Wikipedia:Reference desk/Archives/Humanities/2008 June 22

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.

June 22

Wanted: Sword identification

I'm looking for information on a sword I've seen in a couple of fictional contexts. It's got a blade about three feet long, but instead of tapering to a point, the tip of the blade is a crescent about 50% wider than the body of the blade. I've seen it as the Greatsword in the video game Fable, and as a couple of the swords in the Nausicaä of the Valley of the Wind manga. Is this an actual sword type, or are these drawing from a common fictional inspiration? --67.185.172.158 (talk) 01:27, 22 June 2008 (UTC)

There are three here[1], more here.[2] It's called a cutlass or scimitar, even a form of katana – more recognisable as a pirate sword, but when I look at the articles, it's more of a theatrical or artist's impression by comparison. Julia Rossi (talk) 09:24, 22 June 2008 (UTC)

I don't think that's correct. I'm not familiar with the Nausicaä blade, but the Greatsword in Fable is not a cutlass. Cutlasses and scimitars do indeed get wider toward the tip, but they're curved blades with a single, very distinct, cutting edge. The greatswords in Fable are straight, appear to be double-edged, and have a... er, swollen tip. That is, the edges are straight and parallel, then briefly widen and then form a flat "tip" that's perpendicular to the edges. In outline, it looks almost like a column with a Doric capital. Here is a (small) picture. I think they're entirely fictional; I've never seen anything quite like it and it would have some real limitations as a practical weapon - not only would they be insanely heavy, the knobbed tip would defeat the purpose of having the "blade" - you'd never cut anything because the tip would get in the way. Matt Deres (talk) 13:43, 22 June 2008 (UTC)

Matt's right, except that having a weighted tip on a sword could have a specific function. It would negate the use of the sword's point, but would put a lot of force behind it when swung, such that the cutting edge could better penetrate through armor. I believe there is a sword or polearm that was designed in this way, but I can't remember the name right now. I'll try and confirm if I can dig it up among my books. Legianon (talk) 00:25, 29 June 2008 (UTC)

a citizen kills a diplomat

What if a resident of a host nation kills a diplomats? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.64.128.65 (talk) 01:30, 22 June 2008 (UTC)

Nothing happens due to diplomatic immunity. This is not meant as legal advise. Kills diplomats at your own risk. GoingOnTracks (talk) 02:07, 22 June 2008 (UTC)

I beg your pardon, GoingOnTracks? In a sense, you always "kill at your own risk", but I know of no "diplomatic immunity" that protects the one who brings harm to a diplomat. The diplomat is protected if he/she does harm, to a great or lesser extent, depending on the laws of the diplomat's country of origin. ៛ Bielle (talk) 02:14, 22 June 2008 (UTC)

• This is not legal advice, but the resident would likely be investigated and prosecuted for murder by the government of the place where the killing occurs, and, if found guilty, sent to prison for a very long time (or be subject to the death penalty if that place has capital punishment). Keep in mind that the killing of a foreign diplomat could have repercussions for the host nation's foreign relations, and so the government may well take a more aggressive stance in prosecution of the killer than they would in case of the killing of a citizen of their own country. Diplomatic immunity applies to crimes committed by a diplomat, not against a diplomat. --Metropolitan90 (talk) 03:20, 22 June 2008 (UTC)

Nothing happens to a killer diplomat, but in the reverse, diplomatic immunity is non-transferable. Julia Rossi (talk) 03:39, 22 June 2008 (UTC)

Or, putting it another way, diplomatic immunity is for diplomats. - Nunh-huh 03:47, 22 June 2008 (UTC)

It's not that nothing happens to a killer diplomat -- he would undoubtedly be expelled from the host country. (Depending on the circumstances and the home country's attitude toward the host country's justice system, the diplomat's home country might waive immunity and allow the diplomat to be tried in the host country.) He could also be prosecuted by his home country, but there's no guarantee of that. --Metropolitan90 (talk) 05:19, 22 June 2008 (UTC)

It's pretty customary for nation sending the diplomat to retract immunity from a member of the staff who commits some variety of homocide, see Gueorgui Makharadze.

