Humanities desk
< May 18	<< Apr \| May \| Jun >>	May 20 >

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.

May 19[edit]

Who was the Page to whom John Morley spoke of Woodrow Wilson?[edit]

In our article on John Morley we read that he told J. H. Morgan "I'm sick of Wilson... He hailed the Russian Revolution six months ago as the new Golden Age, and I said to Page, 'What does he know of Russia?' to which Page replied, 'Nothing'. As for his talk about a union of hearts after the war, the world is not made like that." The quotation is referenced to J. H. Morgan, John, Viscount Morley. An Appreciation and Some Reminiscences (London: John Murray, 1925), p. 92. DuncanHill (talk) 13:05, 19 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I think it must be Walter Hines Page, the American Ambassador to Britain. He's the only Page mentioned in the indices of Lloyd George's War Memoirs and Churchill's The World Crisis. DuncanHill (talk) 00:07, 21 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Harry's wedding giggles[edit]

At the Harry and Meghan wedding, during the oath-taking part, why there were giggles after each of them replied "I will" to Archbishop's questions? The guests giggled both after Harry's and Meghan's reply. Did they say it wrong or something else? Thanks. 212.180.235.46 (talk) 14:43, 19 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

It is customary for women there to giggle in joyful moments. 2600:1004:B154:6625:77EB:C50C:F78B:D57E (talk) 14:57, 19 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The crowds outside cheered when each of them said "I will" and everyone could hear them inside and thought it was amusing. Adam Bishop (talk) 15:01, 19 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Vomiting in antiquity[edit]

Now we've all heard the vomitorium myth, and we've all heard the following correction. Usually this comes with the corrector insisting that ancient Romans did not intentionally overeat then vomit on purpose. ¶ In Julian's Misopogon, "But in my childhood a strange and senseless delusion came over me and persuaded me to war against my belly, so that I do not allow it to fill itself with a great quantity of food. [C] Thus it has happened to me most rarely of all men to vomit my food. And though I remember having this experience once, after I became Caesar, it was by accident and was not due to over-eating." ¶ Julian's humble-bragging throughout about his traditionalism and austerity, and this bit seems to imply that people (the "new" decadents at least?) were gorging and puking. Are there any other references to recreational indulgence and puking in the ancient sources, esp. earlier than this 4th C. one? Temerarius (talk) 16:28, 19 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

There are some mentions in classical literature. Seneca writes about people who vomit so they can eat, then eat until they vomit ("vomunt ut edant, edunt ut vomant", in his Letter to Helvia). In his Moral Epistles he also mentions slaves whose job was clean the floor of drunken vomit. Seneca is a pearl-clutching moralist and he's probably not totally reliable about what Roman people actually did, but he is several hundred years earlier than Julian. Adam Bishop (talk) 17:32, 19 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Some names here: Bulimia nervosa#Before the 20th century. 87.112.145.168 (talk) 17:33, 21 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hippocrates' Aphorisms[edit]

Aphorisms seems almost intentionally obscure at points. Could anyone help me untangle these particularly tough ones?

19. Neither give nor enjoin anything to persons during periodical paroxysms, but abstract from the accustomed allowance before the crisis.
23. The evacuations are to be judged of not by their quantity, but whether they be such as they should be, and how they are borne. And when proper to carry the evacuation to deliquium animi, this also should be done, provided the patient can support it.
59. A true tertian comes to a crisis in seven periods at furthest.
49. To procure the expulsion of the secundines, apply a sternutatory, and shut the nostrils and mouth.
58. Strangury supervenes upon inflammation of the rectum, and of the womb, and strangury supervenes upon suppuration of the kidney, and hiccup upon inflammation of the liver.

Temerarius (talk) 16:41, 19 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

They are not particularly obscure - the meaning are clear, as long as you understand the meanings of the words. You seem to have got hold of a fairly old translation, in which certain less pleasant topics are hidden from the tender sensitivities of the ordinary reader by retaining Latin or medical terms. In other words, they are using terms that doctors would understand, but their patients would not. For example, 49. To ensure that the afterbirth is expelled, put something to make the woman sneeze up her nose, then block her nose and mouth.Once you know what secundines and sternutatory mean, the phrase makes perfect sense (though I wouldn't recommend using it during childbirth). You can work them out with a dictionary. Wymspen (talk) 19:28, 19 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Giovanni Antonio Facchinetti de Nuce birthplace[edit]

Can anyone help find a reliable source saying where it:Giovanni Antonio Facchinetti de Nuce was born/just confirming the obvious that he is Italian? it.wiki says Bologna, which I'm sure is true, but there is no reliable sourcing for it. I need it for a potential featured list I am working on, and despite being halfway decent about finding things on obscure dead Italian clerics, I am coming up blank. The two sources in that article are self-published, so I wouldn't want to use them. Pinging Ealdgyth as well: outside your time and geography, but you have experience with digging up facts on long-dead clerics, so worth asking. Currently all I can find is Catholic-heirarchy and Miranda, both of which are self-published. TonyBallioni (talk) 20:59, 19 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

And found thanks to hints from Ealdgyth. TonyBallioni (talk) 16:15, 20 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Why is Duke so prominent in the titles of most British Princes?[edit]

