee ancestry, say, than African. My own extended family has several stories claiming Cherokee ancestry (sometimes said to be a "Cherokee princess"), but despite the effort of many people nothing has been proven. Most of the stories would place the connection in the late 18th century and family records from that era simply do not exist. Lots of archives were destroyed during the Civil War. Pfly (talk) 02:44, 28 March 2012 (UTC)

My family has a story like this (though the family legend doesn't claim that the Cherokee ancestor was any kind of noble). I have searched genealogical records and could not find the supposed ancestor. That said, it can be impossible to trace female ancestors using just Census records, since they generally don't record maiden names. A Native American woman could have married into the family without leaving much trace in the records of her ancestry. Marco polo (talk) 15:10, 28 March 2012 (UTC)

Yea, from what I understand the term "Cherokee princess" is a hint that the story may be fabricated or at least questionable. The term is not that uncommon despite being historically inaccurate (at best). I thought there might have been a Wikipedia page about it, but it appears not. In my case the circumstantial evidence that does exist suggests some unscrupulous folks might have claimed Cherokee blood in an attempt to swindle the Cherokee out of some land in Oklahoma, sad to say. A second claimed Cherokee link seems to be largely lost in the unrecorded history of female ancestry lines. Pfly (talk) 04:13, 29 March 2012 (UTC)

This is a "Who is a Jew?" question. Try to enrol with a tribe, or be recognised culturally by people who affirm that they're culturally native american. If you're rejected, you probably won't have access to the legal or cultural benefits (and hindrances) of being native american. Fifelfoo (talk) 02:50, 29 March 2012 (UTC)

I don't think the above is quite correct. Fifelfoo says "This is a "Who is a Jew?" question" but one can convert to Judaism but one cannot convert to being a Native American. Bus stop (talk) 11:17, 1 April 2012 (UTC)

Where can I find the name of the author of an antique art print?

I have an antique art print. Framed under glass. I have searched everywhere I know of to find the author of the print. There is no signature and no identifying information. I did a reverse image search and ended up on one of your pages. It was an article about a band named Trapeze. They produced an album in 1970 by the same name. They used a copy of the print I own as the cover image on the album. Here is a link to your article: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trapeze_%281970_album%29

I have no problem with copyrights or with anybody using this image. All I want to do is find out who the author of the print was and when it was done. I am attaching a link to the photo of my copy of the print so you can tell it is the same print. Your help will be appreciated.

Antique Print Identification

Thank you, Philip DeLoach - PhiliP63 (talk) 18:10, 27 March 2012 (UTC)

Excellent question ;) Next lead: the original is in the collection of the Victoria and Albert Museum according to the sleeve notes of the album - cf. http://bordeldorock.blogspot.co.uk/2011/09/trapeze-trapeze-1970.html image 3. Sadly no name. If we can't do better, check out http://www.vam.ac.uk/content/articles/w/word-and-image-department/ for links to the enquiry desks of the Word and-Image-department of the V&A. They might field an identification query: "Staff are also responsible for providing information about our collections and services through the telephone, letter and email enquiry services and website content". --Tagishsimon (talk) 18:25, 27 March 2012 (UTC)

Isn't it The Storm by Pierre Auguste Cot? ---Sluzzelin talk 18:31, 27 March 2012 (UTC)

A print based on; well done. I think the engraver got a bit fanciful, or else our The Storm is cropped. But that's an excellent lead for a V&A enquiry: what prints of The Storm have you in your collection? --Tagishsimon (talk) 18:37, 27 March 2012 (UTC)

Extended discussion here alleges there were three versions of the original. Our article at The Storm (painting) is silent on this question. --Tagishsimon (talk) 18:56, 27 March 2012 (UTC)

One comment from the extended discussion talks of a print marked "By Cot property of the Metropolitan Museum of Art gravure Anderson & Lamb Co, NY Littig & Co. bklyn NY". What little we have on Gravure printing might fill in some of the details of the slightly bumpy surface you talk about on your redbubble page. As you're a USian, it's possible that yours is by Anderson & Lamb and or Littig. --Tagishsimon (talk) 19:05, 27 March 2012 (UTC)

Birmingham Bangla arab somali iranian turk afghani

which part of Birmingham, U.K. does Bangladeshis mostly live in? which part of Birmingham, U.K. does Arabs mostly live in? which part of Birmingham, U.K. does Somalis mostly live in? which part of Birmingham, U.K. does Iranians mostly live in? which part of Birmingham, U.K. does Turks mostly live in? which part of Birmingham, U.K. does Afghanis mostly live in? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.31.16.132 (talk) 19:43, 27 March 2012 (UTC)

I doubt that a majority of any of those nationalities lives in any one district of Birmingham. There may be concentrations of each in certain districts, but probably not a majority in any one district. Another issue is that, apart from Bangladeshi, the Office for National Statistics does not distinguish any of these national groups in official data. See Classification of ethnicity in the United Kingdom. Instead, they would be lumped together as "Other Asian" or perhaps (in the case of some Arabs) "African". If you are very interested in this question, you might spend some time on this site, which lists mosques in Birmingham by district. If you click on the "Read More" button for each mosque, you will find information on the national background of the management (and therefore probably the congregation) of many of these mosques. Mosques are likely to be located in districts where their congregants live. Marco polo (talk) 20:05, 27 March 2012 (UTC)