Bear in mind if the murder is commited inside the diplomatic mission (embassy or high commision) of the diplomat, given the extraterritoriality status I suspect the diplomatic mission would be entitled to hold the murderer in the mission, and transfer him/her to their home country for trial for murder of the diplomat. Even if they don't manage to hold the murderer, they will probably be entitled to ask for extradition of the murderer (if there is an extradition treaty between the 2 countries). Indeed this may be the case even if the murder does not occur in the diplomatic mission. In reality, I suspect in most cases the diplomatic mission will simply hand over the murderer for trial by the host country.This discussion supports that view. Even if the country of the diplomat does want to try the murderer themselves, I suspect they will first hand over the suspect to the host country and then ask for extradition rather then try to hold the murderer in the mission and transfer him/her without explicit permission of the host country. (Bear in mind that the idea that a diplomatic mission is soveign territory of the country who owns it is in fact incorrect [3].) I also found some potentially interesting books via Google if you want to read further [4]. Nil Einne (talk) 14:04, 22 June 2008 (UTC)

So far, everyone answering this question has jumped to the conclusion that a killer is ipso facto a murderer, but it isn't so. The killing might be lawful. Xn4 19:48, 22 June 2008 (UTC)

Holy bleep, you just spontaneously used ispo facto, correctly, italicized as it should be, and not even blue linked, it comes so naturally for you. Will you marry me? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.120.108.31 (talk) 22:09, 22 June 2008 (UTC)

Amabilis insania! Xn4 23:33, 23 June 2008 (UTC)

Kristallnacht. --Major Bonkers (talk) 13:00, 25 June 2008 (UTC)

Sorry, Major Bonkers, but I don't understand your reference. Were there known diplomats involved in some way that made their deaths "legal killings"? I am missing something here, and would appreciate some help. ៛ Bielle (talk) 14:55, 25 June 2008 (UTC)

Oh dear - sorry Bielle! The original question asked was: 'What if a resident of a host nation kills a diplomats [sic.]' That was exactly what provided the causus belli for Kristallnacht; see the article:

“ On November 7, 1938, Herschel Grynszpan, a 17-year old German Jew enraged by his family's expulsion from Germany, walked into the German Embassy in Paris and fired five shots at a junior diplomat, Ernst vom Rath. 2 days later, the diplomat died and Germany was in the grip of skillfully orchestrated anti-Jewish violence. In the early hours of November 10, an orgy of coordinated destruction broke out in cities, towns and villages throughout the Third Reich. ”

Sorry for any confusion! --Major Bonkers (talk) 10:25, 26 June 2008 (UTC)

Law question.com

I know that Wikipedia doesn't answer questions that deals with law, but is there any website that take questions that deals with Canadian and International Law? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.64.128.65 (talk) 01:34, 22 June 2008 (UTC)

We can answer questions that deal with the law. We can't give legal advice. There's an important distinction there. Dismas|^(talk) 03:22, 22 June 2008 (UTC)

For example, it would be OK to ask what the sentence is for murder in California. I'm quite new here, so I don't know if this is allowed or not - but maybe the person who asked their question could post it here, and we could tell them whether we could answer it or not.78.150.225.157 (talk) 17:58, 22 June 2008 (UTC)

surnames

What type of surnames are these?: Bandali, Hundani, Haidari, Haiderzada, Khodadi, Medifar, Shahmoradi Zavareh, Sheidae'i, Hoidevzada, Karimzada, Pai, Noorbakhsh and Ahmadshahi? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.64.128.65 (talk) 01:50, 22 June 2008 (UTC)

If you mean where they are from, they are all Persian. --Omidinist (talk) 03:40, 22 June 2008 (UTC)

Hindi-speaking and Urdu-speaking ethnic groups

Which ethnic groups in India speaks only Hindi and and which ethnic group in Pakistan speaks only Urdu? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.64.128.65 (talk) 02:32, 22 June 2008 (UTC)