If all the nobles are called Rank of Place why does only the Crown Prince have Prince of Place as his primary title? Sagittarian Milky Way (talk) 22:08, 19 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Are you asking why Prince William, Duke of Cambridge is not simply "Prince of Cambridge"? ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 23:29, 19 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Yes (or at least Prince of Cambridge, Duke of Somewhere Else). Sagittarian Milky Way (talk) 23:39, 19 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Because he's a Prince of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland. Why settle for Cambridge when you have the whole nation? (btw, Prince is a titular dignity, Duke is a peerage title. And "nobility" is more germaine to continental Europe than the UK). It doesn't make much sense to worry about "why". Things are the way they are because they were so done in history, and not really on the basis of logic. - Nunh-huh 23:47, 19 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Sagittarian_Milky_Way -- Wales is a historical principality (often independent of England before 1282). There has never been any territorial principality of Cambridge, and William is already a prince anyway, so there's no point in creating a Princedom of Cambridge.... AnonMoos (talk) 00:47, 20 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

AnonMoos has it right... It really has to do with land (and thus income). In the Middle Ages, all of the children and grandchildren (and sometimes even great-grandchildren) of a King were styled “Prince Name” (or “Princess Name”)... an example of this is the famous "Prince John" of Robin Hood fame (later to become King John of England).

Simply being styled "Prince Name" (or "Princess Name"), however, could cause problems for chroniclers... because sometimes there would be multiple princes in the family with the same name. So, to tell them apart, the place of their birth would be added on. An example is John of Gaunt (who was so called because he was born in Ghent) ... the "of Gaunt" was added to distinguish him from his uncle Prince John of Eltham, Earl of Cornwall).

The key thing is that the honorific “Prince”/"Princess" did not come with lands attached, and in the middle ages a noble needed land to maintain his/her household. So... when a Prince or Princess came of age, he/she would be granted titles that DID come with land... Duke/Dutchess, Earl/Countess, Baron/Barroness, etc. (For example, John of Gaunt was granted a Dukedom - and became the first Duke of Lancaster.)

things are a little different in modern times... it is still traditional for young princes and princesses to be given a title when they get married. They are still styled "Prince Name"... but with their new title attached (as in Prince William, Duke of Cambridge). Their children (the next generation) are also styled "Prince/Princess Name" ... however since Royals no longer travel around as much (and so there is a likelihood that multiple princes/princesses will be born in the same London hospital) it has become tradition to use their royal parent's senior title to tell them apart (so, the son of the Duke of Cambridge is styled "Prince George of Cambridge, while the daughters of the Duke of York are styled "Princess Beatrice of York" and Princess Eugenie of York).

The one exception to all this is the title “Prince of Wales”. The title “Prince of Wales” pre-existed use by the English royal family... and (more importantly) it came with land (ie income). As AnonMoos notes above, Wales was a separate country... a Principality... and those who claimed to be the rulers of Wales had long called themselves “Prince of Wales”. When Edward I of England conquered Wales, he took over that title (by right of conquest). I suppose that Edward could have claimed that HE was now “Prince of Wales" as well as King of England... but, for political reasons, he instead gave it to his eldest son (the future Edward II). It subsequently became tradition for the title "Prince of Wales" to be granted to the eldest son of all Kings of England. Blueboar (talk) 11:14, 20 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Did preindustrial dukes have the lower ranks of the barony, viscounty etc. that their main mansion or castle was in? Did everyone pay rent to the level above them and receive it from the level below (possibly skipping the levels above commoner and duke?)? Interestingly the world has at least one Kings County, Queens County, King and Queen County, Prince County, Dukes County, and Dutchess County but no Princess County (only Princess X County). The one time a proliferous namer loved this generic eponymous style (4 out of 12) the queen was infertile so no princesses. (the lone Duchess County is also spelled archaically) Sagittarian Milky Way (talk) 17:26, 20 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Yes... sort of... see our article on Fudalism for more. Most Royal Princes were given several lesser titles as well as a Dukedom... land equaled wealth, and power... so Members of the Royal family were given lots of land. This kept the wealth and power in the family (which worked as long as the family did not squabble over who had the best claim to be the next King.) Blueboar (talk) 18:05, 20 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

No, SMW. The spelling with the "t" is the archaic version. Meghan M. is now the Duchess of Sussex, not the Dutchess of Sussex. -- Jack of Oz ^{[pleasantries]} 22:09, 20 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

But Duchess County doesn't exist and redirects to the only Dutchess County in the world (probably) Sagittarian Milky Way (talk) 22:26, 20 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Although of the royal duchies, only the Duchy of Lancaster (the Queen) and the Duchy of Cornwall (Prince Charles) bestow any income today. Alansplodge (talk) 19:16, 20 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note the difference between a duchy and a dukedom. -- Jack of Oz ^{[pleasantries]} 22:09, 20 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Quite right, mea culpa. Alansplodge (talk) 12:26, 22 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Noblesse oblige, sine qua non, habeus corpus and in vino veritas to you. -- Jack of Oz ^{[pleasantries]} 22:41, 23 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]