Humanities desk
< May 9	<< Apr \| May \| Jun >>	Current desk >

Welcome to the Wikipedia Humanities Reference Desk Archives
The page you are currently viewing is a transcluded 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 10

German military item

What is this stick that Gerd von Rundstedt is holding in his right hand? Apparently the same stick of Keitel is lying on the table. I thought it's Marshal's baton, but I'm not sure. 212.180.235.46 (talk) 15:22, 10 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

This similar one is described as WW2 German Fieldmarshall Interimstab Baton. It mentions that the item shown (reproduction) represents one of two batons presented, being the cheaper "interim" one for daily use, representing the more costly ceremonial baton, which presumably is seen at the signing. 136.56.52.157 (talk) 17:20, 10 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Baton (military) is the article. It is the insignia of a field marshal in many countries, including the UK, although the Germans were most particular about carrying them about. Alansplodge (talk) 18:06, 10 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

See also: Marotte? –Preceding uncalled-for satire added by 136.56.52.157 (talk) 18:31, 10 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Ah, that's why it's somewhat different, being a cheaper version. 212.180.235.46 (talk) 18:48, 10 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Every French soldier has one in his knapsack. DuncanHill (talk) 14:20, 11 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I have added a short note to Baton (military)#1935–1945 using this reference. Alansplodge (talk) 12:06, 16 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Coronation of the British Monarch

The coronation of the monarch is meant to be the installation of a protestant king or queen. The accession declaration required the king to declare that he is a faithful protestant. Yet much of the coronation ceremony contained Catholic elements - the anointing, the enrobing of the sovereign in golden priestly garments, and the taking of communion. Why is a protestant ceremony infused with Roman Catholic components. I understand that historical continuity is essential for the ceremony but it does seem paradoxical. --Andrew 18:39, 10 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Not all forms of Protestantism are the same. The Anglican church practices communion for example. Historically, the church has often been seen as divided between high church Anglicans who see ritual, priestly authority etc (closely mirroring Catholicism) as core to their faith, and low church Anglicans who's attitude to such matters is more closely aligned with other Protestant faiths. AndyTheGrump (talk) 18:52, 10 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The historical context for this is the Elizabethan Religious Settlement at the end of the 16th-century, in which the Church of England and the Parliament of England were able to agree on a compromise so that while Protestant principles were broadly adhered to, many Catholic traditions could still be observed by those who wished. This brought an end to the Reformation in England, although the issues would surface again in the next century, leading to the English Civil War and the Glorious Revolution. Interestingly, the liturgy for the coronation of a British monarch barely altered during and after the Reformation, apart from being translated from Latin into English. The exception was the coronation oath, the text of which was decided by Parliament, and although it has now been toned down a bit, retains a strong emphasis on Protestantism and can't be altered without the consent of our political masters at Westminster. Alansplodge (talk) 20:03, 10 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

See also the article High church. --Lambiam 20:28, 10 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Although the present Archbishop, Justin Welby belongs to the Evangelical or "low church" wing of the Church of England. Like everything to do with British society, it ain't simple. Alansplodge (talk) 23:28, 10 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Remember that the Bible talks of the Kings of Israel being anointed… so that part (at least) is taken from traditions that pre-date even Roman Catholicism. Blueboar (talk) 00:25, 11 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I'm slightly puzzled by the characterisation of taking Communion as Roman Catholic. DuncanHill (talk) 00:41, 11 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Just I’ve never been in a CoE church that’s ever offered anybody bread and wine before. Although I suppose Westminster Abbey is a royal peculiar —Andrew 09:55, 11 May 2023 (UTC)s[reply]

Personal experience is not universal. Wikipedia has an article titled Anglican eucharistic theology, which may be useful for you to learn more about practices you may have not personally witnessed before. --Jayron 32 11:58, 11 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

(edit conflict) Looking at the parish church where I used to ring, it is a united benefice with two parishes. Communion is held on alternate Sundays between the two churches with simple Morning Worship on Sundays when the other church is having a communion service. Next I looked at the local cathedral: Sunday - communion 8am and 10:30, Monday, Tuesday, Wednesday - communion at 8am, Thursday 8am and 1pm, Friday 8am, Saturday 9am. I then looked at the local Methodist church, communion at 10:30 next Sunday and it looks like monthly. What was unusual about the Coronation service was that only the ministers and Their Majesties were offered communion, in a normal service all are offered both the bread and the wine (or wafers, or non-alcoholic substitute). Remember that in Luke 22:19–20 Jesus is recorded as instructing his followers to repeat elements of the Last Supper in remembrance of him. Anyone who accepts the Gospels will follow this in some measure. Martin of Sheffield (talk) 12:01, 11 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

In what context were you in a CofE church and not offered the Eucharist? If you just wandered in to e.g. look at the architecture you wouldn't just be offered bread and wine (unless perhaps if there was a church fete on), but the Eucharist is a standard part of many services. Iapetus (talk) 12:25, 11 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

There are some CofE parishes churches that regularly have Morning Prayer (Anglican) on a Sunday morning and Eucharist only once a month. This was common 50 years ago but in my experience (certainly in the two parishes I have been involved in recently) it's now more usual to have a weekly Eucharist as the main service. Alansplodge (talk) 12:36, 11 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

(edit conflict) I've done quite a lot of work on the various coronation articles and as far as I can tell, Communion was only ever taken by the officiants and the monarch and consort. The exceptions were Elizabeth I who fudged the issue (nobody knows whether she did or didn't take Communion) and James II who had that bit written-out because he was a Catholic. Imagine how long it would take to distribute Communion to the 8,000 at the 1953 coronation? Some earlier coronations had even larger congregations, taking some hours to get them all seated in temporary galleries. George III's coronation service lasted six hours, without having to get everybody up to the altar and back again. Alansplodge (talk) 12:36, 11 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Well, yes. "What was unusual about the Coronation service ... in a normal service ...", but then who regards a coronation service as "normal". The last one hereabouts was 70 years ago! Martin of Sheffield (talk) 14:02, 11 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Most Christian denominations practice Communion, though the label, the ritual and the frequency vary. There are exceptions, such as those listed at Eucharist § Non-observing denominations. The Pentecostal church I grew up attending had Communion every week, and also practised anointing of the sick with oil. No robes, though (but the minister wore a clerical collar for weddings). -- Verbarson ^talk_edits 19:29, 11 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The fact that a coronation does not happen very often does not make it "abnormal". ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 00:39, 12 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I think "extraordinary" is a better fit. Alansplodge (talk) 16:20, 12 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Do Northeast Indians have Chinese and Nepalese ancestry?

A lot of Northeast Indians look like East Asians and the North East Region is close to China and Nepal. So are Northeast Indians of Chinese and Nepalese descent?95.144.204.68 (talk) 20:36, 10 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Not in the sense that they would be migrants from modern-day nation states of China and Nepal. Many, but not all, of the peoples of North-East India speak Sino-Tibetan languages and thus have shared ancestry with many nationalities and ethnic groups in China, Thailand, Myanmar, etc.. There are different hypothesis about where the Sino-Tibetan urheimat would be located, but the dispersing of Sino-Tibetan languages is at least several thousands of years back. --Soman (talk) 20:45, 10 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]