Apparently the the Saharia in Madhya Pradesh speak Hindi exclusively. Rockpocket 05:26, 22 June 2008 (UTC)

For the second question, it seems that the Muhajir (Pakistan) speak Urdu. Spencer^T♦C 15:38, 23 June 2008 (UTC)

Hanafi

How Hanafi school of thought reached to Indian Subcontinent? Who introduced Hanafi to the people of Indian Subcontinent? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.64.128.65 (talk) 02:34, 22 June 2008 (UTC)

The Delhi Sultanate was the first Indian dynasty that followed the Hanafi school of jurisprudence. According to Development Of Islamic Jurisprudence In Sultanate Period:

The domination of Hanafi school of jurisprudence in Medieval India owes partly to the Turkish rulers who were Hanafi and partly to the 'ulama' who came from Nishapur, Sana'an, Gliaznin, Kashan, Balkh, Khwarizm, Tabrez, etc., which had been centres of the Hanafi school of thought.

That said, it is likely that Hanafi jurisprudence reached India long before that, albeit on a smaller scale. According to The History of India, as Told by Its Own Historians. The Muhammadan Period, Islam reached the Mappila on the sub-continent at the time of Muhammad Himself and there was regular contact between Arab traders and Indians from then on. So its likely that Hanafi was introduced to India not too long after it was founded by Abu Hanifa an-Nu‘man. Rockpocket 06:04, 22 June 2008 (UTC)

Dress in Spain

I'm a 20s something American law student who's going to be taking some courses in Madrid next month. While I'm not interested in completely redoing my wardrobe, I would like to fit in a little, and wondered how a typical Spaniard in my situation would dress. I've done some Google searches, but I'm having trouble distinguishing legitimate advice. Anyone have any ideas for me? Thanks in advance. GreatManTheory (talk) 17:38, 21 June 2008 (UTC)

I have no idea, but ... indicating if you are male or female might give others a good starting point ... (Joseph A. Spadaro (talk) 00:21, 22 June 2008 (UTC))

Ah, good point. I'm male. And now that I think about it, I'm not sure if the Entertainment desk is the best place to pose this question. Would anyone mind moving this to the Humanities or Miscellaneous desk for me? (I don't know how, or I'd do it myself) Thanks, GreatManTheory (talk) 03:14, 22 June 2008 (UTC)

What they do look like[5] and what game stereotypers make them look like[6] (scroll down). Julia Rossi (talk) 03:50, 22 June 2008 (UTC)

Had this been left on the Entertainment Desk, I would have suggested wearing a bullfighter's outfit, for the pure entertainment value. StuRat (talk) 15:29, 22 June 2008 (UTC)

On a quick search I found [this picture of a faculty get-together] in Navarre. But academic staff looks pretty much the same anywhere in a moderate climate - perhaps you were more interested in street fashion? 84.239.133.47 (talk) 16:57, 22 June 2008 (UTC)

The general trick is to arrive conservatively dressed and adjust your wardrobe after you've got the feel of the place. --Wetman (talk) 17:00, 22 June 2008 (UTC)

It will be very hot and many buildings don't have air-conditioning. You could pack some short-sleeved shirts and chinos. I'm sure students and academics wear polo shirts (with logos) and t-shirts (without outrageous designs), but I don't think Spanish men usually wear shorts in town. Itsmejudith (talk) 20:47, 22 June 2008 (UTC)

Are jeans acceptable about town, or should I stick with chinos? GreatManTheory (talk) 01:27, 23 June 2008 (UTC)

I would say definitely acceptable if clean and not ripped. The Spanish professional men you meet will often be wearing better quality casual wear, with mid-market labels, but they won't mind if you don't. Itsmejudith (talk) 14:41, 23 June 2008 (UTC)

Thank you all for the helpful answers. GreatManTheory (talk) 17:40, 24 June 2008 (UTC)