There are quite well defined districts in Birmingham (suburbs) where ethnic minorities tend to congregate: Lozells, Handsworth, Erdington, Aston, Ladywood, Sparkhill, Small Heath for examples. I'm not sure that different nationalities stay in a particular place, however. Some of the primary schools are multilingual, and I'm talking 70+ different languages spoken by the children who attend. I've tried to find a news story I remember from last year about this with no success. --TammyMoet (talk) 20:21, 27 March 2012 (UTC)

(e/c)You will find some of your questions answered in Demography of Birmingham.--Shantavira|^{feed me} 20:25, 27 March 2012 (UTC)

(Edit conflict) We have an article, Demography of Birmingham, which might be useful, though it only talks about ethnicities not nationalities. The wards of Birmingham with the largest proportions of Bangladeshis are Aston and Lozells and East Handsworth, according to the data on this site, though there are Bangladeshis living all across Birmingham and the West Midlands. Apparently Sparkbrook has a large Somali community too. Smurrayinchester 20:45, 27 March 2012 (UTC)

Why'd rank-and-file soldiers in the Syrian army attack fellow Sunnis?

What does it matter that the upper echelons are Alawites? 66.108.223.179 (talk) 21:36, 27 March 2012 (UTC)

Because they're likely to get shot for disobeying their officers. Besides, being of the same sect is no guarantee of protection against mayhem from your co-religionists. Clarityfiend (talk) 21:45, 27 March 2012 (UTC)

Probably some of those who had the strongest consciously Sunni self-identities or were bothered by taking orders from Alawites decided not to join the army in the first place. However, there have been a number of defections from the Syrian army (and also massacres of attempted defectors)... AnonMoos (talk) 02:25, 28 March 2012 (UTC)

Tribal identity is often more powerful than religious identity. StuRat (talk) 03:00, 28 March 2012 (UTC)

The question is loaded. Not all Syrian soldiers chose to commit atrocities. Some chose to desert or even join the resistance. You are basically asking "Why do the soldiers who choose to stay and attack fellow Sunnis choose to attack fellow Sunnis?"Anonymous.translator (talk) 05:01, 28 March 2012 (UTC)

It's not a loaded question since they didn't say "all", so that's exactly what they are asking, yes. StuRat (talk) 05:47, 28 March 2012 (UTC)

From their point of view, they are killing rebels, who have attacked their fellow soldiers and occupied their cities. I am unfamiliar with how Syrian soldiers are trained, but I would imagine they are taught to believe the bond of being in the armed forces to be as strong or stronger than tribal identities. Please do not assume they share the same worldview as Western newspapers. --Wehwalt (talk) 10:15, 28 March 2012 (UTC)

Why do Christian police officers in the United States kill fellow Christians? The answer is the same: they think they're doing their job. --140.180.39.146 (talk) 15:46, 28 March 2012 (UTC)

Are you suggesting that Christians have no qualms about killing non-Christians but draw the line at killing fellow Christians? -- Jack of Oz ^{[your turn]} 09:34, 29 March 2012 (UTC)

I'm suggesting that Christian police officers do kill fellow Christians, nothing more or less. This is relevant because the OP is asking why Sunni military officers would kill fellow Sunnis, and I was giving an analogy that is presumably more relevant. Would you like to dispute my claim? --140.180.39.146 (talk) 00:58, 30 March 2012 (UTC)

"He who lives by the sword shall die by the sword." Anyone willing to perpetrate violence on another person cannot seriously consider himself a follower of Christ. Pais (talk) 14:23, 29 March 2012 (UTC)

If you're claiming that police officers can't be Christians because they don't have the right to use violence to restrain criminals, that's an extreme minority viewpoint that has no relevance to this question. --140.180.39.146 (talk) 00:58, 30 March 2012 (UTC)

I always like to distinguish between true Christians, which are rare, and "Christians" (I use air quotes when saying that term). "Christians" are Christian in name only, but actually largely believe in Old Testament values, like killing your enemies, valuing wealth above poverty, the dominance of men over women, and intolerance towards anyone different (religion, nationality, sexuality, etc.). And some even seem to long for a return of another cherished Old Testament value, slavery (although usually a more subtle form of economic slavery). StuRat (talk) 17:27, 29 March 2012 (UTC)

I think you're hanging around the wrong folks, Stu. How's that application for migration to Canada going?  :) -- Jack of Oz ^{[your turn]} 18:33, 29 March 2012 (UTC)

I'm working on a method of tying myself to a flock of Canada Geese, so when they fly back north to Canada, they will take me with them. :-) StuRat (talk) 03:42, 30 March 2012 (UTC)

Cheapskate. -- Jack of Oz ^{[your turn]} 09:48, 30 March 2012 (UTC)

No true Scotsman. 66.108.223.179 (talk) 13:51, 31 March 2012 (UTC)

Found a good reason. The Saudis and other countries have now decided to pay rebel fighters. They hope to thereby encourage others to defect. 66.108.223.179 (talk) 17:10, 1 April 2012 (UTC)