Politician income

Can anyone direct me to a reference source for US Senators and Representatives true income, including benifits such as medical, retirement, income taxes etc.? I have read several wikipedia reference articles bur cannot find one that deals with total income. Thank you. WSC —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.85.203.191 (talk) 16:44, 22 June 2008 (UTC)

Hi WSC. You mean absolutely everything they earn - Congressional and privately (eg. speaking engagement salaries)? Publicly paid salaries and expenses are likely published, private income might be harder to track down.78.150.225.157 (talk) 17:53, 22 June 2008 (UTC)

What exactly is an income tax benefit? Nil Einne (talk) 19:31, 22 June 2008 (UTC)

To Nil Einne - I am not sure what the questioner means by the phrase, but there are parts of some politicians' salaries in some jurisdictions (Canadian Federal politicians, for example) that are not subject to income tax. That would be an "income-tax benefit" to me. I don't know how the U.S. system of compensation works, though.៛ Bielle (talk) 00:29, 23 June 2008 (UTC)

I know for medical benefits, that US congressmen/women have full coverage, all treatment and medication paid. So medical benefits would depend on the person's health. There is no income tax benefit for congresspeople. Also, the base salary for a regular member of congress is $169,300, though some of the members turn down pay increases. Hmm, just found a link, see this: http://usgovinfo.about.com/library/weekly/aa031200a.htm. I think this would help. Spencer^T♦C 13:58, 23 June 2008 (UTC)

Following from a link on the page that Spencer linked to above, I found this: [7]. It's written from an obvious and very strong point of view, but it talks about how the "pay increases" Spencer referenced are actually considered "Cost of Living Raises". Which, I guess, explains how they're able to get around the 27th Amendment.Dgcopter (talk) 21:09, 24 June 2008 (UTC)

What religions / philosophies believe that life and suffering give us reasons to enjoy heaven?

I believe that life and suffering (possibly over the course of several lifetimes) shape our unique desires, which give us reasons to enjoy Heaven. I use the term "Heaven" in the general sense, not specifically Christian. Also, I don't believe in Hell or enlightenment. I believe that malicious desires are extinguished upon entering Heaven. What religions / philosophies share these beliefs? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Steohawk (talk • contribs) 18:47, 22 June 2008 (UTC)

Members of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints believe this to some degree. In their Book of Mormon it states that:

"There is an opposition in all things. If not so... righteousness could not be brought to pass, neither wickedness, neither holiness nor misery, neither good nor bad. Wherefore, all things must needs be a compound in one; wherefore, if it should be one body it must needs remain as dead, having no life neither death, nor corruption nor incorruption, happiness nor misery, neither sense nor insensibility. Wherefore, it must needs have been created for a thing of naught; wherefore there would have been no purpose in the end of its creation. Wherefore, this thing must needs destroy the wisdom of God and his eternal purposes, and also the power, and the mercy, and the justice of God. And if ye shall say there is no law, ye shall also say there is no sin. If ye shall say there is no sin, ye shall also say there is no righteousness. And if there be no righteousness there be no happiness. And if there be no righteousness nor happiness there be no punishment nor misery. And if these things are not there is no God. And if there is no God we are not, neither the earth; for there could have been no creation of things, neither to act nor to be acted upon; wherefore, all things must have vanished away." 2 Nep. 2:11-13

In other words, there can be no good without the bad. If there wasn't any misery here then God's whole plan for our happiness (and entrance into heaven) would be destroyed, because we need to be able to choose one or the other and experience both in order to appreciate either. Quite a lovely passage. Wrad (talk) 20:18, 22 June 2008 (UTC)

Thank you, Wrad. Steohawk (talk) 20:39, 22 June 2008 (UTC)

Japanese Inferiority Complex?

Is it true that Japanese have an inferiority complex about the way they look compared to Europeans? Hence the anime characters typically don't look Asian and have huge eyes... —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.7.54.224 (talk) 21:42, 22 June 2008 (UTC)

I draw your attention to the last line of this exerpt from the article Anime, which explains the large eyes as follows:

A common approach is the large eyes style drawn on many anime and manga characters. Osamu Tezuka was inspired by the exaggerated features of American cartoon characters such as Betty Boop, Mickey Mouse, and Disney's Bambi.[3][19] Tezuka found that large eyes style allowed his characters to show emotions distinctly. When Tezuka began drawing Ribbon no Kishi, the first manga specifically targeted at young girls, Tezuka further exaggerated the size of the characters' eyes. Indeed, through Ribbon no Kishi, Tezuka set a stylistic template that later shōjo artists tended to follow.

Coloring is added to give eyes, particularly the cornea, and some depth. The depth is accomplished by applying variable color shading. Generally, a mixture of a light shade, the tone color, and a dark shade is used.[20][21] Cultural anthropologist Matt Thorn argues that Japanese animators and audiences do not perceive such stylized eyes as inherently more or less foreign.[5]'

If they are not perceived as foreign, then it is not likely the eyes are any indication of a feeling of inferiority. ៛ Bielle (talk) 23:04, 22 June 2008 (UTC)

Not perceived as foreign? Right... Somehow I find that unconvincing. Also, there are rumors of large numbers of Japanese women who get eye surgery to make the openings of their eyes larger. Seems to add up to an inferiority complex... —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.7.54.224 (talk) 00:09, 23 June 2008 (UTC)

Asian blepharoplasty is not restricted to Japanese; it is used by many Asian groups. --98.217.8.46 (talk) 00:41, 23 June 2008 (UTC)

I know of no European who bears any more than a passing resemblance to the anime figures either. How things "seem" to you based on "rumors", and what arguments you find convincing are, of course, matters of your personal opinion and belief. I might equally argue, with the same type of data, that the figures of "Popeye" and "Superman" show an inherent sense of inferiority in the American male about his body shape with respect to gorillas, for example, but I wouldn't. This is beginning to feel like a trolling exercise, and I shall thus abandon my participation here. ៛ Bielle (talk) 00:53, 23 June 2008 (UTC)

Whether and to what degree Japanese people find manga/anime characters with unrealistically large eyes make the latter look foreign is a question that can be resolved empirically, but the truth or falsity of (a properly formulated version of) that hypothesis is unaffected by how convincing you find it. Even if, for the sake of argument, unrealistically large eyes do make manga/anime characters look more foreign, your reasoning is still missing premises that would connect that "fact" with the conclusion. As it stands now, your conclusion is a non sequitur. If the Japanese did have an inferiority complex and which manifests as a preference for manga/anime characters with unrealistically large eyes, why didn't they give their manga/anime characters other body features that would make them more foreign or European-like, say blond hair, curly hair, prominent & pointed noses, freckles, and light-colored irises? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.162.233.193 (talk) 06:11, 23 June 2008 (UTC)

Facial features of many anime characters (light/white skin, big eyes) make them resemble Europeans more than Asians, as had been noted by many other than myself. Is the cause of that an inferiority complex? I've asked this question hoping for an unbiased and carefully thought out reply. This is supposed to be the place for questions to be asked and answered. An unbiased and well thought out reply I have not received. If you find the question too politically incorect, Bielle, by all means allow someone with a stronger stomach to answer it. BTW, I don't remember Popeye, but I'd indeed argue the character of Superman was born due partly to some feelings of male inferiority. I would like you to note, also, that I have nothing against the Japanese. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.7.54.224 (talk) 02:44, 23 June 2008 (UTC)

You were given an answer with information specifically dealing with the only 'evidence' you put forth in favor of your 'theory'. It didn't seem biased to me. Pleaase consider the possibility that your theory is wrong, and Bielle isn't part of some conspiracy to cover it up because it's not politically correct.

"Do Manga Characters Look White"

Also, remember that anime characters are designed by and for Japanese people. To them a simple :) smiley face makes them think of what's familiar to them, an Asian face. If you want to draw a cartoon face that looks asian to an westerner, you've got to add some exaggerated features to it (Slanted eyes, dark hair, etc.), but all that stuff is taken for granted over there. APL (talk) 06:20, 23 June 2008 (UTC)

I've given your argument some thought, APL, but I think it's not as convincing as the argument I've put forward. I've already read both articles cited here before asking this question. One other thing you might have difficulty explaining is girl's breasts in anime, which are also not drawn true to Japanese phenotype. You can't say that any breasts look to an Asian person like Asian breasts. The breasts in anime are notably un-Asian and it's not a coincidence real Japanese women's breast aren't large. What could help here is the opinion of some experts on Japanese culture. Even the opinion of any Japanese would be helpful.

[quote]If the Japanese did have an inferiority complex and which manifests as a preference for manga/anime characters with unrealistically large eyes, why didn't they give their manga/anime characters other body features that would make them more foreign or European-like, say blond hair, curly hair, prominent & pointed noses, freckles, and light-colored irises?[/quote] Because it's not freckles or pointed noses that make them feel inferior.—Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.7.54.224 (talk) 06:52, 23 June 2008 (UTC)

On a tangent: What fowlish complex may be the explanation for the popularity of a closet nudist trouser-less duck in Dysneyesque cultures? Clearly, this may be construed to be an institutionalised iconography of bestial soft-porn based on fundamentalist penis envy as experienced by a complex minority... --Cookatoo.ergo.ZooM (talk) 10:24, 23 June 2008 (UTC)

Well, if you've already read those articles, perhaps you could give us a clue to what sort of specific factual information you're looking for?

Because it looks like you're simply asking a yes/no question, and then assuming that everyone who answers 'no' has some sort of agenda. I'm not sure what the point of that is. Perhaps you're waiting for someone to say 'yes', so you can say "That's what I thought all along." and strut away feeling clever? Sorry if that's not the case.

On a different tangent, you seem to imply that you know of a place on Earth where the girls have breasts similar to those possessed by typical female Anime characters. About 50% of us would greatly appreciate it if you could tell us where that is. Thanks. APL (talk) 13:28, 23 June 2008 (UTC)

Comment Many light skinned people risk their lifes trying to get a tan because the like the look and/or think it looks healthy. You could contrue they have an inferiority complex. You could alternatively construe it's a result of a mixture of fashion, misconception and history... Also, although Japanese female breasts may on average be smaller then people from some other races, they aren't as miniscule as you seem to think, and I don't know of many people who would say that Anime character breasts look un-Asian anymore then they look unnatural period, something which isn't uncommon in animated characters. (The lead of Tomb Raider is also known for having extremely large breasts.) Nil Einne (talk) 13:42, 23 June 2008 (UTC)

APL, I'm looking for some conclusive evidence. Opinions of experts (plural, not just one) on the culture, interviews with manga-ka (why did you draw your characters in this way?), polls of the general Japanese populace (do you find oversized eyes, white skin and larger breasts of anime characters attactive? do you find European women on average/in general more attractive than Japanese women? do you think that female (often male, too) anime characters are intentionlly made to look more European than Asian?). There are many inferiority complexes that a large percentage of white people has about their bodies; I don't see how anyone can deny that. Being fat is particularly unpopular. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 207.62.238.123 (talk) 17:48, 23 June 2008 (UTC)

Well, that's the problem. You're looking for a conclusive answer to a subjective issue. Trying to paint an entire society as suffering from a specific condition is pretty much guaranteed to fail. An inferiority complex is too personal to apply to an entire society. You would be more likely to find objective studies of Japanese culture with regards to social hierarchy, and study how that relates to their art (eg. anime). — The Hand That Feeds You:^Bite 22:30, 24 June 2008 (UTC)

The issue is objective, not subjective. For instance, it's objective that from at 1930 to 1945 (probably before and after, too) anti-Jewish sentiment was common among Germans. It doesn't have to be the entire Japanese society; if it's the majority or a significant percentage that suffers from the condition then that's also an acceptable answer. I don't understand your comment about Japanese social hierarchy.